Event quietly protests abortion

shovelhead72 wrote:

Rigid wrote:
Rigid wrote: <quoted text>
take my tax dollars out of abortion and you can do what the hell you want to , but as long as the practice is sponsored even slightly by tax money you don't have complete rights over this crap .
you can't have it both ways , expect me and every other person in the country to pay for your right to kill babies and then tell us to shut up when we think its wrong .
Busted, you baStard. All you really care about is the almighty DOLLAR. Not children, not life, certainly not God's will, but YOUR WALLET. Thank you. You have finally answered my question. Have a sleepless night you sonoFabiscuiteater.

Yep.

LadiLulu wrote:

<quoted text>
Yep.

Hi, La. Got 'im, didn't I. I'm really tired and I think I'll go to bed. Can you suggest a title in the book room that has NOTHING to do with abortion? Thanks. G'nite.

shovelhead72 wrote:

<quoted text>Hi, La. Got 'im, didn't I. I'm really tired and I think I'll go to bed. Can you suggest a title in the book room that has NOTHING to do with abortion? Thanks. G'nite.

I haven't been in the book room yet. I need to, and I shall!

Nitey-nite!

xox!

LadiLulu wrote:

<quoted text>
I haven't been in the book room yet. I need to, and I shall!
Nitey-nite!
xox!

I look VERY much forward to seeing you there; and everywhere else. If there is only one female on these forums, whom I ever get to meet in person, I hope it is you. Sweet Dreams.

shovelhead72 wrote:

Rigid wrote:
Rigid wrote: <quoted text>
take my tax dollars out of abortion and you can do what the hell you want to , but as long as the practice is sponsored even slightly by tax money you don't have complete rights over this crap .
you can't have it both ways , expect me and every other person in the country to pay for your right to kill babies and then tell us to shut up when we think its wrong .
Busted, you baStard. All you really care about is the almighty DOLLAR. Not children, not life, certainly not God's will, but YOUR WALLET. Thank you. You have finally answered my question. Have a sleepless night you sonoFabiscuiteater.

why of course , money is one facet , the context was what ?

again you need to be reminded about intellectual integrity .

this was wehn you told me I had no right to voice my opinion about abortion , the fact still remains if public money , my money is being used to supply what I disagree with then I have a voice .

no matter where you go , the fact remains that you advocate the slaughter of innocent human fetuses .

the rules will change you can count on that.

You would not believe the number of middle school students in Oklahoma (5th to 8th grade) who do not know the fundamentals of human male and female biology. It is truly frightening to read the bathroom walls at the middle school up the street, at which I was a substitute teacher for 4 years while my children attended it: some of these girls think you cannot get pregnant unless you are married. OMG. One wrote, "All my friends got pregnant, why can't I?" Some of them write their email addresses, and say things such as: "I like older men."(!) Some of them believe they can get pregnant as a result of a dream, I *hit you not. And here's the kicker: if I was to enlighten them as to the facts of life, I could conceivably go to prison for MOLESTATION according to the laws of Oklahoma. Shudder.The point to all this, is that in my state, abstinence only sex 'education' is the only format allowed in the PUBLIC SCHOOLS. Therefore, most schools do not offer sex ed AT ALL. Any thoughts?

Rigid wrote:

<quoted text>
why of course , money is one facet , the context was what ?
again you need to be reminded about intellectual integrity .
this was wehn you told me I had no right to voice my opinion about abortion , the fact still remains if public money , my money is being used to supply what I disagree with then I have a voice .
no matter where you go , the fact remains that you advocate the slaughter of innocent human fetuses .
the rules will change you can count on that.

Hey, man. Thanks for proving me right, and yourself a hypocritical, money hungry, despicable sore. A-hole.

Rigid wrote:

<quoted text>
why of course , money is one facet , the context was what ?

I believe the context was your "biblical" references to the 'murder of babies', your assertion that abortion was murder, your ranting about gender equality, and the fact that you couldn't cite the chapter or verse from the Bible for any of the above.

Rigid wrote:

<quoted text>
again you need to be reminded about intellectual integrity.

