Planned Parenthood promotes NFP?
Is this Planned Parenthood promoting Natural Family Planning? Not quite, but close.
Cyclebeads are based on the new Standard Days Method developed in 1998 by the Institute for Reproductive Health at Georgetown University.
The diff?…
NFP relies on a woman charting her waking temperature, cervical mucus secretions, and cervical changes to determine those days of the month when she is fertile. Properly used, it is over 99% effective in avoiding pregnancy.
SDM, over 95% effective when properly used, is based on computer models showing that women whose menstrual cycles are between 26-32 days are potentially fertile on days 8-19.
Cyclebeads are a string of 32 color-coded beads and a black rubber ring. When a woman starts her period, she puts the ring on the first bead, which is red, and moves it in the direction of the arrow once every day. When she gets to the white beads, she is potentially fertile.
I don’t know if the Catholic Church has taken a position on Cyclebeads, but at least some Catholic officials have accepted it.
I view NFP and now SDM as natural forms of contraception. If you click on the aforementioned article, you can see how SDM is being used for population control.
Still, it is odd that any PP would promote Cyclebeads, since it’s not a repeat money maker like all other forms of contraception. There must be a there there I don’t yet know.
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’ll tell you why Jill. At LEAST once a year you get sick or you exercise more, or less, or whatever and your cycle gets messed up. Without charting like NFP this almost guarantees a pregnancy that they can abort. $$$$
Kristen, hm. Valid suggestion.
Actually, I bet it would work if you actually refrain from vaginal sex for the TWELVE DAYS the beads represent out of every twenty-eight days.
Sounds like a crapshoot.
Our local Planned Parenthood teaches classes in that basal-temperature thing and the mucus method. Sounds like it takes more discipline than I have…
I have friends in Cagayan de Oro City in Mindanao who put up a pro-life group that the Archbishop supported. When he retired, another Bishop was appointed, and started pushing the group to prioritize SDM. The relationship has been shaky since the group was cold to SDM because, as you say, SDM promotes population control. The new Bishop even pushed a cooperation project with our Population Commission, which in the end was vigorously opposed by Church groups in that city. Still, while the Church accepts SDM, the NFP method is still more widely promoted in the Philippines.
I bet they do this to help their ‘image’ — after all who wants to be known for making money off of killing babies … for providing contraceptives that fail and for dishonesty and lack of values …
Y’all realize people make more money from a live birth than from giving an abortion, right? Isn’t it possible that some people have a different belief system than you and that they care as much about female reproductive health as you do about fetal life?
Non-profits like Planned Parenthood don’t exist to make money; they exist to help people.
I don’t see how you can think birth control would be a money-maker for Planned Parenthood. They practically give it away.
non-reality,
then how do they make their tens of millions of dollars every year?
Kristen —
The Cyclebeads website says that in a trial, 12 out of 100 women got pregnant during the first year of use. If true, that’s similar to the condom’s failure rate, and a damn sight better than just having unprotected sex willy-nilly.
If Planned Parenthood really wanted people to get pregnant so they would abort more, they wouldn’t give out inexpensive/free contraception. Contraception — even Cyclebeads — makes it much less likely that someone will have an abortion.
Non-reality (thanks Jasper)NFP is a better method. Like I said, cycles get messed up and you never know when that’s going to happen. During those months it’s just like having sex “willy-nilly.”
Oh, and BTW, I don’t promote the use of condoms either…
A drawback though to the cyclebead is that once again it’s all up to the woman. In NFP, ideally the COUPLE practices the method together. That’s why it’s best suited to a MARRIED COUPLE. By observing your body’s fertility symptoms, you come to really KNOW your body and so does your husband. This helps create reverence for the beauty of the woman and helps the man in respecting and caring for his wife.
That is an interesting concept and haven’t really heard of it before. Although, I wouldn’t buy it from Planned Parenthood because then I’d be supporting them. AND I’m sorta doing this crazy thing now they call abstinence…
By observing your body’s fertility symptoms, you come to really KNOW your body and so does your husband. This helps create reverence for the beauty of the woman and helps the man in respecting and caring for his wife.
Posted by: Patricia at January 9, 2008 8:56 PM
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
That’s fabulous if it works for you.
I’m fairly sure my boyfriend isn’t fascinated by my mucus.
It’s simple Jill. They know they are at war….with us. It’s a fall back positiion. It’s a preemptive position taken in anticipation of an attack on their perceived weakness in this area. It’s obvious they could care less about human beings….I mean really….they kill innocent children for goodness sakes.
Like the manner in which so many pro-aborts attempt to justify the existence of PP by the fact that they provide other woman’s “health” services, of course, which includes killing them before they even take a breath, PP can now say they promote natural birth control!
They’ve got to know that this wlll not work in most cases since a woman who is even willing to consider PP for an abortion is probably not real concerned with conception when she in horny heat. Hence, any cost or revenue loss is justified by the PR gain. I mean I can see their lobbyist going before Congress in a bugetary meeting right before my eyes. “Well, yes Senator, we do, we do, support alternative means of birth control, in fact, some of them are natural and endorsed by the…well..can I say it….the Catholic Church….”
Consider it a PR move. I will consider that PP really cares about woman when they close their doors, hopefully soon.
I give them this, they are marketing/propaganda geniuses, but so was Hitler’s propaganda minister Dr. Paul Joseph Goebbels. We both know where’s he’s spending his free time right now.
The Catholic Church would do well to support nothing provided by the devil himself…”for what fellowship does darkness have with light….Ye shall not be unequally yoked with non-believers”…..
Jill dear, I don’t think that the RCC really wants women to be probing their girly parts. It might lead to something near to self pleasure. Which leads to self determination. Spit hisssss.
Oh wow, HisMan has returned to grace us.
Jill,
How about the fact that PP does many things besides abortions and NFP is a way to not get preggers (when used correctly), so it just makes sense that they would implement it at some point.
They’re (PP) not the axis of evil you make them out to be.
anne said, “Y’all realize people make more money from a live birth than from giving an abortion, right? Isn’t it possible that some people have a different belief system than you and that they care as much about female reproductive health as you do about fetal life?”
My answer: Might be true but not for PP. They make a fortune from abortions. And just becasue an entity is a non-profit means very simply that they don’t make or show a profit (on the books anyway, honey), i.e., their revenue cannot exceed their costs. So, what do they do, they spend all of their money on high salaries to admisntrative types and more and more facilites so the organization becomes more and more entrenched. The only way to do away with PP is to do away with it once and for all and the soulless a-holes who work for it can go beg on the street for all I care. The empty buildings could be used as homeless shelters and counseling centers for all the a-holes who were put of a PP job and now realize what they did to 50,000,000 innocent children.
reality said: “Non-profits like Planned Parenthood don’t exist to make money; they exist to help people. I don’t see how you can think birth control would be a money-maker for Planned Parenthood. They practically give it away.”
My answer: Child, have you ever considered a libotomy to permanently detach the rest of your brain from your mind? What an absolutely mindless comment. If you think killing an unborn child in the womb, the very physical expression of God’s intent, helps anyone, you need some intense therapy. Sorry, I’m not sure a lack of basic intelligence can be alterned.
Hey middy, a pro-lifer requires a lot of grace to deal with scumbag murderers. I feel dirty just being on the same website at the same time.
I mean, how would you treat a murderer, of course, considering your very limited understanding of who a murderer is?
If it were up to me, all abortionist and pro-deathers would be put away for life and treated as the nurderers they are.
Hisman, nice to see you!
Carol honey, you said this, “Jill dear, I don’t think that the RCC really wants women to be probing their girly parts. It might lead to something near to self pleasure. Which leads to self determination. Spit hisssss.”
