I'm all for condemning fear mongering. Let's try to remember to do that the next time someone says our country is "doomed" if Obama wins.

Ok if you want to make something illegal then there has to be a punishment. If it's illegal and there's no punishment then there is no incentive to stop doing it. And if you will only punish the doctors then what will you do to women who do it themselves? And what if a woman falls down the stair while pregnant or miscarries? Can you prove that she was trying to abort or it was just an accident or the miscarriage happened naturally?

There is a common herb used in cooking that when inserted into the uterus can cause an abortion. Are you going to ban that too?

And what about all the pro-lifers who think women who have abortions should be executed? That politician who renamed himself, "Pro-life"? Zeke?

Democrat: Obama's grandma confirms Kenyan birth
http://worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=78931
WWW.OBAMACRIMES.COM
PLEASE SPREAD FAR AND WIDE!!!!!!

WWW.OBAMACRIMES.COM
HERE IS THE LATEST INTERVIEW FROM PHILIP BERG:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lVLlMVyR_C8
http://barackobamarollingstone.blogspot.com/

PLEASE SPREAD FAR AND WIDE!!!!

INFORM YOUR FRIENDS!!!!

INFORM OF NEWS NETWORKS!!!!

If you believe a baby in the womb is a person the same as a baby out of the womb, would you not jail a woman who gives her newborn to a person to have it killed? Would the woman get away with no jail time at all? Would you let a white man go free if he murdered a black man because he did not think the black man was a person? If a man puts a hit out on his wife would he not be sent to jail because he did not kill her directly?

If a woman doesn't know she is pregnant and rides a roller coaster and miscarries, will she be charged with negligent homicide? Or just homicide? After all you can't prove she didn't know she was pregnant.

Well folks, now you know what a true paid poster looks like (welcome "James") but please give it a rest.

Should't somebody explain to NARAL what happens if Roe v. Wade gets overturned? It goes to the states where they get to vote on its legality or not. So....it could still be legal plenty of places.

But keep throwing insanity at the wall and see what sticks NARAL. Good job.

Well Elizabeth what if the states do choose (pardon the pun) to make abortion illegal? Then what?

Jess, the idea behind charging the doctors and not the women is that the doctor is killing thousands, while the woman is perhaps being bullied into killing one.

I imagine the rational behind not charging the woman with a crime is that she can be considered a witness against the abortionist. Sort of like how you can grant immunity to a low level thug if he turns on his boss.

Well Lauren what if the woman aborts on her own? She could say her family pressured her into it and her family could counter back with they had no idea she was even pregnant.

"How much time?" None

Really? So abortion is murder, but women who have abortions aren't murderers? Doesn't that kind of send the message that abortion is just fine as long as women do it themselves? And don't you suppose that would create a flourishing black market for abortion drugs?

It might even wind up making it easier for women and girls to have abortions, if all they have to do is get pills from their local illegal drug dealer, get the process started, then go to the hospital and have it finished by the ER staff with no fear of prosecution. Legal abortions are mostly restricted to clinics in cities, but illegal drugs are available even in the smallest of towns. This would turn every small-town ER in to a government-funded abortion clinic.

lauren at October 24, 2008 10:14 AM

Historically, the woman is considered the victim - in other words, there is a problem at a very serious level whereby someone seeks out an abortion.

The woman would not be jailed. The abortionist would be. The woman would receive post abortive counseling if she's hurting. Which many women are, believe it or not!

Reality or better yet un-Reality:

You don't just get it do you? Abortion is murder and we must get off of this gross path of destruction. We all will answer to God someday whether or not you believe it or consider that fact part of your mindset. While you may temporarily be able to rebel against the will of God, i.e., commit sin, you are powerless to change the will of God.

Having said that, it takes time to change the hearts of people as to the absolute atrocity that is abortion. Tha is what we pro-lifers are trying to do. That's why it's called a fight of faith. And you expect us to just give up? There's not a chance that we will ever do this.

It seems Reality that you are too far gone but does that mean that we pro-lifers are to stop trying to do the right thing so that women, let's say 20 or 30 years from now don't have the same destructive and immoral persepctive that you have?

Here's the tragedy of this Reality. We have an entire generation of women like yourself that have travelled so far down the slippery slope of degeneracy and immorality that it appears that you and they are without hope of restoration and reconciliation. It's called being in a reprobate state. Of course, this is not my hope, however, based on the consistent and continued demonstration of the hardness of heart, it does appear that that's where this is headed.

This is the real tragedy of Roe v. Wade: the absolute pollution and degeneartion it has wrought on our country that leads to it's ultimate destruction. Perhaps having realized the truth of this statement someday, a light will go off in your head and you will cry out to God for forgiveness. That too is a hope.

Oh great it's showing in Oregon? Good grief we are not a swing state - I'm almost completely surrounded by Obamanuts - I'm sure who will buy this garbage hook line and sinker.

Obama Birth Certificate: Obama Citizenship Lawsuits Spread to Eight States
http://www.bloggernews.net/118315
WWW.OBAMACRIMES.COM

INFORM ALL AND SPREAD THIS FAR AND WIDE!!!!!

Remember in 1972 when the women's prisons were overcrowded from those hundreds of thousands of mothers who sought illegal back-alley abortions?

What a tragedy that was.

One of McCain’s campaign advisors just endorsed Barack Obama and stated that he voted Obama/Biden by absentee ballot. Why? One word: Palin.

http://blogs.tnr.com/tnr/blogs/the_plank/archive/2008/10/24/reagan-appointee-and-recent-mccain-adviser-charles-fried-supports-obama.aspx

Charles Fried, who was Reagan’s Solicitor General, served on both McCain’s Honest and Open Election Committee as well as on McCain’s Justice Advisory Committee:

http://www.johnmccain.com/informing/news/PressReleases/90c928f6-38c7-4dc3-86c6-15149dbb8e07.htm

http://www.johnmccain.com/informing/News/PressReleases/34a065bf-cc56-4c2d-8bf6-229315cfc3f3.htm

Wow, wow, wow, wow. My jaw just hit the floor.

Oh come on there are people here all the time that claim women have abortions just because they don't want to be inconvenienced. And these women will know they're killing a baby. All they have to say is, "I didn't know and now I feel sorry"? What if the person who performs the abortions says, "I didn't know it was really a human, I am really remorseful." Will they get out without punishment? Can that go with anyone who commits a crime? If they say they feel remorseful should they be set free to?

McCain volunteer completely fabricated attack, confesses.

http://kdka.com/local/attack.McCain.Bloomfield.2.847628.html

hahahahha awesome.

Amanda,

I don't know if I would characterize that story so much "awesome" as I would really, really sad. That girl obviously has some serious issues.

On the other hand, the exposure and embarrassment of those who tried to score political points (Drudge, et al) on the basis of her fabricated story? That is awesome.

some women are told its "just tissue" or a "blood clot" or that "its not a baby yet" despite the fact that advanced ultrasound technology shows the shape of a little human as early as 8 weeks after conception.

Oh and whatever, Amanda. Still doesn't convince me that Obama is the right man for the job.

Jess, abortion has been illegal before in America.

Think about it. Were women being hunted down and arrested for miscarriages back then? Were they interrogated until they confessed that they took an herb that caused an abortion? Were they being put in jail for having secret abortions? Look at our history and you will see that you are overreacting and making up scenarios that are REALLY unlikely to happen.

She probably described the attacker as being a black man. What a sick and disgusting person. The audacity to file a false police report. Oh well. Look who she is supporting.

One of McCain’s campaign advisors just endorsed Barack Obama and stated that he voted Obama/Biden by absentee ballot. Why? One word: Palin.

HisMan: Abortion is murder

No it's not. You are pretending that your opinion somehow alters law.

Yesterday I did a home visit with a family that has a dying little 5 yr old.. The little boy has a severe genetic disorder that causes pain, sufferring, severe neurological affects and he is nearing the very end of his life. The family who loves him dearly and the mother who cares for him on her own and gives him all the comforts she can give him has made a recent decision that I thought was thought provoking..

She has always considered herself pro-life- is a Christian as well as her husband.. She recently became pregnant and after the amnio she found out her baby had the same genetic disorder..After much prayer and thought--- and she did terminate her pregnancy.

When I talked to this mother, she discussed the difficulty in this decision and the pain and suffering she felt by deciding to lose this child.. However, her decision was entirely based on preventing the pain and suffering to the new baby that her current child has daily. These parents felt selfish by making efforts to continue with such a pregnancy knowing that this genentic disease would cause such suffering to their child...She felt that Gods grace and mercy were with her and her husbands decisions and that anyone going through what they are going through would understand...

After a long and emotional conversation with this mother, I came out with the realization that there are families that are in situations that none of us can ever imagine... I know many of you on the website would condem this family and make it a black and white issue... I understand this.. but I suggest that you all go out, talk with families that have been through the process, have pondered and prayed and loved--- and cried.. and grieved... Ask yourself if it is correct to make those decisions for families...

Does this family believe that aborting for any reason is alright.. NO! Do they agree with partial birth abortion---NO!

When I asked the mother to explain to me her perspective she said this...