By YOU? It is to laugh.

Rigid wrote:

<quoted text>
this was wehn you told me I had no right to voice my opinion about abortion , the fact still remains if public money , my money is being used to supply what I disagree with then I have a voice.

I agree with the following: if public money is to be used in a manner of which I disapprove, I should try to change this. I do not agree with public money being spent to promote the religious right's agenda. It is being done every day, and I am actively protesting this in the form of choosing which products to buy, which candidates for whom I vote, and LIVING MY LIFE without the fear of damnation that the religious right spreads. I choose peace, and that involves being able to choose. Ridge, you and I are poles apart in the philosophy department, and never the twain shall meet. Personally, I have no qualms with that.

Rigid wrote:

<quoted text>
no matter where you go , the fact remains that you advocate the slaughter of innocent human fetuses .

Unadulterated BUSHwa. I advocate the ability to make a decision about one's medical condition and the appropriate treatment of same, without breaking laws which apply only to one's gender... Nothing more, nothing less.
]

Rigid wrote:

<quoted text>
the rules will change you can count on that.

I can count on them changing to strengthen women's rights, rather than weaken them, sir. The Supreme Court of the United States is not in the habit, or the business, of rescinding anyone's rights. Mark my words, you'll be long disappointed, before the disenfranchisement of more than half the population of this country becomes law, if ever.

shovelhead72 wrote:

You would not believe the number of middle school students in Oklahoma (5th to 8th grade) who do not know the fundamentals of human male and female biology. It is truly frightening to read the bathroom walls at the middle school up the street, at which I was a substitute teacher for 4 years while my children attended it: some of these girls think you cannot get pregnant unless you are married. OMG. One wrote, "All my friends got pregnant, why can't I?" Some of them write their email addresses, and say things such as: "I like older men."(!) Some of them believe they can get pregnant as a result of a dream, I *hit you not. And here's the kicker: if I was to enlighten them as to the facts of life, I could conceivably go to prison for MOLESTATION according to the laws of Oklahoma. Shudder.The point to all this, is that in my state, abstinence only sex 'education' is the only format allowed in the PUBLIC SCHOOLS. Therefore, most schools do not offer sex ed AT ALL. Any thoughts?

In New Mexico they teach age appropriate sexuality education in the public schools. They teach about HIV, std's, peer pressure, condoms and of course abstinence only. The parents can opt their child out of any part of the curriculum that they don't want them taught. Me, I personally believe abstinence only does not work, teens and raging hormones. I think it would be better to teach alternatives along with consequences, i.e. pregnancy, std's etc. In particular it seems that children are "maturing" at an earlier age. To me sexuality is not a taboo, but it is the evangelical Christians who have made it such.

singer wrote:

<quoted text>I only have ONE God, the only one God almighty. Jesus is the only way to God. You are absolutely being deceived. And I can assure you with 100% certainty, you and every other person ever born WILL face God almighty. I thought I read that Wicca was an off shoot of Christianity. If that be the case how does God not become part of the picture? And if you choose to not follow God you have chosen to follow Satan. It is a choice, you and everyone else makes this choice. Denying God will do you no good at all during judgement. Not for you, not for atheists, agnostics or anyone else. You nor anyone else reading this post will be able to claim "I didn't know" when you face God. I am telling you now. You can choose to follow God, or choose to follow Satan. There are only two choices. One choice leads to eternal reward, the other to eternal damnation. We all choose a god to follow, I choose God to follow. And to keep this post about abortion so biker chick doesn't get all offended, I believe all those innocent babies being aborted will be in heaven. May God help you to see the light.

More comedy gold! When do we get to the skit where we all put our hands on our computers & screech, "Ah'm HII-YULLED!PRAAAZZZ GAAWDDD"? That's one of my favorite bits.

shovelhead72 wrote:

<quoted text>I look VERY much forward to seeing you there; and everywhere else. If there is only one female on these forums, whom I ever get to meet in person, I hope it is you. Sweet Dreams.

Wow!

What a sweeeet thing to say, sweeeeetie!

XOXOXOX!!!!