My answer, yes one can moronically send themselves to hell if they so desire by the idiotic choices they make in this life….have a ball sweetie pie”. Yes, and “….she shall bruise his head” (for the likes of you, this refers to the grand spitter, hisser, satan himselfbeing defeated and all that follow him……loooooooooooooser.
Hey middy, a pro-lifer requires a lot of grace to deal with scumbag murderers. I feel dirty just being on the same website at the same time.
*
Well, if you were in law enforcement I might say that you “deal with scumnag murderers”. Seeing as your not, you can shove it. Also, if you dont want to be on the same board as me, please leave. I doubt anyone would miss you.
I mean, how would you treat a murderer, of course, considering your very limited understanding of who a murderer is?
*
Well, a murder is “unlawful premeditated killing of a human being by a human being “. So, seeing as an abortion is LEGAL, it is not “unlawful” and therefore, it is not a murder. Please go to school and learn this stuff before you sound like an idiot.
*
Now, seeing as both of my parents are cops, and I am studying Criminal Justice, I think I am a little more informed on the subject than you are.
If it were up to me, all abortionist and pro-deathers would be put away for life and treated as the nurderers they are.
*
There’s that loving Christian attitude you’re known for. I knew your “true colors” would shine through eventually.
*
Also, I am not pro-death, nor am I a pro-abort. I am simply pro-choice and you know nothing about words apparently. I forgot how much I dislike you. But POOF! You appear and I remember.
Go to church you bitter old man. And actually treat people like humans.
Heather, nice to see you too! Having some fun with these moral midgets tonight…it’s so easy.
Been away for awhile and I can see not much has changed. Ugh!!!!
Midday:
I do go to church and I don’t kill babies.
I think you could learn a thing or two from me.
I’ll stand up to you murdering pro-deathers any day. T think if those in authority would do the same, the likes of you would shut thier big mouths when it came to killing babies in the womb. And someday your mouth will be shut when you bow your knee to Jesus Christ and confess that He is Lord.
Middrift:
Murder is taking the life of an innocent human being. That’s what abortion is.
You so convieniently forget that is was legal to kill Jews in Nazi Germany under Hitler.
Your definition holds no water and again is typical of the mindless stupidity of pro-aborts.
HisMan:
I am not going to take “moral lessons” from you any day! HAHAAHAHAHAHAHA.
Although, I’d contact MK or Bethany before I ever consulted you.
And, I dont have a big mouth, and I would love to see you or “your God” shut it for me.
And maybe you should pay attention in church next time you go. Last time I was in church they were still teaching “forgiveness and love”. When did the doctrine switch to “pure evil and being hate filled”?
Mindless Stupidity eh?
Please inform me the THREE things that a murder must contain! Or better yet, inform me what the culpable mental state is with abortion?
You’re a fool.
How about the fact that PP does many things besides abortions
:yawn:
I guess all the “other” stuff makes up for dismembering babies..oops..I meant fetuses.
And here’s the amazing thing Midlife, you’re so dumb that you don’t mind demonstrating your manner of thinking to the world.
It’s so easy to piss you people off. All I’ve got to do is tell the truth. Amazing.
Ohhh goody! More fodder for Fundies Say The Darndest Things!! =)
Whaddya say Midnite, why dont we go together down to the police station and turn ourselves in? I’m sure the police would find HisMan perfectly reasonable and lock us right up.
Then we can throw a party in our cell.
I’ll pick you up in a few. Get a playlist ready on your ipod, we might be there a while!!
Hisman, can you put up that wonderful post that you always used to?
I’d like to copy it.
And here’s the amazing thing Midlife, you’re so dumb that you don’t mind demonstrating your manner of thinking to the world.
*Really? I am dumb? I think you’ve gotten more hateful in your little vacation from the site. As for “demonstrating my manner of thinking”, seeing as I follow the state criminal code & I actually understand it; I dont see a problem. Neither do any of myprofessors, friends, or co-workers.
It’s so easy to piss you people off. All I’ve got to do is tell the truth. Amazing.
*
And no, you have not pissed me off. You’ve spoken no “truth” either. You can not tell me three requirements for a murder or inform me of the culpable mental state needed for an abortion; so you’re the one telling lies and making yourself look dumb.
Guess and old dog cant learn a new trick?
Amanda:
Not a problem. I’ll have mi padre sneak in some food and drinks so we can make it a real party :-)
Jill, I disagree. I don’t think it’s natural contraception.
It is not an artificially introduced device used to frustrate the unitive action of intercourse. It does not separate the act from the natural results of that act.
It’s simply a way of discerning whether or not a conception is likely and modifying behaviors (without objects, chemicals, etc. interfering). It also can be used equally for promoting conception (at least NFP can).
“Contra” ception is something that deliberately interferes with a conception that might otherwise occur. Not having sex is not contraception, it’s continence.
Heather, of course yes, first things first though. I have to speak to the rather elementarily educated Mid… in the few minutes that I have available:
Midway you asked a question “(Please inform me the THREE things that a murder must contain! Or better yet, inform me what the culpable mental state is with abortion?)” of me…here’s my short answer and thanks for the oppotunity of a reply:
Is abortion murder? At first it seems offensive even to ask the question. An adequate answer requires a brief review of what has been affirmed so far:
(1) That every man is of equal value without regard to his quality of life (intelligence, ability to produce, sociability, and desirability).
(2) That every man is unique and inviolate (which is the meaning of personhood) because of his special relationship to God as His image-bearer.
(3) That personhood begins at the moment of man’s conception.
Three New Affirmations
Building on the above foundation, I also affirm it to be my judgment:
(1) That murder (intentional killing of an innocent human being because it is considered inferior and expendable rather than equally valuable and inviolable) of any human being at any stage of its development from the point of conception to the point of death is morally wrong and should be subject to punishment meted out by duly constituted authorities.
(2) That all abortion (except critical abortion described below) is murder and is never permissible under any circumstances.
(3) That loss of life to the unborn that occurs as a result of an attempt to save the life of the mother when, on those rare occasions, it is reasonably certain that unless a critical abortion is performed both mother and child will die, is not murder.
“Thou shalt not kill.” Certain scholars more knowledgeable in the original languages than I have said that the Hebrew word for “kill” (rasach) can better be translated “murder,” and the New English Bible has so rendered Deuteronomy 5:17, “Thou shalt not murder.” The word “kill” in and by itself carries no moral weight; neither does it speak to the humanness or nonhumanness of its object. In the sixth commandment God was really speaking about the deliberate destruction (inimical to the human community) of innocent human life without regard for its God-given absolute value and inviolability.
Four Ingredients of Murder
Therefore in thinking of abortion, I talk about the wrongness of murder. Four fundamental ingredients are identifiable in the definition of murder as I have given it:
(1) A person is killed.
(2) He is killed intentionally.
(3) The person killed is innocent.
(4) There is unlawful or sinful motive involved in the killing.
Such is murder. If any one of the four ingredients above is lacking in a particular killing, the killing is not necessarily murder. For example, it is not even murder to butcher cattle for food. The death of a person caused accidentally by someone else is not ever murder. The intentional killing of a person guilty of a capital offense is not necessarily murder, though (spiritually) it may be if there is hidden sinful motive that supersedes the explicit legal reason (lack of innocence). By religious standards the man who intentionally kills an innocent person, but not out of sinful motivation, is not morally guilty of murder though by the standards of the state he can still be so accused and prosecuted.
Abortion ? and The Four Ingredients of Murder
What about Abortion? Is it murder? Are all of the ingredients involved in murder present in an abortion? Consider:
(1) In abortion a human being is killed.
(2) In abortion the human being is killed intentionally, by an act of the will.
(3) In abortion the human being who is killed is innocent.
(4) In all abortion cases, except critical abortion, there is unlawful motive.
