When the pro-aborts say anything beyond "it should be the mother's decision" they tend to put their foot in their mouth and look like fools.

Tony Perkins for President! Great message!

Yes he is your living human son at conception.

Obvi : /

Jess: Yes he is your living human son at conception.
Obvi : /

Hi Jess! With all the rights given to a living human being? (Obviously?)

Yes Janet, obvi.

"Family Reserach Council"

Heh.

Awesome commercial! Thank you Tony!

yawn. Pro life guy thinks life begins at conception. Breaking news.

Hal,

You've been on this blog long enough to know that science, not pro-lifers, has determined when life begins.

Even our resident abortionist, SoMG, has stated more than once that he's takng a life with each abortion procedure. He's called it justifiable homicide.

And you're still questioning that???

Why?

Cause it makes you feel better?

I can't see anything at the Family Research Center, you have to pay for everything. I think it's a scam. If it's so important, why don't they just tell us this stuff for free?

Jess:10:41: I can't see anything at the Family Research Center, you have to pay for everything. I think it's a scam. If it's so important, why don't they just tell us this stuff for free?

You can't see anything? We must not be looking at the same FRC website. What do you have to pay for?
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Doug: 10:05: "Family Reserach Council" Heh.

Are you dubious of FRC's motives because they appear to be family friendly?
(Sarcasm alert) They must be pro-life. Yikes!!! Run!!!

11-year-old Romanian girl raped by her teenage uncle allowed abortion

(CNN) -- A Romanian government committee has decided to allow a pregnant 11-year-old who was raped by her teenage uncle to have an abortion, a government spokesman said Friday.

The girl is 21 weeks pregnant -- too far along to have an abortion in Romania, where the limit is 14 weeks unless the pregnancy poses problems for the mother's health, said the spokesman, who asked not to be named.

The girl's parents had said they would take their daughter to Britain for an abortion if the committee did not allow her to have one in Romania. Abortions are legal in Britain up to 24 weeks.

It was unclear whether the parents would still take the girl to Britain following the committee's decision, reached late Thursday.

Church groups have opposed an abortion for the girl, the government spokesman said. The Romanian Orthodox Church has urged the girl to keep the baby, and has said it will take care of the baby if the family wants to give it up for adoption, he said.

The uncle who raped the girl has since disappeared, the Romanian Health Ministry said. Media reports say the uncle is age 19.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/europe/06/27/romania.abortion/index.html?iref=mpstoryview

Amanda: 10:57: Church groups have opposed an abortion for the girl, the government spokesman said. The Romanian Orthodox Church has urged the girl to keep the baby, and has said it will take care of the baby if the family wants to give it up for adoption, he said.

So, it's good that there is someone to care for the baby after it is born. There are a few unanswered questions. Is it the parents or the girl who want the abortion???? Can they get help with birth expenses from the uncle who is the father?

Amanda, What do you think is the best course of action?

A nine year old was pressured to give birth after being raped and impregnanted in Nicuragua. Do you not realize what serious and devestating effects carrying a baby to term would have on the body of a nine year old? Don't you care about HER!? Already walking and talking and obviously FEELING? We don't have to wonder, "Oh is she a person can she feel pain?" we know she can!

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/03/23/world/main545560.shtml

"Can they get help with birth expenses from the uncle who is the father?"

Janet, why don't they just have her marry him!? Are you joking? He raped her, then ran away. He should be in jail, not raising this kid. He shouldn't even be allowed to be a father, let alone help to raise this kid.

And for anyone who says it's not the babies fault, yes it is! It's the father and babies fault! The baby isn't hurting her intentionally but it is hurting her! Why don't you care about females after they're born?

Janet -

she's 11. she's a rape AND incest victim. If she wants an abortion, there is absolutely NO valid reason not to grant her that right.

if she doesn't want to have an abortion, her parents should not be able to force her to have one, but they should be legally required to put the baby up for adoption so he/she never has to find out how he/she entered the world, and the victim doesn't end up being forced to grow up with her child living as her sibling.

Its too F-d up for me to even imagine.

And you're still questioning that???

Why?

Cause it makes you feel better?
Posted by: carder at June 27, 2008 10:41 AM

Sorry Carder, I wasn't clear. I was questioning why anyone would care what this guy thinks. Not exactly earth shattering.

"Can they get help with birth expenses from the uncle who is the father?"

Jess:11:12: Janet, why don't they just have her marry him!? Are you joking? He raped her, then ran away. He should be in jail, not raising this kid. He shouldn't even be allowed to be a father, let alone help to raise this kid.

Maybe I wasn't clear. As far as him being the father, well he already is if he impregnated her....I don't mean he should help her raise this child. I hope he may be able to provide money for hospital expenses if the girl wants to have her baby and give it up for adoption. The Church has said they will take the baby if she allows them to.....

""Can they get help with birth expenses from the uncle who is the father?"

Whoa- missed that the first time around.

Janet... are you kidding???

he's a NINETEEN YEAR OLD CHILD RAPIST

it also says right in the article that he is no where to be found. Yeah, I'm sure he's just anxiously waiting to pitch in child support for his 11 year old niece.

You think he should be working and providing money, legally in contact with the family he probably destroyed???

If you actually think that is a reasonable solution, I'm honestly not sure you and I exist on the same plane of reality.

http://www.frc.org/get.cfm?i=AL08F04

https://www.frc.org/get.cfm?c=CART&dmy=CAD6AA58-E00A-91F6-344104F193CF411C&CFID=147705&CFTOKEN=7adcbf3fc9332058-CAA7E5E2-0757-1875-2316F53D0329B4D7

I sort of expect him to take a gun out, "Order our products or the baby gets it!"

Hal: 10:36: yawn. Pro life guy thinks life begins at conception. Breaking news.

Tony Perkins is highly credentialed in addition to being a strong advocate for the family. There are many readers new to this blog who may be interested in hearing what he has to say. This man is a breath of fresh air, IMHO.

From The Family Research Council website:
Tony Perkins is President of the Washington, D.C.-based Family Research Council. He is a former member of the Louisiana legislature where he served for eight years....
....A veteran of the U.S. Marine Corps, and a former police officer and television news reporter, Tony brings a unique blend of experience and leadership to the pro-family movement. He received his undergraduate degree from Liberty University and a Master's Degree from Louisiana State University in Public Administration. In May 2006 he received an honorary doctorate in theology from Liberty University. Tony and Lawana, married in 1986, have five children.

"The Church has said they will take the baby if she allows them to....."

"Babies...mmmm....give us your babies..."

Yeah maybe if the Church wanted to carry it inside of their uterus and give birth to it...
"Oh it's only nine months of pregnancy!"
Yeah but the negative effects on her young body will last her a lifetime.

"The baby isn't hurting her intentionally but it is hurting her!"

So kill it, right?

How about setting up a fund to help this girl to come to the US of A and get her entitled abortion if you're going to project your sympathy exclusively for her?

And correction: Your statement should read the "fetus' is hurting her. Unless you're willing to admit abortion kills a baby.

But I'll leave that argument with Doug...

Doug @ 10:09 AM

Doug - speechless! hehe

Naw - actually Doug your comment was held in moderation because it had some "technical" problems. I ok'd it, but currently it's not showing up. I'll check a few more things, if my schedule permits.

"And correction: Your statement should read the "fetus' is hurting her. Unless you're willing to admit abortion kills a baby."

Yes it will probably kill a baby, but she is just a baby herself and deserves a chance at a normal, healthy childhood.

"Hal: 10:36: yawn. Pro life guy thinks life begins at conception. Breaking news."
------------------------------------------

Here's a nice excerpt from the Federation of Societies of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FESGO) ...made last week:

"The members of the Federation note that the humanity of the embryo is not a matter of religion, but of medical science.

"Science teaches that human life begins at conception," the declaration states.  "If it is also true that it is affirmed by religion, it does not for that reason cease to be a strictly scientific truth, to be transformed into a religious opinion. 

He who denies that human life begins with conception does not need to contend with religion, but science. 

To deny this certainty of biology is not to express a lack of faith, but a lack of basic knowledge of human genetics, something that is even known by the general public."
-----------------------

Comment by a "pro-lifer", Hal?

Now, even other medical doctors are confirming it as science FACT.

""Can they get help with birth expenses from the uncle who is the father?"

Amanda:11:22: Whoa- missed that the first time around.

Janet... are you kidding???

he's a NINETEEN YEAR OLD CHILD RAPIST

it also says right in the article that he is no where to be found. Yeah, I'm sure he's just anxiously waiting to pitch in child support for his 11 year old niece.

You think he should be working and providing money, legally in contact with the family he probably destroyed???

If you actually think that is a reasonable solution, I'm honestly not sure you and I exist on the same plane of reality.

I'm sorry, somehow I missed the last sentence of the story that said the uncle had disappeared!!!!

