Weekend question
From SignOnSanDiego.com, December 6:
James Bopp Jr., general counsel for the NRLC [National Right to Life Committee], said efforts to get state laws banning abortion outright “divert our attention and resources into feudal strategies” that would languish in the courts for years.
“We don’t think it is yet time to pursue efforts to prohibit abortion,” said Bopp. “If a law prohibits abortion in any way, it’s contrary to Roe v. Wade (and would be illegal) and if it doesn’t prohibit abortion, then what’s the point?”…
“Human life amendments have been bouncing around in one way or another since Roe v. Wade,” said Susan Hill, president of the Raleigh, N.C.-based National Women’s Health Organization, which is the sole abortion provider in Mississippi. If passed, a human life amendment would “be ruled unconstitutional at this point because it has already been tested.”
We have here a pro-life organization agreeing with a pro-abortion organization that a certain pro-life strategy is futile. Do you think that 1) both sides of the abortion issue can agree on strategy, or anything; and 2) both sides in this case could be right?
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
I think we should follow a two-pronged strategy. Pass incrementalist laws while we work on human life amendments. Each side should NOT actively work against the other.
I would like an absolutist to answer this question for me. Aren’t state laws incremental? Abortion may be legal in one state and not the other if state HLA’s are passed. Wouldn’t a federal HLA be incremental? Abortion would still be legal in other parts of the world. (please note that I support HLA’s. I am just making a point)
Jill: do you mean “both sides” to mean the incremental approach vs. the all-or-nothing approach, or pro-life vs. pro-choice?
I think that both sides *can* agree on some things. Pro-lifers and many pro-choicers agree that providing a woman with the help she needs to carry her baby to term is better than abortion. Pro-choicers and many pro-lifers agree that contraception, used correctly, can help bring down the abortion rate.
I have to agree that differing sides of an issue probably shouldn’t take advice on legislative strategy from each other, though. Just like Democrats shouldn’t take advice from Republicans on which candidates they should nominate (and vice versa I guess, though I don’t see that happen as much).
As much as we need laws to restrict and prohibit abortion, we need social rejection of abortion.
Students in health classes receive sex education that has no real pressure to abstain. There is little social stigma against sexual activity and abortion.
The stigma is against virginity, pregnancy and marriage.
This is the social aspect.
From puberty on people get the message that if you are a virgin, you are too ugly or a nerd or an idiotic zealot. The message is that attractive, fun, normal people are having sex.
The next is the antipregnancy message. You have to be the right age with the right amount of education and the right amount of money etc. etc. in order for people to support your being pregnant. If you don’t meet one or more criteria, there go the eyebrows. No diversity allowed. You are obviously out of control, or don’t know what you are doing or irresponsible, blah blah blah, A virtual trainwreck.
Then there is the antimarriage message. If you get married before a certain age, let’s say 20, then you are too young and therefore stupid and it won’t last, yada yada. The message is you should just use birth control and condoms and have sex till you are ready to get married. It is ridiculous of course, yet real. Young adults are like everyone else. They want love, companionship and commitment. Just because some haven’t met their spouse by 20, doesn’t mean that none have. The antimarriage message is clear even on college campuses that don’t provide married housing.
My friend’s parents spent almost $100,000 on a private college education for her. She had two abortions to stay in school and get a 2.0, only to get married and start a family within a year of graduating. They could have made a down payment on a house for her and her husband and saved two lives. But in her social group education is more important than life itself.
The next is the antipregnancy message. You have to be the right age with the right amount of education and the right amount of money etc. etc. in order for people to support your being pregnant. If you don’t meet one or more criteria, there go the eyebrows. No diversity allowed. You are obviously out of control, or don’t know what you are doing or irresponsible, blah blah blah, A virtual trainwreck.
Hippie
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Nope. If you are too young, too ignorant and too poor to raise and care for a child, you shouldn’t have one.
Nope. If you are too young, too ignorant and too poor to raise and care for a child, you shouldn’t have one.
Because getting help to become more educated and less poor just isn’t an option.
(OK, sometimes it seems like it’s really *not* an option in this country, but it doesn’t have to be that way!)
From puberty on people get the message that if you are a virgin, you are too ugly or a nerd or an idiotic zealot. The message is that attractive, fun, normal people are having sex.
hippie, you’re right that this is a problem, but I don’t agree that we need a stigma on sexual activity to counter it.
Jen R,
I get what you mean. I have a big problem with the stigma against virginity and of not being in a relationship even though this a normal phase.
This is where women have traded one exploiting pressure for a new one. It used to be if you weren’t married by 20, you were a loser and women would sometimes get in bad relationships and be stuck because of social pressure. The new problem is that if you are 20 or 25 and still a virgin, you are a loser. So once again, women are pressured. Either way, she is defined by sex not who she is and what she thinks.
“From puberty on people get the message that if you are a virgin, you are too ugly or a nerd or an idiotic zealot. The message is that attractive, fun, normal people are having sex.”
Funny, I fit the first two criteria for being a virgin.
Glad to know I fit an accurate [for me] stereotype. :)
Hippie,
Don’t listen to anything Rae says. She’s totally fun, hot, and awesome. Guys are just intimidated by how smart she is. It’s a shame they can’t put their egos aside and see that a woman smarter than them is just as beautiful, if not more, than any other woman. It’s their loss.
And being a nerd is awesome! *nerd love*
*hugs Rae*
Dude, I’ve seen your ale wench pictures. You’re hotter than a heat wave in hell. :P
You’re just a virgin because no one’s good enough for you. It’s true. That and I’ve secretly been killing off all the boys that want to ask you out because I think none of them will ever be good enough for my Rae! *evil maniacal grin*
Hey folks, … DISCERNMENT TIME …
for too many decades now I’ve been stymied in trying to get people to see that the pro-life message is an invitation to live … an invitation to ‘dance’ and glow with delight. The rejection and bitterness that stalks my efforts and the efforts of many others, has me wondering if there is in this battle a problem so deep that we almost never confront it.
In the Gospel narratives of Jesus (there are so many parallels between abortion and the crucifixion eg. the mocking), Jesus warns His followers about rejection. This rejection was so thorough and complete that there seems to be an almost palpable ‘Crucify him!’ in the call to ‘Abort him/her!’
I really don’t know. Jill asks if both are ‘right’, maybe both are wrong and just as many followers were ‘hurt’ deeply by this event, it almost seems necessary that what happened to Jesus had to occur. In a way, it seems we humans seek death … even some of us (SoMG) are fixated by it. Does abortion mean that this ritual MUST BE?
I am thinking that this is in fact the case. We kill so many humans now that Doug calls this ‘the best’. If pro-life is as effective with euthanasia as it has been re. abortion, we’re ALL (spiritually and actually) dead.
I presume that just as folks who witnessed Jesus’ death as one more ho-hum moment, we too have not learned.
Nope. If you are too young, too ignorant and too poor to raise and care for a child, you shouldn’t have one.
Posted by: Laura at December 8, 2007 12:17 PM
The problem with that idea is that the standard is ridiculous. People throughout history have been good parents despite being too young, too ignorant and too poor and are doing it now all over the world. What about valuing diversity?
If you are afraid of paying for irresponsible people try this one. My mother spent money hand over fist on junk then went bankrupt. Her creditors posted a loss of over $200,000 and therefore had lower earnings and paid less tax. The businesses got a break but the rest of the taxpayers didn’t. At the corporate tax rate of 30%, her shopping habit cost taxpayers $60,000. This from a woman in a household with over $100,000 income in 1988, the year she went bankrupt. Now a welfare mom costs maybe $3000-$5000 a year in government assistance. She would have to be on welfare for 12-20 years to cost the system what a middleclass bankruptcy costs.
What if she had no kids and got government gov’t grants and guaranteed student loans, what would that cost taxpayers? Well let’s see. Grants could total $12,000. Loans much more because they are guaranteed, so if she defaults like many have, taxpayers don’t have the option of just paying back the principal on the loans. The guarantee part of student loans is to the bank who is guaranteed to get all the principal AND all the interest which is the only reason they would make the loans.
Right now subprime mortgage holders are hoping to be bailed out by the gov’t. The loan originators knew these folks couldn’t pay the loans but they got their money and sold the loans as securites to investors. So the taxpayers get stuck helping out folks and the middle to upperclass brokers took the money and ran.
Let’s not forget the $900 million for the failed HIV vaccine. More welfare for the educated.
Bottomline, welfare moms are cheap. The middleclass and rich cost far more because their mistakes are so much bigger.
hippie, thank you for that post!
Thought this would cheer everyone up for the weekend. Might be the cutest thing you see all week. :D
http://www.collegehumor.com/video:1767758
I see that I read the question wrong. I thought it was referring to debate within prolife circles right now. I have been on my feet for the last nine hours so I won’t even attempt to get into anything. Goodnight everyone.
John McD,
You really must spend alot of time in adoration before the Blessed Sacrament.
It’s wonderful to see the perspectives that our pro-life crew here on Jillstanek.com possess. Mary with medical, Hippie with statistics, Jacqueline with law, Bethany with her personalism, MK with her wit…now you with your contemplative bent. (I’m not ignoring the others, by the way).
Beneath all the temporal, there’s the spiritual, and you seem to nail it precisely.
Indeed, I recall Fr. Pavone preach how “This is My body” is firmly mocked by “My body, my choice.” It’s a path few dare to tread, that of placing the immaterial before the physical. Some out of sheer ignorance (I mean that charitably). Others out of sheer foolishness.
“Does abortion mean that this ritual MUST BE?”
My answer: for pro life, no, for pro-choice, yes.
I’ve even had a post abortive friend who admitted that abortion is a “necessary evil”. I agreed with her that it was evil, just not necessary.
We have here a pro-life organization agreeing with a pro-abortion organization that a certain pro-life strategy is futile. Do you think that 1) both sides of the abortion issue can agree on strategy, or anything; and 2) both sides in this case could be right?
Jill, it’s the same old deal of idealism versus practicality. Frankly, I think the Zekes of the world aren’t going to win on this issue because they’re so far out in left field that they rarely win at all.
I don’t want women to lose the freedom they have in the matter, but I certainly think that
Carrie is right – from the Pro-Life point of view, it makes sense to get what is achievable in the real world – incrementalist laws (if they really are possible – I don’t know what has been done), and also try to “swing for the fences” as far as Constitutional changes etc.
I certainly think both sides of the argument can agree on some strategies.
……
John M: In a way, it seems we humans seek death … even some of us (SoMG) are fixated by it. Does abortion mean that this ritual MUST BE?
John, I’d say that different people think about death in different ways. There’s a whole continuum of feeling about it, and some people do want to die. Most don’t, but there truly is a wide range of feeling.
……
I am thinking that this is in fact the case. We kill so many humans now that Doug calls this ‘the best’. If pro-life is as effective with euthanasia as it has been re. abortion, we’re ALL (spiritually and actually) dead.
Many humans have always been killed, one way or another. The present time is not “unusual,” though there are sky-is-falling types who think it is. Of course, there have always been some people like that too. The more things change…
Sometimes, yes, it is best to have an abortion. Not that pregnancy prevention wouldn’t have been better, but once an unwanted pregnancy is fact then abortion may be the best thing to do.
John, one question – what real “rejection and bitterness” do you see “stalking your efforts”? You make unique and interesting posts, and I think people from both sides of the debate can appreciate them.
Doug
Why doesn’t this sort of thing ever happen to RTL organizations’ offices?
http://www.kvia.com/Global/story.asp?S=7466795
Let’s not forget the $900 million for the failed HIV vaccine. More welfare for the educated.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
..And all that money towards cancer research AND CANCER HAS NEVER BEEN CURED.
The Diabetes Assn., the March of Dimes, Multiple Sclerosis research, Parkinson’s research, all a waste of time.
Let’s give all that money to every loose-legged backseat eighth-grader who is willing to crank out the next generation of ignorant trainwrecks!
Great plan Hippie!
(By the way, I do agree with you in one respect – your mother should be doing prison time.)
@Doug,
as you know I am severely, physically disabled and because the problem is a genetic one, the disability is not to easy to ‘distance’ myself from. So, in a very thorough way I must accept my life as in ALL ways as imperfect. How can I at the same time learn to accept myself and reject myself? The acceptance part is a bit easy, but when I understand that over 90% of kids with Downe’s are aborted … many doctors even insist such be done; and all abortion laws permit death ‘for severe disability’ …. just where is my advocate? If I should ask for an advocate, would you Doug call for my life or my death.
Every time an abortion occurs, it is a direct assault on a human being’s rights to exist. Claiming that fetuses are both living and human but still killable’ because he/she does not meet someones notions of ‘wantedness’ has very strong application for your own survival.
If we try to hide behind our ‘rights’ as our defense, we will shortly find out that all that legal killing we did also killed any notion of ‘rights’ (and fairness) too. All that is left is ‘wantedness’ and any and all ‘burdens/’useless-eaters’ will be fodder for death. What will be your argumentation Doug to pacify those who want to kill you?
I am dead meat … being both disabled and over 60. For years now I wondered about the reason for my death … senior or disability? Do you know? A bullet to my brain is much cheaper than sustaining me, no?
John McD: “The rejection and bitterness that stalks my efforts and the efforts of many others, has me wondering if there is in this battle a problem so deep that we almost never confront it.”