Points three and four require further explanation:
It is argued by some that the unborn child is not innocent since its life is attacking the life of the mother. Dr. Joseph Fletcher in his Situation Ethics, commenting on the case of an insane patient raping and impregnating another insane patient, says of the conceived one: “The embryo is no more innocent, no less an aggressor or unwelcome intruder!” 1 But has a crime really been committed by the unborn child? The thoughts of David Granfield on this matter in The Abortion Decision are, as usual, incisive and to the point:
A crime has two elements: a mens rea, or unlawful intention, and a actus reus, or unlawful conduct. Although the law does not punish mens rea alone, it may impose civil liability if there is an actus reus without mens rea, thereby sanctioning the actor for his unintended but unlawful conduct. An automobile fatality subjecting the drivers to imprisonment if intended, may subject him only to tort damages if unintended, and even to no damages if he is excusable. The physical act was the same, but the responsibility in each case was radically different.
The unborn child’s conduct, on the other hand, is neither immoral nor criminal. No law requires the fetus to stop growing. Even if the child knew fully what was happening, he would find it impossible to control his normal and natural embryo-logical development. The child is doing what all children do.
It is not solely the lack of evil intention, and infantile mens rea, that makes the child innocent; it is primarily the lack of any evil deed, any even infantile actus reus. In total innocence, the child has an inviolable right to life. He forfeits this not by any principle of justice, but only by the principle of expediency.
Another factor favoring the unborn child’s innocence at the time of abortion is that the Fourteenth Amendment guarantees to every person the right of due process of law before its life can be taken away. Since the unborn child is a person, and since a person charged with a crime is innocent until proven guilty, and since abortion is done without due process of law, the aborted child is done a grave injustice.
But is it true that in all abortion cases, except critical abortion, there is unlawful (sinful) motivation involved? Yes. Take, for example, what might be the most difficult situation facing a woman and her doctor resulting in an abortion that would seem to be killing not involving improper motivation: the case of a mother who was brutally raped. The mother has been deeply hurt; her emotions are frayed; her husband resentful of the pregnancy
and wants no part of a “lunatic’s seed”; the mother feels she has been done injustice. And she has! But by whom? Who is the guilty one? Who brought this upon her? The rapist. He is the one who should be sought out, prosecuted and punished. The unborn child? What has he done? What can he do differently? Is he to suffer for the crime of the rapist? The mother, in her understandable frustration, diverts her hostility to her unborn. Irrationally she thinks she is “getting back” by having the child aborted. Maybe the child is innocent, she thinks her more rational moments, but its life in this case is of less value than her own, and therefore it becomes expendable. The only possible rational reason for abortion following rape is the conclusion (value judgment) that the child’s life is not equally as valuable as the mother’s life and is not inviolate before the surgeon’s hand.
What about critical abortion? Is this not murder, too? No. Loss of life to the unborn that occurs as a result of an attempt to save the life of the mother when, on those rare occasion, it is reasonably certain that unless a critical abortion is performed both mother and child will die, is definitely not murder. Why? Because even though an innocent human being is intentionally killed, there is no sinful motive involved necessarily.
(1) The motive is sinless in that the child is not killed as the result of a choice concerning the comparative value of two lives, but rather as the result of a choice to save the only life that can in this situation be saved.
(2) The motive is sinless in that the child is not killed as the result of a choice concerning its violability or inviolability, but rather as a result of the tragic circumstances having rendered all choice on the question meaningless (as for example in an ectopic pregnancy) and leaving as the only choice whether or not to save the one life that can possibly be saved ? the mother’s.
If in fact a situation arises in which a very real choice has to be made by the mother (the fetus not yet existentially capable of choice) whether she will die so that her child may live or the child will die so that she may live, then, it would seem to me, that ideally the mother could be expected to respond in the same way that she would probably respond if that threatened child were three years old: by sacrificing her life, if the situation called for it, to save the life of her loved one. Has not such an act always been exalted by mankind as an exemplary expression of highest humanness? How many congressional medals of honor, awarded posthumously, have been awarded for heroic acts of self-sacrifice. Such morality, however, issues from the heart; it cannot be legislated and ought not be subject to punishment or condemnation if not fulfilled.
In summary, then, of the ideas expressed in this latest section, I again flatly stated that all abortion (except critical) is murder. And if to some people the word “murder” sounds a bit harsh, then maybe the uneasiness this word causes them is due to a lack of understanding of what abortion is actually like. The picture is ugly.
Four Methods of Murder by Abortion
Abortion is the act whereby the unborn child is intentionally removed from it mother’s womb and encouraged to die (as in hysterotomy abortion), or is intentionally destroyed and then removed from the mother’s womb ( as in a dilatation and curettage abortion or suction abortion), or is intentionally destroyed and then allowed to be stillborn by natural process (as in a salt poisoning abortion).
A more detailed description of the four methods of murder by abortion is as follows:
(1) Suction Abortion: A tube attached to a powerful suction apparatus is inserted into the mother’s uterus. The unborn child, with its placenta, is literally torn apart limb from limb and deposited in a jar as just so much fetal waste material. Suction abortion is by far the most popular method of aborticide (accounting for about 75 percent of all abortions in the United States and Canada).
(2) Dilatation and Curettage Abortion: The word “dilatation” refers to the forced enlargement of the cervix or neck of the uterus. The word “curettage” refers to the use of a curete (an instrument resembling a sharp-edged spoon) for scraping the so-called “products of conception” from the uterine cavity. As might be expected, the unborn child is cut to pieces by the surgeon’s knife, and after removal, is reassembled by the operating nurse so as to make sure that no parts remain in the womb that might cause further bleeding or infection. This method may be used until the twelfth week, after which it is unsafe.
(3) Salt Poisoning Abortion (Saline Amniocentesis): It is generally considered unsafe to do an abortion between the twelfth and sixteenth weeks. After the sixteenth week enough fluid has accumulated in the amniotic sac to make it possible to inject either a 20 percent saline solution or a 50 percent glucose solution. The injection is made with a large needle through the abdominal and uterine walls, and the baby is poisoned to death within an hour’s time. Anywhere from twenty-four to thirty-six hours later the mother goes into labor and delivers a dead baby which has the appearance of a candied apple because its skin has been burned off. This method of abortion ranks second in frequency behind suction abortion.
(4) Caesarean Section Abortion (Hysterotomy): This method of abortion becomes an available option after the unborn child has advanced beyond the fourteen-week stage. It is like a normal Caesarean section delivery in which the child is removed surgically through an incision made in the abdomen and uterus. But there is one difference: the child is not given the care it needs after its cord is cut; it is simply discarded in a stainless steel bowl and is heartlessly left to die ? usually an asphyxial death.
Two Related Matters
Two other matters related to the question still require attention.
First of all, for those who are interested in Scriptural exegesis and try to base their thinking on biblical authority, the Exodus 21:22-25 passage often has come into the realm of discussion on the matter of murder. It reads: When men strive together, and hurt a woman with child, so that there is a miscarriage, and yet no harm follows [italics mine], the one who hurt her shall be fined, according as the woman’s husband shall lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine. If any harm follows [italics mine], then you shall give life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, stripe for stripe.
The exegetical debate on these verses has focused on how the two “harms” mentioned in verses 22 and 23 are to be interpreted. Two contrasting positions with their conclusions are as follows:
(1) Position A 5
vs. 22: “and yet no harm follows” ? The child is miscarried, but does not die.
vs. 23: “If any harm follows” ? The miscarried child and/ or the mother dies.
Conclusion: This passage does not place a higher value on the life of the mother over the life of her child, but requires “life for life” if harm (death) to either one or both occurs. If neither dies, a fine must still be paid because the woman has suffered emotional hurt in the forced premature birth of her child.