" I will always be pro-life-- always, I will always value life and understand God's gifts.. but I will also have a new understanding of Gods grace and mercy.... and I know that my baby..(the baby was 12 wks ga) is in heaven, recjoicing with my heavenly father, free of pain and suffering...and that, that is a gift..."

Bethany then why do I care why it's illegal? Do it yourself and it's a lot easier and cheaper then getting Planned Parenthood to do it.

Amanda: McCain volunteer completely fabricated attack, confesses.

So, attempting to paint Obama supporters as "bad" turns out to just be a wacky person who's for McCain....

Obama is the man for the job..

Bethany then why do I care why it's illegal? Do it yourself and it's a lot easier and cheaper then getting Planned Parenthood to do it.

I was going to respond, but I'm not really sure what your point was here?

When I talked to this mother, she discussed the difficulty in this decision and the pain and suffering she felt by deciding to lose this child.. However, her decision was entirely based on preventing the pain and suffering to the new baby

Landy, interesting, and a very good post from you there. I'm Pro-Choice, and I too look at suffering - I see more suffering in denying abortions to women who want them than in the way we have it now.

Too bad about the five year old boy - that's rough.

LizfromNebraska, it doesn't have to make you think that Obama is the right man for the job. But for everyone who hopped on the "SEE, THIS IS WHY OBAMA AND EVERYONE WHO VOTES FOR HIM IS EVIL" train, it'd be nice to hear some "My bad"s.

There was this email being sent around to try and shine a negative light on Michelle Obama by saying that she ordered two lobsters, caviar and champagne for lunch once. Really? That's the best they can do? Who doesn't eat lobster? Everyone I know eats lobster all the time. Lobster was actually the last meat I ate. And it was good. I ate lobster cakes and if I didn't know them personally I would probably still eat them.

In other news Palin was given a $150,000 spending spree for clothes from the McCain campaign. Her favorite store is Saks. I feel their clothes are too drab though.

One of McCain’s campaign advisors just endorsed Barack Obama and stated that he voted Obama/Biden by absentee ballot. Why? One word: Palin.
Posted by: Holy cow at October 24, 2008 12:44 PM

It was courageoous of John McCain to select her for his vice-presidential nominee. When my mother was born women couldn;t even vote. A vote against McCain because Sarah Palin is bigotted and every bit as wrong.bigotted as bad as voting for McCain because Obama is black. MSM is tip-toeing around their black messiah but have no problem feedig into a prejudiced that Sarah Palin is not qualified. Sadly, many men will not vote for McCain just because he has a woman on the ticket.

Good I confused Bethany.

I don't know what my point was either.

lol Jess

I'm not going to vote for McCain simply because Palin is a woman. Paris Hilton is a woman but I wouldn't vote for her for president.

She has always considered herself pro-life- is a Christian as well as her husband.. She recently became pregnant and after the amnio she found out her baby had the same genetic disorder..After much prayer and thought--- and she did terminate her pregnancy.

How terribly tragic that this mother decided to kill her child.
And Please, lets stop using the euphemisms here ok? She didn't terminate a pregnancy, she killed her baby by aborting the child.

When I talked to this mother, she discussed the difficulty in this decision and the pain and suffering she felt by deciding to lose this child..

She didn't "lose" the child - she wilfully destroyed her child.

After a long and emotional conversation with this mother, I came out with the realization that there are families that are in situations that none of us can ever imagine... I know many of you on the website would condem this family and make it a black and white issue... I understand this.. but I suggest that you all go out, talk with families that have been through the process, have pondered and prayed and loved--- and cried.. and grieved... Ask yourself if it is correct to make those decisions for families...

I agree whole heartedly that this situation is very sad and that there is alot of pain in such a situation.
But it is NEVER EVER permissible to do evil to achieve a good. NEVER.
It IS a black and white issue. I hope you realize that this is the EXACT sort of strategy that the Nazi's used to make a case of euthanasia - what is really what you are presenting here - except it's prior to birth. You simply cannot make a case for abortion using these hard cases and what is really false charity. How can killing a person be the most loving action?

Yes Bethany, now that I confused and disoriented everyone I must leave. I bid you good day : )

TS,

"It was courageoous of John McCain to select her for his vice-presidential nominee. When my mother was born women couldn;t even vote. A vote against McCain because Sarah Palin is bigotted and every bit as wrong.bigotted as bad as voting for McCain because Obama is black."

Um...that would depend upon your reasoning, wouldn't it? Not voting for him when you'd planned to because he picked a VP running mate who was female would be bigoted. However, not voting for him when you'd planned to because you don't agree with his VP pick because you disagree with her stances is not.

"MSM is tip-toeing around their black messiah but have no problem feedig into a prejudiced that Sarah Palin is not qualified."

Actually, she's not. Obama isn't incredibly experienced either, but working in the federal government will give you more experience with foreign policy matters than will being governor of a state.

"I bid you good day"

But Jess...

HisMan: Abortion is murder

No it's not. You are pretending that your opinion somehow alters law.

Posted by: Doug at October 24, 2008 1:42 PM
--------------------------

Doug:

My opinion doesn't amount to a hill of beans my friend. But, dah dah, we're not talking about my opinion are we now? I merely believe what the Creator has taught me and it is obvious you don't.

Who in your mind defines right and wrong? The state? So when gay marriage is ever legalized in won't be wrong in God's eyes?

You think becasue abortion is legal that it is not murder in God's eyes?

Was the imprisonment and murder of Jews moral in Germany because the Nazis legalized it?

Your humanistic and morally relativistic views are evident. You are corrupted and have bought into the lies of Liberalism, Humanism and Moral Relativism all of which stand in contempt of a holy and absolute God.

Why should I be so surprised when the Bible so clearly says in 1 Corinthians 1:18-19, "18For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. 19For it is written:
"I will destroy the wisdom of the wise;
the intelligence of the intelligent I will frustrate."

Doug, how long will you continue in your foolish ways?

If a woman doesn't know she is pregnant and rides a roller coaster and miscarries, will she be charged with negligent homicide? Or just homicide? After all you can't prove she didn't know she was pregnant.

Posted by: Jess at October 24, 2008 10:00 AM

Jess: I guess the only thing I can say to your numerous posts is this:
Of course the state can't regulate every action and protect an unborn baby in every circumstance. Of course women can takes herbs, work themselves to death in the first trimester etc.. And all these things were done by women for centuries - but it was the WOMAN doing it and society was not complicit in the large sense of the word.
But it's quite another to sanction the killing of babies by giving government/taxpayer monies to institutions to promote the killing, and commit the killing. It's also quite another thing to have government funded organizations promoting the behaviours the result in women getting pregnant outside of marriage and/or in circumstances that make it difficult to bear a child.

Don't beleive these asinine polls that Doug puts out my friend of course unless you really beleive that Obama is going to win. Just follow the money my friends and see who's paying for these polls, it's the Liberal media. The Dems know that BO has only 80% of his base voting for him and they are very, very worried. Heck, Gore had 92% and Kerry 89% and couldn't win. Don't be fooled by BO henchmen, and the likes of Hal and Doug. They're just trying to discourage you and it's a lie.

This from the AP:

"AP poll puts McCain nearly tied with ObamaCOMBINED NEWS SERVICES
October 23, 2008
While most national polls continue to have Barack Obama holding a statistically significant lead over John McCain, one survey released yesterday showed McCain within one percentage point of his Democratic rival.

The latest Wall Street Journal/NBC News and Pew Research Center polls out yesterday both put Obama ahead by double digits, but an Associated Press-GfK poll shows Obama with 44 percent support and McCain with 43 percent backing among likely voters. Obama's lead was five percentage points among registered voters in that poll.

The AP poll of 800 likely voters had a margin of error of plus or minus 3.5 percentage points. Experts said the unusually tight likely voter outcome was the result of a restrictive approach for defining likely voters that probably excluded many Obama supporters."

McCain is going to win and it will be decided in Ohio just like it was in 2004 (not like everyone thinks it was decided in Florida).

The key here is that there are a number of Democrats that would never vote for Obama unfortunaltey because he at least appears to be a black man (which in reality, he is not - he is mixed race).

Personally, I have nothing against electing a black man for President. It's just that Obama is only 7% black, 50% white and the rest Arab. Not only that he's a rabid pro-abort, for the redefinition of marriage and for the redistribution of wealth. His legal citizenship is a big question as well that the media hasn't addressed but may be forced to.

One good thing about this whole mess is that the media MSM is tanking. Ad revenues are down and they have lost all credibility. Why, because they are propagandists and not journalists.

HisMan: maybe prayer will make all the difference!

McCain volunteer completely fabricated attack, confesses.

http://kdka.com/local/attack.McCain.Bloomfield.2.847628.html

hahahahha awesome.

Posted by: Amanda at October 24, 2008 1:23 PM------------------

Actaully, she is probably a closet Obama supporter.

No no, Patricia, only voodoo can provide you with the aid you seek.

Shake a chicken foot really hard at a picture of your foe. That'll do the trick.

There are a couple of things that makes the legal situation after a repeal of Roe uncertain.

One is that depending on what grounds Roe is overturned, the result might be different. For example, if some technicality or lack of constitutional foundation is cited, that would put abortion out of federal jurisdiction and back to the states. But if the court rules that all human beings are persons (which they have always been in the common language), then all unborn humans will be protected by state criminal statutes just like born humans are now.