I understand your frustration with the above. I have made a decision on Thursday to only read posts, and to never write them again. My posts have been nothing but futile attempts to express my thoughts, most of which have incurred such deep-seeded hateful, spiteful attacks.
However, I did have to post this last thought to you, John. After reading your 9:55 pm post, I had to cry. I would take care of you in a heartbeat, John. I mean that sincerely. I looked at your website a few days ago, and saw exactly as I expected: a distinguished, admirable, well-spoken gentleman.
God bless you John…
Laura,
The point of my post is that whether we spend on a welfare mom, a middle class bankruptcy, student loans, corporate bailout or even research, we are taking a risk that we won’t see a return for that investment.
I find it ironic that we most resent helping poor women, which costs the least. Yet we don’t resent our much larger losses on other gambles that benefit middle and upper class folks.
as you know I am severely, physically disabled and because the problem is a genetic one, the disability is not to easy to ‘distance’ myself from. So, in a very thorough way I must accept my life as in ALL ways as imperfect. How can I at the same time learn to accept myself and reject myself? The acceptance part is a bit easy, but when I understand that over 90% of kids with Downe’s are aborted
Posted by: John McDonell at December 8, 2007 9:55 PM
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
John-
Not only did Stephen Hawking reveal the laws of the universe from the confines of his wheelchair, he found a way to cheat on his wife from the confines of his wheelchair.
There isn’t any one of us who isn’t physically flawed, but the abitity to soar in the space between our ears is the greatest gift EVER!
I would never carry a child with Downs.
Having a child who was bright enough to realize that he was physically sound enough – but not smart enough – to engage in real life strikes me as cruel.
Laura,
The point of my post is that whether we spend on a welfare mom, a middle class bankruptcy, student loans, corporate bailout or even research, we are taking a risk that we won’t see a return for that investment.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The fact that you place Welfare moms and corporate bailouts on the same level with student loans and medical research PROVES that you have no clue.
You might also look up the expression “promise.”
It kind of defines the difference between throwing cash at trainwrecks and investing in miracles.
Laura,
I know some find it hard to put a price on hope. However, I know people who have been on welfare and have got it together and are great parents and workers etc. $900 million for a vaccine that doesn’t work is simply an expensive experiment not a miracle (unless you are the researcher who was able to make a living off an idea that didn’t work). Other experiments have worked out better and we have good treatments. As taxpayers we need to ask for reasonable cost benefit analyses in order to decide what to fund.
It sounds like you feel that it is okay to throw money at projects that don’t meet their goals just because you like the goal.
Let’s give all that money to every loose-legged backseat eighth-grader who is willing to crank out the next generation of ignorant trainwrecks!
I find it upsetting that there is a strong streak of sexual judgmentalism among abortion opponents. I also often despair that there are people who want to ban abortion but don’t seem to have any interest in helping women who are faced with an unexpected pregnancy (at least not if it will mean using any of their taxes).
Of course, I know that not all pro-lifers are like that. It’s kind of reassuring, in a backwards way, to be reminded that not everyone who’s like that is pro-life either.
Speaking of money,
We have talked about the problem of depopulation and asset deflation and how retirees will be affected. Here is a link to an interview with an economist explaining why investing in the stock market for your retirement is pretty dangerous when the labor pool is shrinking. Be warned, he seems to hate Bush’s economic policies as much as I do, which is saying a lot.
http://www.michael-hudson.com/interviews/030711_counterpunch.html
No answer from Doug concerning being a advocate for John’s revealing question to Doug. “If I should ask for a advocate, would you Doug call for my life or death”.
But I will predict a answer from the sophist Doug.
Yes, I will be your advocate for your life John, because your born and away from the womb by many years.
It makes Doug keep that shine of civility which Doug admires in Doug.
Of course this is done only for “public consumption”, since Doug failed a women suffering in despair, and compounded it by assassinating her family and character at this post board. A affair of Doug’s vice getting the better of Doug the Vulcan mind weighing decisions, choices and matters disconnected to emotion. Face it, when life got tuff, old Doug got outta there fast, by manipulating her suffering and sorrow. That is why Doug is my favorite Pirate and personality, found in the Caine Mutiny as Lt. Keefer. You know the answer John, and Doug avoids answering from not being able to say one word disparaging his character and personality displayed here.
On the other hand Doug, manages to being a hard hitting pessimist who could easily advocate for the death of John.
After all, it isn’t his life anyway, and Doug knows “no sweeter fat then sticks to my bones”.
Bet that quotation goes over the head of the Vulcan Doug.
Then Laura, the Kosmic Thug Judge, reveals her vapid vision of Hawkins which must include pessimism about men of course.
Of course, I have mentioned the hillarious fact that those who distort, avoid,deny, and ignore pro life post, to push their pro murdering values at this site, are getting a free ride to spread their pessimism for murdering the baby in the womb.
Which is for AB Laura to understand, that this site is filled with schills, and needs those schills for discussion to take place.
Remember AB Laura, your communicating with cartoon characters for murdering babies in the womb.
They range the whole spectrum of abortion murder advocates. From SOMG(Smith’s Old Meat and Garden), a vicious amoral character from Motel Hell, to Laura the lazy philosopher who sums up life as what goes around comes around thinking, that includes some of the most dirt poor post here concerning compassion.
To that Sad Eyed Sally, a pitiful character devoid of actually being able to understand life beyond sexdeath as a dynamic of living.
I may speak for John here, and simply say that John knows he dealing with zombies of the soul, that place where God meets your heart and you exchange sorrows,joys, and disappointments in life.
From Laura the lazymind, to Doug, scratch Doug, he’s a narcissist devoid of shame, sorrow, despair, to Sally, who meets only a chemical in her brain to advise her PTSD. One must know Ab Laura, your dealing with those who have no reference outside of their self made conscience which demands their self made decisions cannot be wrong.
It’s a rebuke of themselves, which is not possible in those pro murder cartoon characters here at this site.
Remember AB Laura, John’s post affected you AB Laura from God speaking to your heart when you read the words from John’s heart.
The rest just zombied out.
John McD, that was a very thought-provoking post. I would advocate for you. People with disabilities do have people in the general public that do care about them. The plight of unborn children with disabilities was one of the reasons that I decided to get actively involved with prolifism. We are all dependent on each other in some way,aren’t we? People who don’t consider themselves disabled might need someone to fix their car,fill their cavity,file their will, or prescribe them medicine. We are all in this together and we all have something to offer.
AB Laura, I hope you reconsider. I feel that people jump down your throat. The people on this board that preach tolerance should practice it. I haven’t seen much tolerance for AB Laura and her religious viewpoints!!!!
Nathan, 12/8, 7:37a, asked: “Jill: do you mean “both sides” to mean the incremental approach vs. the all-or-nothing approach, or pro-life vs. pro-choice?”
I was speaking of pro-life vs. pro-abortion (“choice”), Nathan.
Lyssie, 12/8, 7:09p, cute!
I would never carry a child with Downs.
Having a child who was bright enough to realize that he was physically sound enough – but not smart enough – to engage in real life strikes me as cruel.
Posted by: Laura at December 8, 2007 11:05 PM
Laura, you are a sad, sad woman.
Yllas, you are completely correct these people are zombies without a soul.
as you know I am severely, physically disabled and because the problem is a genetic one, the disability is not to easy to ‘distance’ myself from. So, in a very thorough way I must accept my life as in ALL ways as imperfect. How can I at the same time learn to accept myself and reject myself? The acceptance part is a bit easy, but when I understand that over 90% of kids with Downe’s are aborted … many doctors even insist such be done; and all abortion laws permit death ‘for severe disability’ …. just where is my advocate? If I should ask for an advocate, would you Doug call for my life or my death.
John, of course I would certainly advocate for you. I like you, you old rascal.
……
Every time an abortion occurs, it is a direct assault on a human being’s rights to exist. Claiming that fetuses are both living and human but still killable’ because he/she does not meet someones notions of ‘wantedness’ has very strong application for your own survival.
Nope – the Birth Standard is age-old and massively prevalent in human nature. I know you’d rather it wasn’t this way, but being born or not makes on heck of a difference. The unborn are inside the body of a person, and that is a big thing.
……
If we try to hide behind our ‘rights’ as our defense, we will shortly find out that all that legal killing we did also killed any notion of ‘rights’ (and fairness) too. All that is left is ‘wantedness’ and any and all ‘burdens/’useless-eaters’ will be fodder for death. What will be your argumentation Doug to pacify those who want to kill you?
Honestly, that sounds like gloom-and-doom to me, and it’s not borne out by history, reality, and, again – human nature. If we’re all going down in a handbasket, and if the sky is falling, then I’m wrong, but for thousands and thousands of years there have always been people bemoaning “the state of things,” and to this point they have always been the incorrect ones.
……
I am dead meat … being both disabled and over 60. For years now I wondered about the reason for my death … senior or disability? Do you know? A bullet to my brain is much cheaper than sustaining me, no?
Well, you know what we all are, in the long run. John there is no way I think your death will be anything but natural causes. Hey, can I take a look at your website? AB Laura mentioned it, yet I couldn’t locate it by searching.
Best,
Doug
Anyone who believes in abortion is heartless.
I’m sure of the fact that there is a hell. Maybe those who refuse to repent will burn in a hot hell, as you support the worst evil imaginable. I’d love to watch you BEG for a glass of water that you’ll never get. Eternity is going to be a mighty long time.
No answer from Doug
Yllas, I just now read John’s question, and that’s only because I have a broken-down truck that’s being fixed. Otherwise it wouldn’t have been until late this afternoon or this evening.,
For all your buffoonish pretense and false concoctions, I like John very much.
Doug
Let’s not forget the words REPROBATE MIND.
Laura, you really can’t call yourself PC. You are anti choice. You are self choice. If it suits you, people should do it.
wee bit of advice,
AB Laura, it is without doubt that you have an initial very powerful experience of Christian faith and it does ME immense good whenever you post. I have much help in sustaining my strange life of weakness mostly from Jesus’ Mom … now my Mom too! It is not so-easy to stop, once you have nourished Jesus’ Life in you. Follow Him … if He leads you to read and reflect, do so. If and when He urges you to post, then do so!
yllas, you have made my day again. Ever since you started posting … I thought of Inna. (Inna was a very, very special lady.) She like you, always talked straight-from-the-hip …. wonderful, wonderful. (Inna died some time ago, but it sure is great to be reminded of her. Thanks.)
AB Laura, I hope you reconsider. I feel that people jump down your throat. The people on this board that preach tolerance should practice it. I haven’t seen much tolerance for AB Laura and her religious viewpoints!!!!
Posted by: Carrie at December 9, 2007 5:37 AM*********************** AB Laura, please keep posting! We need your input:] To heck with a lot of these pro choicers and anti choicers. We ALWAYS know the truth. Abortion is murder, and abortionists are murderers. I don’t even read most of their gobbly goop anymore. It’s boring.
“I’m sure of the fact that there is a hell. Maybe those who refuse to repent will burn in a hot hell, as you support the worst evil imaginable. I’d love to watch you BEG for a glass of water that you’ll never get. Eternity is going to be a mighty long time.”
*rolls eyes*
Good job Heather, you just exemplified the “pro-lifers are Christian nut-bars that in reality just want to punish people instead of help them” stereotype to the finest.
Be proud.
Jacque, I don’t know where you are, but please read this. I have been doing some thinking about our discussion. I have been distancing myself from the women in my circle who support abortion, and the ones who continue to justify their own abortions. I’m done with them. I don’t really want them in my life anymore. I’m too good for that!
I’m sure of the fact that there is a hell. Maybe those who refuse to repent will burn in a hot hell, as you support the worst evil imaginable. I’d love to watch you BEG for a glass of water that you’ll never get. Eternity is going to be a mighty long time.
Posted by: heather
Dang… cant we all get along? im not telling you that you are going to Hell for not excepting the Divine words of Allah, spoken through his Prophet Mohammad (PBOH) am i?
Liam, No. We can’t.
I’d love to watch you BEG for a glass of water that you’ll never get.
:: laughing ::
Heather, you’re a trip.
Liam, supporting abortion is the most evil thing that someone can do. You support the works of darkness? Then that’s YOUR choice.
Doug, thank you. *bow*
Heather: Why? i respect your beliefs, and have NO urge to force mine down anyones throat, so why can we not talk in a civilized manner? Did Jesus not say “Judge not, lest Ye be Judged” and “For judgement is the sole providence of The Father”?
Hey Doug, long time no see.
What’s up in the hizzle, dawg? :)
Heather, i do not support abortion. But i dont believe telling people they will “burn in Hell” is going to solve the matter or change anyones mind.
John: yllas, you have made my day again.
John, in lieu of rational argument, such lame ad hominems as those of yllas would appeal to some people.
Doug
What’s up in the hizzle, dawg? :)
Hey Rae, hope things are going well for you, and here’s to a good Holiday season for us all.
Been pretty furious here – lots of customers wanting stuff done before year’s end. Mobile, AL, then back to company HQ in WV, then to east of Houston, TX, and clear back again.