(2) Position B 6
vs. 22: “and yet no harm follows” ? Even though the miscarried child dies, no harm is done because the mother has not died.
vs. 23: “If any harm follows” ? The mother dies as a result of the blow she suffered.
Conclusion: This passage suggests that death to the child is not a harm and does not come under the “life for life” principle, whereas death to the mother is a harm and comes under the “life for life” principle. Therefore, it seems that a higher value is placed on the mother’s life and lesser value on the life of her fetus.
My own views on Positions A and B above and on the Exodus 21:22-25 passage generally are as follows:
(1) If the interpretation of the two “harms” in Position A is correct, then its conclusion certainly follows.
(2) However, even though Position A might seems to be preferable, I am personally of the opinion that the interpretation of the two “harms” in Position B is a more likely interpretation because the focus of the whole passage is very definitely on the woman.
(3) But, even though I believe the interpretation of the two “harms” in Position B is correct, I do not believe that Position B’s conclusion necessarily follows. Why?
(4) The reason why death to the fetus is not a harm but death to the mother is a harm has nothing to do with the relative value of the two lives. This most likely has to do with the lack of intentionality in the death of the child but the presence of intentionality in the death of the mother. It is nowhere explicitly stated in the passage whether the hurt suffered by the pregnant woman in the miscarriage was intentional or not. It is highly probably, however, that the attack upon her was intentional, because the principle of “life for life” did not apply in Mosaic law to a death accidentally caused. If the pregnant woman were a mere by-stander or by-passer and was accidentally struck by a wild blow, then the Mosaic law would not require “life for life”; it would require something less (like a fine) for life. In verse 14 of the same chapter the law reads: “But if a man willfully [italics mine] attacks another to kill him treacherously, you shall take him from my altar, that he may die.” Deuteronomy 19:4-10 actually states that three cities were to be set apart for the protection of people who were involved in accidental manslaughter and were being pursued by hateful avengers.
(5) A likely reconstruction of the incident would be something like this: Two men were fighting. The pregnant wife of one of the two men interfered on her husband’s behalf (A dead or injured husband isn’t much help when another child comes along). The other man intentionally struck her (it was two against one). The woman was hurt and suffered a miscarriage. The assailant, by law, had to pay a fine if the hurt he caused to the woman did not result injury or death (no harm followed). But if the hurt he caused resulted in injury or death (harm followed), the assailant had to pay with his eye, tooth, hand, foot, burn, wound, stripe, or with his life. The miscarried child’s ultimate state (dead or alive) was immaterial because what happened to it was purely accidental.
(6) Evidently, it was so common an occurrence for a wife to interfere in her husband’s brawls that a special clause of “fair play in fighting” had to be introduced into the Mosaic law, because sometimes the wife became a bit too vicious. In Deuteronomy 25:11 the law reads: “When men fight one another, and the wife of the one draws near to rescue her husband from the hand of him who is beating him, and puts out her hand and seizes him by the private parts, then you shall cut off her hand; your eyes shall have no pity.”
(7) I would not for a minute contend that a biblical case for saying that the unborn child is of equal value and that the intentional killing of it is murder can be based on an argument from silence, as in Exodus 21:22-25 where nothing is said about what might have happened to the assailant if he had intentionally struck the child in utero causing it to die (which would have been an abortion rather than a miscarriage). But neither can a wrong conclusion about the lesser value of the unborn child, based on this passage (Position B’s conclusion), be used as a possible biblical justification for abortion.
Capital Punishment and War
The second matter related to the question about murder, which can be appropriately discussed, concerns the validity of capital punishment and war. If abortion is murder, some ask, then what about capital punishment and war:
(1) In capital punishment and war human beings are killed.
(2) In capital punishment and war human beings are killed intentionally.
(3) In capital punishment and war, however, the human beings killed are not innocent ? provided, of course, they are proven guilty and sentenced to death by a court of law (as in capital punishment) or are proven guilty and declared war upon by an act of Congress (as in the case of a just war).
(4) Unlawful (sinful) motive is not necessarily involved in capital punishment and war:
(a) The victim is not necessarily considered inferior, but guilty before the bar of justice and therefore punishable for the sake of justice.
(b) The victim is not necessarily considered violate or expendable. Theoretically at least, the person doing the killing is (as a delegated functionary of the state) fulfilling representatively the wrath of God (Rom. 12:9 ? 13:7) and thus is not killing as man qua individual man (which would be murder) but as man qua representative of God (which is not murder because man is not inviolate before God).
WOOOOOOOOT!!! Its on!
I’ll make appletinis. MK can stop by and bring us some mullets (lemming too?).
=)
We’ll invite Hisman for stand-up comedy. I hear his “bitter hateful persecuted straight rich white guy” routine is HILLLLLLLLLAAAAARRIOUS. He even prentends to believe in the loving message of Jesus Christ. Funnier than Stephen Colbert I bet.
I can’t wait!
Yeah, that’s too damn long, and I am not going to bother reading it. B/c I know that it is (1)bull$sh*t and (2)does not relate to any criminal code in the US.
So until you can give me the two specific things I asked for, I am going to ignore you.
Also, I asked about mans law NOT your god’s law.
Maybe someone should go back to pre-K grade and learn how to read….
—————————–
And seriously, your more hateful than you were before. Maybe you should talk to your priest or pastor about that.
Also, I think they are using them to discredit NFP or other methods of choosing abstinence/continence on certain days. “See? They don’t work and are a pain in the a$$. Try these pills instead.” Without solid teaching and a couple actively working together and supporting each other, it’s easy in our culture to slip into the birth control mindset. Then they’ve got clients for life (or at least until menopause.) PP WANTS people turning to them to help plan their families – NOT educated mentoring couples, like the NFP classes have teaching.
It’s a warm fuzzy marketing tool for them. I’m surprised they’re not pushing it as “organic birthcontrol” “green” “all-natural”.
The Cycle beads are not the “team” oriented method like NFP, man and woman working together. Instead, it’s the woman taking a week and a half of saying “no” to her man for no reason he can discern (with the mucus method, you can kind of get the visual aid; you can see the hormones working via temps.)
I think a couple would get mighty tired of letting some bead arbitrarily telling them not to have sex without the biological cues to back them up. Just my two cents.
Amanda:
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA
::snicker::
That will be a **great** party. I am so there!!
I think I’m done reading for tonight..the immaturity has gotten a little too much for me.
Now Heather back to you:
I think the post you’re talking about is this one. It’s the defintion of abortion I came up with derived after lots of prayer and meditation:
Abortion is an affront to the creative nature of God, it negates God as Creator,
Abortion denies the power of God to right a wrong, it negates God as Redeemer,
Abortion makes that which is good, the birth of human life, into that which is evil, the death of human life, and then calls it good, the very definition of blasphemy,
Abortion negates the resurrection power of God as it takes flesh that is alive in it’s earthly abode (the womb) and kills it, while God takes that flesh which is dead in it’s earthly abode (the grave) and desires to make it alive,
Abortion’s desire is to take that which was composed from the chaotic array of elemental molecules into a symphony of life infused with an eternal soul, and turn it back to the entropy of randomness, chaos, nothingness, uselessness.
Abortion is against all that is hopeful, all that requires faith for success; for it’s solution; annihilation, it’s goal; death, it’s dream; breaking God’s heart, it’s vision, Satan’s ultimate power.
Abortion is a counterfeit, for the clawprints of Satan are everywhere to be found in its performance;
Abortion disguises hate as love, bondage as freedom, choice as maturity, sin as righteousness, political correctness as wisdom,
Abortion pits men against women, mothers against their children, fathers against God,
Yes, abortion is Satan’s feeble attempt at killing God Himself, for abortion is a metaphor for Satan; it is his coat of arms, his family crest, his logo, his brand, it belongs to him……for he laughs at its willing proponents as they craft their own self-destruction, mantled in self-deception.