The other is that when Roe is overturned, "do it yourself" abortions may become much more widespread and common than they are now, either by prescription or by over the counter abortifacient chemicals. Such abortions would be more difficult to detect, and would raise the issue of enforcing either antiabortion laws or ordinary criminal homicide statutes in such cases.

As has been stated in this thread, historically no woman has ever been punished for having an abortion, and there are many reasons for that. And that would probably be the dominant thinking after the overturning of Roe, but it is not at all certain whether that would be 100% true in every state.

Personally, I understand the reluctance of prolifers to endorse any kind of punishment for women who have elective abortions, but I can't say that I can make a moral case for that view.
After all, do we give a pass to those who hire killers of born people?

Patricia- You are a very interesting person--- with alot of anger and obviously not a person who follows the way of the God that I know----Your anger and judgement is sinful in itself... Nobody is going to listen and respect a person like you with the way you communicate... so get help!

I think that this blog needs to have more folks writing in about the truth and reality... I saw a blog the other day about Invitro and frozen embryos...and hardly anyone commented...

Patricia- You are a very interesting person--- with alot of anger and obviously not a person who follows the way of the God that I know----Your anger and judgement is sinful in itself... Nobody is going to listen and respect a person like you with the way you communicate... so get help!

Posted by: Arlene at October 24, 2008 2:48 PM

Thank you for being so judgemental yourself Arlene. I appreciate your candor.
My post was written entirely without any anger. It is not judgemental to tell someone that they killed their child for the sole reason that the child has an incurable disease, and therefore is not perfect, and that they do so out of a false sense of charity and love.

Answer my question Arlene: how is killing this baby the loving thing to do?

Arlene, even the admins of this blog agree with you, but Patricia isn't interested in anyone's advice, no matter how well meaning. I think she enjoys being bitter and angry. I know a few people like that - on both sides of the religious/poltical spectrum. Some people just need to be angry. Whatever gets them through the day.

Posted by: Amanda at October 24, 2008 2:56 PM

Really Amanda? You were told by Jill, MK, Bobby and the others that I am a person with a great deal of anger?
If so then I would like the "admins of this blog" to verify this statement and if it is not true to delete Amanada's comment.

No no, Patricia, only voodoo can provide you with the aid you seek.

Shake a chicken foot really hard at a picture of your foe. That'll do the trick.

Posted by: Marie Laveau at October 24, 2008 2:31 PM
______________________

Another atheist chimes in........

Gee Marie, aren't most people of French origin Catholic? What happened to your roots? Oh, I know, you've progressed beyond the need for God. Let me ask you this Marie, who ya gonna pray to the next time you find yourself in a desparate situation, like finding out you have cancer, or as that trailer truck is oming at you at 70 mph, or your heart starts to inexplicably palpitate? Oh, I know, your statue of Obama.

This too Marie. Voodoo or witchcraft is actually forbiden by the Bible while prayer is not only encourgaed but commanded. Are you encouraging Patricia to sin Marie? Are you not aware theat teaching or encouraging people to sin, i.e., being a pro-abort actually brings on God's displasure?

Have you no fear of God or are you like many of the pro-aborts on this site who just believe he's our sky-buddy?

Patricia:

Patricia thre's no maybe about it. PRAYER WILL MAKE ALL THE DIFFERENCE. Oh, and contrary to Marie's ignorant assertion and nearly blasphemous comment, chicken feet are for soup.

Dear HisMan,

Marie Laveau is an historic figure from New Orleans, who is famous for having been a voodoo priestess.

My post in her name was a joke. Yes, I am an atheist. I just figure that shaking a chicken foot will do you as much good as praying, so why not give it a shot?

Shake a chicken foot really hard at a picture of your foe. That'll do the trick.

Posted by: Marie Laveau at October 24, 2008 2:31 PM

Marie,
Is that what Rev. Wright meant in his 9/11 sermon when he said America's chickens have come home to roost?

One good thing about this whole mess is that the media MSM is tanking. Ad revenues are down and they have lost all credibility. Why, because they are propagandists and not journalists.
Posted by: HisMan at October 24, 2008 2:25 PM

Couldnt agree more! CNN and MSNBC are disgraceful. I always considered the media somewhat biased, but never before has it been quite so blatant about it. There is absolutely not a shred of pretense towards neutrality.

They are doing everything they can do to discourage Republicans and make everyone think this race is over.

My post in her name was a joke. Yes, I am an atheist. I just figure that shaking a chicken foot will do you as much good as praying, so why not give it a shot?

Posted by: google is your friend at October 24, 2008 3:08 PM

Maybe in your books, Ms google, but I know plenty of people who have seen the results of prayer, myself included.
Ever tried prayer?

It is so NOT over!! I can hardly wait to vote along with my other prolife, conservative, right wing nutjob friends!!

Arlene, even the admins of this blog agree with you, but Patricia isn't interested in anyone's advice, no matter how well meaning. I think she enjoys being bitter and angry. I know a few people like that - on both sides of the religious/poltical spectrum. Some people just need to be angry. Whatever gets them through the day.

Posted by: Amanda at October 24, 2008 2:56 PM

Amanda,
And popping in to do some mud-slinging every few days is how you release.

Arlene @ 2:48,

I think that this blog needs to have more folks writing in about the truth and reality... I saw a blog the other day about Invitro and frozen embryos...and hardly anyone commented...

Jill has posted on these issues several times. Click on list of topics (IVF) on the right side of the web site. Perhaps this is just a busy time with politics and abortion topics, etc.

Writing about truth and reality.... I have to laugh. That's the goal, but we fall short at times.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Jess,

Speaking of reality, we don't all eat lobster all the time. Lol. You live on the northeast coast where you can grab them out of the water yourself, right? (Just kidding.) Here in the midwest we probably pay about $50.00 for a lobster dinner in a restaurant.

...and about the "Michelle Obama ate a lobster" story...you guys do know that was a hoax don't you? Some merry pranksters photoshopped up a New York hotel receipt for a night that Ms. Obama was never anywhere near New York.

Patricia,

You are an awesome person and an awesome blogger who's not afraid to tell it like it is. Abortion stinks. I admire that, and anyone who thinks otherwise (Amanda) is plain out wrong! :-)

"Arlene, even the admins of this blog agree with you...."

Not this admin, Amanda.

Revision por favor.

google is still.... @3:24,

...and about the "Michelle Obama ate a lobster" story...you guys do know that was a hoax don't you? Some merry pranksters photoshopped up a New York hotel receipt for a night that Ms. Obama was never anywhere near New York.

Haven't heard that. Another JOKE?

HisMan @ 11:33,

Right on!

Amanda,
I would appreciate if in the future you do not try to speak for me. Thank you.

Patricia,
You bring a great deal to this blog!! I am so glad you are here!

thank you carder. And also to Janet and Carla.

My prime motive is to speak for those who have no voice - the unborn. I may not always say things in the most charitable manner but I believe we've spent 30 decades being too nice about abortion and just not saying what really needs to be said about killing our children for whatever seems to be the most convenient reason at the time. As I've said time and time again on this blog my heart goes out to all women(and men) who have suffered the trauma of abortion and who have difficult circumstances in their lives.
But the measure of who we are as a civilization is in the way we treat the most helpless of our society whether they be unborn babies or people like Terry Schiavo.

HisMan: Abortion is murder

"No it's not. You are pretending that your opinion somehow alters law."

My opinion doesn't amount to a hill of beans my friend. But, dah dah, we're not talking about my opinion are we now? I merely believe what the Creator has taught me and it is obvious you don't.

It's your opinion that there is a "Creator" in the first place. Your opinion matters to you, and many share it, for that matter.
.....

Who in your mind defines right and wrong? The state? So when gay marriage is ever legalized in won't be wrong in God's eyes?

There's no proof of gods. Any entity with an opinion about a thing will have its perceptions of the good/bad/right/wrong of it. As individuals, and as groups we have our feelings of right and wrong.
.....

You think becasue abortion is legal that it is not murder in God's eyes?

Again, no proof of such. Had you been raised in a different family, country, culture, etc., I think you'd believe different things, and just as fervently. Regardless of where you ended up, and really - even regardless if you had beliefs about divine beings or not - you'd still have your opinions. So, regardless of what unprovable beliefs we hold, and regardless of what we ascribe our opinions to, morality remains a concept of the mind - it does not have separate physical existence.
.....

Doug, how long will you continue in your foolish ways?

I could certainly ask you the same thing.

I think you're a good and caring husband and father, and your opinion does amount to a hill of beans, at least, but I do not think reasoning such as yours is a good enough reason to take away the freedom that women currently have.

Don't beleive these asinine polls that Doug puts out my friend of course unless you really beleive that Obama is going to win.

Oh HisMan, you're being silly.

RCP includes that AP Obama +1 poll you mentioned. It brings the average down a bit, yes.

RCP has been thought to be skewing things in McCain's favor, actually, by the selection of the polls it chooses to include in the average. It's "asinine" to think that "the Liberals" are somehow "behind" the RCP poll average.

Good grief, Fox News has Obama at +9.... The average now is Obama up by 7.8 points.