Wednesday, just got back from TX, driving through the first nasty snowstorm of the season in the Ohio valley, when a call comes in, a nuclear power plant over in the neck of the woods of the Chicago/ NE Illinois contingent – Braidwood Nuclear Generating Station, down I-55 a little past Joliet. A big electrical transformer was a little low on oil – the oil acts as a coolant and electrical insulator. We loaded up Thursday and drove that night, getting in at 3 a.m. local time. Yeah Baby, three hours’ sleep and to the plant we go….
Now, we do this stuff all the time, come in, set up, add oil. Nuke plants have high security and nervous managers, but this was a real trip – by the time we got through security and all the meetings, etc., a half-hour job turned into almost eleven hours. Things went well, though, and the lights will be on along Lakeshore Drive tonight. The guy I was with and I were dog-ass tired, drove a little that night, then the rest yesterday and got back to HQ and loaded up for another job for tomorrow, in East Chicago, IN. Would have been nice to have an easy day – just drive over there today – but an air line busted and now I’m already 7 hours behind when I wanted to leave and there’s supposed to be all kinds of freezing rain in northern Ohio and Indiana.
Other than that, I ain’t doin’ much.
Doug
Doug, thank you. *bow*
Ha! Heather, I think you have a really good time online. Gotta love it…..
@Doug,
“Honestly, that sounds like gloom-and-doom to me, and it’s not borne out by history, reality, and, again – human nature. If we’re all going down in a handbasket, and if the sky is falling, then I’m wrong, but for thousands and thousands of years there have always been people bemoaning “the state of things,” and to this point they have always been the incorrect ones.”
We’re back to demographics again. Find out what the latest UN guestimates are …. the male dominance in China has been raised (I believe) by 3 millon to 33 million single males …. what an army!
Coupling this with a population inversion … THE VERY FIRST in history …. makes me think that those saying the sky is falling are delusional – far too easy! Jesus said: ‘… people will want the mountain to cover them …’ That seems about right.
AB Laura and John,
Since both of you have expressed consternation about the fact that your earnest appeals have been met with rejection and bitterness, I though I’d shed some light on the subject.
To some extent, you are both telling other people that their views are incorrect, immoral, and a threat to their spiritual well-being. How is that not offensive to someone who doesn’t share your views? You are telling them that they lack a certain state of grace which they could easily achieve if they only accepted your view of the world.
Many believers (here I mean religion) here have expressed indignation at outright attacks against their faith, so why are you surprised when nonbelievers express indignation when you attempt to beat them over the head with your religious interpretation of the world?
I think Karl Marx was very close when he said “Religion is the Opiate of the Masses”
by this, i mean, Religion, like opium, can have great benefits. It can be a comfort to those in pain, be used to strengthen a person and even save lives.
But i can also harm, become an addiction and strip people of there families and friends, even causing pain and death.
there are SO MANY good reasons to be Anti-Abortion…. why can people not discuss things logically?
REPROBATE MIND
Let’s pay a visit over to the shack at “Heather’s Anagram Sunday” (Ye Hunger Adamant Harass)
Bandit Emperor
Raiment Probed
Tampered Robin
Imparted Boner
Dampen Orbiter
Bar Redemption
That sounds just a wee bit busy.
:D
I bet you’re looking forward to Christmas, will you be getting some time off by then?
We’re back to demographics again. Find out what the latest UN guestimates are …. the male dominance in China has been raised (I believe) by 3 millon to 33 million single males …. what an army!
John, yep, lots of guys over there, probably gettin’ a wee bit frustrated. (Or is that “gettin’ their wee bits frustrated”?) Still, things are rarely as bad (or as good ) as they look.
……
Coupling this with a population inversion … THE VERY FIRST in history …. makes me think that those saying the sky is falling are delusional – far too easy! Jesus said: ‘… people will want the mountain to cover them …’ That seems about right.
I love you, Man, you have a great mind. Love the reference.
Doug
Rae, yes – off from Dec. 21 to Jan. 6., a moment to tame my wild, wild heart. My wife’s Atlanta family rocks, and our hopes and dreams are very close.
Christmas is mainly for the kids, Carlo, Franchesco, and Isabella (can you tell that my wife’s family is Italian?), but the whole time has a good amount of “adult party” to it too.
Dec. 29 – Jan. 3 we’re going to New Mexico, just my wife and me. We have some homies in Albuquerque, spend a couple days in Santa Fe, and New Year’s Eve in Taos.
What’s up for you this season?
Dawgster
there are SO MANY good reasons to be Anti-Abortion…. why can people not discuss things logically?
Liam, I like the way your mind works, What good reasons do you see?
Doug
AB Laura and John,
Since both of you have expressed consternation about the fact that your earnest appeals have been met with rejection and bitterness, I though I’d shed some light on the subject.
To some extent, you are both telling other people that their views are incorrect, immoral, and a threat to their spiritual well-being. How is that not offensive to someone who doesn’t share your views? You are telling them that they lack a certain state of grace which they could easily achieve if they only accepted your view of the world.
Many believers (here I mean religion) here have expressed indignation at outright attacks against their faith, so why are you surprised when nonbelievers express indignation when you attempt to beat them over the head with your religious interpretation of the world?
Posted by: Anonymous at December 9, 2007 11:38 AM
————
Please read my first post above … it was an appeal for discernment, certainly not any kind of attack. If someone wished to input on my call fo reflection, then they can do so.
Re. my perspective on Jesus’ death …. for me a very big deal. For ‘others’, His death was kinda banal. Strange how these tend to coincide with abortion from the fetuses viewpoint.
Jesus also warned His followers about rejection. It is a ‘red’ flag …. kinda the way ‘the cross’ is a ‘red’ flag to spiritual life. So I asked what the take abortion is. Is it a ‘red’ flag that MUST BE to signal the end-times?
Doug:
well, most of my reasons are based in Logic. there are waiting lists of people who want babies, and it seems foolish that one person would destroy something that it is destroying someone else NOT to have.
Another is Life. i believe killing is wrong unless it is for survival. Humans were meant to eat meat (omnivorous) so we do, but i do not support killing of things we cannot eat unless in defense of your own life. >1% of abortions on done to save the life of the mother.
Another reason is because i support choice, but also advocate responsibility. We, as americans, have a CHOICE about who will run our country, but we also then have to live with that choice, and take responsibility for it. We voted in GWB and now we have had to live with that choice. We cannot just have him killed and yell “do over” and pretend it never happened.
To me, Choice without responsibility cannot exist. this is why we cannot vote, drive, drink, or smoke until we are old enough to accept the responsibilities of those choices.
Liam,
“there are waiting lists of people who want babies, and it seems foolish that one person would destroy something that it is destroying someone else NOT to have.”
This is not logical.
Basically, you’re advocating forcing someone to do something that they don’t want to do because someone else would like to them to do it.
How is this compatible with democracy, free choice, or any of our American ideals?
@Doug: My classes end this week and then I have a week of finals (two on this upcoming Saturday, the rest the following week) and a safety-training session on the 17th for 3M. Then I’ll be working full time at 3M for break. Then on January 4th-6th I’ll be in Chicago for a Dresden Doll concert on the 5th (and I’ll probably go visit MK while I’m there and get my ears pierced in celebration of my 20th birthday, huzzah!).
Going to Sioux Falls, SD to go visit my grandma for Christmas and classes start back up again January 22nd.
So not too busy, but I should make a good chunk o’ change at 3M and I may be able to finally afford internet in my apartment! :D
Anon:
I was merely saying how it is illogical to kill something you dont want, when you could just as easily give it away.
As for “forcing someone to do something they dont want to do”…. welcome to the World. i dont want to work, but if i dont, my family will starve. i dont want to drive the speed limit, but if i dont, i lose my license.
we are CONSTANTLY being forced to do things we dont “want” to do…. because not everything we WANT is ethical or right.
Anon said, “To some extent, you are both telling other people that their views are incorrect, immoral, and a threat to their spiritual well-being. How is that not offensive to someone who doesn’t share your views? You are telling them that they lack a certain state of grace which they could easily achieve if they only accepted your view of the world.
Many believers (here I mean religion) here have expressed indignation at outright attacks against their faith, so why are you surprised when nonbelievers express indignation when you attempt to beat them over the head with your religious interpretation of the world?”
————-
Anon & all other unbelievers: (Anon, I apologize if you are a believer…I’m just assuming from your statement)
Of course I expected outright attacks! I just didn’t think that they would have the effect on me that they did.
My Father is the King of Kings & Lord of Lords, and I am humbled and blessed to be His daughter.
If I knew of a man in the desert that stood along side of a road handing out $1,000,000.00 checks to anyone who would come and simply shake his hand; And this man had an unlimited supply of money, didn’t ask any questions, and simply handed you over the check after shaking his hand. If I knew of this man, and received a check from him, of course I would tell as many people as I could about him! Those who didn’t believe me, of course I would keep trying!
If I went to Vegas, and there was a wheel to spin that only had two colors, red & green intermittently and I had $10,000.00; The man spinning the wheel said, “if you spin the wheel and hit a green spot, you will win double your bet. If you hit a red spot, you get a free spin. You can play as long as you want.” The wheel was tucked way back in a corner that wasn’t visible to many. Again, I would tell as many people as I could about this wheel!
The way I see it, (between believers & unbelievers) is that one of us is wrong. Can only be. If a believer is wrong, he loses absolutely nothing. When he dies, he’s done.
However, if an unbeliever is wrong, he loses EVERYTHING!
I apologize if I “beat anyone over the head”, or personnaly attacked their non-belief. I don’t believe I did…but if so, please understand that it was out of love for you, not hate. I believed I just stated my opinion as a comment, and if you took it as a personal attack, I am sorry. I don’t believe I have ever called anyone a derragotory name on these threads, although I have been called many. Again, I expected it, but didn’t think it would have the type of effect on me that it did.
I realized, for myself at least, that some things are bigger us. I had no idea until I read some threads that abortion had been going on since ancient times. I personnaly feel that this issue is bigger than I. I’m not giving up, I’m simply going to “let go & let God”…I will be praying for everyone here, and all mothers that are contemplating abortion.
I can’t, but God can. This is what I have learned.
I am not sure that it is incrementalism vs. HLA or proabortion vs. antiabortion.
I think the abortion issue is a human rights issue best tackled by education. That is why it is so important for young people to be educated about prenatal development and for them to see with their own eyes what abortion really is.
Like most human rights issues, people can’t care if they don’t know about it.
Some will say that everyone knows about the issues surrounding abortion. I think that depends on age and social group. I don’t think that every 5th grader knows when an unborn baby’s heart starts to beat. It isn’t in the curriculum. I think it is at least as important as a scientific fact as knowing that frogs become tadpoles and then frogs. Much of biology focuses on human life so it is as reasonable to teach kids about prenatal development as it is to teach them about tadpoles.
If 5th graders were making posters and oral presentations about human prenatal development, and bringing in their fuzzy ultrasound pictures of themselves for show and tell, the next generation would have a fresh perspective on the beginning of human life. I would like to see that change in the elementary, middle school and highschool curriculum.
AB Laura,
DON’T YOU DARE DESERT US!!!! THAT’S AN ORDER!!!!
Can it be tough sometimes? Of Course. Can your feelings get hurt? Oh Yeah! Do you spend evenings crying sometimes, because of the darkeness? You Bethcha!
Look at the cross. I don’t hear Him complainin’.
Your view is valid, important and very, very welcome. If not by all, then certainly by those of us that are “less smart” as Laura would say. And if you leave I’ll hunt you down like a mad dog.
Now get typin!!!!!
Sometimes in a war you gotta fight the enemy one on one…and sometimes you drop a bomb.
Incrementalists can take em out one by one, but if the bomb hits it’s mark, whose gonna complain?
I say, fight the war with any and every means…
There’s those of us that pray, hold signs, go to Washington, State Capitals, write for newspapers, run for office, stand outside clinics, work in CPC’s, blog on websites…
There’s a millions jobs to be done. Why is one better than the other? If the goal is to end abortion then let’s do it already.
by this, i mean, Religion, like opium, can have great benefits. It can be a comfort to those in pain, be used to strengthen a person and even save lives.
But i can also harm, become an addiction and strip people of there families and friends, even causing pain and death.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
“Patriotism, like religion and whiskey, is a good thing taken in moderation.” Mark Twain
Your view is valid, important and very, very welcome. If not by all, then certainly by those of us that are “less smart” as Laura would say.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I would never say “less smart.”
That’s about as awkward as English gets…
@MK: Did you get the email that I sent you yesterday?
It makes Doug keep that shine of civility which Doug admires in Doug.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I always wonder who Yllas is talking about.
She’s always so vague…
Liam,
“I was merely saying how it is illogical to kill something you dont want, when you could just as easily give it away.”
But it isn’t “just as easy” to give it away. Last time I checked, childbirth and pregnancy were not “easy” and can pose a significant threat to a woman’s health.
“As for “forcing someone to do something they dont want to do”…. welcome to the World. i dont want to work, but if i dont, my family will starve. i dont want to drive the speed limit, but if i dont, i lose my license.”
Ah yes, I realized after I made that statement that I’d opened myself up to this.
You don’t have to work. No one is forcing you. You could let your family starve.
You also don’t have to drive the speed limit. Once again, no one is forcing you. You could speed if you wanted to.
