Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision

H of C wrote:

<quoted text>
Condoms break. Women and girls are raped without consideration for birth control. What then? Do you really not understand that condoms are not always the cure-all?

Do you really not understand that I said no such thing?

Doug wrote:

<quoted text>
I really don't know how you can justify this. Didn't you learn in Biology that when 23 chromosomes meet 23 chromosomes, it becomes a cell? Isn't a cell life? Doesn't it divide and reproduce, respirate, etc? The only argument that you have is that "human life" starts at delivery but clearly life begins at conception. This is the radical rationalization that the abortion lobby has put on this issue. Don't believe the hype.
Your definition is too arbitrary. A baby is still dependent on its mother after delivery. It can't feed itself.

The potential for life begins at conception. P-O-T-E-N-T-I-A-L. Until week 25? the fetus will not survive outside of the womb. A fully formed baby is dependent on someone else for care and not necessarily its mother.

Cpetr13 wrote:

You have the oddest interpretations of other peoples' words.
<quoted text>

Your just saying that b/c I disagree with you. I probably should consider the fact that you think its odd as a good thing - lol

Cpetr13 wrote:

About 31, as I recall. Why, do you have pedophile fantasies?
<quoted text>

Son, thank you. I thought the Church might be facing another lawsuit.

Age : How fortunate your mother didn't abort you . As I understand God never condems anyone to hell .We condem ourselves. By accepting Jesus Christ as Lord and savior, you need not worry about the White Throne Judgment . Can a murderer in court clain "Choice" as a defense ?

Those "liberal activist judges" you PLM'ers keep yowling about were for the most part appointed by conservative administrations.

The question ultimately boils down to, "Why would a woman in Utah not have the same basic rights as a woman in California?" When it becomes a matter of civil rights, the federal constitution trumps the states every time.

Child support is not sexist; if the child is born and not given up for adoption, then BOTH biological parents are equally RESPONSIBLE for its support.

Doug wrote:

This discussion is frivolous. We are supposed to believe that this is a Constitutional issue. But really a few liberal activist judges made abortion legal nationwide.
This should be a state issue. The Federal government has no business in this. And if you believe so much in the right the choose, don't you believe in the father's RIGHT TO CHOOSE not to pay child support. Most sexist law in America. Equality my....

mr peepers, I'm sure my mother regrets not having aborted me. I've been a trial and tribulation. She will be rewarded in Heaven. I'm sure you and she will have much to discuss at some future point.

Abortion is not murder. However a murderer can claim self-defense or temporary insanity. What is your point?

I have billions of cells in my body, all with the same number of chromosomes. If I choose to slough some of them off, living or not, that is my choice. If I were a woman, the same would hold true for pregnancy.

When life begins has, until fairly modern times, presumed to have begun either at quickening (when the woman truly feels to fetus moving) or at birth. A fertilized egg is alive, but then so were the sperm and egg. That does not obligate a woman to allow it to use her uterus and bodily systems for its own purposes against her will.

A born child is not dependent on its mother; anyone can fed that kid.

Doug wrote:

<quoted text>
I really don't know how you can justify this. Didn't you learn in Biology that when 23 chromosomes meet 23 chromosomes, it becomes a cell? Isn't a cell life? Doesn't it divide and reproduce, respirate, etc? The only argument that you have is that "human life" starts at delivery but clearly life begins at conception. This is the radical rationalization that the abortion lobby has put on this issue. Don't believe the hype.
Your definition is too arbitrary. A baby is still dependent on its mother after delivery. It can't feed itself.

Cpetr13 wrote:

Actually, idiot, I said nothing about a liver becoming a baby. You referenced the fetus being alive and human, and that is ALL you based your argument on. Both livers and tumors are unarguably human and unarguably alive.
<quoted text>

LOL

I didn't say you did. I was pointing out the huge difference in those things is that they are not seperate individuals in their proper stage of development in life that will become babies unless they die.

It's obvious you didn't, if you don't know the difference.

The argument is living human BEING btw. A human liver would be part of a human being, but not a human being.

I also think the argument can be made that cancer is a living "disease" in humans, rather than being "human". Definately not a seperate human being though.