Anyone else recall Nobama saying the one vote he regretted was voting to save the life of Terri Schiavo? I seem to recall that, but cant remember where I read it.

And some people have the audacity to say Nobama is "pro life."

Nothing could be further from the truth!

Good grief, Fox News has Obama at +9.... The average now is Obama up by 7.8 points.

Posted by: Doug at October 24, 2008 3:56 PM

Sometimes I wonder if the MSM posts these "facts" with the intent of promoting their favoured candidate and based on wishful thinking.

For example, immediately before the Canadian election, I remember reading the front page of the Globe and Mail which had a piece about how Dion (leader of the Liberal party and MSM fav to win it all)was in position to sweep the election from incumbent Stephen Harper and how polls showed the Liberals only a few points behind the Conservatives.
Dion as we all know (at least in Canada, lol) was only the second Liberal leader to have lost so many seats in the history of the party and the Liberals have the lowest # of seats in the House of Commons since 1975.
Too bad, MSM. You were wrong....again.

Patricia, well - the polls say what they say.

We'll see which ones were the most accurate, but in the meantime the media is just telling us what the figures are.

There has been mention made of polls which had it right on target in previous elections. I do see a surprising spread in the polls, currently, but I also see no reason to suspect that things are "rigged."

Also, it's apparent to me that Obama is going to win, and probably win big.





270 needed to win.

For those who say the polls are "bunk," etc., what happens if Obama does win by 10% or 7%, etc?

Are you going to admit you were wrong? I doubt it.

Amanda, I certainly didn't see any anger in Patricia's post. As for the mods agreeing with Arlene...who exactly were you referring to, because it wasn't me. And apparently not Bobby or Carla either.

Oh and Carder! :)

Nevertheless, it WAS an attempt by a very liberal paper to change the outcome of an election. If anything, it might have helped the Conservatives, because the thought of having Dion as PM was a truly scary notion.

I have emails from MK, Bethany, and Chris, some of whom quoted Jill - all saying that Patricia is an bitter person who brings only negative energy to the blog.

But you can all keep lying if it makes you feel better. You know what you said whether you admit it to her or not.

But how will she ever get help if everyone keeps protecting her feelings?

I agree whole heartedly that this situation is very sad and that there is alot of pain in such a situation.
But it is NEVER EVER permissible to do evil to achieve a good. NEVER.
It IS a black and white issue. I hope you realize that this is the EXACT sort of strategy that the Nazi's used to make a case of euthanasia - what is really what you are presenting here - except it's prior to birth. You simply cannot make a case for abortion using these hard cases and what is really false charity. How can killing a person be the most loving action?

Posted by: Patricia at October 24, 2008 2:00 PM
................................

The Nazis practised genocide. They weren't particularly concerned with alleviating the suffering of the terminally ill through euthanasia. You apparently have that in common with the Nazis while going a step further by insisting that an infant must be gestated at all costs to the point of being able to suffer.
You sound like the Nazi to me. Cold. Heartless. Unfeeling.

Nevertheless, it WAS an attempt by a very liberal paper to change the outcome of an election. If anything, it might have helped the Conservatives, because the thought of having Dion as PM was a truly scary notion.

Posted by: Patricia at October 24, 2008 4:51 PM
.......................

Patricia, Canada's governmental system is different from the US. Your political party's labels aren't necessarily directly transferable to political parties labeled with the same words in the US.

Amanda, do you ever come here looking for anything other than a fight? Honestly. Who are you to judge Patricia when all you do is try to cause trouble and lose your temper with various individuals? What? You're allowed to get angry but she can't ever get angry?

Hmm, and I have a post from you from way back when saying you were never coming back here. Guess you changed your mind, huh?

What Patricia said today was NOT said in anger, and was not out of line...I don't care what you say about it. Want to pick more a fight with someone? Go play at Amanda Marcotte's blog.

Amanda, do you ever come here looking for anything other than a fight? Honestly. Who are you to judge Patricia when all you do is try to cause trouble and lose your temper with various individuals? What? You're allowed to get angry but she can't ever get angry?

Hmm, and I have a post from you from way back when saying you were never coming back here. Guess you changed your mind, huh?

What Patricia said today was NOT said in anger, and was not out of line...I don't care what you say about it. Want to pick more a fight with someone? Go play at Amanda Marcotte's blog.

Posted by: Bethany at October 24, 2008 5:50 PM
..............................

Bethany, it is your opinion that Amanda is looking to pick fights. It is also your opinion that Patricia does not post out of anger.
Your opinion is not more valid than Amanda's in the real world beyond this blog.
You sound frustrated to me Bethany. So does Amanda to me. Isn't that OK?

Sure, that's okay, Sally.
I was frustrated.

I have emails from MK, Bethany, and Chris, some of whom quoted Jill - all saying that Patricia is a bitter person who brings only negative energy to the blog.

Amanda, very often Patricia is angry and bitter. In the 2:00 p.m. post, though, I don't see much at all of that - my opinion anyway.

I think she was somewhat insulting, though - putting her stamp of "evil" on other people and their actions, and saying "what you are presenting here..... the EXACT sort of strategy that the Nazi's used" - I think that's going well overboard, and the "false charity" stuff - by no means is that a given. What there is is a difference of opinion on it.

Nahhh - I'm not angry or frustrated - far from it.

I just think its amusing some of you are willing to trash each other in emails - but when its someone on your own side, you'll tip toe around and lie about it here on the blog, while at the same time, have a total lack of the same type of regard for people's feelings if they're pro choice.

Also, it doesn't do Patricia any good if no one is honest with her about how she represents herself. I mean, if my boyfriend was as afraid of hurting my feelings - we wouldn't still be together. He had to be honest with me about something I was doing that bothered him - even though he knew it would upset me... but if he hadn't said it, it would have cost us our relationship.

"One of McCain’s campaign advisors just endorsed Barack Obama and stated that he voted Obama/Biden by absentee ballot. Why? One word: Palin."

Doug,

It was the financial mess that tanked McCain, not Palin.

Thats why I have so much respect for Elizabeth - she'll just come right out and say it - no matter who its to.

"One of McCain’s campaign advisors just endorsed Barack Obama and stated that he voted Obama/Biden by absentee ballot. Why? One word: Palin."

Jasper: Doug, it was the financial mess that tanked McCain, not Palin.

Jasper, your opinion versus a McCain campaign advisor. Both Palin and the economy are certainly factors.

Hey, at least you're admitting the "tanked" part....

Amanda: That's why I have so much respect for Elizabeth - she'll just come right out and say it - no matter who its to.

That's a big ten-four right there!

Patricia,

I don't know what Amanda is talking about, she's probably trying to cause trouble again.

Amanda,

who are you talking about, what emails?

"All laws have their basis in morality".
Quote from Father "Rocky" - Relevant Radio

I have emails from MK, Bethany, and Chris, some of whom quoted Jill - all saying that Patricia is a bitter person who brings only negative energy to the blog.

Amanda at October 24, 2008 5:03 PM
------

I don't ever recall making such statements about Patricia.
Send those emails with my words to chris@jillstanek.com.

"All laws have their basis in morality".

True, Janet, morality being perceptions of the good/bad/right/wrong of things, i.e. what's wanted and what's not wanted.

"All laws have their basis in morality".
Quote from Father "Rocky" - Relevant Radio

(Posted by: Janet at October 24, 2008 6:45 PM)

This is my attempt to get the conversation back on track....

If we assume this quote is true, we should be compassionate towards women who abort. Shouldn't we take the high road, so to speak and forego jailing these women?Perhaps they should perform community service at a homeless shelter, a charity, or the like.

Abortion stops a beating heart. How can you say its NOT murder? These babies have no voice - except those in the anti abortion movement. They'll never have a right to vote or learn their ABCs or sing a song. Their lives were snuffed out before they had a chance.

Patricia, you are very much loved and bring a lot to this blog.

I'd like a copy of this supposed email too, Amanda.

"The problem, I think, is Patricia. I just emailed Chris today and said something has to be done, and he agreed"

thats all I need to post... since you all know what you've said anyway.

No Amanda - I want you to email me the whole email exchange you're claiming.

Chris,

Don't you think that would be a little embarrassing for whatever mod she had the email exchange with? Why don't you guys email it to each other personally?

no Amanda, you need to send those emails to Jill and to Chris and to Bethany. Verbatim.
And if this is not true then Jill needs to clear the air and if these allegations are false, then Amanda needs to be banned permanently.

If we assume this quote is true, we should be compassionate towards women who abort. Shouldn't we take the high road, so to speak and forego jailing these women?Perhaps they should perform community service at a homeless shelter, a charity, or the like.

Posted by: Janet at October 24, 2008 6:58 PM
.............................

Apparently you think that law and legal consequence should be subject to your whims. What should a woman living in a homeless shelter be subjected to if she chooses to abort?
Your brand of 'compassion'?

Yes, ban Amanda permanently for daring to say something to your (virtual) face that others say behind your back! Burn the witch! Burn her!

Elizabeth @ 8:00 PM

Amanda can send me the entire email she's claiming I agreed with.

If I was the one that made such an agreement re: Patricia, then Amanda can produce the proof to me.