“we are CONSTANTLY being forced to do things we dont “want” to do…. because not everything we WANT is ethical or right.”
The best extension of your logic that I could come up with is thus.
you said:”there are waiting lists of people who want babies, and it seems foolish that one person would destroy something that it is destroying someone else NOT to have.”
(Leaving aside for the moment the issue that it does destroy someone not to be able to have a baby and that the adoption system in this country is an incredible mess. I don’t have the exact figure at hand, but there are tons of children languishing in foster care. If these couples are so desperate for a child, why not adopt one of them?)
Your argument is that it is valid to force someone to do something that they do not want to do–well, actually its more than that, in this case you’re arguing that it is permissible to “use” someone’s body against her/his will–because someone else would really like to.
So then why can’t men simply legally force unwilling women to have sex with them? After all, the man really wants to have sex with her. So why should she be able to deny him?
AB Laura,
“Of course I expected outright attacks! I just didn’t think that they would have the effect on me that they did.”
At least you expected them. You know, your actions (well, at least your words) might be undermining your cause. Generally, one doesn’t convert because someone else screams in his/her ear and verbally abuses them until they do so.
If you genuinely want to show someone “the way” (assuming that your way is right) and convince them to accept your beliefs, you should try to befriend them and engage them in genuine conversation. Otherwise, it comes across as you simply attempting to prove your own moral superiority.
“The way I see it, (between believers & unbelievers) is that one of us is wrong.”
And what makes your beliefs correct?
“Can only be. If a believer is wrong, he loses absolutely nothing. When he dies, he’s done.
However, if an unbeliever is wrong, he loses EVERYTHING!”
I love this argument. It rests on several problematic premises that are easily disproven.
Foremost, it assumes that there are no costs to worshiping/believing. That is not necessarily true. Additionally, it assumes that one can simply force oneself to believe. This is not necessarily the case.
For sake of argument, let’s assume that you are correct and it is safer to believe in a god. Which one should a person believe in? Last time I checked, the Christian god wasn’t the only one out there. There’s Zeus, Athena, Vishnu, Allah, Mars, Venus, Shiva, ect. Which one is the “real” one?
Your assumption that it is safest to believe in a god is also problematic. It might be safest to believe in a god if you believe in the “true” god, but what about all those people who believe in a different god? Who’s to say that the “true” god might not be an extremely jealous and vindictive god who would actually prefer people to deny the existence of god as opposed to worshiping a false one?
“I’m not giving up, I’m simply going to “let go & let God”…I will be praying for everyone here, and all mothers that are contemplating abortion.”
See, here’s where you come across as trying to prove your moral superiority. What is to be gained from telling someone who doesn’t agree with you that you’re going to pray for them in hopes that they will change their wicked ways? All you’re doing is indicating to them that they lack a state of grace which they should aspire to. The problem is not that you pray for them but that you insist on telling them that you do so.
John,
Honestly, that was directed more at Laura than you.
Generally, you don’t beat people over the head with things while she tends to.
“Jesus also warned His followers about rejection. It is a ‘red’ flag …. kinda the way ‘the cross’ is a ‘red’ flag to spiritual life. So I asked what the take abortion is. Is it a ‘red’ flag that MUST BE to signal the end-times?”
People have been predicted the end of times since the middle ages. I sincerely doubt that they’ve got it right this time.
The prophecies in the Bible are so vague that they could be taken to mean almost anything.
Anon:
Very simply, the rest of what i said originally. CHOICE.
we cannot Choose for someone, but a woman (and her partner) choose to have sex. they know the risks, and make the CHOICE. rape is wrong for the same reason murder is…. there is no Choice.
Abortion is wrong for the same reason rape is. the Victim has no choice.
Liam,
“Very simply, the rest of what i said originally. CHOICE.”
So then what about pregnancy resulting from rape? Should a woman be forced to gestate even when, using your logic, she never consented to the risks of having sex?
“we cannot Choose for someone, but a woman (and her partner) choose to have sex. they know the risks, and make the CHOICE.”
This argument again. So engaging in an action that carries a particular consequence limits one to having only one option to deal with said consequence. That makes perfect sense.
So why do drunk drivers who get in car accidents and get severely injured receive medical care?
“rape is wrong for the same reason murder is…. there is no Choice.”
That’s a simplified view of murder. At the moment, assisted suicide is illegal as well (except, I believe in Oregon).
“Abortion is wrong for the same reason rape is. the Victim has no choice.”
Abortion has no victims (at least before viability), whereas outlawing abortion makes every woman a victim.
“I’m not giving up, I’m simply going to “let go & let God”…I will be praying for everyone here, and all mothers that are contemplating abortion.”
See, here’s where you come across as trying to prove your moral superiority. What is to be gained from telling someone who doesn’t agree with you that you’re going to pray for them in hopes that they will change their wicked ways? All you’re doing is indicating to them that they lack a state of grace which they should aspire to. The problem is not that you pray for them but that you insist on telling them that you do so.
Posted by: Anonymous at December 9, 2007 3:38 PM
People who say they will pray for someone who doesn’t share the same religion or even any religion aren’t trying to act superior. I knew this Hindu substitute teacher who worked in our building now and then and she was always praying for someone and telling them about some miracle by some prophetess teacher and passing out little blessing cards. Anyway, she was just trying to show her concern for others in the way she knew how. She knew we weren’t Hindus and she wasn’t arrogant. I really appreciated the way she remembered people and was warm and friendly. I was not offended by her prayers.
“So then what about pregnancy resulting from rape? Should a woman be forced to gestate even when, using your logic, she never consented to the risks of having sex?”
Right, we should totally make laws based on >1% of occurences. Murder should be legal, because sometimes its self defense.
We dont make laws on the VAST MINORITY of cases.
“So why do drunk drivers who get in car accidents and get severely injured receive medical care?”
Saving a life is priority. if the woman will DIE without one, i would not protest her abortion… again thats less then 1% of cases.
Liam,
“Right, we should totally make laws based on >1% of occurences. Murder should be legal, because sometimes its self defense.”
That wasn’t my question. My question was if abortion should be permissbile in cases of rape. I didn’t ask about other cases or whether we should keep abortion legal because some pregnancies are due to rape. I asked if abortion should be allowed in cases of rape regardless of whether or not abortion itself is outlawed.
“Saving a life is priority. if the woman will DIE without one, i would not protest her abortion… again thats less then 1% of cases.”
And what if there is no life to save (ie. abortion)?
Anon:
to answer your question, i would still say no. because you cannot use one crime to justify another. “i got robbed, so i stole my neighbours TV” just doesnt work.
“And what if there is no life to save (ie. abortion)?”
to imply a Foetus is not alive one would hgave to hgave no knowledge of Biology. A cell is alive, all things made of Organic Cells are alive… thus a foetus is ALIVE.
See, here’s where you come across as trying to prove your moral superiority. What is to be gained from telling someone who doesn’t agree with you that you’re going to pray for them in hopes that they will change their wicked ways? All you’re doing is indicating to them that they lack a state of grace which they should aspire to. The problem is not that you pray for them but that you insist on telling them that you do so.
Posted by: Anonymous at December 9, 2007 3:38 PM
————
I thought AB Laura’s analogy was specific, insightful and correct … the one about the fella handing out $1,000,000 ((the amt. though is more in the billion-dollar range + YOU need do something – instead of shaking His hand, give Him a glass of water – He thirsts (said so Himself). ))
Declaring that you love someone is ‘oppressive’. This is stupidity unlimited. If you say your morality is love-based and is inferior to logic-based ‘morality’ …. I have some real estate for you near the Brooklin Bridge … . AB Laura’s willingness to pray is not condescending, but then again this real-estate deal in Brooklin …
I posted something a while back talking about the different religious opinions with regard to abortion and when life begins. There are major differences between the major religions and to me it seems that the “mainstream” abortion debate in this country is always presented from the Christian perspective. This concerns me in that you don’t often hear the perspective of other religions in debate.
In my previous comment I mentioned concern for how an interpretation of this issue by only one religion, might affect religious freedom in this country. I gave the example of Jewish law, which has many differences from that of Christian belief.
Jewish law (Halacha) neither bans abortion nor does it allow for indiscriminate abortion “on demand”. As a general rule, abortion in Judaism is permitted only if there is a direct threat to the life of the mother by carrying the fetus to term or through the act of childbirth. In such a circumstance, the baby is considered a “rodef”, or a pursuer after the mother with the intent to kill her and in this circumstance the mother is obligated to abort the fetus. This is in contrast to what the Vatican says which does not permit abortion even if it would save the mother’s life, since one evil (the abortion) can not be committed in order to prevent another (the death of the mother) and in this case the doctor must let nature take its course even if it means the death of both mother and child.
Judaism also recognizes psychiatric, physical factors and whether or not the baby would be a threat to it’s siblings (for example lack of resources, food etc.) in evaluating the potential threat that the fetus poses.
There is another big difference between Jewish law and Christian belief. The Jewish faith does not consider the fetus a “full life” equal to the mother’s until it’s head is out of the birth canal, this is in contrast to what the Vatican and most Christian religion’s believe which is that life begins at conception, or even a few weeks before according to the pope.
My previous post went into these issues with a bit more detail, and I think I mentioned a few other major religions (Islam, Buddhism…) But the point I wanted to raise is that often, other religion’s views of the abortion issue don’t get included in the debate. Thus if a law were going to be enacted stating that life begins at conception…well, this is in fact a religious interpretation from the Christian perspective and would exclude other religions who have different beliefs and might threaten religious freedom and be akin to theocratic law. Thus I think any law needs to allow for different religious beliefs.
Personally, I don’t think criminalizing abortion will work. I also feel that the federal government has no place in this issue (that’s my libertarian streak). This is a state issue and should be dealt with at the local level. But criminalizing abortion at the federal level will only lead to a black market that will place an unequal burden on women when men are just as responsible (it takes two to make a baby and often the father is just as responsible for a decision to abort as the mother is). Furthermore, our jails are already overcrowded from a racist, unconstitutional drug war that doesn’t work and only makes matters worse (the U.S. locks up more of it’s citizens than communist China!). I don’t think that making things illegal and instituting a “nanny state” is the answer, whether it be drugs, pornography, cigarettes or abortion. Even if we don’t like these things, the answer to reducing this behavior is not going to be found through criminalization and legal sanctions. I think the best route is to motivate people socially to reduce and alter certain behaviors and to provide outreach and help, not punishment and jail sentences. This requires education for both men and women, and increased access to prenatal care and health services for women and children.
Liam,
“to answer your question, i would still say no. because you cannot use one crime to justify another. “i got robbed, so i stole my neighbours TV” just doesnt work.”
So then why do you bother arguing about consent? Basically, to you, women don’t matter in the slightest and you have no problem telling women that their lives are not worth as much as the contents of their uteruses.
“to imply a Foetus is not alive one would hgave to hgave no knowledge of Biology. A cell is alive, all things made of Organic Cells are alive… thus a foetus is ALIVE.”
A fetus is alive in the same sense a skin cell is alive. Should it also be illegal to scratch because you might kill a skin cell?
Hippie,
“People who say they will pray for someone who doesn’t share the same religion or even any religion aren’t trying to act superior.”
It depends on the circumstance. If a friend I knew told me that she was going to pray for me because I was going through a rough patch, I’d probably be touched.
The different between what AB Laura does and what the sub. in your example does is twofold.
First, she does not know anything about me. Why should she care what I think, what I believe, or what my life is like? What possible benefit could it be to me (if what say of prayer is true) to know that some perfect stranger who doesn’t know anything about me feels the need to pray for me?
Secondly, she is openly trying to convert me. In that context, throwing in prayer is abusive.
Anon:
Keep your false insights to my personal life to yourself ok? i have been married almost a decade now, and my wife means more to me then anything.
also, did i NOT SAY if it saved a womans life i support abortion? Are you illiterate or just ignoring that?
Also, Scratching removes dead skincells not living ones. take some biology classes.
John,
“I thought AB Laura’s analogy was specific, insightful and correct … the one about the fella handing out $1,000,000 ((the amt. though is more in the billion-dollar range + YOU need do something – instead of shaking His hand, give Him a glass of water – He thirsts (said so Himself). ))”
There is a difference between saying “I believe this” and saying “I believe this and you MUST believe it.”
“Declaring that you love someone is ‘oppressive’.”
Prayer does not equal love.
“Basically, to you, women don’t matter in the slightest and you have no problem telling women that their lives are not worth as much as the contents of their uteruses.”
What a crock. All women are the contents of someone’s uterus at some time, or they would not exist. Also, go check out realchoice.0catch.com before you go parroting that tired, discredited old “safe & legal” tripe. The only people legalizing abortion made it safer for was the abortionists, not women, and not children, male OR FEMALE.
Next time your car breaks down, will you call a fully matured skin cell or a grown up foetus?
Abortion has no victims (at least before viability), whereas outlawing abortion makes every woman a victim.
Posted by: Anonymous at December 9, 2007 4:01 PM******************* BS..who told you that?
Who went and made women victims? In most cases, they have done this to themselves!!! Who pulled their pants down and gave the man permission to penetrate her vagina?
Next time your car breaks down, will you call a fully matured skin cell or a grown up foetus?