Rape is not a part of my morality. It's hard to comprehend this situation. That said: He's an uncle; I was thinking his family may be able to help out. If they don't have money, then forget it....just wishful thinking on my part?

Reasonable solution? I would like to see her carry the baby to term no matter what the obstacles. Maybe you would expect her to abort?

Amanda, maybe we do exist on different planes of reality. Lol. I can see pretty clearly from where I sit that abortion is never the best solution. :)

"Rape is not a part of my morality."

OOOPS! Correction: "Rape is not a part of my REALITY"

"Reasonable solution? I would like to see her carry the baby to term no matter what the obstacles. Maybe you would expect her to abort?

Amanda, maybe we do exist on different planes of reality. Lol. I can see pretty clearly from where I sit that abortion is never the best solution. :)"

So you're just going to let this 9 year old be tortured just so one more person can live in this world?

Honestly, I don't think every baby is a special gift from God. Not special enough to kill a nine year old for.
And remember, God killed a bunch of Egyptian kids just to make a point. He obviously didn't care much about them.

"Rape is not a part of my REALITY"

You don't think rape is a reality? You don't think it's real?

"So you're just going to let this 9 year old be tortured just so one more person can live in this world?"
---------------------------------

You call pregnancy "torture" ??

Janet, all I see on that website is a bunch of reactionary gay-hating GARBAGE.

Again, if the pro life movement wants to establish credibility in mainstream America- they're going to need to separate themselves from these virulent gay haters.

Their pro life message is getting drowned out by a bunch of "OHNOEZZZ NOT TEH GAYS!!!!" and its pathetic, sad, and counterproductive to any kind of message that we should be welcoming of regardless of our personal opinions of whats best for people.

And here you see the inherent problem with embedding YouTube videos... "related videos" puts obscene content on your webpage.

"You call pregnancy "torture" ??"

For a small 9 year old body? Yes.

Before I started the pill I called PMS torture. I bloated so much I felt like my abdomen would explode. I would throw up from the pain of cramps, and my back always hurt so much I could barely sit up straight. That was when I was ten. I would hate to have been pregnant at nine.

correction:

"welcoming of *LIFE* regardless of our personal opinions of whats best for people."

Family Research Councils motto should be: All life is precious... UNLESS ITS A HOMO!!

Because thats basically what everything on that ridiculous site is saying.

Amanda, I can't believe you haven't already been recruited to the gay lifestyle, working at PP and all.

I lived with a gay roommate for a few months, I'm lucky I didn't catch it!

Doug: 10:05: "Family Reserach Council" Heh.

Are you dubious of FRC's motives because they appear to be family friendly? (Sarcasm alert) They must be pro-life. Yikes!!! Run!!!

Janet, well, I did misspell it...

I'm not "dubious" of their motives, I just think it's a silly, reactionary place, as Amanda noted.

Not "research" but just a fringe site. Not any huge deal, IMO, and thus I just give it a "heh."

Amanda, I'm not saying I promote the hating of gays by promote the anti-abortion stance of FRC. Jill's is a pro-life blog, not a pro-gay/anti-gay blog, although some people forget that. Can we please separate the two? I'd rather not get into that discussion.

"Rape is not a part of my REALITY"

Jess:11:47:You don't think rape is a reality? You don't think it's real?

Before jumping to conclusions, re-read my next sentence, "It's hard to comprehend this situation." (in other words, I haven't had to deal with this difficult situation before.)

Jess, Even PP asks for donations on their webistes. That is nothing new.

I feel like people are "screaming" at me. I need a break.. Ciao for now.

One last comment....

And here you see the inherent problem with embedding YouTube videos... "related videos" puts obscene content on your webpage.

Posted by: Cranky Catholic at June 27, 2008 11:53 AM

I noticed that too. Families/Obscenity - they go hand in hand, don't you know? (sarcasm alert)

"Jill's is a pro-life blog, not a pro-gay/anti-gay blog, although some people forget that. Can we please separate the two? I'd rather not get into that discussion."

Jill posts anti-gay garbage on her site all the time. Just yesterday, HisMan said that gays are worse than abortionists and theives. So I'm not the one with a problem keeping the two separate.

In fact, its because pro life can't seem to keep itself seperate from anti gay that I end up in the odd position I'm in. I would NEVER EVER vote for a candidate who supports the idea that my aunts, who've been together for 12 years, are just sexual deviants who don't actually love each other. So no matter if I change my opinion on abortion - even if I decide I think it should be completley illegal, I'm still going to be voting for pro choice candidates because I have YET to encounter a pro life leader who isn't spouting hateful homophobic garbage from the same mouth that preaches about the sanctity of ALL life.

You want to show me that all life has dignity and rights from conception to death? Try actually LIVING UP to that and TREATING all life with dignity and rights. Until then, its just a a lot of hypocritical nonsense.

put the baby up for adoption so he/she never has to find out how he/she entered the world, and the victim doesn't end up being forced to grow up with her child living as her sibling.

Its too F-d up for me to even imagine.
Posted by: Amanda at June 27, 2008 11:16 AM

Your prejudice against Children of Rape.
That's too f-d up to imagine. Well only from A man Da. To do a Dogma Doug, absolute statment on ya, children of rape have been born since time began. Mothers have kept the child unless they thought like you Amanda. In which case Christians took them into their family when the pagan mother simply left them at the trash dump or gehenna.

The Christians took your refuse A man Da from rape and raised them in those tombs underground. In fact, scratched on those tombs are the names of the victims of rape and their birth and death day noted. Translated into English from Latin, many were named "found on trash dump", or "found in sewer". Sometimes just shortened to "I am S--T".
OF course the one's which the mother bashed in the head, or drown to death were also left in the gehenna. They were buried in the tombs and given the same names as the living babies they found abandoned by pagan mothers. Some pagan mothers just didn't have the heart to murder the child of rape. Umlike you A man Da.

Were you aware of that history of Western Civilization A man DA? Of course not, since you just "can't imagine" such things in life being soo f...d up. Many of the early Christians were born of rape, A man Da, and the mother who was raped, kept and loved the child till their death. In fact, it is also written down in those tombs such words of the child who survived the mother and lovingly wrote of mother who kept her.

So.

Question. Would you abort a child of rape?
Question. Would you give the child up since it reminds of a time of being unable to control your sexual life, A man Da?
Question. Are you just a neo-pagan A man Da at heart? Unable to imagine being able to keep a child of rape and if you had child whisper in that child's ear, Look their goes I am S--T, she/he was born from rape and given away. Or, she kept the child of rape, whispers AmnDA, into her childs ear, can you imagine, it's too f--. up.

Ps, Thinks that funny and clownish A man DA?

Uh Amanda.

Am I homophobic? We "license" marriage and can decide what and who can get a license to be married in this nation. Seems you can't tolerate decisions which deny a license by true democracy,voting. Next thing you know, your going to spew some hate speech about being prejudice about same sex love.

You can't say I'm against same sex love, A man Da, after all I'm a female and love my mother. What type of love are you writing about here?

ooooh. the loon has emerged from his nest.

*gets popcorn*

AmanDA.

I have it on good sources that Hisman loves his father who is the same sex as Hisman. How can a person be homophboic if he loves the same sex?

What type of love are you writing about between same sex people? I even heard that Hisman even loves his nephews also. And I bet if he has a male granchild he loves that male grandchild too. In fact, Hisman might even kiss and hug that same sex grandchild.

So AmanDa, ain't your being rather silly accusing other people of being homophobic, when they just disagree on a matter of who gets a license to marry? Drop the loon writing Amanda, unless you can be more specific about this prejudice that people have abour same sex love.

YES JANET WE ARE YELLING AT YOU!

No, I'm kidding Janet I think you're awesome. Plus yllas didn't show up until after you left. Please come back I'm sorry I made you sad: (

yllas, why are you calling Amanda, "A man Da"? You said you love your mother, but are you having sex with her? Because we are talking about intimate, physical love here.

And where is ssej?

The story about that girl from Romania is heartbreaking. Abortion is going to traumatize her.

What happens if she's injured like that 13 year old girl that became infertile here in the USA?

Because Liz, being raped by your uncle then getting pregnant was just peachy for her.

Why do you think abortion would traumatize her? Do you think if she has the baby she'll take one look at it and fall deeply in love and forget the whole thing? Sorry, things don't always happen like they do in the movies.

A man Da? Seriously? That's the best comeback you can come up with?

That reminds me of my 2nd grade classmates referring to me as "Step on Me".

As for the pregnant 9-year-old, it really depends on what she wants. However, I think a pregnancy could really screw up her body...she's still a child and her body is not developed enough to handle a pregnancy. So yes, I do support her parents taking her out of country to get an abortion if she wants to.