Copyright 2007, 2008 by HisMan
Can you copyright a post on someone else’s blog?
How funny.
That’s the one. Thank you!!
My answer: Child, have you ever considered a libotomy to permanently detach the rest of your brain from your mind?
Posted by: Hisman at January 9, 2008 9:52 PM
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Don’t do it!
If you mess with your brain, you’ll never learn to spell “lobotomy!”
Elizabeth:
Meet HisMan. He’s nice to you as long as you believe EXACTLY what he does.
If you differ at all, you’re a sinner, a whore, you’re going to hell, and god doesnt love you.
Always obey HisMan…
you guys must really miss me, cause you’re baiting me so much to come back with these rantings of a madman.
Oh Hal!
::tacklehug::
Where have you been silly?
Amanda:
“Hateful and persecuted”…no, but I do like babies and want to ring the necks of those that would hurt them. If that makes me hatelful and persecuted in your mind…so be it. In fact, I can’t wait for my kids to have grandkids so I can turn them into mini-mes againat the likes of you. Of course, if I got it right, there won’t be too many of your descendants around because you’re too busy having anal sex and if you’re having normal sex, you’re killing the results.
“Straight rich white guy”? What’s that make you?
A bi-lesbo, she-male, welfare condemned, woman of color gal? You should be proud.
Well, feeding into that doesn’t make you appear any better Midnite.
I just don’t have the energy to read anything sarcastic or hateful tonight on EITHER side. It is mentally exhausting at times. If we could debate civilly, it would be good…but sometimes, that just doesn’t happen.
Midnight! Howdy! I’ve forcing myself to stay away, but I had a feeling something was brewing tonight, and sure enough…..
“because you’re too busy having anal sex”
stop it, you’re killing me. can we really have the anal sex debate again?
woman of color gal? You should be proud.
WHAT is that supposed to mean EXACTLY??
“because you’re too busy having anal sex”
…While I have my abortions!
(I’m an incredible multitasker!)
“Hateful and persecuted”…no, but I do like babies and want to ring the necks of those that would hurt them. If that makes me hatelful and persecuted in your mind…so be it. In fact, I can’t wait for my kids to have grandkids so I can turn them into mini-mes againat the likes of you. Of course, if I got it right, there won’t be too many of your descendants around because you’re too busy having anal sex and if you’re having normal sex, you’re killing the results.
“Straight rich white guy”? What’s that make you?
A bi-lesbo, she-male, welfare condemned, woman of color gal? You should be proud.
Posted by: Hisman at January 9, 2008 10:51 PM
You still think I’m not better Elizabeth? I’d never say things like that to someone.
You werent around when HisMan used to be. He’s an ass. Simple as that..
Hey Hal:
Let me see: I want to preserve the lives of children and that makes me a madman. I know, I get riled because millions of murders are being committed every sinlge day and I’m supposed to put my sweet Christian guy face on.
Let’s contrast that with you: By your own admission and corect me if I am wrong, you kill your first two offspring and then try to convince others that you did the right thing. Not only that but you come to this site after you spend goodness knows how many thousands of dollars on a shrink (which got you nowhere) as a type of perverted murder support group.
Somebody, please tell me what I am missing because I am going mad trying to figure it out, aaaaaaaaaaaaaaargh!
…While I have my abortions!
(I’m an incredible multitasker!)
Posted by: FetusFascist at January 9, 2008 10:57 PM————- No. You’re just an incredible loser.
That may be true..I do not know the history..I just wish civil debate would happen. There has been a lot of sniping lately. I don’t like sniping.
But SERIOUSLY..what is meant by the woman of color gal thing?
I didn’t like the rich white guy comment either BTW.
WATCH IT with the race comments people..or I will start emailing moderators.
Murder Support Group?
Wow, if abortions were ILLEGAL (which they’re not), than there could be one in JAIL.
God get some new material HisMan, w/o the pinch of evil…
Hisman, hal still can’t come to terms with those 2 abortions. He’s still in therapy.
Elizabeth:
He does not care. He is evil, and hateful to people in the name of his “God”.
This is the man that said “children should die of starvation in Darfur, than be adopted by a LGBT couple”.
And if I am not mistaken, I believe he has a problem with interacical relationships as well….
Wow, you’re funny, bitter, AND racist!
How fantastic.
Well ladies, I’m off to bed to let my boyfriend know I’ve got a craving for butt sex (I never even knew about this, THANK YOU HISMAN for expanding my sexual liberalism!! =)
Sweet dreams!
I never spend any dollars on a shrink? Did I ever imply otherwise?
I didn’t kill any of my offspring. but I understand you view it that way.
It’s not that you’re against abortion that I find insane, lots of decent rational people are against abortion. (some even visit this site)
But your other opinions, you must admit, are a bit “out there.” Fine by me, it’s all good entertainment. But when others encourage you I wonder about the whole operation here. So, I guess I’ve had my chuckle and will fade back into the wilderness.
Who brought up race first?…It was Amanda.
Hal, I thought you were in therapy. You’re not? Anyway hal, whatever.
Thank you Midnite..When I saw your pic I thought you were very pretty as well!
As far as him having a problem with interracial relationships..well..that’s his problem..not mine.
I love bi-racial babies. Especially mine. hehehe…
Hi Hal-
Good to see you! (It’s me, Laura. I changed my handle because there were suddenly three Lauras on the board. Truthseeker called me a “Fetus Fascist” and it stuck…)
Elizabeth:
You brought up the “WHITE” guy thing, not me. I made the contrast as you implied that you were exactly opposite from me.
I assume that means you’ve got something against white guys? Yes…no?
By the way, I’m not a typical white. I’m a very, very dark Sicilian with olive colored skin with jet-blue black hair. My wife calls me very exotic looking. In fact, I’ve been called every racial thing in the book. The straight thing you got exactly right. My wife is blond and blue eyed and our offspring, who we didn’t kill, are gorgeous.
No, I’m a straight, hard-working, Sicilian guy. Sorry to dissappoint your mischaracterization of me.
I do love babies though. Can’t wait for grand kids.
Would you like me better if I were a gay, poor, black guy? Guess you wouldn’t feel threatened by one of those fellows would you now?
Elizabeth:
I must agree, I think they’re cuter than any other baby… And thank you for the nice comment..
Heather:
No one gets offended when you call the white. It’s when other races are brought into the mix (which HisMan did).
And thus is the problem….
Heather,
Yep. I stated I didn’t like the rich white guy comment either by Amanda.
HisMan:
Elizabeth never brought up race. She simply repeated what was already said on the board. Now you’ve been gone for a while (thank god).
Let me fill you in.
She is PL
She has a beautiful daughter
Dont attack your own kind idiot.
Elizabeth, I know, but I wanted to remind you guys of who said it first.
Would you like me better if I were a gay, poor, black guy? Guess you wouldn’t feel threatened by one of those fellows would you now?
Posted by: Hisman at January 9, 2008 11:08 PM
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
You aren’t hip enough to be gay or black.
In either case you’d need a bigger crank.
HisMan,
Go look at the comments. AMANDA is the one who brought up the rich, white guy thing..NOT ME..I even have stated I don’t like that comment either.
When you open up the ridicule of one race..other races become fair game..so Amanda is wrong as well.
Midnite,
I was offended by the “white guy” comment. What does being WHITE have to do with ANY of it?
::snicker::
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHA
That was classic Laura. Thanks for the chuckle. I needed one.
Yeah – I forgot to mention in the other thread Elizabeth – your daughter is absolutely GORGEOUS.