Posted by: just thinking… at December 9, 2007 5:16 PM
LOL! I thought your entire post was excellent!
just thinkin…LOL! Let’s never forget that abortionists stalk, rape, and have molested their patients. PC women have helped to make this possible.
“Let’s never forget that abortionists stalk, rape, and have molested their patients. PC women have helped to make this possible.”
Last I checked, PC women don’t tell or force abortionists to stalk, rape and molest their patients. That is due to the abortionist’s own poor judgment/lack of decency.
Re Heather: “just thinkin…LOL! Let’s never forget that abortionists stalk, rape, and have molested their patients. PC women have helped to make this possible.”
So what are you saying, that every time a woman goes to her gynecologist and gets a routine pelvic exam that the doctor is molesting her??? Maybe this is part of an inside joke that I missed???
Nicole, stick around. I’ll do some posting.
just thinkin…LOL! Let’s never forget that abortionists stalk, rape, and have molested their patients. PC women have helped to make this possible.
Posted by: heather at December 9, 2007 5:44 PM
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Yes, and priests rape children.
Christians have helped to make this possible.
Abortionist joked and laughed during abortion
One abortion patient reported that,
“I was almost 5 months when I told my mother so I had to pay $1,000 to have a saline abortion and the doctor stuck this big needle in my stomach and joked and laughed the whole time like he was at a golf game with his country club buddies and he had no emotion or empathy for me it was awful and demeaning, then I was admitted into the hospital until I delivered the baby, the pain that I had with the delivery were terrible and when the baby came the insensitive nurse said It’s a girl! Like it was a normal delivery and it was a happy occasion but all I could do was cry, after that I was taken into another room where the doctor removed the after birth and checked me for missing body parts from the baby and there was so much blood I thought I was gonna die right there. Then they put the baby in a jar and left her in the bathroom on the edge of the shower for me to see.”
@Nicole: Just wait, she’s going to start spamming the comment section with 10-20 odd posts about evil abortionists that molest, rape, and bad-talk their patients.
It’s a real trip as she does it at least once per day or at least once per thread.
Patient awoke to find abortionist raping her
In 1995, abortionist Lawson A. Akpulonu found himself in trouble. Akpulonu, 49 at the time of his arrest , worked for three abortion clinics, and according to the LA Times (LA Doctor
Rae, for the record, you are a piece of work.
Lifestyle of an abortionist
On January 15, 1999, abortionist Neville W. Duncan was placed on 18 months’ probation, sentenced to 30 days in jail and fined $250 after pleading no contest to charges that he beat his wife and was arrested with crack cocaine in his pocket.
According to the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel article, Doctor sentenced to 30 days in jail, A prosecutor in the case stated that,
“When you are providing medical services to others, they expect you to be healthy and in a good way. . . . In this case, I want him to be monitored. If he is to continue as a medical professional, he needs to remain absolutely drug-free.”
Here is the mug shot of Duncan from the time of the event.
Abortionist asks patients to masturbate
In February of 2006, the California Board of Osteopathic Examiners requested that abortionist Laurence A. Reich turn in his medical license (case #00200000100800).
Documents of the accusations presented to the board include allegations that Reich fondled one woman during an exam, asked her if it felt good and then kissed her. Another woman said that Reich was sexually excited during an exam and asked her to stimulate herself so that he could diagnose an infection. Another said he asked her to stimulate herself in front of him and later asked her to demonstrate an oral sex technique on his thumb.
This was the end of a story that began in 1982 when a complaint was filed by the board against Reich that included allegations from six women, four accusing him of sexual impropriety and two of incompetence
As a result of these allegations, the board placed Reich on probation from 1984 to 1994, and required that he have a nurse present while treating patients, according to court records. Initially Reich?s license was revoked, but the board stayed the revocation for 10 years as long as Reich followed certain terms.
However, in 2002, Reich was again accused of performing sexual acts on his patients. .
An October 30, 2005 article in the LA Daily News entitled, Convicted physician continues practicing, said that patients accused Reich of sticking his fingers inside their vaginas without medical necessity and asking them inappropriate questions about their sexuality then Reich gave the women his home phone number.
In one instance, the case revealed that Reich was accused of asking a patient some very personal questions about her sex life, if she had ever had an extra-marital affair, if she was happy with her husband, and about her sexual fantasies.
Reich then reportedly placed his hands on her genitals and rubbed her. He asked her if she masturbated and if her vagina became easily lubricated. He then requested that she lubricate herself, the patient asked Reich if he meant that she should masturbate and Reich replied in the affirmative. The patient refused.
Sheila Elder one of Reich?s accusers said that she was referred to the Family Planning Medical Clinic in Van Nuys through a friend. Elder was 29 when she visited Reich’s clinic on Sept. 25, 1999, seeking to renew her birth-control prescription, according to the complaint filed by the Attorney General’s Office.
Her complaint alleges Reich touched her inappropriately, told her she had cervical scarring, and that she should schedule another appointment so he could examine her further. After the exam, Reich asked for her home phone number, and gave Elder his home, work and pager numbers, according to the complaint. He pushed for the follow-up visit to further examine the scarring, she said. Instead, Elder followed up with her family physician, who said he found no sign of scarring.
Yvette Chambers stumbled on the clinic through a 411 telephone call. She told CNN (California case shows need for checking doctors’ backgrounds: 12/5/2005) that she was, “in the exam room with her feet in the stirrups, Reich, the only other person in the room.”
She wasn’t comfortable with the way Reich touched her, or with his questions about her sex life during a gynecological exam at a Los Angeles-area clinic.”I was questioning myself as to why I felt so uncomfortable, because it’s a doctor, he’s a doctor. Look at him he’s in a doctor’s (office), his beard’s cleanly cut,” Chambers said. Then, she says, he asked her out to lunch. “At that point I realized ‘eww, eww, I have just been molested. I have just been violated. He just asked me out, ” Chambers said.
Chambers filed a complaint against Reich after the February 2000 appointment, adding to a list of allegations that date back to the 1970s, according to documents on file with the California Osteopathic Medical Board — which regulates osteopaths but not medical doctors.
“He took advantage of me, and he did it under the guise of a doctor,” Chambers said in an interview. “In a normal setting, I’m 100 percent sure I would have acted different, I would’ve stopped him. But he’s a doctor.”
Elder told the press that, “If they had taken this seriously from the get-go, if they would have done something earlier, what happened to Yvette wouldn’t have happened.”
The media pointed out that little information was available to these victims before they fell prey to Reich. CNN said that the board did not state on it’s public information website that Reich was arrested in 2002 on sexual battery charges and pleaded no contest to one count of sexual exploitation by a physician, a misdemeanor.
On December 9,2005, pro-choice Senator Barbara Boxer expressed disgust in the system and called for the board to remove Reich’s medical license. She writes,
“I recently learned of the extraordinarily disturbing circumstances surrounding the actions of Dr. Laurence Reich, an osteopath who practices in California. I believe that immediate action should be taken to suspend Dr. Laurence Reich?s medical license until a full hearing is held and any legal cases against him are completed…Due process is an important part of our legal and regulatory system to protect the interests of various professionals who are regulated by government. In this case, the question that is raised by the history of Dr. Reich is, what about the protection of the public?s interest? This license suspension is long overdue to protect the public. ”
In February of 2006, California’s Osteopathic Medical Board accepted the tendered license of Laurence Reich. Reich will be allowed to practice until April 14, giving him time to close or sell his practice, officials told the Daily News of Los Angeles, (Osteopath Surrenders License, avoids hearing: 2/16/2006 ).
In turning over his license, Reich admitted that he had pleaded no contest “to a criminal offense substantially related to the qualifications, functions or duties of an osteopathic physician and surgeon,” according to court documents. He was sentenced to one day in jail and one year’s probation.
“Rae, for the record, you are a piece of work.”
@Heather: Thank you. I try my darnedest. I am a piece of work…a piece of God’s work. :-p
Also, Scratching removes dead skincells not living ones. take some biology classes.
Posted by: Liam at December 9, 2007 4:58 PM
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Scratching also removes live skin cells.
Take some biology classes.
@ anon,
“Prayer does not equal love.” If there is any one thing you will learn here is that prayer is totally an expression of love … it is a sexless act of love, but nonetheless love.
And Nicole, before you start characterizing the take on abortion that RC has, you should find out yourself … you are major-time incorrect re. the life of the mother. Try the site: Catholic Answers … the Church’s stance is so straight it’s almost boring to repeat.
Nicole, yes!!! Let Rae run and tell you what I’m going to do!!! Oh DO hurry up Rae!
You don’t want me to expose the industry? Do you have a problem with that? If so, why?
@Heather: I don’t have a problem with it. Quite frankly I hope those creeps get exposed.
But it gets old having to read that crap all the time and having to sift through your spamming in order to read comments I haven’t read 10,000,000 times before.
Abortionist grabs women inappropriately
On May 28,2003, The Medical Board of California (Division of Medical Quality Case # 10-2001-125390) disciplined the medical license of abortion doctor John R. Rivera, Jr.
The case involved an incident of assault perpetrated by Rivera when Rivera was attending a San Diego Street Festival. Rivera approached a woman standing in line waiting to purchase some beer. The case revealed that he then asked her if she would like to attend an ecstasy party the next night, and the women said she didn
Rae, I think it’s good for the new people. Nicole asked.
Then here’s an idea:
Copy and paste all of your news clippings into one file and when people ask about it or the topic comes up and people want to know, ask for their email addresses and email it to them so they can read it on their own.
Either that or start up your own web page that you can link people to in order to read this stuff instead of constantly posting it here.
okay, I see your point, but just be careful not to generalize. Yes, some doctors have raped patients, as have some priests, teachers, police officers, politicians, firemen, nurses, stock portfolio managers, carpenters, electricians, and on and on. It’s a horrible thing when anyone does it and I feel terrible for what happened to those women, I think all those rapists should be locked up so they can’t hurt anyone else…but being an abortion doctor, or a gynecologist doesn’t make one a rapist or molester.
Did anyone read my previous big long post about different religious perspectives in the abortion debate? I’d be interested in other people’s thoughts on the issue?
But it gets old having to read that crap all the time and having to sift through your spamming in order to read comments I haven’t read 10,000,000 times before.
Posted by: Rae at December 9, 2007 6:21 PM
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Amen.
Rae,
Why is it you get to tell heather how many times to post something? Are you a mod? No? Then let the mods handle it if they don’t want it posted a bunch of times.
@Nicole: I read it and I’ve heard it before. :) The Jewish traditions have always interested me and I’ve always been curious on the eastern religion’s opinions on abortion. I’ve talked to my Hindu friend a couple of times about it and basically the gist of it is that abortion is considered a great sin in Hinduism but it’s still widely practiced due to the desire to have sons instead of daughters.
Of course I’ve met some other Hindus online and they say that abortion is permissible as a fetus isn’t sentient (which is why they don’t kill animals or something, because they’re sentient).
So it could be that my real-life friend is a particularly conservative Hindu or some people are bastardizing their own religion to fit their political affiliations.
I don’t think people bother to click on links. I don’t bother most of the time.
@Elizabeth: I find it annoying, and I was just expressing my opinion and frustration.
Excuse me for getting annoyed by repetitious posts.
@Heather: If somebody is truly interested in learning about something, they will click on the link in order to expand their knowledge.
All you have to do is simple..read the first couple lines and you can tell if you have read it before…and scroll right past it. Not that hard. That’s what I do, that’s why it doesnt bother me.
Elizabeth, thank you. Nicole, I didn’t mean to bombard you. I haven’t even scratched the surface. There was an abortionist who was just busted for having tons of “kiddie porn” on his computer!!!
@Elizabeth: It gets annoying having to scroll through paragraphs and paragraphs of junk looking for comments I haven’t read before.
Fine, I won’t complain about it again, sheesh.
“There was an abortionist who was just busted for having tons of “kiddie porn” on his computer!!!”
My old parish priest at the church I used to attend got busted for having kiddie porn on his computer.
Needless to say he wasn’t our priest anymore after that.
Aww Rae, don’t get all offended…I’m just defending Heather..I’ve noticed some people getting on her case lately so just thought I’d help her out.
Yes, but what on earth does a priest have to do with an abortionist?..As far as the priest goes, it’s simple! Take the priest out of the church and put him in jail. Toss away the key!
My old parish priest at the church I used to attend got busted for having kiddie porn on his computer.
Needless to say he wasn’t our priest anymore after that.
Posted by: Rae at December 9, 2007 6:37 PM
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Plus, your priest worked in a church. We know that those are magnets for gun violence. I swear, it seems like every time I turned on the TV today, someone was being shot in a church!
(Here’s where I should post the 600 stories on the Colorado church shootings…)
Nicole, abortion patients are easy prey for sexual molestation, and abortionists KNOW that.
@John McDonell “And Nicole, before you start characterizing the take on abortion that RC has, you should find out yourself … you are major-time incorrect re. the life of the mother. Try the site: Catholic Answers … the Church’s stance is so straight it’s almost boring to repeat.”
What are you referring to by “the life of the mother” Is it the part where I said that one evil (abortion) can not be committed in order to prevent another (death of the mother) and the proper course of action is to let nature take it’s course even if it means the death of both mother and child”??? How are you assuming I don’t know about what the Vatican says and Catholic law. I don’t think that I was “characterizing” by stating a position of the Catholic abortion ban. Characterizing would be making subjective judgments. What I was saying was based in fact. Well, before I bother to go into detail…is this in fact what you are referring to?