"burnthewitch", Amanda isn't "daring" to say something to Patricia that we wouldn't say to her face. She is intentionally misleading others here because she can't be happy unless there is some drama going on. She doesn't come to this blog anymore unless she's starting a fight with someone. It's sad because she used to actually seem to be a nice person.

Aww, you guys are really taking me back today. It's totally just like high school!!

Yes, ban Amanda permanently for daring to say something to your (virtual) face that others say behind your back! Burn the witch! Burn her!

Posted by: Burn the witch! at October 24, 2008 8:04 PM

The point is that you do not make a claim against another person's good name without backing it up. Amanda therefore needs to back up her claim.
BTW: are you claiming that Amanda is a witch. Or maybe you ARE Amanda!

@Sally: indeed the political systems of the two countries are quite different. However, the Democrats are directly equatable to the NDP and Liberal parties in Canada. The Republicans are very similar to what the Progressive Conservative party use to espouse as it's values. The MSM in both countries is liberal proabort and highly intolerant of any opposing viewpoint. They have an agenda and that is to promote the most liberal of views. It use to be that newspapers and radio and TV reported the facts. Now facts are thrown in with misinformation, bias and in some casees outright fabrication. This goes on in both countries. I think my point was quite relevant, even if you do not.

Obama spending $293,000 an hour in October.

OBAMA’S OCT 1-15 SPENDING = $105,599,963.76

By contrast, McCain’s Oct. 1-15 spending was $9,246,618.70

http://hotair.com/archives/2008/10/24/nbc-obama-spending-293000-an-hour-in-october/

Jasper - are you inferring that Obama likes to spend a lot of money on things with questionable outcomes?

I'm not Amanda I'm Jess and I don't want Amanda banned permenantly. She said she was pro-life once and wanted to end abortion but some people here gave her so much crap for being a "baby killer" (even though she never killed any to our knowledge) that she got frustrated and then mad.

Hey Patricia you should have seen some of the stuff I wrote about you before it got deleted. Ah but that was awhile back. Love you doll face : )

"You live on the northeast coast where you can grab them out of the water yourself, right? (Just kidding.) "
No that's basically how it happens here. It was only like $10 a lobster over the summer if you bought it. I think she was supposedly in New York at the time. Oh well a friend once bought a $100 steak. Does that make them a bad person? Well yes because they killed a cow but I mean sometimes it's ok to celebrate something. There's no food shortage (if I could mail a PB+J to Africa I would, I don't think it would work though).

Bethany I think it would be boring to live in a Utopia. Luckily I don't have to worry about that, at least being poor keeps life interesting : )

Hey Patricia you should have seen some of the stuff I wrote about you before it got deleted. Ah but that was awhile back. Love you doll face : )

How sweet of you m'dear. I know the truth sometimes hurts Jess... :-D

If people didn't reproduce I think we would be great friends Patricia.

"Jasper - are you inferring that Obama likes to spend a lot of money on things with questionable outcomes?"

HaHa... yes Chris...with other people's money too!

OPM - I hear that's the best way to invest! heh

If people didn't reproduce I think we would be great friends Patricia.

Posted by: Jess at October 24, 2008 8:49 PM

It's all a matter of perspective Jess. I simply believe that everyone has a purpose. God doesn't create junk and every human conceived is a person with a purpose and is important to everyone else on this Earth and plays a part in God's overall plan.
Proaborts do not believe this. In their minds,a human being's value is based on wantedness - by someone else. They do not have a worth inherent in and of themselves.

"One of McCain’s campaign advisors just endorsed Barack Obama and stated that he voted Obama/Biden by absentee ballot. Why? One word: Palin."

Doug,

It was the financial mess that tanked McCain, not Palin.

Posted by: Jasper at October 24, 2008 6:23 PM

Hey Jasper, it was the man's OWN words. So at least for some, and in this case some very staunch and public (but thankfully, thoughtful) Republicans, it's PALIN.

I believe we don't come into this world with a purpose Patricia, we make our own goals and we have to rely on ourselves to achieve them. I believe everyone has potential, will they reach it or will they drive drunk and run you over in their car? Well we have to wait and see. You don't know what a person will achieve until they die, and well, if you abort them obviously their potential is limited.

There were plenty of people who were wanted who grew up to be crack heads and rapists, there are plenty of people who were unwanted who grew up to be Catholic : /

You don't know what a person will achieve until they die, and well, if you abort them obviously their potential is limited.

Posted by: Jess at October 24, 2008 9:01 PM

You'll go far with that attitude Jess.

I was going to comment on the "phantom emails", but I'll wait for the movie. Here's the oddest, weirdest claim I've seen in a while:

"I'm not Amanda I'm Jess and I don't want Amanda banned permenantly. She said she was pro-life once and wanted to end abortion but some people here gave her so much crap for being a "baby killer" (even though she never killed any to our knowledge) that she got frustrated and then mad. "

How does anger at anonymous posters on the web cause someone to change their mind about whether it's right to electively kill babies? Do you and Amanda think this is some kind of social club? Do you rally think that getting mad at some born person or people can cause you to want to keep abortion legal when you didn't before? Give me a break, please!

If abortion, as the Anti-choicers claim, is murder then why are you not pushing for the criminalisation of the procedure and the incarceration of the women and their doctors? It seems a weak hand to say " we don't want this" but to give no legal incentive against it.

How does anger at anonymous posters on the web cause someone to change their mind about whether it's right to electively kill babies? Do you and Amanda think this is some kind of social club? Do you rally think that getting mad at some born person or people can cause you to want to keep abortion legal when you didn't before? Give me a break, please!

Doyle, thank you!

How does anger at anonymous posters on the web cause someone to change their mind about whether it's right to electively kill babies? Do you and Amanda think this is some kind of social club? Do you rally think that getting mad at some born person or people can cause you to want to keep abortion legal when you didn't before? Give me a break, please!

I don't know the whole story, but I do remember that Amanda has said a few times that she has, at certain times, been closer to pro-life than pro-choice. And whether it's rational or not, I do think it's easy to be repulsed by the emotional reactions you have to certain things, especially if your opinions are not yet fully formed or set in stone. If one group is saying, "I want to lower the abortion rate but I want to do it by helping women, not by outlawing it," and another group is saying all kinds of judgmental or outlandish things in addition to saying, "abortion should be illegal," it's pretty easy to run screaming in the direction of the group that sounds less offensive. Maybe not the most mature or rational reaction, but understandable.

Honestly there have been times here when I've felt like something really struck me, and I could feel my mind changing. But without fail someone runs in and makes a "you're not pro-life" comment to PIP or something and it's like...no, I will never be considered pro-life by everyone on the planet, nor likely by everyone on this website, if only for the sole reason that regardless of what my beliefs are now or in the future, I will probably never consider them a political deal-breaker. Why bother worrying about the label I affix to my views?

I can see it being something like that with Amanda. I don't know, though -- it's just speculation on my part.

Doyle, I have a feeling that we'd not agree on much, but I do agree with that. Whining and moaning about how all the 'pro-aborts' are goin' to hell isn't very productive.

I find it hilarious that Jill posted this video, complaining that it's fear mongering, and yet she posts video, after video....about the born alive thing. Hello, pot, I'd like to introduce you to a kettle I know....

Legally, abortion would be similar to a case of a contract killer. Generally, the contract killer gets less time than the person who hires him/her, as the individual who wants the killing done is considered to be the instigator. Thus, if you firmly, really, believe that abortion is murder, the woman (the person who hires the murder out) would get 10-20, and the doctor who preformed the abortion would get 5-7, depending on the situation.

Personally, the patronizing of women that goes on in the comments to this story astounds me. I'm a woman. I'd have an abortion if I was pregnant. I know the stages of development, and that an abortion ends the pregnancy, killing the fetus. Most women do. Most women AREN'T bullied into getting an abortion. Keep your positions consistent: either the woman murdered the fetus, or she didn't.

Apparently you think that law and legal consequence should be subject to your whims. What should a woman living in a homeless shelter be subjected to if she chooses to abort?
Your brand of 'compassion'?

Posted by: Sally at October 24, 2008 8:04 PM

Cheer up Sally, there's enough crabbiness around here already. I'm just trying to have a conversation. My whim is my opinion which I am entitled to. I gave my opinion so let me ask you - what would you do?
. . . . . . . . . . .
Yo La,

How about making it illegal as an incentive and post a fine for the woman, or community service and jail time for the abortionist and/or suspension of medical license?

. . . . . . . . . . .

Jess,

Why do you eat lobsters but not cows? It's pretty cruel how they drop those lobsters in boiling water don't 'cha think?

HA,
I never thought about abortion like a contract killing, but it's a good analogy. I wonder why contract killing isn't legal?

I wonder why pro-lifers never answer my questions? That's one for the ages, perhaps.

HA,

I wonder why pro-lifers never answer my questions? That's one for the ages, perhaps.

Maybe because your comment at 10:39 had NO question marks. Just a couple of insults. I did answer your comment with a comment. Doesn't that count for anything?

Your analogy is interesting, but something's not quite right with it. I'm actually surprised that the contract killer would get less jail time than the hirer. REALLY? The abortionist the is the guy getting paid and ultimately doing the "job" therefore most guilty, IMO.