As for the comments on the 9 year old's physical capacity to bear a child...If she is physically developed enough to concieve a child, she is physically developed enough to birth a child. Now of course, there may be complications, especially those related to premature birth, but physically, this 9 year old is no different than a typical 13 year old in terms of reproductive capacity.

Now, that said, I obviously do not think that a 9 year old or a 13 year old should be having babies, and it is obvious that a crime has been commited if she is.

I don't think that we should automatically assume that abortion is the best case scenerio for young victims of rape. An abortion can be a traumatic experience, even for adults and I think it is dangerous to downplay that reality. Especially if this girl is deeply religious or raised in a deeply religious community, she may carry around the guilt of the abortion well into her adult life.

I think that there needs to be support from everyone involved in the situation, but I do not think it is a situation in which an abortion should be automatic.

Oops looks like the girl was 11, not 9. Not that that matters, but I wanted to make it clear what I was talking about.

So if you're victimized Jess, and someone on the street reminds you of the crime, you can kill them, because that's just - right?

Look rape is wrong - it's a horrible crime, however the pre-born is innocent of the crime. You're justifying abortion on a pretense that doesn't work anywhere else in our society. And the only reason why is you don't consider the pre-born as a human being.

Additionally, it's not unreasonable to believe that there is trauma after an abortion that came about via rape. Two wrongs don't make a right Jess.

BTW - I'm testing something out here - that explains the wrench in my post tagline.

No the pregnant nine year old is from Nicaragua. The 11 year old is the Romanian.

Your really a dense kinda mind Jess.
You can't say I'm against same sex love, Jess, after all I'm a female and love my mother. What type of love are you writing about here?
And so does Hisman touch and hug his father, who is the same sex. That's physical love. What type of physical love are you wrting about Jess? But, since

Because we are talking about intimate, physical love here. Have you not hugged your mother and father Jess? Are you having sex with your mother and father?

And is touching and hugging a same sex person,such as a mother not physical love Jess?

Of course it is. To which I shall reply, what type of physical love are you writing about here, Jess?
Since a person loves the same sex and touches the same sex often growing up, the person is not afraid or in fear of the same sex.
In fact, it would be a rare bird that never hugged and kissed their mother as a girl,or father as a boy. So all this homophobic accusations are actually based in some other type of physical same sex love, which you might explain to us so we may not be in fear of touching and hugging a person of the same sex.
What are the "qualities" of this same sex love, which you write of Jess, which are not contained in Hisman hugging his son, or giving his son a goodnight kiss, and now being accused of by some silly little girl named A ManDa of being in fear of same sex love?

If you see your rapist walking down the street I'm sure courts would be lenient if you walked up to him and started smacking him.

*giggle*

Stephanie, my personal favorite is aMANda Huginkiss. My boyfriends last name rhymes with a bodily function - he has it much worse than you and I. =)

The funny thing is, yllas ACTUALLY wonders why I dont bother replying to these garbage posts when they are written out the way 3rd graders pick fights over who gets to use the swingset next.

ME ME ME !!! YOU POOPHEAD!!!

Yllas - be nice. That's a personal attack. Jess has a different view, but you're not going to convince her by calling her names.

yllas, do you not know what sex is? It involves a bit more then just "touching". Do I hug my Mom and Dad? Yes, I love them sooo much and I love cuddling up with them and Sandy on the couch. Do any of them penetrate me with anything? No. And If they did that would be the very end of any kind of relationship with them.

Again, I don't know what you think sex is or what you and your parents do, but I do differentiate between normal parent child affection and the love you feel for a sex partner.

"The funny thing is, yllas ACTUALLY wonders why I dont bother replying to these garbage posts when they are written out the way 3rd graders pick fights over who gets to use the swingset next."

Well, she wants me to have sex with some guy on an island. So you have it a bit easier. (not that there's anything wrong with that)

Jess said If you see your rapist walking down the street I'm sure courts would be lenient if you walked up to him and started smacking him.

Umm - wouldn't you want him arrested? Also, the courts wouldn't be lenient if you sliced him apart and vacumned him up.

(You know, I like my preview page better...)

Oo Hal can I join?

Lauren, I do not agree with you. I don't understand how a 9 year old child have the same physical capability to birth a child than a 25-year old.

Their reproductive systems may be functioning, but there's a lot more than just having a working uterus that contribute to birthing. I imagine that things like the pelvis is not quite developed enough for a smooth pregnancy and birth.

Thank you for standing up for me Chris : )

Absolutely Jess, but we'll have to bring my wife too. (otherwise it wouldn't be proper)

Chris, I accidently scalded some guy with hot chocolate when he made a sexy kinda remark to me.

I never got in trouble for that.

Chris, also, I do like the page you have now. Maybe you should add a "tags" column so we can find things more easily? I don't know how hard that is but Jill has one. If she has one you should get one too : )

Amanda,

Lol. My last name is Yeh (American pronounced it as Yay) so I was called "Step on Me, Yay!".

My boyfriend and your boyfriend may have something in common with unfortunate last names though. His last name is Crabbs. =/ You bet he got a lot of flak for that in high school and still now.

You're welcome.

You avoided answer my questions - ah well. Right now I have to get back to some other work.

Jess - if you run off to the island with Hal and his wife, will you bring your hamsters?

A tag-cloud is a good idea. Along with dynamic comment-watching from the back-end, so I can see ya'll typing your comments in and be writing a reply in real time.... hehe

(that's a nice laugh and not a Bwahhahha mean laugh....)

I got to get back to work - play nice okay?

Ok Steph, your BF wins. That is rather unfortunate. However, its worth noting that one of the most horribly unfortunate names I've ever seen - is also one of the most respected and highly awarded professionals to work in the field of developmental education.

Richard Woodcock Johnson.

Yes thats right.

Dick.
Woodcock.
Johnson.

no joke.

but office jokes abound when we have to order the "Woodock Johnsons test".

yllas: after all I'm a female and love my mother.

Now doggone it, yllas, despite your "uspsgirl" clothes, MK assured me you were a guy.

I knew that Zeke was a guy even when people thought he was a girl.

So, what have you done with MK? Are you forcing her to recant her story?

Your statement should read the "fetus' is hurting her. Unless you're willing to admit abortion kills a baby.

But I'll leave that argument with Doug...

Carder, uh....

There is no "admitting" as to "baby" or "not baby," since it's a subjective thing. Not really an argument in the first place.

have a good weekend.

Doug - speechless! hehe

Heh - yeah, Chris, that's me.
.....

Naw - actually Doug your comment was held in moderation because it had some "technical" problems. I ok'd it, but currently it's not showing up. I'll check a few more things, if my schedule permits.

No biggie - it was a picture from imageshack.com. Didn't used to have problems but something has changed. I may need to use a slightly different format for all the HTML stuff to get it to work correctly.

There's the code for the picture but now Imageshack adds on a link to their site, and I was thinking that Jill's site counted it as two links, thus getting held up.

Jess: And where is ssej?

Just let the voices inside that one's head bounce around a while longer. There's one in there....

Well Chris.
You said you love your mother, but are you having sex with her? Because we are talking about intimate, physical love here.

And where is ssej?

Posted by: Jess at June 27, 2008 1:01 PM

Let that insult to me, by Jess, slide right by ya, huh Chris?

I have YET to encounter a pro life leader who isn't spouting hateful "HOMOPHOBIC garbage from the same mouth that preaches about the sanctity of ALL life

I would NEVER EVER vote for a candidate who supports the idea that my aunts, who've been together for 12 years, are just sexual deviants who don't actually love each other
Posted by: Amanda at June 27, 2008 12:29 PM

To which I posted about same sex love and homophobia being impossible in Hisman,me, or even You Chris. This writing about homophobia and Christians is just plain silly and I called Amanda out on that silly canard by giving simple examples of same sex love in me and Hisman. Of course Jess insulted me first Chris if you followed the thread. I asked what type of love is she talking about and her reply was just plain old dense, and not a answer to my question of what type of same sex love she is writing about.

Tell you what Chris, your going to lose more Christians posting here at this site, by allowing the propaganda of pro abortionist, homosexual bigots, anti-Catholic bigots and outright insults that pro lifers endure at this site, by the same few propagadist for abortion.

You've even got your own abortion doktor giving out prescription drug information for abortion, and allow those post. You better hope some pro lifer's child or young adult ain't reading that abortion doktors ill informing and deceptive information on abortion drugs Chris, then gets that abortion drug mentioned by your site's own abortion doktor, and dies from trying to abort a baby in the womb.

You better hope no person(a young Christian child) is reading these post at Jill's and comes across the pro child sex post of Hal and others at this site Chris.

So, Keep up the good work Chris, and you keep the playing field level for the abortion propagandist and same sex lovers at this site who are asked a simple question, and get no reply to a simple question asked about the qualities of same sex love.