Laura, go ahead. We are discussing abortion. Not church shootings.
Laura will do ANYTHING to deter the topic heather, didn’t you know?
Laura, go ahead. We are discussing abortion. Not church shootings.
Posted by: heather at December 9, 2007 6:45 PM
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Really? I thought this board was about abortion, not sexual assault.
I’m beginning to think those stories make you HOT.
Cocaine, stalking – just another day
According to NY State Board of Professional Medical Conduct Case # BPMC 01-99, abortionist Daniel Holschauer had been treated for cocaine abuse and was reported to have lied on his medical applications about his troubles. Local news stated that he lied to officials at two hospitals when he applied for privileges at both hospitals, claiming he’d never had a problem with drugs or alcohol abuse. An article in the The Times Herald (01/06/01) stated that in fact, he’d been in drug rehab for cocaine addiction, which had cost him a job in 1988, and which was an ongoing problem. He was also charged with stalking abortion patients that he wanted to have sex with.
Really? I thought this board was about abortion, not sexual assault.
I’m beginning to think those stories make you HOT.
Posted by: Laura at December 9, 2007 6:48 PM
Yes. That includes exposing the industry.
Suzanne Poppema- Abortion is not pleasant
In an interview with Jenn Shreve, posted in Salon Magazine, abortionist Suzanne T. Poppema, co-author of Why I am an Abortion Doctor (Prometheus Books) and a board member of the National Abortion Federation and Physicians for Reproductive Choice and Health, Poppema said, “Abortion procedures are not aesthetically pleasant. There’s no question about it.”
Poppema runs the Aurora Medical Services clinic in Seattle
Why isn’t abortion pleasant? I thought it was just a choice.
Abortion nurse sees doc touch and kiss patients
In March of 2004 an Oregon abortionist Ronald C. Stevenson was sentenced to 5 years probation for aggravated harassment of his patients.
The Bullet 2/14/2004, 3/12/2004 and The Associated Press State & Local Wire, Accused doctor faced similar complaints in Washington: 11/23/2003, reported the story.
Four nurses told police that they had witnessed abortionist Stevenson inappropriately touch and kiss his patients. One of his patients reported to police that Stevenson had caressed her as she awoke from anesthesia, Stevenson was then reported to have kissed the woman.
In another investigation, a 26-year-old Seattle woman told police that she was seeking an abortion and went to abortionist Stevenson at the Okanogan Valley Clinic. The woman said she awoke from the procedure to find abortion doctor Stevenson caressing her.
She didn’t report the incident until a friend of her sister’s said Stevenson had made advances toward her.
The Oregon Board of Medical Examiners stated that Stevenson entered into a Stipulated Order with the Board on July 14, 2005. In this Order he agreed to surrender his Oregon medical license while under investigation. Stevenson may not reapply for licensure for a minimum of two years and must obtain an evaluation before his application can be considered.
Stevenson entered into a Voluntary Limitation with the Board on January 15, 2004. In this Order Licensee Stevenson agreed to the following terms: Stevenson will provide the Board with 14 days notice prior to beginning practice in Oregon; Stevenson will offer a chaperone to all female patients over the age of 16.
——————————————————————————–
Laura will do ANYTHING to deter the topic heather, didn’t you know?
Posted by: Elizabeth at December 9, 2007 6:46 PM************************************************************************** LOL! Elizabeth, that’s all she can do! You can’t do too much defending when it comes to these posts!
That’s why they don’t want me to post them.
Why isn’t abortion pleasant? I thought it was just a choice.
Posted by: heather at December 9, 2007 6:54 PM
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~`
YOU DON’T EVEN READ YOUR OWN FRIKKEN’ ARTICLES!
Do they bore you, too?
The quote was “Abortion procedures are not aesthtically pleasant.”
Is childbirth “aesthetically pleasant?”
Is any medical procedure “aesthetically pleasant?”
@Elizabeth: I’m not offended, just exasperated. That’s all. :)
@Heather: I bring up priests and kiddie porn because guess what, abortionists aren’t the only ones getting busted for looking at kiddie porn!
Does “Pete Townshend” mean anything to you?
Hey Anon,
you wrote,
“The different between what AB Laura does and what the sub. in your example does is twofold.
First, she does not know anything about me. Why should she care what I think, what I believe, or what my life is like? What possible benefit could it be to me (if what say of prayer is true) to know that some perfect stranger who doesn’t know anything about me feels the need to pray for me?
Secondly, she is openly trying to convert me. In that context, throwing in prayer is abusive.”
Posted by: Anonymous at December 9, 2007 4:56 PM
Did you mean to say what AB Laura does is exactly the same as what that subsitute teacher did?
The two points you made would apply to that lady 100%. She started with it the minute I met her. She didn’t even know my name. Of course religious people don’t bug me even though I don’t believe what they believe. They don’t mean it in a bad way. They aren’t trying to be the boss of you.
Abortionist stabs girlfriend with syringe
From three media reports in the New York Post (April 15, 21, and May 25, 2000) and the documentation in NY State Board of Professional Misconduct Order # BPMC-00-130, we are able to put together a picture of bizarre events that happened at the Montefiore Medical Center.
In April of 2000, doctor Stephen Pack was accused of trying to force an abortion on his girlfriend Joy Schepis, a nurse who had worked with him at Montefiore Medical Center in the Bronx.
Pack reportedly became enraged toward Schepis who was seven weeks pregnant with a child he had fathered. Prosecutors said Pack, who was married, asked Schepis to have an abortion. She refused and told him she would take care of the baby without his support.
Pack ordered methotrexate, a labor-inducing drug that works like RU-486, and filled two syringes with it and attacked Schepis in the hospital’s parking lot. Witnesses to the incident said Pack stabbed Schepis in the buttocks and thighs and told her that he was going to give her an abortion.
Witnesses heard Pack yell, “Are you going to have an abortion or not?” she reportedly replied “No!” Witnesses then quoted him as yelling out, “I’m going to give you an abortion!”
The NY State Board of Professional Medical Conduct stated that Pack, “administered an injunction of methotrexate to a patient who did not seek or consent to an injection.” Schepis defined Pack as a “pathetic excuse for a human being.”
She told reporters, “He is a vicious, wild animal who belongs in a cage.” Pack told the court he was sorry for his actions. Schepis said that she was pleased he would serve time in prison. But she said she did not believe his apology.
”I don’t think he’s very sorry for anything except that he’s going to jail,” she said. Pack plead guilty to assault and abortion charges and was sentenced to two years in prison. Schepis, gave birth to a healthy baby and she said the drug has not affected her son.
——————————————————————————–
Elizabeth: I’m not offended, just exasperated. That’s all. :)
@Heather: I bring up priests and kiddie porn because guess what, abortionists aren’t the only ones getting busted for looking at kiddie porn!
Does “Pete Townshend” mean anything to you?
Posted by: Rae at December 9, 2007 7:02 PM………………………………………………………………………………………………….. We are talking about abortion. Don’t ever tell me about violence on the PL side again! NOT EVER! Because you have no room to talk!
Next time someone decides to mention abortion clinic bombings just remember, I’ve got my SPAM. *evil cackle*
“We are talking about abortion. Don’t ever tell me about violence on the PL side again! NOT EVER! Because you have no room to talk!”
Um, Heather, I rarely if ever bring up violence on the Pro-Life side.
So what on earth are you referring to?
Rae, that isn’t directed at you, so I am sorry. However, it’s very frustrating when people always bring up Paul Hill and Eric Rudolph. The majority of PLfers would never kill anyone, but look at all of the violence on the side of CHOICE! Fair is fair!!
@Heather: Oy, I’m from Minnesota, the home state of SPAM. :D
“We eat ham and jam and SPAM a lot…”
Did anyone read my previous big long post about different religious perspectives in the abortion debate? I’d be interested in other people’s thoughts on the issue?
Posted by: nicole at December 9, 2007 6:27 PM
With regard to Jewish perspective on abortion. Abortion is basically wrong and not really allowed just for a choice. Here is a good discussion of the Jewish perspective.
http://www.slate.com/id/1005956/
“…Orthodox Jews have differing opinions on abortion, but wrong to create the impression that the liberal notion of abortion on demand is among them. Jewish law emphatically rejects that idea. Women are never allowed to dispose of a fetus for so-called trivial reasons–because they can’t afford to have a baby, for instance, or because there’s a chance that it may be deformed.”
Really? I thought this board was about abortion, not sexual assault.
I’m beginning to think those stories make you HOT.
Posted by: Laura at December 9, 2007 6:48 PM************************************************************** You would…PERVO!
“The majority of PLfers would never kill anyone, but look at all of the violence on the side of CHOICE! Fair is fair!!”
@Heather: It’s called taking the high road and not killing others, even if you think it’s warranted. YOU do not have the authority to kill because you think somebody “deserves it”. Nobody does.
Rae, lol! Okay, going to read the above link.
That includes abortionists. They have no right to kill!
@Heather: You are correct. Morally, they do not have a right to kill. However, in the US and many countries, they are legally allowed to do so. Why is beyond me.
@John
I’ll go ahead and clarify the Catholic position, I was raised Catholic and taught Sunday school so I am quite familiar with it…(Oh, but you were assuming I know nothing of RC belief, were you?) Well, here it is. For Catholics, there is a ban on all abortion, more specifically DIRECT abortion. There are some unusual exceptions for INDIRECT abortion. One example is an ectopic pregnancy (when the egg gets lodged in the fallopian tube and must be removed). The usual procedure for this is the removal of the oviduct. An indirect result of this procedure is that the embryo is destroyed, however because it is not a direct abortion, it is an exception to the ban. Other exceptions include things like the removal of cancerous tissue. However, aborting a fetus to save a women’s life is NOT an exception to the ban because it would be a direct abortion. Here’s a few excerpts that show the Church’s position when it comes to a women’s life being threatened by pregnancy.
Tribunal of the Holy Office ruled on AUG 1889
(The fetus has)…”an equal right to its life with its mother; therefore neither the mother, nor medical practitioner, nor any human being whatever can lawfully take that life away. The State cannot give such right to the physician; for it has not itself the right to put an innocent person to death. No matter how desirable it might seem to be at times to save the life of the mother, common sense teaches and all nations accept the maxim, that ‘evil is never to be done that good may come of it’; or, which is the same thing, that ‘a good end cannot justify a bad means’.”
AND
From his encyclical Humanae Vitae, Pope Paul VI:
“It is not licit, even for the gravest reasons to do evil so that good may follow there from, that is, to make into the object of a positive act of the will something which is intrinsically disordered, and hence unworthy of the human person, even when the intention is to safeguard or promote individual, family or social well being…directly willed and procured abortion, even if for therapeutic reasons [is] to be absolutely excluded.”
I think both those statements are pretty clear. I don’t see how I was “characterizing” anything about RC belief or that what I was saying was “incorrect”. Maybe you can clear me up on what you meant. Or maybe you should stop making assumptions about people you don’t know. Facts are facts, and the RC ban on abortion is pretty clear.
But then again the US also supports the death penalty and pointless wars that cannot be won against ideology, so allowing abortion isn’t really that surprising to me.
@anon & Liam,
many moons ago, the concept of body autonomy came up and the PC’er (Diana) wondered if there was an analogy to refute this concept. Eventually, I landed on the analogy of a midway ride. If someone purchases a ticket (has sex), and then proceeds to get on the ride (pregnancy), the client is responsible to go right to the end of the ride (to term) … (and will usually have restraint-devices forcing the client in case he/she panics).
Thanks to Liam, thought of another one. Pregnancy is something like skydiving. Abortion is then allowing someone to cut you free of your chute. You are at first happy to fall free. (There is a reckoning one day – human beings just do not bounce!) And body integrity just does not matter anymore when there should be self-integrity (wearing a chute) instead!
Anon wrote,
“Secondly, she is openly trying to convert me. In that context, throwing in prayer is abusive.”
___________________________________________________________
Life must be awfully cushy for you to think someone saying they are praying for you is abuse.
Is it abuse when someone cheers for the opposing team or calls you out at first base?
Oh the abuse, you poor thing. I hope you have insurance for your therapy to recover.
Prayer is abusive? LOL!
“Oh the abuse, you poor thing. I hope you have insurance for your therapy to recover.”
I do, actually. Thanks for the kind wishes, I’ll be sure to tell my therapist next week that someone was nice to me.
Trying to convert you. The key word there is “trying”…Heck, I don’t give a rat’s behind if you don’t.
Okay, even I’m choking on the sarcasm in that.
@Nicole,
the characterizing was/is in fact old news. Since the pontificate of John Paul II a person AUTOMATICALLY is excommunicated from any kind of promotion of direct abortion. (A friend of mine said that there were two firsts here: 1) it is the very first time that excommunication is automatic, and 2) it is a first when a moral issue is targeted – usually its a ‘faith’ issue.)
The argument of a woman’s health being a problem was correct with older practices in obstetrics, but modern forms of obstetrics makes this so remote that there are always two beings of equal value and neither is ever pitted against the other.