My friend and her husband are a bi racial couple and had a gorgeous baby girl not too long ago who has that same *perfect* skin tone as your daughter. I also babysit for two beautiful kids who are half white half Indonesian. I agree, bi-racial babies always seem to get the best pick from the gene pools!!
=)
Goodnite!
PS – good to see you Hal!
What does being black or white have to do with any of this? NOTHING!
Elizabeth:
The white guy comment opened the door for HisMan to say “colored gal”. Which is wrong.
I am simply pointing out that when you call someone white, no one gets offeneded. But when he describes other races the way he did, it gets offensive and pisses people off.
Does that make any sense?
“Guess you wouldn’t feel threatened by one of those fellows would you now?”
Threatened? By what???? Some delusional anonymous internet bible thumper?
EXACTLY heather! I get so peeved when race somehow is dragged into topics that REALLY have nothing to do with them.
Mid-nit:
You are good at one thing on this site and I know of your voracious appetite for other people’s approval and compiments so I’ll cave….and it’s this:
You’re an expert at twisting the truth aka a superb liar.
The majority of my friends are black, if my daughter decided to marry a black man or any other man, as long as he were a good and decent person, I would have no problem with it.
As far as the Darfur thing: I never said that.
You are one sick lying puppy. Go get some help and spend less time on this site.
sorry that was me – keep forgetting to log in.
and Elizabeth – that comment I made was a direct snip at many many many of the hideously racist comments HisMan has made in the past. It wasn’t mean to be offensive to him at all. I just have to take him with a good sense of humor, or I’d feel sick.
Wait, let me re-phrase that. Not as many people get offended when described as white.
I do understand Midnite.
I get offended easily by generalizations made about any race honestly.
But “colored” gal threw me in an uproar…I was going to bed..really I was.
I never saw Hisman make any racist comments. Not ever.
but if she decided to marry another woman, you’d go even more insane.
HisMan:
I may be many many many things, but a “liar” is not one of them. I never lie.
As for people twisting the truth, you must be refering to your sidekick Jasper.
And for the Darfur thing, yes you did say it. It is printed in words on this site. Amanda copied and pasted it onto another thread earlier this week.
Your the one lying right this second, not me.
I was called a “cracker” the other day. I didn’t appreciate it either. I STILL don’t know what it means.
Mid-lump:
As Ronny Reagan would say: “There you go again”.
I didn’t write “colored gal”, I said “woman of color” which could mean any one of a number of races other than Caucasion. She called me a “straight, rich white guy” which is about as reversed race based and prejudiced as one could get. I didn’t bring it up.
Along with therapy please seek some reading and reading retention courses.
I am simply pointing out that when you call someone white, no one gets offeneded. But when he describes other races the way he did, it gets offensive and pisses people off.
Does that make any sense?
Posted by: midnite678 at January 9, 2008 11:13 PM
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Because “white,” as it was used in that context, connotes privlege.
Hisman used the expression “color” as a reference to lesser beings.
One suggests status, the other just blows.
LOL.
Cracker is a bad name for being white. Or honky. It’s our version of the horrible “N” word (which I refuse to spell or even say).
Heather,
Crackers..the food.. are white..you know..so white people are “crackers.” I guess that’s what it means…it’s ALL pretty stupid if you ask me.
Thanks for the sorry attempt of empathy. But I dont need therapy. And said “woman of color gal”, excuse me for getting slightly confused. It must be happening in your extrememly old age.
And why dont you take a course of humility and being nice while your at it.
Well, glad I came. Goodnite all.
Crackers..the food.. are white..you know..so white people are “crackers.” I guess that’s what it means…it’s ALL pretty stupid if you ask me.
Posted by: Elizabeth at January 9, 2008 11:21 PM
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
NO! Look it up. Think “whip cracker.”
It’s taken on a different meaning, but that’s the origin.
Maybe if all the snipy comments were left unsaid..or untyped I guess in this case..people wouldn’t get offended and retaliate. I’m pretty sure we’re all adults here. Let’s work on acting like it.
I’m going to bed..Goodnight all.
Elizabeth:
That’s easier said than done when HisMan hisses hatfulness and evil out of his mouth….
Anyhoo, I am off to bed. I got class in the morning.
Let’s not forget what the initial point was.
PP is a truly evil, propagandist and cunning organization that is now entrenched and supported by a whole host of unwittingly deceived people as demonstated by the typical, ludicrous minds of pro-aborts on this site. In the few minutes that I spent tonite, anyone with a mind and any sense of moral outrage could see the absolute mind numbing stupidity demonstrated by pro-aborts. The rage that can be summoned from their dark sub-conscious resevoir of hatred for all that is sacred and good by simply speaking the truth is bewidering and hard to understand. Ah iniquity, who can understand?
Midnite, it’s been fun, however, it’s so, so, sad that you, Hal, Amanda, etc. haven’t yet seen the light.
And again, I’ll expect an apology from you when you are unable to prove I said what you claimed or should I say twisted about Darfur.
Heck, I’ve served poor people all over and have had my best times in life doing so.
Hisman,
“It’s so easy to piss you people off. All I’ve got to do is tell the truth. Amazing”
I’m not pissed off, I’m very happy. My Grandma and I were reading the bible and she said Jesus erased all the stupid old testament laws like, “Don’t wear two different kinds of fabric or you will be stoned.” Now I know that Jesus just want’s us to love, and I do love, I love you and I love abortionist and I love Jesus and he knows that so I’m going to heaven but you hate, so you will never be welcomed into his kingdom.
Hisman,
“I didn’t write “colored gal”, I said “woman of color” which could mean any one of a number of races other than Caucasian. She called me a “straight, rich white guy” which is about as reversed race based and prejudiced as one could get. I didn’t bring it up.”
You mean “reverse racism” and no, since it doesn’t “all straight, rich white guys are like you” it is not racist. If it did say that it would be racist because it characterizes someone by their race. Reverse racism is not characterizing someone by their race. You just think it’s reverse racism because you don’t believe people can actually be racist against white people because you have been brain washed to believe no one can genuinely dislike a white person. Also Caucasian is faulty. A Caucasian is a person from the Caucus Mountain region and such a person doesn’t even fit the stereotype of a European American, seeing as that is viewed as more Western/Northern. I suggest if anything refer to them as European Americans as you should refer to someone of African descent as African American.
I don’t get it. I always try and hit the most fertile time in the cycle.
Jess,
Are you genuine when you say you love Jesus?
Then bite your tongue. You cannot judge who will or will not get to enter God’s kingdom. Jesus alone will be our judge. When you say
************************************
I’m going to heaven but you hate, so you will never be welcomed into his kingdom.
Posted by: Jess at January 10, 2008 12:08 AM
*************************************
Are you a practicing Christian? What faith is your grandmother?
Do you actually believe anyone filled with hate is going to heaven? If there’s a bunch of hate filled people running around insulting everyone then I’d rather not go.
Yes I am a practicing Christian who loves Jesus and nothing you or anyone else says will change that. my Grandmother is a Christian too.
Do you actually believe anyone filled with hate is going to heaven? If there’s a bunch of hate filled people running around insulting everyone then I’d rather not go.
Yes I am a practicing Christian who loves Jesus and nothing you or anyone else says will change that. my Grandmother is a Christian too.
My song is of mercy and justice;
I sing to you, O Lord.
I will walk in the way of perfection.
O when, Lord, will you come?
I will walk with blameless heart
within my house;
I will not set before my eyes
whatever is base.
I will hate the ways of the crooked;
they shall not be my friends.
The false-hearted must keep far away;
the wicked I disown.
The man who slanders his neighbor in secret
I will bring to silence.
The man of proud looks and haughty heart
I will never endure.
I look to the faithful in the land
that they may dwell with me.
He who walks in the way of perfection
shall be my friend.
No man who practices deceit
shall live within my house.
No man who utters lies shall stand
before my eyes.