Yes it will probably kill a baby, but she is just a baby herself and deserves a chance at a normal, healthy childhood.

Posted by: Jess at June 27, 2008 11:36 AM

I don't think having an abortion is going to give her that.

yllas - point out the problem and I'll take care of it - sorry, I just noticed your comment but not jess's.

Was it the comment at Jess @ 1:01 PM?

Kristen, it could help.

And yllas, most pro-lifers on here are very nice and can carry on an intelligent conversation.

"Yes it will probably kill a baby, but she is just a baby herself and deserves a chance at a normal, healthy childhood.

Posted by: Jess at June 27, 2008 11:36 AM

I don't think having an abortion is going to give her that."

I agree with you Kristen, I think that chance was eliminated the moment she was raped. But what I think would cause further trauma to her more than anything else is removing the option for her to choose. No one should be trying to convince her one way or the other. Some might say she's too young to make that decision - well - she was too young to be pregnant in the first place - and I think being forced in to ANOTHER thing against her will (either being forced to abort OR forced to give birth) would just make it worse. Even if she ends up regretting the decision later, at least it was HER decision. I think its a lot easier for us to examine our own decisions and reflect and learn from them than to deal with the results of decisions made FOR us.

Doug - I unpublished your comment about various names.

Everyone: I'm trying to be fair to all.

If you have valid comment points make them.

yllas - I'm not siding with Jess. The thread is going over the top due to Amanda's Romanian post @ 10:57 AM.

You can all bring it back in line - it's up to you.

Chris, she didn't know what we meant by same sex love. I told her it was the type of love you have for a person you would have sex with.

I'm not calling anyone names.

And you're doing a great job moderating Chris!

Jess - agape (boundless, perfect love), storge (parental love), phileo (brotherly love) or eros (sexual love) which one are you talking about?

Second.

Oops, meant I second Jess's applauding of your moderation, Chris.

Chris, I guess Amanda said yllas was against same-sex love, yllas responded by saying she loved her mother, who is the same sex as her. I said that Amanda meant she was against (eros) sexual love between two people of the same sex, and that the love she felt for her Mom was different.

Chris -

the post wasn't meant to be off topic.

The fact is, we can all acknowledge life begins at conception, but fatherhood? not for all. and the ability to parent? not for all. even the ability to safely give birth? not for all.

so as long as their are perverts out their raping children and impregnating them, and girls getting pregnant who would rather overdose on heroin and throw themselves down stairs than have a child, the message that life begins at conception isn't going to have any kind of profound effect on the abortion debate.

I'd urge you as a sensible human being not to indulge in Yllas's baiting. Nothing got out of hand until he/she showed up...and that is a recurring theme here.

Tell you what Chris, your going to lose more Christians posting here at this site, by allowing the propaganda of pro abortionist, homosexual bigots, anti-Catholic bigots and outright insults that pro lifers endure at this site

yllas, it's ludicrous for you to even mention "insults."

Jill has said she wants "a spirited debate." You may just want preaching-to-the-choir stuff and your own brand of propaganda, but most of the rest of us like the honest opinions, feelings, and discourse that takes place here.

I actually didn't say anyone specific was against anything - I said that the FRC has emphasized its anti gay agenda more than its pro life agenda... and yllas chose to make it personal. I mentioned no names.

Amanda - you're supporting my argument that man is evil at heart and that the Spirit of Christ is the only answer to truly address that. ;-)

I know there was semantic confusion re: love. I've seen yllas argue quite effectively when she wants to. I think it would be great if we could approach this topic with at least a perspective that there's someone on the other side of the Internet who's more like us than not, and that's the basis for respect.

The best blog discussions I've seen are when people are mature enough in their responses that you could say - yeah, I could have you over my house, sit out back on the deck and have a great spirited debate and at the end of the night - we still value each other as friends. The only way that happens is if we really treasure what's essential to each one of us, recognize that for what it is, and keep that respect throughout our debate.

If we're really wise, we'll be closer to the person at the end of the debate than we were at the beginning.

Hey - I'm writing a sermon here and I didn't set out to do that. Be nice.

And oh - one more thing: I have the keys to the blog. ;-)

I just got here, but remember that this is a very sensitive topic and people on both sides are quite emotionally involved in this (and rightfully so). Let's try and discuss this with respect and love (phileo) for each other.

Blanket of love. We're all under the blanket of love.

Oh beautifully said, Chris.

Great video: of course the irrational thinking of proaborts is always easy to expose!

Amanada:The fact is, we can all acknowledge life begins at conception, but fatherhood? not for all. and the ability to parent? not for all. even the ability to safely give birth? not for all.

This statement is irrational. I hope you know this? If life begins at conception this means that the new life, known as a baby, has a FATHER and a MOTHER - that is a man and a woman who made the baby and who are it's PARENTS. Fatherhood begins at conception as does motherhood. Even when the baby is aborted, the only difference is that the father is the father of a dead baby. If the baby is born, the father is the father of a living baby.
Why do you want to make things so complicated?

Blanket of love. We're all under the blanket of love.

Posted by: Bobby Bambino at June 27, 2008 3:05 PM

are you sending "vibes" over cyberspace? You belong in the 70's generation!!!lol

I agree with Chris that the discussion on this thread has really gotten way off topic.

If life begins at conception this means that the new life, known as a baby, has a FATHER and a MOTHER - that is a man and a woman who made the baby and who are it's PARENTS.

Patricia, maybe somebody would say it's a "baby" at conception, and of course maybe not.

Usually it's at birth that we say "he became a father today," etc.

Tony Perkins is highly credentialed in addition to being a strong advocate for the family. There are many readers new to this blog who may be interested in hearing what he has to say. This man is a breath of fresh air, IMHO.

From The Family Research Council website:
Tony Perkins is President of the Washington, D.C.-based Family Research Council. He is a former member of the Louisiana legislature where he served for eight years....
....A veteran of the U.S. Marine Corps, and a former police officer and television news reporter, Tony brings a unique blend of experience and leadership to the pro-family movement. He received his undergraduate degree from Liberty University and a Master's Degree from Louisiana State University in Public Administration. In May 2006 he received an honorary doctorate in theology from Liberty University.....
Posted by: Janet at June 27, 2008 11:28 AM

Liberty University? It's a 4th tier Baptist College co-opted by Falwell which prohibits free speech.

creating a child vs parenting/fathering that child are two VERY different things.

All fertile men can impregnate a woman, not all men can be a FATHER.

Credit to Jill for promoting a spirited debate, and to Chris and the other mods for the work they do. None of us should be afraid of encountering and discussing a variety of viewpoints.

Here's the point Chris.

I don't care what insults are thrown at me, and simple questions are ignored repeatedly and passed off by the propaganist for abortion. I don't ask for a intervention by you when the same propagandist repeat the same propaganda for abortion into infinity.
Take Jess and her reply about me not knowing about sex. What type of people do you allow to post here that can't answer a simple question that is asked about "same sex love" and come back with a answer about me having sex with a parent?

This is the quality of propagandist for same sex love, who whip out the homophobic rant, and are being called on the fact, that no one is a homophobe from being in love with the same sex person since birth. Their parents. Amanda went off on a rant about Hisman and Christians to which I asked a few simple questions and get ignorance and insults in return.

Phylo

interesting tidbit about Liberty and the Bush administration.

Liberty has the worst ranked law school in the entire country, the lowest amount of graduates who go on to pass the bar exam - and yet the Bush admin hired more Liberty law grads than Harvard Law grads.

Patricia, maybe somebody would say it's a "baby" at conception, and of course maybe not.

Usually it's at birth that we say "he became a father today," etc.

Posted by: Doug at June 27, 2008 3:14 PM

Well Doug, it use to be that it was already implied and accepted that when a woman became pregnant, she was carrying a BABY and the parents were PARENTS. The implied meaning was that they were the parents of the baby in-utero.
The idea that maybe it's a baby at conception and maybe it's not - is relatively new proabort lingo and thinking in modern science. In fact, scientifically conception is the beginning of a baby. Whether or not people deny this, it is still a baby.
Ultimately, you are splitting hairs to support your choice for abortion. A person truly searching for the truth would maybe be a little more intellectually honest.

* lowest of fully accredited law schools

Liberty is currently only "provisionally accredited", and among those, the bar passage was above average, but is still in the 4th (lowest) tier of US law schools.

Haha, still not a law school you'd brag about.

I need to stop typing so fast - I start writing something, then do something at work, then hit post without re-reading...

creating a child vs parenting/fathering that child are two VERY different things.

All fertile men can impregnate a woman, not all men can be a FATHER.

Posted by: Amanda at June 27, 2008 3:17 PM

NO. all men who create a baby ARE FATHERS. Whether they are able to PARENT a child may well be another matter. However, I like to believe that most men have within themselves the capability to be a good father to their child.

I went on a rant about Christians?