See, it’s always good to see someone who wants to convert, but I like to be realistic about things. We have lots of people on death row who aren’t sorry for murdering someone. Scott Peterson is still “innocent” according to himself. So is O.J. Some of you are content to stay right where you are. So, I won’t beg you.
Abortion patient told to ‘shut up’
In a press conference, abortion patient Melanie Bell, testified about her abortion experience. She said she was told that her pregnancy, which was nine weeks along, was just a “blob of tissue.”
She said nurses told her to shut up when she asked for the procedure to stop.
Abortionist: sex, rape, and hatred
One of California?s biggest sexual misconduct cases against an abortion doctor, might indicate that gynecologist Ivan C. Namihas had a hatred of women.
In March 1981, Roberta Ward, underwent a hysterectomy performed by Namihas. The operation went well, but a few days later the patient’s sutures tore open. Namihas put her under anesthesia and sewed her up. A few days later, the stitches tore again. This time Namihas, seemingly agitated, redid the stitches — but omitted the anesthetic.
“It was excruciatingly painful, but he finished so quickly I didn’t have time to do anything,” she says.
When Ward went in for a final checkup, she suddenly realized the examination was anything but routine. She says that when she was alone with Namihas, her feet in the metal stirrups, Namihas commented that Ward’s husband would “appreciate” his handiwork because he had “sewed me up tighter.”
Then the doctor began to fondle her, Ward says. “I thought, ‘Do I yell? Do I kick? My feet are up in these things.’ So I laid there like a corpse, thinking, ‘It’s going to be over.’ It seemed like an eternity.”
Ward tried to take action against Namihas with the state medical board, but the complaint she filed never seemed to go anywhere until Kathleen Schmidt took over the case.
After interviewing Roberta Ward in 1981, Schmidt had no doubt that Ward had told the truth, however Schmidt needed additional witnesses to procede. Six years later she got the break she needed when she overheard another investigator discussing a sexual misconduct case;and mentioned the name Namihas.
The patient, April S., claimed to the investigator that during a pelvic exam, Namihas had fondled her sexually. This complaint stalled as well as Namihas managed to convince two investigators that she had misunderstood a common medical procedure.
Then in 1990 a former girlfriend of Namihas’s, Jeanette Jacobs filed a complaint. Jacobs stated to the medical board that Namihas had gotten her pregnant, then performed an after-hours abortion on her without adequate equipment.
The LA Times reported that Namihas allegedly impregnated at least two of his patients, and that he told one woman, whom he treated for more than 10 years, that he became a gynecologist so he could vent his anger toward women.
A former employee said that Namihas “seemed to get some perverse pleasure” from inflicting pain on patients and several women told the LA Times grisly tales of enduring excruciating procedures without anesthesia. Another woman said that she, “felt he had problems with women in general because he talked about how much he hated his mother and bad relationships he’d had with girlfriends and his wives.”
Still another said, “He told me the reason he became a gynecologist was because he hated women and he could use a knife to cut them.?
Dozens of women complained to state medical authorities that Namihas had fondled, masturbated or otherwise sexually abused them. Many of the alleged instances of abuse dated back to the late 1960s and continued through 1992, they said.
In a 1993 Primetime investigation several patients shared their horrors:
* “The examinations would be without gloves. It was my first gynecologist that I ever went to. I didn’t know that they were supposed to use gloves. I know that now.”
* ” He wanted to be my first sexual experience, to make sure that it was done correctly.”
* “And he wanted me to sit on his lap and give him a return demonstration so that he knew that I knew how to masturbate.”
Kathleen Jewel Elliot wrote this letter to the Orange County Medical Association in 1973.
“During the examination of the pelvic region, he began massaging the erogenous zones of my vagina, telling me to close my eyes and relax. He also used foul language. I have no idea at all what can be done, if anything. At least you will have this on record in case you receive other complaints.”
In some of the treatments, the indictment alleges, Namihas performed painful laser surgery on patients and billed for the procedures even when test results and biopsies came back negative.
When state medical authorities revoked Namihas’ license in May, 1992, more than 200 women came forward and said he abused them.
Officials of the California Attorney General’s office have described Namihas as “a predator in a white coat” and called his alleged transgressions “the worst case of sexual abuse by a physician in California history.”
Court documents filed by the attorney general allege that he:
* Made one of his patients pregnant and then performed an abortion on her without adequate equipment and safeguards.
* Aggressively assaulted and kissed a hospital employee and had her fired when she reported it.
* Boasted of his sexual prowess and had “physical encounters” with a nurse while a patient was in labor, thus “abdicating his responsibility” to the patient.
* Performed a dilation and curettage on a woman without anesthesia, an act the attorney general called “cruelty, plain and simple.”
* Taught a patient how to masturbate, then told her to go home and think of him while she masturbated.
* Induced the same patient to perform oral sex on him.
* Exposed his penis to a patient.
* Harassed a woman “for being in labor for 18 hours.”
In the June 1997, US Attorney’s Bulletin (Volume 45, Number 3) California Assistant Attorney General Jonathan S. Shapiro states, ” The term ‘abuse of patient trust’ must have been coined for Dr. Ivan C. Namihas. Arrogant, cruel and greedy her carried out a particularly cruel form of fraud against his victims.”
He also pointed out that after abusing his patients and destroying medical files, Namihas moved to Las Vegas, Nevada and might, “still there living in his mansion n the 15th hole of a private golf course, but for the courage and persistence of some of his patients.”
On July 3, 1992, the Medical Board of California revoked Namihas’ license
——————————————————————————–
2 for the road. I just wanted you to realize that abortionists don’t respect women. They don’t care about women. They’ll take your money AND your body.
We have talked about the problem of depopulation and asset deflation and how retirees will be affected. Here is a link to an interview with an economist explaining why investing in the stock market for your retirement is pretty dangerous when the labor pool is shrinking. Be warned, he seems to hate Bush’s economic policies as much as I do, which is saying a lot.
Hippie – good stuff. He’s really hard on Bush, deservedly so IMO, but Clinton by no means “did” good stuff, economically. No biggie, though, compared to the deflationary forces which are indeed quite strong. How to avoid them? Primarily further debase the currency and ramp up the debt. Nice, eh?
Interesting times.
Doug
Former employee – It was just a slaughterhouse
The Los Angeles Times article, Doctor accused in abortion suit testifies (07/30/89), gives insight to why abortionists are known as the washouts and losers of the medical profession.
In January of 1987, Belinda Byrd, a 37-year-old Los Angeles woman who was in her 19th week of pregnancy, went to Inglewood Women’s Hospital abortion facility for an abortion to be performed by Steven Pine. Unfortunately, Belinda would not survive the day.
Pine, and Inglewood’s chief of staff, abortion doctor Morton Barke were sued by the mother of the dead woman charging that Pine performed an abortion that perforated Byrd’s uterus. The family also accused Pine of leaving the abortion hospital while Byrd lay bleeding and unattended for about three hours in a bed until she lost consciousness.
A nurse’s aide who worked at the abortion hospital at the time of Byrd’s death said in court that Pine: rarely examined patients after they left the operating room and routinely signed discharge forms before the patients left the recovery room.
Margarette Wooten a former employee of Inglewood told the court that patients at the facility were routinely discharged while they were still “groggy” and “unalert” from their operations.
According to the Times, Wooten said she later quit her job at the abortion hospital without notice because,
“It was just a slaughterhouse and I couldn’t take it any more.”
Liam: well, most of my reasons are based in Logic. there are waiting lists of people who want babies, and it seems foolish that one person would destroy something that it is destroying someone else NOT to have.
While I think adoption is fine if both parties want it, a given woman has no obligation to provide kids for anybody else. Yes, there may be waiting lists, but there are also 150,000+ kids in the US alone waiting for adoption. Talk about a waiting list….
……
Another is Life. i believe killing is wrong unless it is for survival. Humans were meant to eat meat (omnivorous) so we do, but i do not support killing of things we cannot eat unless in defense of your own life. >1% of abortions on done to save the life of the mother.
Yes, “life,” but there is also freedom, and I don’t think it’s right to take away the freedom that women have in the matter. On meat, I think it’s farfetched to say we were “meant” to eat meat. Our digestive systems are way different from carnivores. Oh well, I still love a dang ribeye…
……
Another reason is because i support choice, but also advocate responsibility. We, as americans, have a CHOICE about who will run our country, but we also then have to live with that choice, and take responsibility for it. We voted in GWB and now we have had to live with that choice. We cannot just have him killed and yell “do over” and pretend it never happened.
The time for ending a Presidency is usually 8 or 4 years, short of impeachment and kick-out. Okay, we missed the 4 year point for Bush Jr., but that doesn’t mean a woman shouldn’t have an abortion if she has an unwanted pregnancy.
……
To me, Choice without responsibility cannot exist. this is why we cannot vote, drive, drink, or smoke until we are old enough to accept the responsibilities of those choices.
The responsibility for the pregnancy is with the woman, not with what you want her to do. There are a practically unlimited number of things we let minors choose for themselves. Voting, driving, smoking, boozing – do you see many people wanting them to be legal for youngsters? There is no significant amount of sentiment that things should be different there, i.e. pretty much nobody wants it to be legal. Abortion is not that way at all.
Doug
Rae, that sounds great – 3M = a monster company. And – Dresden Dolls – “Brechtian punk cabaret” HA I love that.
Is your Grandma a partier? And I hear you on getting internet access at home. I’m almost never there but only have dial-up access, and it’s even a slow dial-up at that. Hard to believe how pathetically slow it is….
Ciao,
Doug
I apologize if I “beat anyone over the head”, or personnaly attacked their non-belief. I don’t believe I did…but if so, please understand that it was out of love for you, not hate. I believed I just stated my opinion as a comment, and if you took it as a personal attack, I am sorry. I don’t believe I have ever called anyone a derragotory name on these threads, although I have been called many. Again, I expected it, but didn’t think it would have the type of effect on me that it did.
AB Laura, you’re gonna have some of that online. Just a fact, and besides there’s no way for voice inflection to be heard, body language to be seen, etc., so things can get magnified. I hope you stay – I’ve never had a complaint about you and we’ve had a good time.
Doug
yllas: It makes Doug keep that shine of civility which Doug admires in Doug.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Laura: I always wonder who Yllas is talking about. She’s always so vague…
Laura, I think it was you that hit it on the head – echolalia. Sometimes I think we’re too hard on yllas but then other times all I see is a mean person trying to use this debate to justify their meanness while hiding behind somebody else’s name spelled backwards. Takes all kinds….
Doug
Also, Scratching removes dead skin cells not living ones. take some biology classes.
Liam, I was…uh… with this one woman this one time, and believe me – it’s not only dead ones that can come off.
Doug
P.S. (Ouch – that’s gonna leave a mark….)
Rae, for the record, you are a piece of work.
Heather, yes she is. Do you have a problem with that? ; )
Doug
P.S. You rascal – you know I like you too.
Lifestyle of an abortionist
Lifestyle of a spelunker.
Lifestyle of a woman who made little umbrellas for drinks.
Lifestyle of a pigskin pantywaist.
@Heather: I bring up priests and kiddie porn because guess what, abortionists aren’t the only ones getting busted for looking at kiddie porn!
Rae: Does “Pete Townshend” mean anything to you?
Geez, he was ten years old in 1955. Did they even have kiddie porn back then?
Nicole, nice post by you on religions and the comparisons of perception, as when is it “a life” or “a full life,” etc. I see it as all one thing along with other valuations even if no religion is involved. There is physical reality, and then there is what we want.
Doug
Nicole, because you were raised Catholic and taught Sunday school that makes you an expert in the Faith? Please stop, my sides are aching!
John is correct in his response to you but I’d like you to name ONE medical reason where a direct abortion would be THE ONLY way to save the life of the mother.
(And please don’t use “mental health” because that is a complete cop-out. And before anyone even tries to call me insensitive to the mentally ill, you should know that I’ve been on antidepressants before and admitted to the hospital for depression in my early 20
Oh Doug,
You fit in quite well in that folie a famille composed of Sally the deathsex worshipper, Laura the lazy minded, and of course old SOMG.
Writing of being hit on the head, Doug,did you get hit on the head while being with a woman whose misery and suffering was added to by you Doug?
Remember Doug, the future belongs to those who don’t murder babies in the womb. That contradiction in the law about anyone but the mother murdering her baby in the womb, will end with life being protected from conception. Sooner or later, you’ll be a outlaw advocate, doing what outlaws have always done. Advocating others to break the law while making a buck off those suckers. You sly devil you.
Old Doug,
What you think are ad hominem remarks from me Yllas, are character and personality observations by me, gained by your own words written here Doug.
By your writing about some women you knew and then attacked her character and personality revealed more about you Doug, then her.
Typical of a selfish manipulator of human beings, you threw in a few words about your “mistakes” in that story about some woman who serviced your vices.
I understand your service here at Jill Stanek’s blog, of being a personality that represents “to select from a number of possible alternatives” and decide on one of those alternatives.
But, your a pirate Doug, you really fly the flag of abortion with the appropriate skull and cross bones, while showing the other side of the flag as freedom of selecting.
It is possible your personality was formed from being soaked in polychlorinated biphenyls when no one guessed at the danger of insulating liquids. Or the fact that the electrical insulating industry lied to you and others for years, which has affected your personality from being lied too, or not listened to.