Yeah, but your opinion isn't law. If you make abortion illegal, THIS is what will happen. I don't get it. What do you want? Do you want abortion legal or not? If it's not legal, what punishment do you want?

What of the fine paid? Where would the money go? Toward the "pro-life" effort? Wouldn't it then be seen as not an effort to "save babies" but a political witch-hunt and a money grab for a special interest group?

What is next? Making Comprehensive sex education illegal?

Plus, Medical facilities are often run by corporations or by incorperated businesses. Under the law (Thanks to George Bush and like minded men before him) such entities have rights known as "Corporate Personhood", which provides that regulations that cause a corporation to "suffer significant damage" cannot be enforced. You do realize that THIS law has been the law of the land for well over a hundred years.

Yeah, but your opinion isn't law. If you make abortion illegal, THIS is what will happen. I don't get it. What do you want? Do you want abortion legal or not? If it's not legal, what punishment do you want?

Posted by: HumanAbstract at October 25, 2008 12:03 AM

The abortionist should be convicted of murder and sentenced to prison and the mother should be sentenced to mandatory counseling similar to what is given to people with suicidal tendencies.

either the woman murdered the fetus, or she didn't.
Posted by: HumanAbstract at October 24, 2008 10:39 PM

She didn't. The abortionist tore the baby from her womb.

YoLa and HA,
What about the father in this? Shouldn't he have a voice at the trial of those who killed his child?

Hello Janet. Do you know what question it is that HA says pro-lifers never give her an answer to? Did I just answer it?

Truthseeker -

Saying fathers have rights in the pregnancy of a woman is akin to the idea that women are property of men. Do men then have a say in the choice of a woman to get a hysterectomy or get her tubes tied? Does she need permission to go on the Pill?

Women are not the "property" of men, but when there is a BABY involved the father DOES have rights where the baby is concerned. He has the right to try and stop her from killing the baby.

In Canada there was a case where man took his girlfriend to court to stop her from having an abortion.

I believe the fathers (or even grandparents) have every right to do this.

They should be willing to take 100% responsibility to raise the child though.

ABORTION = MURDER = CAPITAL CRIME = EXECUTION = NO JAIL TIME

Extremely simple.

Simple and frightening, Zeke. Your plan lacks compassion for those that were forced to abort or were not told of the lifelong consequences of killing your own child.

Killing us human beings in the first nine months of our lives and depriving each one of us of our entire human lifespans violates our rights, is therefore a crime and should be legally prohibited.

All those who freely choose to participate in abortion crimes in any way are morally responsible for their actions and should be prosecuted and punished. Killing a human being is a SERIOUS crime and has to be treated as such.

The argument that mothers (and presumably fathers) should be able to commit this violent and lethal crime against helpless innocent human beings and always get completely away with it is simply not a credible argument from a logical standpoint. Additionally, if parents have a psychological compulsion to kill their unborn children based on difficult life circumstances and know they can get away with it, they will have no disincentive to commit the crime. This will cost the lives of hundreds of thousands and eventually millions of unborn children who otherwise might have been saved. Also, there will be nothing that can be done to stop mothers killing their children by themselves, without the assistance of a criminal abortionist, because technically they will be committing NO crime.

For a pro-life person to take such a position is completely absurd, and since it sacrifices huge numbers of lives needlessly, is completely immoral. Allowing mothers to kill their unborn children by themselves or to contract with a criminal abortionist to do the killing, with complete impunity, is NOT pro-life, but is abortionist and anti-life.

The only way to stop abortion crime is to make it law enforcement priority number one, set up police stings on both sides of the transaction, deter mothers, criminal abortionists and all others from participating in the crimes, catch those on both sides trying to commit the crime before they do it to save lives and vigorously prosecute anyone who kills or attempts to kill a human being. This is the only way you will really be able to stop abortion crime.

Saying fathers have rights in the pregnancy of a woman is akin to the idea that women are property of men. Do men then have a say in the choice of a woman to get a hysterectomy or get her tubes tied? Does she need permission to go on the Pill?

Posted by: Yo La Tengo at October 25, 2008 1:46 AM

YoLaTe, Not the same at all. If a woman does not get a hysterectomy the man is not financial responsible for "raising" her hysterectomy for the hysterectomy's life outside the woman. If the "fetus" is not a person, then should the man be able to "insis" on an abortion in the first three months and if the woman disagrees and carries the "fetus" to term then the man has no
more financial responsibility caus ehe wanted the burden disposed of before the fetus became a baby. You can't dismiss the father's rights because unlike getting your tubes tied, the baby is also legally his responsibility and "burden" so why shouldn't he have a say?

I showed the entire email to Rae and Elizabeth - so they can back up that its real, and they know who its from. But I'm not going to do that to the person who sent it to me, as its apparent you'll all throw that person under the bus since none of you will admit what you've said behind Patricia's back.

As for Bethany...i REALLLLLLY don't think you want me to post the email from you... stating that certain pro life posters on this blog are part of a "scary cult". Your email names names...I won't go there.

I didn't bring this up to start a fight - I brought it up because the brown nosing and back patting on this blog has reached such an outrageous degree that the only ones who DARE to disagree with anything a pro lifer says are pro choicers, PIP, or Elizabeth. Its even funnier to see that knowing you all trash talk each other in emails.

Chris: are you inferring that Obama likes to spend a lot of money on things with questionable outcomes?

Uh, that was William Bennett. ; )

I am curious, I must say.

Zeke,
How shall a post abortive mother like myself be executed?

As for Bethany...i REALLLLLLY don't think you want me to post the email from you... stating that certain pro life posters on this blog are part of a "scary cult". Your email names names...I won't go there.

I don't have the other emails you've referring to, due to having to restore my computer and a poor memory. However, I know within their context, they are not what you are making them out to be.

But I do have this particular note you're referring to, because it's on Facebook, and so now I can clear the air about your blatant half-truths and deceptions.

I don't mind naming names, because I have publicly contradicted these people over and over right here on this blog. I'm not ashamed to admit that the Bob Enyart followers are the ones I was referring to in the note you mention. I DO think their church is a cult (a church with false teachings). They believe my beliefs are cult like as well.

You, however, are too dishonest to tell the whole truth about the things you're saying in order to cast me in a bad light.

Carla - would you say that when they ask the question:

"How much time will you do?"

that it's really about a kind of self-imprisonment without Christ?

I'm sorry if I'm so frank with that question.

In the long wrong, I guess you could say that being pro-choice is about not fully understanding the extent of your choice, because until you've lived your life, and experienced having made that choice and reflected upon it's impact, you don't really know.

"Walking a mile in your shoes..."

Hey guys (and gals),

Either post the emails, or quit talking about the emails. If we're going to dissect the emails, we ALL may as well be able to see them. Or you could just discuss this privately through email. That's just my suggestion anyway.

And just for the record,

Amanda is not dishonest. Why would she bring something up KNOWING it would be something she would HAVE to back up? That doesn't make much sense to me.

Chris,
I guess I am still amazed that others would suggest such a thing. I shouldn't be, I know. When I first came here a year ago I was asked the same thing. In fact, I think it was Zeke who asked me how I should be executed.

Elizabeth, why would she bring it up at all, is a good thing to wonder. What in the world does it have to do with this topic? I know exactly what Amanda is doing. She is trying to cause division, because it makes her feel good to do so.

Elizabeth, if you have the emails, can you please send them to me through email. I already know who forwarded them (and no, there will be no "throwing under the bus for that person), and I would like to see the context of the messages so I can clear this up as well. Thanks.

I say we don't entertain Amanda. I say we just ignore her comments. She is just here to cause trouble.

You're right, Jasper.
Thanks.

I guess you mods will just have to fess up now. Amanda gotcha this time and she has an e-mail to prove it. ROTFL.... Amanda, maybe you should enter into a mudslinging contest.

YoLaTe, did you see my 9:10 a.m. post? What is your opinion of it?

HA @ 12:03 AM,

Yeah, but your opinion isn't law. If you make abortion illegal, THIS is what will happen. I don't get it. What do you want? Do you want abortion legal or not? If it's not legal, what punishment do you want?

How do you know THIS is what will happen? No one except you Pc'rs wants to see women go to Jail for murder. Did you read Kill's link above? (Also read AUL's Clarke Forsythe's article, "Why the states did Not prosecute women for abortion before Roe v. Wade.")

I'd like to see medical licenses taken away from all doctors who commit abortions. What they do is a disgrace to the "medical community". I'd like to see women get help and support from individuals and groups instead of aborting out of desperation. I'd like young girls to value themselves enough to abstain from sex until marriage (or at least until they know they are mature enough to raise a child) if that is not a possibility for them.

. . . . . . . . . . . . .
Yo La @ 12:35 AM,

What of the fine paid? Where would the money go? Toward the "pro-life" effort? Wouldn't it then be seen as not an effort to "save babies" but a political witch-hunt and a money grab for a special interest group?

Remember, abortion is basically not a political issue. It has been conveniently politicized by the Democrat party to garner votes. "Special interest group"? It's sad that now we call the saving of babies' lives a "special interest". At one time in history it was a common interest of all. As far as fines you asked about- it would go into the pot that serves needy pregnant women.

What is next? Making Comprehensive sex education illegal?

No. Individual schools should have a choice what they will and will not teach. It falls under freedom of speech.