Really?

Care to link me to that?

That would be especially fascinating for me, as I consider myself a Christian, if I went on a rant about myself without even realizing it!

"Usually it's at birth that we say "he became a father today," etc."

Also Doug, we say things like "the sun will rise tomorrow at 6 am" but no one accuses him of being a geocentrist. It's just a way of speaking that we've adapted in our culture. Although I have no problem with what you wrote, I agree with Patricia (what a shock, ehh?)that if we wanted to get technical, it wouldn't be correct.

"However, I like to believe that most men have within themselves the capability to be a good father to their child."

Like the 19 year old who raped his 11 year old neice? Sorry - I just can't associate him with being a "father". He forced sperm in to an unwilling child. I think thats about it.

Jill posts anti-gay garbage on her site all the time. Just yesterday, HisMan said that gays are worse than abortionists and theives. So I'm not the one with a problem keeping the two separate.

In fact, its because pro life can't seem to keep itself seperate from anti gay that I end up in the odd position I'm in. I would NEVER EVER vote for a candidate who supports the idea that my aunts, who've been together for 12 years, are just sexual deviants who don't actually love each other. So no matter if I change my opinion on abortion - even if I decide I think it should be completley illegal, I'm still going to be voting for pro choice candidates because I have YET to encounter a pro life leader who isn't spouting hateful homophobic garbage from the same mouth that preaches about the sanctity of ALL life.

You want to show me that all life has dignity and rights from conception to death? Try actually LIVING UP to that and TREATING all life with dignity and rights. Until then, its just a a lot of hypocritical nonsense.

Posted by: Amanda at June 27, 2008 12:29 PM

There is your rant AmanDA.

Insulting Jill, whose is a Christian, and Hisman, who is a Christian. I want you to notice the absolute statement you made about Jill's site A man DA. Your very first sentence contains the word ALL. Is your statement one hundred precent true A man Da? Or does it contain some false truth, in that first declarative statement of your rant?

Since one must conclude you do not write false statments unless it is for propaganda purposes, why are you here Amanda? To declare to the board more absolute truths about Jill being anti gay garbage ALL the time? How ranting of you Amanda. And the best part? you think it wasn't a absolute truth you just wrote insulting the person who allows you to post here. What cajones A man Da.

While he may not have a degree from the best university in the US, this does not disqualify Tony Perkins from speaking about fatherhood. He is after all the father of 5 children.
I didn't know one needed a doctorate to have an authoritative opinion on fatherhood.

I'm starting to wonder if you actually believe anything you say is coherant or worth being taken seriously, Yllas...

Hope you have a good day.

Patricia -

"While he may not have a degree from the best university in the US, this does not disqualify Tony Perkins from speaking about fatherhood. He is after all the father of 5 children.
I didn't know one needed a doctorate to have an authoritative opinion on fatherhood."

I didn't post that as anything against this guy personally - just that Phylo mentioned Liberty, and I think their relationship with the Bush admin is very interesting...just reminded me of it is all. I certainly don't think you need a degree to know about fatherhood, but I think its a little silly to imagine all men have the same perception or ability to parent as he does. All I'm trying to say is, his message isn't going to mean anything to a rapist or a jerk who doesn't CARE if life begins at conception or not, so its preaching to the choir. Thats all.

"However, I like to believe that most men have within themselves the capability to be a good father to their child."

Like the 19 year old who raped his 11 year old neice? Sorry - I just can't associate him with being a "father". He forced sperm in to an unwilling child. I think thats about it.

Posted by: Amanda at June 27, 2008 3:47 PM

Well obviously, this young man has some serious problems. However, how does aborting this baby solve the girl's problems, the man's problem. The only thing that we know for sure here now is that there will be a dead baby. This is not a solution to this terrible situation. We can do better than this.
Again, Amanada like the arguments for abortion, you post a "hard case" but most men are not hard cases. They do have it within them to be good fathers, if given a chance and if they can have a role model.

Amanda.

I post your rant. You post a insult. Since you didn't deny the truth of my post, one must conclude you are ignoring the truth contained in my post and doing what you have done throughout this post thread . Hide and deny anything which alters your perception of yourself and the ability to insult Jill Stanek and Hisman by a silly rant.

Patricia: Well Doug, it use to be that it was already implied and accepted that when a woman became pregnant, she was carrying a BABY and the parents were PARENTS.

I'd say no - you were a parent after the birth. Looking at the derivation of the word:

"from O.Fr. parent, from L. parentem (nom. parens) "father or mother, ancestor," noun use of prp. of parere "bring forth, give birth to, produce," from PIE base *per- "to bring forth"

I do agree that some people would have said "there's a baby in there," prior to birth, but mostly after a point in pregnancy, i.e. when the woman was visibly pregnant. And you know - the dude is handing out cigars and having a few drinks, saying "I just became a father.."
.....

The implied meaning was that they were the parents of the baby in-utero.

Yeah, that sounds reasonable to me. Again, yes, some people felt that way and some didn't.
.....

The idea that maybe it's a baby at conception and maybe it's not - is relatively new proabort lingo and thinking in modern science.

No, if anything it's science itself that points up the difference between a born baby and what is in the beginning a single cell, then two cells, then four, etc.

Patricia: In fact, scientifically conception is the beginning of a baby. Whether or not people deny this, it is still a baby.

Definitely wrong there. Scientifically it's a zygote, embryo, fetus, etc. "Baby" or not is subjective, and science does not rule on such things.
.....

Ultimately, you are splitting hairs to support your choice for abortion.

No, I'm being factual while you are pretending.
.....

A person truly searching for the truth would maybe be a little more intellectually honest

:: laughing ::

Oh, the irony.

Patricia: In fact, scientifically conception is the beginning of a baby. Whether or not people deny this, it is still a baby.

Definitely wrong there. Scientifically it's a zygote, embryo, fetus, etc. "Baby" or not is subjective, and science does not rule on such things.

Again Doug you are splitting hairs and using semantics to change the nature of what is. At conception a new human life or baby begins - it may have other scientific terms but it is a developing baby. The only reason you cannot accept this fact is that it allows YOU to PRETEND so as to be able to support the right to destroy that baby through abortion. If you can change the fact that it is a baby then maybe abortion will be a little more palatable. But killing an unborn baby will always be just that - murder. (Sorry to have to break that to you)

I didn't post that as anything against this guy personally - just that Phylo mentioned Liberty, and I think their relationship with the Bush admin is very interesting...just reminded me of it is all. I certainly don't think you need a degree to know about fatherhood, but I think its a little silly to imagine all men have the same perception or ability to parent as he does. All I'm trying to say is, his message isn't going to mean anything to a rapist or a jerk who doesn't CARE if life begins at conception or not, so its preaching to the choir. Thats all.

Posted by: Amanda at June 27, 2008 3:56 PM

Why is this even important? Tony Perkins message was not directed at rapists. It was directed at Obama, calling him in on his use of fatherhood when it suits him politically.

"Again, Amanada like the arguments for abortion, you post a "hard case" but most men are not hard cases. They do have it within them to be good fathers, if given a chance and if they can have a role model."

Oh I know thats a hard case, but the point is, telling someone life begins at conception isn't going to make a bit of difference if they don't believe that matters. Regailing fatherhood isn't going to make a bit of difference to someone who has no desire to be one. So the whole idea that this video will persuade ANYONE to change their position about abortion is a little outlandish.

(Bobby, on that picture of me you asked for - I'm too scroungy looking right now. I had to shave to get in a refinery last week, and now I've got about 1/6 of a beard where the salt is winning out over the pepper. Damn gray whiskers. Wish I didn't even have to shave at all.)

"Usually it's at birth that we say "he became a father today," etc."

Bobby: Also Doug, we say things like "the sun will rise tomorrow at 6 am" but no one accuses him of being a geocentrist. It's just a way of speaking that we've adapted in our culture.

Yes, oh Wise-Well-Beyond-Your-Years Bobby. No doubt, and why do we drive on parkways and park on driveways?

What we are talking about here is "how we speak," and very often it's said that one became a mother or father or parent at the birth of a baby, not before. The origin of the word "parent" really does go to the "at birth" deal.

"Today I became a grandmother," for example. It's at birth, not at conception, certainly for the most part.
.....

Although I have no problem with what you wrote, I agree with Patricia (what a shock, ehh?) that if we wanted to get technical, it wouldn't be correct.

There are two different things, however. If you want "technical" or "medical" or "scientific" then we have embryo and fetus and we don't have "baby."

There is "biological parent," and "conceptus," and blah blah blah, technically.

Then we come to the second part, the "how we speak" part, and one could say "I was a biological father at conception, but today I became a father," without contradiction because of the difference between being scientifically correct and common usage.

Moe could say, "she's got a baby in there," and Joe could say, "She's going to have a baby," and both can be correct within common usage.