They rationalized ever decision they made and ignored facts for years for the profit made in not changing their product.
Behind the choices, and then decisions made by the electrical insulating industry of capacitors and transfomers was a certain personality and character which formed those choices and decisions.
So Doug, here you write, thinking ad hominem attacks are being heaped upon you Doug, just as those who hid the health dangers of polychlorinated biphenyls rationalized their personalities and character to their family, brothers, sisters, and suffering women they met and used for personal vice.
Be honest with yourself, Doug, your family of pro choicers are personality disorders on display from Sally to SOMG.
You play the part of a Vulcan, Doug, with a ting of vice thrown in for those young chumps, who buy your selling of vice being natural.
But, it is the personality and character which was formed from choices and decisions that make Doug that Lt. Keefer of abortion which amuses me. Interesting enough, Doug makes me laugh more, when Doug decides to entertain us with some wine “personality”, which may be characterized as “Atlanta pretentious” with a aroma of Texasred hiding under “why ignore perfection”. Doug’s perfection that is.
See Doug, it’s not attacks against you, just your personality and character being observed, which explains your will and volition to allow murdering human beings.
Doug is not going to advocate for John if any suffering of Doug is involved in being a advocate for John.
Doug, a personality which cannot understand that the suffering, despairing human being, will ask those they need the most, at the most excruciating time of their life, to leave and abandon them is common amongst those who are suffering.
Ask Jesus about being abandoned by the personality of the Doug’s in this world.
Fact is Doug, your for the choice to rid the John McDonell’s before they are born. Or will you deny women the right to choose and decide to murder for genetic culling, Doug?
Your “public consumption personality” Doug, demands choice Doug.
But, I understand your “faking in public” Doug, a “concern” for those who suffer such as John. But, IRL, you exposed yourself about what Doug does when a person/woman is going through public humiliation and mental anguish of meeting a mistake in life after giving up that mistake years ago.
Don’t take this as ad hominem Doug, it is just exposing a b-ll—-er when one is spreading that dung in public.
And Doug, I know how to spread that dung too, I just became capable of knowing when not to believe my own dung, unlike you Doug.
See Doug, being pessimistic about you, is actually just being a realistic optimist about those who make up a public persona , and cruise pro life boards with a eye patch flipped up, prowling for souls to destroy.
Then again Doug, you really believe in your perfection and personality you have exposed here.
Hope you’ll visit our truly pro-life, no-exceptions site, TheAmericanView.com & hear some of our radio shows. God bless you all — and he does when we OBEY Him. John Lofton, JLof@aol.com; Editor, TheAmericanView.com
John Lofton, thanks for the great reminder. OBEY! Kristen, how true. What mental condition would warrant an abortion?
@Heather: I bring up priests and kiddie porn because guess what, abortionists aren’t the only ones getting busted for looking at kiddie porn!
Rae: Does “Pete Townshend” mean anything to you?
Geez, he was ten years old in 1955. Did they even have kiddie porn back then?
Posted by: Doug at December 9, 2007 9:56 PM************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************** Okay, again, allow me to explain myself. I don’t doubt that a lot of people are viewing child porn, but wouldn’t you switch gynecologists if you found out that YOURS was looking at it? It’s vulgar.
Well, you might have to switch. Your gyn would be incarcerated.
@Heather: Of course I’d switch if I found out my gynecologist was looking at kiddie porn. I’d also report his sorry behind to the authorities.
Laura: I always wonder who Yllas is talking about. She’s always so vague…
Laura, I think it was you that hit it on the head – echolalia. Sometimes I think we’re too hard on yllas but then other times all I see is a mean person trying to use this debate to justify their meanness while hiding behind somebody else’s name spelled backwards. Takes all kinds….
Doug
OOOOOHH no Doug, I’m sure you didn’t just go there. 1/2 the time I don’t even know what planet you’re on. Why post a picture of Nicole Ritchie and her b/f = Kidd Rock. I didn’t find that relevant, and I thought it was weird.
Why post a picture of Nicole Ritchie and her b/f = Kidd Rock. I didn’t find that relevant, and I thought it was weird.
Posted by: heather at December 10, 2007 10:43 AM
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
It was a joke!
It was the result of those two mating!
It was hilarious…
Jill, you forget that you also have a handful of “pro-life” people who agree with pro-abortion groups that laws like parental notification, no tax-funding for abortion or partial-birth abortion bans are wrong.
It was a joke!
It was the result of those two mating!
It was hilarious…
Posted by: Laura at December 10, 2007 12:27 PM************************************************************************************************************ It was stupid.
hilarious? Yes. I was falling out of my seat. I’ll watch Conan for my entertainment.
okay, I see your point, but just be careful not to generalize. Yes, some doctors have raped patients, as have some priests, teachers, police officers, politicians, firemen, nurses, stock portfolio managers, carpenters, electricians, and on and on. It’s a horrible thing when anyone does it and I feel terrible for what happened to those women, I think all those rapists should be locked up so they can’t hurt anyone else…but being an abortion doctor, or a gynecologist doesn’t make one a rapist or molester.
********************************************************************************************************** Being an abortionist doesn’t make one a rapist? That is incorrect.
Heather,
“Being an abortionist doesn’t make one a rapist? That is incorrect.”
Why? The woman has given the doctor permission to surgically enter her uterus and remove the contents. Last time I checked, the defintion of rape included pentration without consent.
Heather,
“Being an abortionist doesn’t make one a rapist? That is incorrect.”
Why? The woman has given the doctor permission to surgically enter her uterus and remove the contents. Last time I checked, the defintion of rape included pentration without consent.
Posted by: Anonymous at December 10, 2007 7:05 PM Did you bother to read my above posts?
The woman has given the abortionist permission to enter her uterus. Right. That’s why the mother is a murderer.
Heather,
“The woman has given the abortionist permission to enter her uterus. Right.”
Technically, yes. If you consider the z/e/f to be an indiviaul human deserving of protection, you can (and do) argue that an abortion “kills” the z/e/f. You cannot, however, argue the point that the doctor performing the abortion is “raping” anyone. If you subscirbe to the belief that abortion is murder, the z/f/e is being murdered, not raped. The definitions of rape and murder are quite differnet. The only one who could conceivably be raped in this scenario is the woman, but the doctor cannot be raping her because she has given permission.
Anon said,
“Last time I checked, the defintion of rape included pentration without consent.”
Posted by: Anonymous at December 10, 2007 7:05 PM
While I’m almost positive Heather was using one of the first two definitions, I think you should probably go back & read the definition of “rape” again:
Rape: (Encarta)
3 Violent destructive treatment: the violent, destructive, or abusive treatment of something
4. Abduction: an act of seizing somebody and carrying him or her away by force.
IMO, seems to me the abortionist is QUITE the rapist!
Anon, you’re kidding, right?
AB Laura,
I am aware of that. However, one does not use the term “rapist” in conversation to describe someone who is abducting and carrying away another person.
Heather was using the first definition of the word.
In any case, the second would not fit either. A doctor does not “abduct” a z/e/f.
Heather,
“You’re kidding, right?”
Not at all. To kill is not the same as to rape. They are two distinctly different concepts; one cannot logically equate them.
James Bopp is just another Godless lawyer using a Godless strategy.
He said at the National Press Club a few months ago that it will be 35 years before pro-lifers can make a serious move to make abortion illegal.
So, he either has a 35 year plan or he is just hoping that lawyers will be able to MAKE MONEY from alleged pro-life legislation (more accurately regulation of abortion) so they can fund their pensions and retire wealthy.
Steven Ertelt, who is a well-documented liar and was severely trounced in a 3 part debate
on the fetal pain awareness law by Bob Enyart, said:
“Jill, you forget that you also have a handful of “pro-life” people who agree with pro-abortion
groups that laws like parental notification, no tax-funding for abortion or partial-birth abortion
bans are wrong.”
Enyart and Coloroado Right To Life and American Right To Life and myself have NEVER EVER said that
its wrong to get rid of taxpayer funding for abortion. By getting rid of tax funds for
abortion you are helping to close down clinics while not endorsing a law that says “and then you
can kill the baby”.
We are against the parental concent law because it is the REGULATION OF ABORTION and puts up a tiny
barrier that is easily hurdled by girls under 18 (and this law only affects girls under 18) by
going to a judge and getting a judicial bypass.
The so-called Partial Birth Abortion Ban that was OKd by the Supreme Court was not a ban at all, but
more of a “how to manual”. And if an abortionist breaks the law who is there to alert the police
and have them charged and sentenced? The vile majority opinion signed on or supported by all the
Catholic judges (who incurred automatic excommunication by promoting “less shocking
methods” of performing abortions) even said that it the abortionist performs the abortion procedure
that was banned “on accident” then there is no penalty.
Again, we will always oppose any law that goes against God’s absolute and enduring command
You shall not murder. Its a level of obedience and faithfulness that cannot even be imagine by
Ertelt or Jacqueline, otherwise they would not favor the failed strategy that CONTINUOUSLY CALLS
FOR COMPROMISING on God’s absolute moral law.
Even though the majority opinion for the misnamed Partial Birth Abortion Ban is online and available
for all to read Ertelt hopes that no one will read it and see that it is in fact an abortion manual
and the failed result of $250 million in misappropriated money – spent to pass a law that
cannot result in saving one single innocent baby from being aborted.
Heather,
“You’re kidding, right?”
Not at all. To kill is not the same as to rape. They are two distinctly different concepts; one cannot logically equate them.
Posted by: Anonymous at December 10, 2007 10:41 PM Didn’t you read my posts?
Of course I did. None of them prove that doctors who perform abortions necessarily must be rapists as well.
Okay, stay blind.
Heather,
“Okay, stay blind.”
The fact that some gynecologists who perform abortions have either raped or molested their patients does not make every gynecologist who performs abortions a rapist/molester any more than the fact that some Catholic priests raped and molested alter boys makes every Catholic priest a rapist/molester.
yllas: That contradiction in the law about anyone but the mother murdering her baby in the womb, will end with life being protected from conception.
Again, you’re just pretending. You may not like abortion all that much, but in no way does that mean “murder.”
yllas: Old Doug
:: laughing :: Well, you may well be younger than me…. I guess I gotta give you that one.
I love the references to PCBs…
Doug
yllas: Doug is not going to advocate for John if any suffering of Doug is involved in being a advocate for John.
Nonsense. You have retreated into merely playing the fool.
Doug reveals his self love again.
When I write about you Doug, your self esteem must reply. What a weak public personality you have Doug.
Abortion is murder Doug. Ask Scott Peterson about murdering baby Conner. Or the fool in Texas who thinks like you Doug, still denying that baby in the womb he murdered.
What I enjoy about you Doug, is the few words and sentences you take and highlight in response to my observations about your personality and character.
Btw Doug, I’m older then you Doug, and applying the word “old” to your persona is for the reason that you are old Doug. Old thinking, frozen in time, incapable of moving on and seeing the future does not include murdering the unborn.
When you pick among the many sentences(chose) I write about your character, it exposes what you must defend about yourself Doug. Thanks, Doug.
And what you ignore in my writing about your character Doug, is just as delightful too. Thanks Doug.
It allows me to chose and decide what makes Doug soo committed to murder against the weak and young.
Good old John, simply took the other spectrum of life and asked you a simple question about advocating for his life or death Doug.
You didn’t give a clear cut answer Doug. I plead and advocate for your LIFE old man John. That is all you needed to write. Nine words Doug.
Your persona is a fake Doug, a down to earth fake Doug.
A person who cares only for the fat that sticks to your own bones.
John was applying to himself what occurred to Jesus when he was in the garden of Gethsemane. John knows your a fake Doug. Your real personality advocates for the decision of death for the most weak and young amongst us.
And the old and weak are just on the other end of the spectrum of the life cycle.
You would “press” for John’s death Doug, from being for death, for the most weak and defenseless in life, who depend on another for life.
And that word “press” does have a special meaning in the above sentence Doug. It will zoom right above your intellect and reasoning, but John will catch it.
It is where Jesus met the persona and character of old Doug’s.
Tis in the heart Doug, that heart that knows where realism meets despair, and fakes in life such as you Doug. John knows your persona Doug.
I know your persona Doug.
And all arguments about abortion revolve around a real simple theme old Doug. Life or death.
Your for allowing others to murder innocent life old Doug.
Heather,
“Okay, stay blind.”
The fact that some gynecologists who perform abortions have either raped or molested their patients does not make every gynecologist who performs abortions a rapist/molester any more than the fact that some Catholic priests raped and molested alter boys makes every Catholic priest a rapist/molester.
Posted by: Anonymous at December 11, 2007 8:49 PM*********** Abortionists are murderers and rapists.
yllas: Btw Doug, I’m older then you Doug, and applying the word “old” to your persona is for the reason that you are old Doug. Old thinking, frozen in time, incapable of moving on and seeing the future does not include murdering the unborn.
Despite your penchant for silly fantasy in lieu of you having any rational argument, I do believe you, there. And of course abortion is not “murder.” You may not like it all that much, but your opinion isn’t what determines murder or not.
Anyway, increased population pressure makes for more tolerance for abortion and less sentiment against it, so if anything I’d say the future goes against you.