Myth:A woman should have a right to "choose."
Fact: But why is it that "the right to choose" only involves terminating a baby? A woman does NOT have the right to choose to smoke pot nor does she have the right to choose to sell her body in prostitution. If she does "choose" these things, she gets put in jail even though ONLY her body is involved in those choices. On the other hand, if she chooses to have an abortion, this is condoned despite the fact that the life of another individual is involved.

Also, where are the protections for the baby's rights? Most people, even severely handicapped individuals would NOT choose death if given the choice At present, there is no protection for the unborn baby because the Supreme Court decided NOT that the baby isn't human right FROM conception (that was pretty well proven) but rather that the writers of the constitution did not intend to include the unborn in the unalienable right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. In fact, the truth is that when the constitution was drafted only 5 percent of Caucasian males had full rights. If we are going to be consistent, than no one's rights (except perhaps Caucasian males) are protected and we need to have a Constitutional Convention to right that wrong!

{An interesting side bar to this...when a woman smokes or drinks or takes drugs while have a another living being in the womb that living being can be and is affected by this...and can be considered abuse not of her body but of the baby. Just an interesting little note.}

Myth:Abortion does not raise the risk for breast cancer
Fact: In 28 out of 31 worldwide studies, it was shown that abortion SIGNIFICANTLY raises the risk for breast cancer. This is because of the undifferentiated cells in the breasts formed during the first trimester which the body "forgets" to destroy after an abortion (in which a woman becomes UNpregnant in 5 minutes. One of the first published studies which showed aborted women as having as high as a 250 percent greater risk of breast cancer was the Janet Daling study of 2000 women. Daling, a pro-choice scientist tried to withhold her findings from the news services. The Melbye study which proved no risk, counted 60,000 aborted women as woman who had NOT had abortions. When this is adjusted, the Melbye study showed a higher risk of breast cancer after abortion than other studies.

Did you know:

Jane Roe (Norma McCorvey) of Roe V Wade never had the abortion they fought for her right to have, in the Supreme Court (they lied to her that the case would be decided in time for her to abort). She went on to become pro life and a couple of years ago, converted to the Catholic church. She is fighting as we speak to reverse the Roe V Wade decision
Jane Doe of Doe v Bolton (companion decision to Roe V Wade) has also turned pro life and wants HER decision reversed
Dr Bernard Nathenson who was a co-founder of NARAL for the purpose of advocating for legalized abortion and one of the early abortion rights activists, is now pro life and also converted to the Catholic church

Myth:Though I would never have an abortion myself, I don't believe I should impose my morality on others.
Fact: The fact is that most of our laws do legislate moral issues. When there is another life involved, protection of that life is considered appropriate. Also by not protecting the unborn baby, aren't we imposing our morality on him/her?

Myth:Abortion is appropriate after a rape.
Fact: Most rapes do not end up in pregnancy however, if a pregnancy results, terminating the innocent baby only compounds the mother's distress and injury as there is a lot of evidence that the mother bonds with her baby soon after conception. On the other hand, carrying the pregnancy fulltime and having a sweet baby which resulted, can do a lot to heal the mother's injury from the rape.

Myth:Abortion is appropriate in the case of incest
Fact:In the vast majority of cases, abortion after incest protects the sexual predator and not the victim. If a pregnant incest victim terminates her baby, the predator has no reason to stop the incest. On the contrary, if the mother carries the pregnancy and keeps the baby, this has a great potential of stopping the incestuous attacks.

Myth: Abortion is legal, therefore, it must be right.
Fact: It is true that many people judge by what is legal to decide if it is right or not. However, the fact remains that some Supreme Court decisions (like the Dred Scott decision which removed the African-American's right to life) may NOT be moral or ethical. The Supreme Court only has to decide if it is constitutional. That being said, since many people use the law as a litmus test, this would be one of the strongest arguments to make abortion illegal.