Plus, Medical facilities are often run by corporations or by incorperated businesses. Under the law (Thanks to George Bush and like minded men before him) such entities have rights known as "Corporate Personhood", which provides that regulations that cause a corporation to "suffer significant damage" cannot be enforced. You do realize that THIS law has been the law of the land for well over a hundred years.

I'm not sure what you are getting at. That medical corporations won't be able to sue for damages from lost abortion revenues? Come on. They've gotten 35 years of revenues already from killing babies. They'll just have to deal with it.

Janet I said I would eat lobsters if I didn't know them personally. I met plenty of lovely lobsters at my job and I see them as equals to cows and humans etc.

I say we don't entertain Amanda. I say we just ignore her comments. She is just here to cause trouble.
Posted by: Jasper at October 25, 2008 10:50 AM

What? She took MY job.

Jess, I responded on the other thread. :-)

I met plenty of lovely lobsters at my job and I see them as equals to cows and humans etc.

Jess, ini that vein, I'm guessing you don't feel that way about scallops.....?

Jasper: I'm not prepared to ignore the allegations Amanda has presented since they involve me.

I didn't bring this up to start a fight - I brought it up because the brown nosing and back patting on this blog has reached such an outrageous degree that the only ones who DARE to disagree with anything a pro lifer says are pro choicers, PIP, or Elizabeth. Its even funnier to see that knowing you all trash talk each other in emails.

Posted by: Amanda at October 25, 2008 9:33 AM

I disagree with pro lifers and get banned for it silly Amanda. And according to Dogma Doug, why I'm right up there with him knowing "that no one has a good argument for abortion, they just think they do".

Once again, your in a reality that is blind to the fact that pro choicers are worth more then pro life posters at this site.

And for Jill, and her tilted to the pro choicer mods:

And now, after writing this post, in the famous words of Joe Mantagna, in movie named House Of Games, after being shot by the psychiatrist he said," Thank you sir, may I have another"? Banning that is.

Which would prove my point that pro lifers are banned for actually disagreeing with some pro lifer about the value of pro life posters being less then a pro choice poster, at this site.

yllas: I disagree with pro lifers and get banned for it silly Amanda

No, you get banned for not being in control of your silly emotions and breaking the rules of the site.
.....

And according to Doug, why I'm right up there with him knowing "that no one has a good argument for abortion, they just think they do".>/i>

No, you're not "right up there" with almost anybody at this site, be they Pro-Choicer or Pro-Lifer, and everybody knows it.

However, yllas, for you to be banned while a clown like "James" the silly spammer isn't - well, for any and all of our differences, that just ain't right.

Haha, Doug, we don't agree on a whole helluva lot..but when you're right, you're right!

Jasper: I'm not prepared to ignore the allegations Amanda has presented since they involve me.
Posted by: Patricia at October 25, 2008 9:31 PM

Patricia, Amanda is loving the fact that her mudslinging is getting you so upset. The mods have told Amanda that her allegations are BS. You don't have to ignore her allegations. I recommend you just keep on letting her have it with the truth. She will self-destruct. btw - You know I enjoy your posts a lot too. ts

Amanda,
I have seen many pro-life and pro-abort people leave this site complaining that they were treated unfairly. Your statement that the mod's are biased against pro-aborts who post here is completely unfounded. Since I have been here I have seen more pro-life people leave this blog because of percieved bias by the moderators.

Mod's, ignoring Amanda is fine, but how about starting with a one week bannination, otherwise you will have no teeth to cut through her BS when it continues. Thats my two cents.

above post was ts

Hi yllas.

"in the famous words of Joe Mantagna"

Joe Mantagna is my second cousin! My dad used to play with him when they were little kids. That's right. I'm related to a man who was in the greatest movie ever... The Money Pit.

Jasper: I'm not prepared to ignore the allegations Amanda has presented since they involve me.
Posted by: Patricia at October 25, 2008 9:31 PM

Patricia, Amanda is loving the fact that her mudslinging is getting you so upset. The mods have told Amanda that her allegations are BS. You don't have to ignore her allegations. I recommend you just keep on letting her have it with the truth. She will self-destruct. btw - You know I enjoy your posts a lot too. ts

Posted by: truthseeker at October 26, 2008 1:36 AM

The fact is truthseeker that neither Jill nor any of the mods have explicitly denied the allegations. Therefore, it appears that there WAS some kind of discussion about me by Jill and the mods and they came to the conclusion without knowing me, knowing my circumstances in my life, or ever having met me personally, that I am a bitter divorced woman who posts on Jill's blog to spew my venom of bitterness against proaborts. If that is their view so be it - I can't change how they view me - and so much for Christian charity. I appreciate your charity and support truthseeker, but the fact is at this point this IS how things stand.
What is even sadder is that after trashing people, then they go and email others about it. yeah, that's very comforting.....

What is sad too is that a good discussion prompted by Landry was sidetracked.....

Patricia,

I just sent you a message with more detail, but I vehemently deny any conversation among the mods about you being a bitter divorcee or anything of that nature. Everything I have ever said about you you are aware of. I explicitly deny the allegations. God love you.

Joe Mantegna is my second cousin!

Bobby, the next year after 'The Money Pit' he was in 'House of Games' - one of my favorites. He rocks.

Bobby, my respect for your pop-culture preferences grows ever stronger.

Jill, Mods,

I think it stinks that this thread is being used for grade school styled gossip.

For a commenter to make accusations about someone which can't be confirmed, or repudiated immediately, because all parties are not part of a conversation, is childish to say the least. Please, something needs to be done in this case, the sooner the better. Thank you.

Janet I agree wholeheartedly this is very childish and immature. And totally unfair to Patricia.

Without a copy of the email, I am not really sure what to do, because I do not know or remember what the email says, or who the email is from, or who the email was directed to.

If my computer hadn't had to be restored last month, I would still have all the emails myself, because I rarely delete emails.

It must have been several months ago when this conversation occurred, and I KNOW that within it's context it doesn't say what Amanda is implying, or what Patricia is inferring from what Amanda said. I just can't prove that till I get a copy of the email.

I wish Elizabeth or Rae would be willing to send me a copy so that we could clear the air.

BTW, I may not remember the emails but I do know that not once did any of us moderators say she was a "bitter divorcee" or anything of the sort.

It could have been that there was a fight that broke out between members months ago, and we moderators were trying to figure out how to fix the problem or to see what caused the problem (which is obviously what we do as moderators). That is the only thing I can think of. But I would have to see the email to be sure.

Hello all. Just stopping by to say hello. Also, GOOOOOOOO McCain and Palin!!!!!! I live in Ohio and we are saying NO to Obama!! Good day all!!

Hi Heather...it's been a while. Hope you're doing well!

Bethany, thank you. I have started protesting abortion clinics and I see pro aborts in action now. Got to meet baby killer Martin Ruddock the other day. Can't repeat what he said to us. I treasure my freedom of speech!!!!

I really don't sit in front of the computer these days. What's done is done. No need to rehash the past. Just glad I am active these days in the PL movement and I have met some WONDERFUL people!!!

You are stronger than I, Heather.

Okay...bye.

HMMMMMM, now I am curious. Did I make the list??????

I picked a good day to come on. I was wondering if I made "the list."

That would be a shame to say that kind of thing behind people's backs. Especially those who always preach kindness:{

Truthseeker, all of your posts the last two days have been right on target. Thank you!

(that is not to say that you're not always on target! I always love your posts).

Hey to you Heather *High5*

Thanks Bethany.
Not sure why but I keep on wanting to call Amanda names of animals when I am posting about her... yesterday I wanted to call her a fish and today I wanted to call her a goat. Not sure what that means but it has me laughing...

"Bobby, my respect for your pop-culture preferences grows ever stronger."

Haha, excellent... you're referring to what I said to Jess way above, right? I'm glad I spent all that time in college watching TV rather than studying...

TS, nice to see you too:]

Patricia,
I echo what Bobby said.

Thanks to Bobby and also to Carla.
:-)

YoLaTe, Not the same at all. If a woman does not get a hysterectomy the man is not financial responsible for "raising" her hysterectomy for the hysterectomy's life outside the woman. If the "fetus" is not a person, then should the man be able to "insis" on an abortion in the first three months and if the woman disagrees and carries the "fetus" to term then the man has no
more financial responsibility caus ehe wanted the burden disposed of before the fetus became a baby. You can't dismiss the father's rights because unlike getting your tubes tied, the baby is also legally his responsibility and "burden" so why shouldn't he have a say?

Posted by: truthseeker at October 25, 2008 9:10 AM

But what if a father WANTS the woman to have an abortion, by your logic, his vote trumps and she would be forced to have that abortion. When does the carrier of the fetus get a vote?

re: Janet at October 25, 2008 1:32 PM

If you had taken the time to read my post more carefully before responding you would note that the term "special interest group" was used in terms of groups like NRL and Operation Rescue. I suspect that making it illegal might funnel funds to fringe groups such as these and their (if that is even possible) more extreme ilk. The last thing we need is an empowered morality police.

No, you get banned for not being in control of your silly emotions and breaking the rules of the site.
Posted by: Doug at October 26, 2008

Mind reading again Dogma Doug?