Morning by morning I will silence
all the wicked in the land,
uprooting from the city of the Lord
all who do evil.
Psalm 101
Jess,
Don’t take offense. It is not our place as Christians to judge the souls of others. Judge their actions, but never wether or not they’ll go to heaven. As Christians we give that authority to God alone.
Ah but Psalm’s is in the Old Testament and Jesus preaches love over law.
Jess,
At the beginning of the Sermon on the Mount Jesus issued a solemn warning in which he presented God’s law, given on Sinai during the first covenant, in light of the grace of the New Covenant:
“Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets: I have come not to abolish but to fulfill. For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth pass away, not one letter, not one stroke of a letter, will pass from the law, until all is accomplished. Therefore, whoever breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches others to do the same, will be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does them and teaches them will be called great in the kingdom of heaven.”
Jesus is the fulfillment of the law in it’s entirety.
Sorry for the delay in posting the response Jess. My baby girl woke up and I had to rock her back to sleep.
And so it goes.
And one wonders why Hooves left this site when a person such as Midnight continues to be a wanna be cop with a gun. Who thinks murderering a human being in the womb, is not murder, from not being a human being by law!!. But, it is a human being,and it is murder, since the law/courts have upheld the murder of a non born baby.
Scott Peterson, and hundreds more have thought just like the Midnight, thinks.
And your going to be a person with a gun in your hand making decisions of life and death, Midnyte?
Ah, midnite is soo sure a baby is not human, this wanna be cop, might have let Scott Peterson get away with murder. Connner who? No, no, that baby in that pregnant women,named Laci, was not carrying a human being. And remember, murder is premeditated killing of a human being. And babies in the womb are not human beings by my interpetation of law, blabs the wanna be copper, named Midnight. And the head cop takes Midnyte off to the side and says, Shut up you idiot, your just a cop, not a judge, district attorney, or a person who writes law. You already made a fool outta me and the department with your fanatical belief in abortion. Now, the district attorney has to explain why a cop was going to let a murderer named Scott Peterson get away with murder. What’s the matter with you Midnite?
yllas,
I am glad to see you back. You know when I called you out the other day I meant no offense.
It was my first day on this blog and I was still feeling things out. What you say about the evil called abortion is true. I too feel the rage inside of me…. but for the grace of God and the Holy Spirit I would strike out also. Peace
They took away our native tongue
And taught their English to our young
And all the beads we made by hand
Are nowadays made in Japan
Maybe it’s a ploy to lure in the Catholics.
/cynicism
Dum da dum…you totally said that, Hisman. But you know, you’re right. It wasn’t Darfur. It was Sudan. I can post it for you again if you’d like. It was in the post about Mary Cheney having her baby.
Hal,
And you don’t believe in GOD!!! lol…you’re an answer to a prayer. I’m so glad to see you. Thank you for coming back. Thank you, so much.
Milehi, I’ve gone round and round with good Catholic friends on my thought that NFP can be used as natural contraception.
Contraception literally means, “anti-conception,” and knowing one’s fertile time and withholding from sex so as not to procreate is “anti-conception” in my view.
I would also venture to say the reasons for couples not wanting to impregnate or become pregnant are a lot less spiritual than what is typically listed by NFP proponents.
But my friends don’t see it this way, as often as we have talked about it. So I don’t think you and I are going to have a meeting of the minds on this topic… :)
Doug,
They took away our native tongue
And taught their English to our young
And all the beads we made by hand
Are nowadays made in Japan
Where is that from?
Well, *that* was interesting.
Midnite, Amanda-
I think it would be best just to ignore HisMan instead of talking to him/provoking him. Don’t acknowledge his verbal diarrhea, take the high road, as it’s really not worth the hike in blood pressure that happens when he pops in. It would also contribute to the civility if you don’t provoke him because it will stop the cycle of viciousness that occurs.
but if she decided to marry another woman, you’d go even more insane.
Posted by: Hal at January 9, 2008 11:18 PM—————–So what, Hal? Not everyone has to accept a gay lifestyle. It’s part of being PC, you know.
How about the fact that PP does many things besides abortions and NFP is a way to not get preggers (when used correctly), so it just makes sense that they would implement it at some point.
They’re (PP) not the axis of evil you make them out to be.
Posted by: midnite678 at January 9, 2008 9:48 PM
The “cyclebeads” that they are showing are in no way close to NFP. I think the above post referencing that PP was “implement”ing NFP was a typo. But at any rate your statment is incorrect.
you guys must really miss me, cause you’re baiting me so much to come back with these rantings of a madman.
Posted by: Hal at January 9, 2008 10:48 PM————– Who the heck are you to judge ANYONE?
Where is that from?
Posted by: mk at January 10, 2008 6:30 AM
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Cherokee People, Cherokee Child
Cherokee People, Cherokee Child
Posted by: FetusFascist at January 10, 2008 7:49 AM
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I stand corrected:
Cherokee People, Cherokee Tribe – Paul Revere and the Raiders.
Thanks Laura,
I knew I recognized it…Cher…man, we are from another generation. I mean, Cher who? Never heard of her. Must be before my time.
Laura,
And not that I’d know this or anything because I’m waaaaaaay too young, but I believe the words are Cherokee People/Cherokee Tribe…not child. Although on this site, child might be a better “choice”.
Truthseeker, thank you for Psalm 101! I needed that.
Truthseeker,
Yes thank you for the Psalm…and also for your post on Hillary Cries. My sentiments to the “t”.
AB, hi 5!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I will hate the ways of the crooked;
they shall not be my friends.
The false-hearted must keep far away;
the wicked I disown.
I especially like this part!
“you’re an answer to a prayer.” what do you mean MK? You DID miss me?
Haven’t returned a single phone call to my PC “friends”…they gotta go.
Not everyone can use hormone based contraceptives. If a woman relies on the sponge, diaphragm, etc then these beads could just tell her when she is at higher risk of a pregnancy. Youre back to the antichoice hysterical irrational hatred of Planned Parenthood. PP has prevented more abortions than all the sidewalk counselors in the nation and theyve done it by providing contraceptives and sex education. If someone really cared about women and reducing the number of abortions in the US they’d respect and admire PP and support their work. The last figures I read showed that for every 3 women who had an abortion at PP, 97 went for something else. Antichoicers are more than happy to keep 97 women from getting the health care they need, including contraceptives, if they can make life more difficult for 3 women who arent doing what antichoicers think they ‘should’ be doing.
My answer: Child, have you ever considered a libotomy to permanently detach the rest of your brain from your mind?
*************************************
The word is lobotomy so HisMan is looking incredibly stupid right about now, never mind the fact that he is apparently too stupid to even know what a lobotomy does. It looks like the antichoice side has yet another really disgusting excuse for a human being on their side of the discussion. Congratulations.
What a lot of crap from Hisman – how predictable. The fool even harbors the delusion that HE (or whatever idiot he is quoting) defines what constitutes murder, ignoring the actual defintion of the word. We have more proof that idiots flock to the antichoice side, as if we needed more proof.
Texas Red, watch who you label.
TR, cuz you have no right!
I’ll stand up to you murdering pro-deathers any day. T think if those in authority would do the same, the likes of you would shut thier big mouths when it came to killing babies in the womb. And someday your mouth will be shut when you bow your knee to Jesus Christ and confess that He is Lord.
Posted by: Hisman at January 9, 2008 10:11 PM
*******************
YOU are going to have to explain your lies and your disgusting hatred and your hypocricy. In the context of your own beliefs youre going to have one whole heck of a lot of explaining to do. Your attitude is anything but a reflection of the teachings of Christ.
I was called a “cracker” the other day. I didn’t appreciate it either. I STILL don’t know what it means.