I don't have a problem with "unborn baby" - it's well understood and IMO not worth spending much time arguing about - I'd only note that it's not a meaningful argument to state "it's a baby" in the context of the abortion debate any more than it is to state "it's not a baby."

A manDa.

When a person doesn't answer simple questions, one must conclude you lack the intelligence to reply from knowing the argument or statement has some truth you shall not debate.
You may deny that your post was a rant, to which the debate turns to the definition of rant. You may agree that your post is a rant, but that would require some honesty being asked of a propagandist.

Now, Amanda, you have mentioned this third grade insult to me several times already. Do you understand that a child answers a question or statement with "whatever you need to make you feel better" is exactly what a child does to a parent or person who ask or answers a question or statement of a child in the third grade? The shorter version is just, Whatever.

You know that Amanda, and yet you have plastered this board with such replies to questions directed to you about your rant on Jill Stanek and Hisman. Also questions about adoption and abortion concerning your ethics on such matters directed to you AmanDA.

To be truthful Amanda, if you were compelled to answer the questions concerning your statements in a courtroom, what do you think a jury would conclude about your answering questions, with not answering the questions concerning your rant and statements you wrote? Liar? Something to hide?

Unable to answer from knowing the answer is going prove the charge of "rant" against you as being true, but not able to admit the truth against you from sheer pride and arrogance of child in the third grade?

Like the 19 year old who raped his 11 year old niece? Sorry - I just can't associate him with being a "father". He forced sperm in to an unwilling child. I think thats about it.

Wow, Amanda, you have a very effective way of saying things. That gave me such a "Yuck" feeling. What horror there is in the world.

And for all you Pro-Lifers, I do understand that you see abortion as a great horror too.

While he may not have a degree from the best university in the US, this does not disqualify Tony Perkins from speaking about fatherhood. He is after all the father of 5 children. I didn't know one needed a doctorate to have an authoritative opinion on fatherhood.

Patricia, right on and no doubt! Not saying he's anybody to be telling a pregnant woman what to do, but as far as speaking about fatherhood I figure the 5 kids is some pretty darn good qualification.

So the whole idea that this video will persuade ANYONE to change their position about abortion is a little outlandish.

Posted by: Amanda at June 27, 2008 4:28 PM

You never know Amanada what the right words will be. Maybe it will get people to see how inconsistent Obama's thinking on life issues really is. And that he's really not the big supported of fatherhood that he makes himself out to be, especially since he supports a woman's right to unilaterally kill her baby. (with or without the father's consent)

yawn. Pro life guy thinks life begins at conception. Breaking news.

Posted by: hal at June 27, 2008 10:36 AM

Apparently, this IS news to you HAL.

@ Doug :-D

Patricia: In fact, scientifically conception is the beginning of a baby. Whether or not people deny this, it is still a baby.

"Definitely wrong there. Scientifically it's a zygote, embryo, fetus, etc. "Baby" or not is subjective, and science does not rule on such things."

Again Doug you are splitting hairs

No I'm not. I am being correct and seeing the difference between subjective terminology and scientific/medical definitions.
....

and using semantics to change the nature of what is.

Nay, Senora, "what it is" is defined scientifically. Semantics studies usage and changes in meaning, and that is the subjective realm where "baby" and "not a baby" reside.
....

At conception a new human life or baby begins - it may have other scientific terms but it is a developing baby.

You can say that, and you're only as correct as somebody else saying "it's not a baby."
.....

The only reason you cannot accept this fact

You are confusing "fact" with subjective preference and usage. They are two different things.
.....

is that it allows YOU to PRETEND so as to be able to support the right to destroy that baby through abortion. If you can change the fact that it is a baby then maybe abortion will be a little more palatable.

Wrong. Now you are talking about valuation, and that is a separate thing from definitions and semantics.
.....

But killing an unborn baby will always be just that - murder. (Sorry to have to break that to you)

You've stepped down from pretending that the subjective is objective to being flat-out incorrect about "murder."

Amanda: I need to stop typing so fast - I start writing something, then do something at work, then hit post without re-reading...

Hee hee hee I gave up on work long ago today....

A manDa.

yllas, you're getting close to China.

Amanda: the point is, telling someone life begins at conception isn't going to make a bit of difference if they don't believe that matters.

Right - there is so much (IMO) time wasted on this approach where people act like others don't believe the unborn are "human" genetically, etc., or where statements that don't address what the abortion debate is about are put forth as if they did.

I certainly agree that life is there at conception, and that the zygote is different from the sperm and egg, and that it is a human being in a very real sense.

The abortion debate remains.

Doug: I see no point in continuing this discussion. I wonder what you think it is that has been conceived? Blastocyst, zygote, embryo are merely stages that we all go through, just as are toddler, adolescent, etc. They are developmental stages - even pregnant women have stages (primapara etc). Blastocyst is merely the scientific term for the early developing human baby.

It amazes me that proaborts can be so rigidly scientific about the definition of conception but lose this ability when the discussion truns to other aspects of the abortion debate.

If denial makes you feel better at this stage in your life (middle age) so be it. But it's your loss (on many levels).

I say a baby exists from the moment of conception. As for you, I have no idea what you think has been conceived.

If denial makes you feel better at this stage in your life (middle age) so be it. But it's your loss (on many levels).

Hey, Patricia, 50 is "the new 30," ain't it? ; )

I think the denial here is on your part. You're acting like there is no difference between medical and scientific definitions, and subjective terms where the usage is up to the individual. They are not the same.
....

I say a baby exists from the moment of conception. As for you, I have no idea what you think has been conceived.

You can call it anything. That is not the argument.
.....

Blastocyst, zygote, embryo are merely stages that we all go through, just as are toddler, adolescent, etc. They are developmental stages - even pregnant women have stages (primapara etc).

There, "toddler" is a bit undefined, since it will fall within a subjecive range of ages. Personally I see it going infant to toddler to child. Same for "adolescent." It's roughly between puberty and full maturity (or is it even that well defined?). Still, quite a range.
.....

Blastocyst is merely the scientific term for the early developing human baby.

Again, it's no more correct to say "baby" there than not.
.....

It amazes me that proaborts can be so rigidly scientific about the definition of conception but lose this ability when the discussion truns to other aspects of the abortion debate.

Well, youse is da one what done los' dat 'bility.

There are rigid scientific definitions, and then there are subjective terms. You are mixing them up.

There are rigid scientific definitions, and then there are subjective terms. You are mixing them up.

Posted by: Doug at June 27, 2008 5:32 PM

Nope.

Amanda"3:30: * lowest of fully accredited law schools
Liberty is currently only "provisionally accredited", and among those, the bar passage was above average, but is still in the 4th (lowest) tier of US law schools.
Haha, still not a law school you'd brag about.

Maybe no one cares about this at this point.....I have no ties to Liberty, but for the record:

The law school, which opened in 2003, gained provisional accreditation from the American Bar Association in 2006, which enables its graduates to sit for any bar examination in the United States.[13] Provisional Accreditation is the highest level of accreditation available at present; full accreditation cannot be granted until a school has been in operation for five years. Although, students graduating from a provisionally accredited law school enjoy the full rights guaranteed to fully accredited schools. [14]

In 2007, U.S. News & World Report ranked Liberty University in the second tier of Southern Master's Universities for school year 2008, and denotes as becoming increasingly more selective.

In 2005, Barron's Profiles of American Colleges ranked LU as a "competitive" college.[16]

In 2007 Liberty University School of Law, provisionally approved by the American Bar Association[17], announced an 89% Bar passage rate from its first graduating class of Law Students. The bar passage rate far exceeded the State Average of 71.97%.[18]

WHat you are saying Doug is that personhood is dependent upon a scientific term. These are human constructs however. A baby is a human being and person from the moment of conception through to death. It does not matter what they are called - blastocyst, zygote or "bun in the oven" - the entity that is a new being is still the same. The terms are human constructs which do not change the "nature" of the developing human in utero.
Your argument is pointless.

"Janet, all I see on that website is a bunch of reactionary gay-hating GARBAGE.

Again, if the pro life movement wants to establish credibility in mainstream America- they're going to need to separate themselves from these virulent gay haters. "

Amanda,

where exactly is the gay-hating on the FRC website? Why do you throw around these lies?

Touche to Tony!

I asked my Dad when he became a father and he rolled his eyes at me and said, "You're sisters birth" (she's older then me). And he's pretty darn pro-life.

I like Father Frank Provone’s analogy where he explains that before a bully beats up its victim, he calls the victim names. This is in order to dehumanize them, so it is easier to beat them up. And it is the same with the unborn. They are called names, blob of tissue, etc... so as to dehumanize them and ease their conscience as they begin to dismember the child.

Conception = Mother and Father

Doug:3:14: Usually it's at birth that we say "he became a father today," etc.