Myth: If Abortion is made illegal, then women will be put in jail for having an abortion.
Fact: That has never been the way things have worked. Basically the doctor who performs the abortion could be liable to a fine or more. In practical terms, however, what would likely happen is that we would go back to doctors performing "therapeutical abortions" in hospitals as they did before Roe v Wade. What would change is woman would no longer use abortion as birth control and that type of thing. In one survey 75 percent of women stated if abortion were not legal, they would not abort.

Hey, Joey, are you aware that plagiarism is illegal? You are cutting and pasting someone else's writing without attribution. That's stealing, dear. Furthermore, what you've copied *illegally* is merely more opinion, not fact, and is no more valid than the opinions of anyone else.

Laws ARE NOT made to enforce morality. Laws are passed to protect the rights of people, NOT FETUSES, under the constitution. Murder is illegal because it infringes on another's rights, not because it's immoral.

Get a clue.

Kay wrote:

Hey, Joey, are you aware that plagiarism is illegal? You are cutting and pasting someone else's writing without attribution. That's stealing, dear. Furthermore, what you've copied *illegally* is merely more opinion, not fact, and is no more valid than the opinions of anyone else.
Laws ARE NOT made to enforce morality. Laws are passed to protect the rights of people, NOT FETUSES, under the constitution. Murder is illegal because it infringes on another's rights, not because it's immoral.
Get a clue.

Yep.

Kay wrote:

Hey, Joey, are you aware that plagiarism is illegal? You are cutting and pasting someone else's writing without attribution. That's stealing, dear. Furthermore, what you've copied *illegally* is merely more opinion, not fact, and is no more valid than the opinions of anyone else.
Laws ARE NOT made to enforce morality. Laws are passed to protect the rights of people, NOT FETUSES, under the constitution. Murder is illegal because it infringes on another's rights, not because it's immoral.
Get a clue.

Okay, than lets repeal all the laws on murder huh? How about when someone breaks into your house, we won't bother persecuting them. Oh, what about DWI's that kill someone. Yeah laws are there to protects rights...laws are moral and ethical and should be that way. Unless of course you are a politician or someone who wants to justify murdering babies as they did to Jews in Germany. By the way with you logic, Germany was fine in slaughtering the Jews. Thank you for supporting the rights to do the same to the babies of America. I am sure the ripped out, in pieces babies thank you.

http://www.epm.org/artman2/publish/prolife_wo...

Efforts to establish abortion as a legitimate solution to the problems of being a woman in a male-dominated society surrender women to pregnancy discrimination. Those feminists who demand the right to abortion concede the notion that a pregnant woman is inferior to a non- pregnant one. They admit that pregnancy and motherhood are incompatible to being a fully functioning adult, and that an unencumbered, unattached male is the model for success. By settling for abortion instead of working for the social changes that would make it possible to combine children and career, pro-abortion feminists have agreed to participate in a man's world under a man's terms. They have betrayed the majority of working women—who want to have children.

Abortion allows men to escape responsibility for their own sexual behavior. A man whose child is aborted is relieved of the requirement that he support his children. It is not surprising that the Playboy Foundation is a major supporter of abortion rights, because abortion is a natural consequence of the Playboy's ideal of uncommitted, anonymous sex without consequences. Women can be reduced to the status of a consumer item, which if "broken" by pregnancy can be "fixed" by abortion.

JosephOne wrote:

<quoted text>
Okay, than lets repeal all the laws on murder huh? How about when someone breaks into your house, we won't bother persecuting them. Oh, what about DWI's that kill someone. Yeah laws are there to protects rights...laws are moral and ethical and should be that way. Unless of course you are a politician or someone who wants to justify murdering babies as they did to Jews in Germany. By the way with you logic, Germany was fine in slaughtering the Jews. Thank you for supporting the rights to do the same to the babies of America. I am sure the ripped out, in pieces babies thank you.

What part of my post did you fail to understand? Was it everything after the first word? Murder deprives a person of his rights. So does killing someone because you were drunk and driving. Breaking into a house and stealing is not illegal because it's "morally wrong". It's illegal because it's an infringement of someone else's rights. What part of this are you unclear about?
Your hysterical words above provide sufficient evidence that you are plagiarizing in the rest of your posts. Try to find a better source of information; what you're using is bogus.