Posted by: heather at January 9, 2008 11:19 PM
*******************
“Cracker” basically means illiterate white trash, but sometimes its simply used as a derogatory term for anyone who is caucasian.
So, I take it someone has called you a “cracker” before??
illiterate white trash? When did you come up with that one?
TR, cuz you have no right!
Posted by: heather at January 10, 2008 10:06 AM
*******************************
Youre not part of my decision making process and you never will be. And yes, I have the right to do what I think best when it comes to my health, my body, and my life regardless of whether you approve or not. I have every right to do what I think is best and you dont have a single solitary thing to say about it.
Hisman:
Don’t “honey” me.
So, I take it someone has called you a “cracker” before??
Posted by: heather at January 10, 2008 10:13 AM
***********************
You can make all the stupid assumptions you want. Looking like a stupid chienne comes naturally to you.
TR, who cares? However, I don’t think you are capable of making decisions for yourself.
You can make all the stupid assumptions you want. Looking like a stupid chienne comes naturally to you.
Posted by: TexasRed at January 10, 2008 10:28 AM————– I’m laughing at your stupidity. Keep it coming.
illiterate white trash? When did you come up with that one?
Posted by: heather at January 10, 2008 10:25 AM
************
Cracker, trailer trash, white trash all are used interchangably in this area and all are insults. I think in Florida they use it a little differently and its not as insulting.
You can make all the stupid assumptions you want. Looking like a stupid chienne comes naturally to you.
Posted by: TexasRed at January 10, 2008 10:28 AM————– I’m laughing at your stupidity. Keep it coming.
Posted by: heather at January 10, 2008 10:29 AM
**********************
Oh yes – the PeeWee Herman defense – ‘I know you are but what am I?’ Look at your own posts. Youre laughable.
hahaha..Honey, this conversation is over.
TR, who cares? However, I don’t think you are capable of making decisions for yourself.
Posted by: heather at January 10, 2008 10:28 AM
*****************************
No, you dont think. That’s well established. Looking like a stupid chienne is not an asset. Maybe you’ll learn that someday.
hahaha..Honey, this conversation is over.
Posted by: heather at January 10, 2008 10:55 AM
**********
Yes, youve embarassed yourself sufficiently for one day.
The Catholic Church would never make an official statement on something such as cycle beads. Whatever is used that does not separate the unitive and procreational aspects of the sexual act among married couples would be perfectly acceptable.
Jeff, I just checked out your website. I love the post about “change.”
Yes, people really should look at those votes for the Civil Rights Act.
Hal,
“you’re an answer to a prayer.” what do you mean MK? You DID miss me?
Posted by: Hal at January 10, 2008 9:07 AM
Have you not been paying attention…! Of course I missed you, and I was worried that you were gone for good. No more scarin’ “mom” like that! Bad boy.
MK said it, Hal. We wouldn’t want you to leave, ever. Please stick around. Even though we disagree, we still love ya.
************************************
What a lot of crap from Hisman – how predictable. The fool even harbors the delusion that HE (or whatever idiot he is quoting) defines what constitutes murder, ignoring the actual defintion of the word. We have more proof that idiots flock to the antichoice side, as if we needed more proof.
Posted by: TexasRed at January 10, 2008 10:04 AM
***************************************
TexasRed,
I myself was a bit surpised when I looked up murder and it included the word illegal.
Does that mean all the babies aborted before
the Death Roe decision were murder but the last 50 million were just the wanton slaughter of human life with premeditated malice? Oh, I forgot to mention the mutilation and mangling.
Is that rally what the PC community stands for or is it just a few bad apples? Any PC’ers care to reply on Red’s behalh I would be gad to hear it.
Yes, youve embarassed yourself sufficiently for one day.
Posted by: TexasRed at January 10, 2008 11:06 AM———- Nope. You have.
Carol honey, you said this, “Jill dear, I don’t think that the RCC really wants women to be probing their girly parts. It might lead to something near to self pleasure. Which leads to self determination. Spit hisssss.”
My answer, yes one can moronically send themselves to hell if they so desire by the idiotic choices they make in this life….have a ball sweetie pie”. Yes, and “….she shall bruise his head” (for the likes of you, this refers to the grand spitter, hisser, satan himselfbeing defeated and all that follow him……loooooooooooooser.
Posted by: Hisman at January 9, 2008 10:05 PM
………………………………
Nut job.
Anee:
Sorry sweetie.
Carol:
Loooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooser!
Texass Red:
Vanilla, vanella, lobotomy, libotomy.
I have to admit, I never won a spelling bee but I never would be so stuuuuuuuuuupid as to name myself after a hot dog.
What are you trying to compensate for tiny?
Texas:
Look you imbecile, I could wrap rings around your tiny brain.
For example, here’s your quote: “Not everyone can use hormone based contraceptives. If a woman relies on the sponge, diaphragm, etc then these beads could just tell her when she is at higher risk of a pregnancy. Youre back to the antichoice hysterical irrational hatred of Planned Parenthood. PP has prevented more abortions than all the sidewalk counselors in the nation and theyve done it by providing contraceptives and sex education. If someone really cared about women and reducing the number of abortions in the US they’d respect and admire PP and support their work. The last figures I read showed that for every 3 women who had an abortion at PP, 97 went for something else. Antichoicers are more than happy to keep 97 women from getting the health care they need, including contraceptives, if they can make life more difficult for 3 women who arent doing what antichoicers think they ‘should’ be doing.”
1) You forgot the period after etc
2) Youre is not a word unless you’re French (which you probably are).
3) Antichoice is also not a word.
4) Theyve is not a word.
5) And this is a gem, “The last figures I read showed that for every 3 women who had an abortion at PP, 97 went for something else.” It should have read “for every 100 women who went for something else (whatever that means), 3 went to PP.”
Think…you mindless idiot.
Hisman, I don’t think it’s fair to call anyone a mindless idiot. And the “gem” you refer to was more proper the way Texas Red phrased it than the way you did. She’s talking about the statistic that 3% of the services at PP are for abortion, thus, 97 out of a hundred women who go are there for something else. Thus, it is entirely correct to say that for every 3 women who went for an abortion there were 97 women going for some other reason.
Nice try, but your attempt to be mean backfired.
I don’t think this Hisman is the same HisMan that we all know. Click on his name- it doesn’t go to his regular website, which is: http://www.followchrist.ag.org/
And whoever you are, [anonymous poster posing as Hisman], could you please tone it down and find another user name to post with?
Thank you.
you know, that makes sense. I’m no fan of either, but there was a difference with this impostor.
Apologies to the real HisMan.
I know Hal. Right? I mean I was wishing he would start posting scripture again, just to get away from the insults. After last week, I was ready to eat some lead.
I remember this method from twenty years ago. I had been a Catholic as a young person, and knew a man who became a Jesuit. The Jesuit and I met again, and he told me about this natural family planning method. He said some people used it when they wanted to get pregnant, as well as when they wanted to avoid pregnancy. So this is not something completely new. Probably many educated Catholics are using this, as well as using hysterectomy and vasectomy.
Many women NEED hysterectomies for other reasons such as uncontrollable bleeding. I had to have a hysterectomy for uncontrolled bleeding, even though my husband was not fertile any more–I just had to have it, with a hematocrit of 26 over years, and inability to take poison birth control pills. It was not a religious issue. Therefore many still practicing Catholics have hysterectomies, for this hypermenorrhea, cysts, fibroids, etc.
I am no longer a Catholic, and I would practice birth control if I were still fertile.
I just wanted to let you know this method’s been around way more than the twenty years I knew about it. And approved by the Vatican. Unfortunately it does allow occasional pregnancy to occur. Occasional pregnancy is much better than yearly births.
Try not to hate one another over a situation we are placed in, the tragedy of being human.