That's only because men are a little slow.... and don't believe there's a baby it until they actually see it. They pass out chocolate cigars to all their friends. It becomes more real. They bring baby home and the first night they are woken up to a baby's cries at 2:00 AM. NOW they are a father! :)

Great posts yllas. According to the homos anybody who isn't comfortable with "sexual relations" with same sex partners is defined as a homophobe. Guess what Amanda, sexual relations between same sex partners is unnatural, extremely dangerous, and the thought of it makes very uncomfortable. Am I a homophobe?

truthseeker, I'd say you were a homophobe. Well that's because I think you're scared of them. I mean, why not leave them to their "unnatural, extremely dangerous" sexual preference and just ignore them? They are having sex with each other, two consenting adults. I like to "play rough", if you get my drift. That's probably dangerous and unnatural, why don't you try and ban that too?

Janet,stop belittling fathers by calling them slow. I don't think Dad's get the credit they deserve these day, lets give all the good Dads a round of applause! HIP HIP HORRAY!
That wasn't technically applause as much it was a cheer, oh well.

Karen K, I've been calling that, "blob of tissue" a baby for awhile now. That changed nothing.

DRats! Tripple post!
I'm sorry, I got the comment error page then I tried to stop the page from loading then I reloaded the page.

Please don't delete my comment because I talk about my sex life, I just want everyone to really open up and not be afraid to say what they are really thinking or feeling.

According to the homos anybody who isn't comfortable with "sexual relations" with same sex partners is defined as a homophobe. Guess what Amanda, sexual relations between same sex partners is unnatural, extremely dangerous, and the thought of it makes very uncomfortable. Am I a homophobe?

Well, I don't think your definition is technically correct. I'm not comfortable with sexual relations with same sex partners meaning that I would never have them. That doesn't make me a homophobe, that just makes me a heterosexual. Just as with a homosexual, it would make them uncomfortable to attempt to have heterosexual sex. In fact, I've talked to quite a few gay people about it, and they get all grossed out even thinking about it, as I'm sure you do when you picture homosexual sex in your head. But I wouldn't call homosexuals "heterophobes."

I would only classify you as a homophobe if you allowed someone's sexual orientation to dictate whether or not you had a relationship with them. And by relationship I mean, be friends with them, or if they were your family, still show them the same kind of love family members show each other. If their sexual orientation makes you THAT uncomfortable even when they don't bring it up or talk about it, then I would call you a homophobe. I would call you a homophobe if you found out one of your friends was gay, and then you acted differently around them or stopped being friends with them.

But to be fair, I think bringing up anti-gay sentiments in the midst of the pro-life message is wrong and contradicts what being pro-life is all about. I see where Amanda is coming from, and it bothers me as well. I frankly don't get the whole abortion-homosexuality connection, and I think it's just a tactic used to demonize homosexuals. I also think Amanda is particularly sensitive/defensive when it comes to this issue because of her friend being the victim of a vicious hate crime. While you may not agree with her, you can truly sympathize with her outrage over people who spout hatred about gay people, as she has seen first-hand what that hatred can do.

Well put G'sMom

drat, i've been doubleposted upon

That's only because men are a little slow.... and don't believe there's a baby it until they actually see it.

I guess I'm a little slow too then.

I always thought I was having a baby, but when I saw her for the first time I was like "Awww, it's a baby!"

truthseeker, I'd say you were a homophobe. Well that's because I think you're scared of them. I mean, why not leave them to their "unnatural, extremely dangerous" sexual preference and just ignore them? They are having sex with each other, two consenting adults. I like to "play rough", if you get my drift. That's probably dangerous and unnatural, why don't you try and ban that too?
Posted by: Jess at June 27, 2008 11:58 PM

Jess, Afriad not. And if you leave someone alone and ignore them while they make bad choices then your not much of a friend.

During the Hillary/Obama debates, both said they believed the "pontential" for life begins at conception. But fatherhood beings at comception? Looks like anything but the baby is relevant to Obama.

Elizabeth:12:55 AM: "That's only because men are a little slow.... and don't believe there's a baby it until they actually see it."
I guess I'm a little slow too then. I always thought I was having a baby, but when I saw her for the first time I was like "Awww, it's a baby!"

Lol!

Jess: Janet,stop belittling fathers by calling them slow. I don't think Dad's get the credit they deserve these day, lets give all the good Dads a round of applause! HIP HIP HORRAY! That wasn't technically applause as much it was a cheer, oh well.

I said that tongue-in-cheek, a bad attempt at humor on my part. You are so right - Fathers DO deserve a round of applause for all they do! Happy Belated Father's Day to all the Dad's out there!

Excellent comments Elizabeth (Gabriella's Mom)!

OH, I like Karen K's post! Very nice!

Well Elizabeth,

The reason gays,abortion, and contraception are related is the fact that the reproducitve organs purpose is focused on the byproduct of the reproductive organs; pleasure.

It is why this board exist, since abortion is based upon the unwanted purpose of the reproductive organs natural purpose. The word reproductive organs is not used at this board, and is euphemised to the word sex.

Many at this board, in fact I shall say 90% deny the existence and understanding of vice. Although local government and the national goverment has organizations dedicated to the control of vice, such as the DEA, and the local government has a "vice unit" which also arrest those plying and trading in the vice based trade of prostitution, and drugs.

Somg is nothing more then a person who kills the unwanted product of vice behavior, while he encourages the behavior that got them to his killing house of human beings.

Hisman and others might write that the wages of sin is death, and so it is, when one looks upon the millions dying of AIDS. Or STD's which can and do render a women sterile.

Philosophically, Socrates wrote that virtue can know vice, but vice cannot know evil. The penalty for vice is the vice itself, the not seeing the good in its fullness, the good that ought to be there.

If one bends reality to fit your desires, you have separated reality from truth, that truth being, that the only purpose of those organs is reproduction.

Don't think vice exist, or does not apply to you?
Of course not, and for millions of others dying from their vice, it never existed and never was the cause of their death. Some disease did them in, but never their pleasure driven,uncontrolled desires were the reason for their disease.

Dogma Doug, will deny vice exist. Hal denies vice exist, and Amanda fights for vice being a virtue via the use of the organs of reproduction being used to enforce their desire driven reality.
Question. Is gay eros (only the eros) a virtuous act for you Elizabeth? I do not condemn philos and agape gay "love".

Why is it whenever I hear about Gay pride Parades, I also always then hear what goes on in these parades, it is indecent. But I guess what do you expect from a people who flaunt their rejection of All Mighty God and His teachings.

"the participants who, in past years, have publicly exhibited themselves in the nude or semi-nude, performed lewd, simulated sex acts, made obscene gestures, uttered lewd or filthy words, and made street solicitations for prostitution - all violations of the existing "Public Morals" law."

Chicago Gay Pride Parade 2008
by Arlene Sawicki -Illinois Family Institute

"The City of Chicago Events schedule lists hundreds of parades, festivals, conventions, visual arts shows, concerts, and performances open to the public throughout the year.

Chicago parades include the famous St. Patrick's Day Parade in March, where the Chicago River is tinted green in honor of the Irish. The Polish American Constitution Day Parade, held May 1st, celebrates the first European democratic Constitution established in Poland in 1791. The Columbus Day Parade, held in Autumn, is another ethnic celebration featuring the contributions of Italian Americans. The Von Steuben Day Parade, held in September, is the German American event of the year. Thousands of Chicagoans participate in these parades and support the causes they represent.

However, never within the celebration of these events would you find the flagrant and offensive violations of the Public Morals Laws of conduct as you do in what has become known as the annual Chicago Gay Pride Parade, held this year on Sunday, June 29th, 12:00 p.m.

Chapter 8-8 of the Chicago Public Morals Laws is quite clear in defining "Indecent acts and words" 8-8-070, "Indecent exposure or dress" 8-8-080, "Street solicitation for prostitution" 8-8-060. Year after year these laws are conveniently overlooked by the Chicago Police Department, who are present in great numbers and hired to keep order during the parade.

Take ACTION: Click HERE to ask Chicago Mayor Richard Daley and Cook County State's Attorney Richard Devine to enforce decency laws during Chicago's Gay Pride Parade this Sunday."

And I absolutely do not hate anyone, "Love the sinner, and hate the sin."

Thanks Truthseeker.

Seems that to not be a homophobe one must be "penetrated" by a "same sex person". See, I was used for their eros demands to prove I'm not a homophobe. Does that now clear me of being a homophobe? Of course not, in the logic of Amanda and Jess. Now, Jess can actually be asked if she is not heterophobic, if she is a homosexual?, and has not had heterosex to deny her heterophobia. I could still declare her a heterophobe as Jess will continue to declare you, me, or anyone that simply does not agree with her about gay eros.