Aquarius-WY wrote:

<quoted text>
Do you really not understand that I said no such thing?

Well, then what did you mean when you stated the following:

"If you REALLY do not understand that a condom will prevent the unwanted children in the first place, you are not using good common sense."

From this statement, it appears you think condoms will prevent unwanted children thus negating the use of abortions.

There is no doubt that teen pregnancies can ruin lives; girls are beaten and even killed for getting pregnant.

Overpopulation is real and unarguable.

The right wing keeps blaming single mothers for troubled youths, criminals, etc. Go bark up their tree for a change.

So a teenager with a baby and no actual skills is going to just pop out of poverty and own a fortune 500 company? And again, it's your right-wing pals who keep harping on welfare moms.

Right Wing Conspiracy wrote:

<quoted text>
You must live under a rock if you have not heard all the propaganda to justify abortion over the years.
"Teen pregnancy ruins lives. The world is overpopulated and getting more so. Unplanned pregnancies should be a thing of the past. Children of teenage mothers too frequently grow up to be troubled youths, criminals and so on, and continue the cycle of poverty and welfare dependence."
http://www.ppwi.org/aboutus/management/manage...

The truth is that foreigners are given the approximation of some rights but in fact the constitution does not grant them any rights whatsoever. We have adopted policies concerning due process and other critical portions of our laws, but they have no actual rights in the sense that citizens do.

Right Wing Conspiracy wrote:

<quoted text>
Are foreigners treated like the slaves were? Are they considered property w/o rights?

Of course I do. I just don't think women are "accountable" for accidental pregnancies.

Aquarius-WY wrote:

Reality is better than truth.
What a joke. Fits you though.
You have no concept of accountability of one's actions, nor do you want to.

As an atheist, I don't have to worry about any "judgment" either.

As many abused spouses have pointed out, sometimes murder is a necessary choice.

mr peepers wrote:

Age : How fortunate your mother didn't abort you . As I understand God never condems anyone to hell .We condem ourselves. By accepting Jesus Christ as Lord and savior, you need not worry about the White Throne Judgment . Can a murderer in court clain "Choice" as a defense ?

Abortion is MURDER!!!!!!!!!!

Aquarius-WY wrote:

Reality is better than truth.
What a joke. Fits you though.
You have no concept of accountability of one's actions, nor do you want to.

Aborting an unwanted pregnancy is "accountability", whether you approve of the decision or not.

Cpetr13 wrote:

The truth is that foreigners are given the approximation of some rights but in fact the constitution does not grant them any rights whatsoever. We have adopted policies concerning due process and other critical portions of our laws, but they have no actual rights in the sense that citizens do.
<quoted text>

You didn't answer my questions.

You're making my point for me when you say that they aren't granted any rights by the Constitution. Thing is, blacks were denied that when they were born here. A foreigner isn't considered property like slaves were, nor are they treated like blacks were at that point of time.

http://lawreview.kentlaw.edu/articles/82-1/Ch...

Cpetr13 wrote:

There is no doubt that teen pregnancies can ruin lives; girls are beaten and even killed for getting pregnant.
Overpopulation is real and unarguable.
The right wing keeps blaming single mothers for troubled youths, criminals, etc. Go bark up their tree for a change.
So a teenager with a baby and no actual skills is going to just pop out of poverty and own a fortune 500 company? And again, it's your right-wing pals who keep harping on welfare moms.
<quoted text>

They aren't killed for getting pregnant. They are killed b/c the killer is a violent criminal. That's not the pregnancy ruining their lives, that's the killer do it. However, the message given to certain people is that getting pregnant as a teen will always ruin their life. Even when they have a supportive family.

Plus, adoption is always an option as it's not a problem getting an infant adopted.

Overpopulation is an opinion and that's always arguable - lol

It's not single mothers, we attack. It's the anti-family value system that keeps fathers out of the home.

We don't harp on welfare moms who take advantage of the services to get themselves out of poverty such going to college. We harp on those who trap themselves into the constant cycle of gov welfare dependance and never try to get off.

Scripture says :: The fool in his heart ,says there is no God .

The Bible ...words to live by .It's # 1 !