Jill gave no reasons for banning me while I was defending another pro lifer against accusations by other pro lifers at this board. Another creation of paranoia resulting from Calvin's dilemma.

Why is it that Doug can't read? Because what you read is already a conclusion reached in your mind that makes reality bend to your dogmatic statement "that no one has a good argument against abortion, they just think they do".

From that point on, I have mocked and imitated your style of dogmatic, closed minded thinking. The best part is when you deny I'm doing just that, and write that I'm not mocking you and your silly sophist postings at this site.

Why can't you accept a compliment dogma Doug?

Now, facts be the fact dude, and once again your reading comprehension is suffering from your dogmatic mind training of your youth.Remember Dogma Doug, God loves to murder you, and has been murderering before there was a murderer on this Earth. And if your God version doesn't use a mind puppet to murder you in the womb, God gets to make you suffer in pain as long as he can get away with it until you murder yourself as a act of freedom from the murdering Calvinistic God of your parents.

Which is why millions of Calvinist began to seek a way out of the murderering God and his really mute son on "abortion matters", and have become silly little boys defending the murder of human beings in the womb. And comes the silly scared boy of Calvin, replying that it's not murder. You be right dude, and neither was it legally possible to murder a slave too. And neither can one murder living chattel property today, such as a dog or cat.

When did you stop believeing in the "All seeing Eye", that is on every dollar bill printed by the money men of the USA, Dogma Doug? Another creation of the paranoia resulting from Calvin's dilemma.

Well, at least you have broken free of such a sadistic, dogmatic mind interpretation of God via the bible and Calvin, and have set yourself as the Captain of your Ship. To bad you still are nothing more then the captain of a abortion ship sailing into the womb of a women and murderering "that which is and is not".

P.S. Since your a bible scholor pontificating on the bible and abortion, what, and where, is the words I have in quote found in that "good news" of the murderering God's words?

Jill gave no reasons for banning me while I was defending another pro lifer against accusations by other pro lifers at this board.

yllas, how many people do you think you're fooling?

Why is it that Doug can't read?

If you could pay attention, you'd see the list of "Do's" and "Do Not's" for Jill's site, when posting. You often violate a good many of them. That's why you get banned.
.....

Because what you read is already a conclusion reached in your mind that makes reality bend to your dogmatic statement "that no one has a good argument against abortion, they just think they do".

Again, you're just so massively confused. The dogma is on your part, and when a thing is my opinion, I say so, rather than engaging in the false pretenses that is your normal deal.

You asked, and I answered, and no - I see no good enough argument against (all) abortion that we would take away the freedom that women have in the matter.

And of course, some people think they do - that also is a matter of opinion.

As I said previously, though, to let a lame spammer like "James" go while banning you - hey, that just ain't right....

For that matter, you'd make a good spokesperson for the entire Pro-Life movement. From the standpoint of Pro-Choicers, anyway.

; )

Yo La,

re: Janet at October 25, 2008 1:32 PM
If you had taken the time to read my post more carefully before responding you would note that the term "special interest group" was used in terms of groups like NRL and Operation Rescue. I suspect that making it illegal might funnel funds to fringe groups such as these and their (if that is even possible) more extreme ilk. The last thing we need is an empowered morality police.

I did read your post. I would not expect groups like NRL or OR. to benefit from penalties against abortionists. In my scenario, fines would be collected by a government agency. These pro-life groups have no affiliation with the government. I believe your suspicion is a stretch.

For you Doug, and the hope you grow up and away from the monster God of your parents which led you to the monster ability to murder human beings in the womb.

Well, at least you have broken free of such a sadistic, dogmatic mind interpretation of God via the bible and Calvin, and have set yourself as the Captain of your Ship. To bad you still are nothing more then the captain of a abortion ship sailing into the womb of a women and murderering "that which is and is not".

Now, facts be the fact dude, and once again your reading comprehension is suffering from your dogmatic mind training of your youth.Remember Dogma Doug, God loves to murder you, and has been murderering before there was a murderer on this Earth. And if your God version doesn't use a mind puppet to murder you in the womb, God gets to make you suffer in pain as long as he can get away with it, and until you murder yourself as a act of freedom from the murdering Calvinistic God of your parents.

Your opinion of no one having a good argument against abortion is your truth without proof. A private dogma begun in the worship of the All Knowing murderering God of your youth.

In principle, you have stayed true to the earliest thoughts put in your head by your parent's or some silly Calvinist. God is the mover of murder, and murdering a fetus is doing God's pre-planed work for the murderering God of Doug.

Another words, it is the nutty plea of nutty pre- destinationist God doers------Why did you murder? "Why, God made me do it, good sir".

Of course that plea has faded into history as the children of the nutty pre-destinationist were beginning to see the nuttiness of such reasoning, and most turned out like you Doug, a don't know, can't prove, and absolutely can't know or not know about their version of God.

Though many more pre-destinationist Christians began the silly journey into Eastern or Western paganism which allows murder,robbery,rape, etc, through pre-destination in principle too.

The dalits of India being a perfect example of such principles.

Not being able to comprehend the meaning of agnostic, as being a silly contradiction in terms, has never stopped a person such as Doug becoming a Humpty Dumpty man of words, redefining agnostic into some defintion worthy of Humpty Dumpty reasoning.

Which leads back to what you ignore in your replies to anyone at this board. Such as the fact that you couldn't legally murder a slave, or better known in legal terms, as living chattel property. And your appeal to the law also being imbued and assigned that muderering a innocent human being in the womb, is not murder, is what was the legal assignment and attributes of a slave was in the legal matters of murderering a slave. You couldn't murder a slave. You could kill a slave, but never murder a slave.

That you preach that slavery is not compatable with this so called modern times is your dogma blinding you to the fact that you argue and reason as a slave rights sophist did before the matter of slavery was settled by the sacrifice of blood. That blood sacrifice to truth, established a absolute truth in Christian nations and societies that slavery was not legal or morally right absolutely.

But, you have reasoned slavery back into existence Doug, and fail to understand your principle for abortion is returning slavery into a right, and of course must deny any absolute truth in appealing to what is nothing more then slavery status of certain human beings known as a fetus, etc.

Again, one must replay the Doug, and eventually ask how a person becomes a preacher for living chattel property and the answer is------ his mind worshipped evil and the works of a evil God as a child. Nothing changes once you have the mind of a silly scared boy wanting to believe so much, and finding nothing but evil.

Evil is “nothing other than an attraction of the will towards nothing, a negation of being, of creation, and above all of God, a furious hatred of grace against which the rebellious will puts up an implacable resistance.” (Lossky)

Your attraction to the nothingness of abortion is your negation of being you were taught as a litle bitty boy, scared cra----- by stories of mass murder by that God. The "flood" being one act of mass murder. Being taught that God is the originator of the negation of being lives in your mind today Dogma Doug, and your will is attracted to nothingness, the negation of life, the aborting of creation in accordance with your evil God. And to this day, your still a silly little Calvinist mind puppet.

Now, as you read this, puppet of Calvin, and the murderering God, I show no emotion. I only write for your mind to deny my words as they are perceived by a person who can't find one reason to stop the murder of innocent human beings.

Afterall, only a dogmatic is unable to know one reason, against his reasoning, on matters of the murderering of innocent human life. And simply because the dogmatic knows that " no one has a good reason/argument against his furious worship of the creation of the negation of life".

Evil is “nothing other than an attraction of the will towards nothing, a negation of being, of creation, and above all of God, a furious hatred of grace against which the rebellious will puts up an implacable resistance.” (Lossky)

I don't know who Lossky is, but I agree with him/her.

But what if a father WANTS the woman to have an abortion, by your logic, his vote trumps and she would be forced to have that abortion. When does the carrier of the fetus get a vote?

Posted by: Yo La Tengo at October 26, 2008 9:36 PM

Not at all YoLaTe. By my logic if either parent wants to take responsibility for raising the child then the baby should live.

yllas, your out-of-control emotions have twisted your mind around, and it is the expression of that which got you banned. If you'd follow Jill's rules, you'd be okay - it's as simple as that.

Your opinion of no one having a good argument against abortion is your truth without proof.

Nope - that's just you making stuff up again. I gave my opinion, and identified it as such. You're the one who pretends their opinion is more than it is, i.e. as though there is an imaginary outside source for it which somehow validates it.

You begin with a lie, and then spend a fair amount of time building on it. Up to you....
.....

Such as the fact that you couldn't legally murder a slave, or better known in legal terms, as living chattel property.

And that's not at issue. Again, all that is there is you pretending that it is, and that's not the truth. If right-to-life was not attributed, and/or the killing was not against the law, then no murder, no. I know that, you know that, most people know that.
.....

That you preach that slavery is not compatable with this so called modern times

Again, there you are being false. There is slavery that exists in the world today, as far as I know. In the US, the 13th Amendment forbids, it, right? That really changed things and settled it as a matter of law, here, don't you think?
.....

and the murderering God

Within all your less-than-sane blathering, it's still you projecting your own emotions and beliefs onto others. I'll discuss gods in the hypothetical sense, but I'm agnostic. If you want to postulate a God, fine and dandy, but your pretenses about that God and your incorrect pretenses about what is murder and what is not are yours alone, not mine.