Imagine such logic; your a crackphobic person,so says the crackhead to you, since you do not agree with the "lifestyle" of a crack consumer, or used crack yourself.

That's right, anti- choicers, let's force
small girls who have been raped to bear children, even though their hips are not developed yet. This can make childbirth extremely dangerous. Smart idea.

That's right, pro aborters let's force small girls who have been raped to bear a abortion, even thought their hips have not developed yet. This can make abortion quite dangerous. Smart idea.

Come on propagandist for human property and the decision to intentionally kill human beings, you can do better then that.

Has the body changed in the last thousand years when a women gave birth at the average age of 14 years old. You do know that women gave birth at a young age and to be truthful your here, and so am I from the continuous birthing of women giving birth at young ages. And they still do.

yllas, you do realize that the mother and infant mortality rate during labour, delivery and shortly after is much shorter now, in countries where women are waiting until their twenties or thirties to start having children.

And you do realize the life expectancy for everyone has risen significantly in the past thousand years?

Why don't you stop cooking your food, humans ate raw food for millennia before fire. Sure they only lived till about their twenties, but they did it!

That's right, anti- choicers, let's force
small girls who have been raped to bear children, even though their hips are not developed yet. This can make childbirth extremely dangerous. Smart idea.
Posted by: robert berger at June 28, 2008 9:33 AM

Mr. Berger, "Small" girls? Did you mean adolescent (young in age) or did you actually mean small? Cause the ability to get pregnant does not always mean the maturity to even understand the consequences of getting pregnant. And if it hppened to my daughter her uncle would not be asked to support the child cause he would be six feet under. As far as the baby goes, I would offer her all the suport I could to enable her options to NOT kill the baby but the decision is made much more difficult when killing a baby in a pregnancy that was already so far in gestation. I hear about premature babies surving as early as 22 weeks nowadays, so the their are options which end the pregnancy without trying to kill the baby.

It's a fact. In adolescance, girls hips widen and this helps in childbirth. If they give birth before this, it makes childbirth very risky.

"Imagine such logic; your a crackphobic person,so says the crackhead to you, since you do not agree with the "lifestyle" of a crack consumer, or used crack yourself."

Yeah I'd say I was crack-phobic. I think I would be uncomfortable, even scared, in the presence of someone who uses crack.

And though I'm not gay, I'm not scared of them. I think their lifestyles are normal, natural and just fine by me.

Yllas,

Interesting point of the early Christians taking in the products of rape.

Please try making your points minus the name-calling i.e. a Man da, Dogma, Sad-Eyed, etc.

Thanks.

Jess, Lets be real here. If you really cared about any man then you would not engage in behaviour that exposes them to AIDS? By definition, engaging in homosexual sex they are letting loose on Analy Injected Death Serum. So the very thing that defines a person as homosexual is a behaviour that threatens the health of their "lover".

It's a fact. In adolescance, girls hips widen and this helps in childbirth. If they give birth before this, it makes childbirth very risky.
Posted by: robert berger at June 28, 2008 11:26 AM

Robert, That makes sense. What about C-sections? I wouold think they would be just as safe on an adolescent as they are on an adult.

"Imagine such logic; your a crackphobic person,so says the crackhead to you, since you do not agree with the "lifestyle" of a crack consumer, or used crack yourself."

Yeah I'd say I was crack-phobic. I think I would be uncomfortable, even scared, in the presence of someone who uses crack.

And though I'm not gay, I'm not scared of them. I think their lifestyles are normal, natural and just fine by me.

Actually truthseeker, AIDS stands for AutoImmune Deficiency Syndrome. And if both men get tested prior to any sexual contact, then stay in a monogamous relationship, they won't get AIDS through sex. AIDS doesn't just appear out of nowhere.

Yllas: 8:46: Philosophically, Socrates wrote that virtue can know vice, but vice cannot know evil. The penalty for vice is the vice itself, the not seeing the good in its fullness, the good that ought to be there.

If one bends reality to fit your desires, you have separated reality from truth, that truth being, that the only purpose of those organs is reproduction.

I miss the philosophical posts of John McD, so it's good to hear some philosophy from you! We live in such difficult times, I wonder if virtue and vice are even taught in school anymore. I highly recommend to all students at least one class in philosophy in college (even for the science and math students who are so bogged down by degree requirements). "Philosophy of Man" is one suggestion, others may have their own suggestions. Yllas, it's nice to hear the real you coming through in your posts, maybe you could change your moniker to reflect the "real you"? Just a thought.

http://www.aids.gov/

This is for you truthseeker, it is a government website the tells the facts about AIDS.

Jess,
When a man injects sperm into another man, the receiver sees the other man's sperm as foreign DNA and attacks it. Sometimes this can produce the adverse effect of one's own antibodies attacking the host. Makes complete sense to me.
Everybody makes their own choice but there is a reason AIDs is so much more prevalent in homosexuals. It is because that's where it starts. Once infected though, unfortunately the virus can be spread when a person with AIDs has sex or shares bllod with an unaffected person.

So you think AIDS just "begins" in a homosexual? Their body just creates it? Where did you find this? Did you know a woman's body attacks mens sperm because it see it as a foreign invader? How come women don't get AIDS?

I gave you a government site, where did you find your information?

http://pacific.unfpa.org/cinema/faq%20hivaids.htm

"+ Your body's health is protected by its immune system which is a network of chemicals, cells, tissues, and organs found throughout your body. These work together to protect you from germs. Your immune system can distinguish the difference between what belongs in your body and what does not belong. When your immune system detects something foreign, it tries ti destroy and remove it to keep you healthy. "

So according to your logic even a bad cold could give you AIDS because it attacks your immune system.

Jess,
It doesn't just "begin" in homosexuals. There are many reasons why women don't give AIDS to one another. They do not inject sperm into each other is the most obvious. Also, there is a difference in the genetic makeup of men and women. Evolution has designed the men to be the invaders of the womens body and that is probably why lesbian sex and/or heterosexual sex do not cause AIDS. As far as where did I get my information, it comes from my lifetime of hearing and reading about AIDS. It is my understanding that science has yet to determine the actual origins of AIDS. Their best guess right now is from the deviant sexual behaviour of a man who had sex with a monkey in Africa.

http://pacific.unfpa.org/cinema/faq%20hivaids.htm

"Women are considerably more susceptible to the virus than males. Women’s risk of infection stems from a combination of biological, social and economic realities. This is because the lining of the vagina is highly vulnerable to the virus and semen is typically the most virulent carrier of the virus."

If it just appears because sperm is a foreign DNA, then wouldn't women have it more then men?

And why would we need to be monogamous, if we ever had sex with anyone, by your reason, we could get it. Just one partner, your husband, because their DNA is foreign. And it could never be spread to heterosexual men through sex because their body isn't receiving anyone's DNA. So a man would be completely safe having sex with a woman who is infected?

So according to your logic even a bad cold could give you AIDS because it attacks your immune system.
Posted by: Jess at June 28, 2008 12:50 PM

A bad cold could evolve into (give you) pneumonia
not AIDS.

Then why would sperm give you AIDS?

And your immune system doesn't give you pneumonia, it tries to prevent you from getting pneumonia. That is why many people who are suffering from weakened immune systems develop it, because their immune system is too weak to fight it off.

"Their best guess right now is from the deviant sexual behavior of a man who had sex with a monkey in Africa."

If that's true then where are all the AIDS infested monkeys?

So a man would be completely safe having sex with a woman who is infected?
Posted by: Jess at June 28, 2008 12:54 PM
Jess,
I would think it less likely then the chances of a man passing it to a woman, but if a woman already has aids then she could pass it to a man though the transfer of bodily fluids during sex.

"When a man injects sperm into another man, the receiver sees the other man's sperm as foreign DNA and attacks it. Sometimes this can produce the adverse effect of one's own antibodies attacking the host. Makes complete sense to me."

But if neither of them have AIDS or HIV, if they continue in a monogamous relationship they will never, ever get AIDS or HIV.

"Their best guess right now is from the deviant sexual behavior of a man who had sex with a monkey in Africa."

If that's true then where are all the AIDS infested monkeys?

Posted by: Jess at June 28, 2008 12:59 PM

Good point Jess. That is just what scientists investigation the origins have said. I don't agree with that either.

truthseeker, so why do you think it begins in homosexuals? And again, where are all the AIDS infested monkeys?

"That is just what scientists investigation the origins have said. I don't agree with that either."

What scientists ever said that? Where did you find that? And if you don't agree with it then why did you post it? You must not agree that AIDS pops out of nowhere then. If so, two uninfected, monogamous homosexual males will never pass it to each other. In that case homosexual sex is not unhealthy or deadly.

"When a man injects sperm into another man, the receiver sees the other man's sperm as foreign DNA and attacks it. Sometimes this can produce the adverse effect of one's own antibodies attacking the host. Make