NationStates Jolt Archive

you wanna kow what the real problem is, its people like you that listen to dumbasses like moore, you wann know y there are so many murders in the U.S? its because normally countries with bigger population have more murders, i dont know sound pretty damn logical too me dont you think chicken pi. Im not saying that this person is correct but she does have a good point, why shuld the baby have to pay for the idiocy of the parents i dont think that abortion should be alowed at all however since this will never happen i doont think that they should be allowed unless theres a chance of the mother dying that at least 90% :sniper:

Oh, where to begin...

Oh yes, the smiley. Get rid of it. It has weakened your argument.

Next point, your grammar and spelling. How the hell did you pass English? I would have to think your teacher was a moron, if she passed you with English as sinfully horrible as this. I mean, learn how to use punctuation, it's there for a reason!

...my eyes hurt after reading this travesty of an argument!

*runs in*

Sorry I took a while! I now have the torches! can I have the four that have helped form the mob come over here? I have the three and torches. We just need to form a lynching mob now....

Seriously? I think Commando should admit defeat. This is one issue he is outnumbered on.
I'll take one of those. It would go great with my pitchfork...

And yeah, the pro-life side has not been helped by Commando's remarks.

you wanna kow what the real problem is, its people like you that listen to dumbasses like moore, you wann know y there are so many murders in the U.S? its because normally countries with bigger population have more murders, i dont know sound pretty damn logical too me dont you think chicken pi. Im not saying that this person is correct but she does have a good point, why shuld the baby have to pay for the idiocy of the parents i dont think that abortion should be alowed at all however since this will never happen i doont think that they should be allowed unless theres a chance of the mother dying that at least 90% :sniper:

Yes, but it still isn't exactly low, is it? Especially considering that it's the number of firearm homicides in America, not counting other forms of murder. I'll tell you what: I'm bored at the moment, so I'll try to dig up some firearm homicide and population figures for various countries and compare them based on ratio.

By the way, don't use that dumb sniper smily. It doesn't exactly add to what you're saying, it's just an annoying way of expressing your anger at my difference in opinion.


Does anyone know a good site where I can find homicide figures for a particular year? I've been trawling through all sorts of crap on google.

I'll take one of those. It would go great with my pitchfork...

And yeah, the pro-life side has not been helped by Commando's remarks.
Oh, pitchforks.... why did I leave mine at home? :D

Try this:
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph-T/cri_mur_cap (Murders per capita)
http://www.nationmaster.com/red/graph-T/cri_mur_wit_fir_cap&int=50 (muders with firearms per capita)
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph-T/cri_pri_per_cap (prisoners per capita)

I really don't feel comfortable with a bunch of old white men telling me what i can and cannot do with my own body. thanks :P

also, if you're so pro-life you would realize that bush is ANYTHING but. and he's the farthest from Jesus anyone could get. i'm sure starting his little 'war' for oil and killing very innocent people (american, arab, or otherwise) who are already conscious and very aware is really pro-life. And i'm sure with your reference to Hitler you realize that there are provisions in the patriot act where special camps can be established under martial law.

and thirdly, Jesus preached 'love thy enemy'. I'm sure he didn't mean 'slaughter thy enemy and all who assist him.' He (Bush) likes to talk Christian but really, if Jesus were here he'd be in a fit at all these moronic primates who are using His name to do awful, rotten things to people.

Yes, i think adoption is a nice alternative to abortion but i will defend my right to get rid of a baby if i get raped or knocked up. The government can dictate my life outside my body but they can keep their grubby hands outta my womb.

IMO, that is just dead wrong.

Another blind Bush hater...

Jesus would think our good deed in Iraq a noble one.... freeing a people from a ruthless dictator is good work undoubtedly in Jesus' eyes.

Got the homicide figures from http://polyticks.com/polyticks/beararms/liars/world.htm

Woops, I nearly forgot - population figures are from http://www.census.gov/ipc/www/idbrank.html

These figures are based on 1995 figures (well, all of the population figures are. The firearm homicide figures varied a little, but were all from around 1995).


US
firearm homicides - 15,835
population - 266,557,091

Australia
firearm homicides - 96
population - 19,164,620

Canada
firearm homicides - 176
population - 29,619,002

Germany
Firearm homicides - 168
population - 81,653,702

Japan
Firearm homicides - 34
population - 125,341,354

Sweden
Firearm homicides - 27
population - 8,877,890

Spain
Firearm homicides - 76
population - 39,749,715

UK
Firearm homicides - 72
Population - 58,426,014

I haven't read through these figures carefully yet, so I haven't made any conclusions from them.

If you think these figures are biased, feel free to do your own research.

Try this:
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph-T/cri_mur_cap (Murders per capita)
http://www.nationmaster.com/red/graph-T/cri_mur_wit_fir_cap&int=50 (muders with firearms per capita)
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph-T/cri_pri_per_cap (prisoners per capita)

I would probably get some data from that and compare the two sets of data to ensure the validity of my research, but I really can't be arsed.

Actually, I think I might. Interestingly, America ranks 24th for all murders but ranks 8th for firearm murders.

Firearm murder figures
1. South Africa 0.74 per 1000 people
2. Colombia 0.52 per 1000 people
3. Thailand 0.31 per 1000 people
4. Zimbabwe 0.04 per 1000 people
5. Mexico 0.03 per 1000 people
6. Costa Rica 0.03 per 1000 people
7. Belarus 0.03 per 1000 people
8. United States 0.02 per 1000 people
9. Uruguay 0.02 per 1000 people
10. Lithuania 0.02 per 1000 people
11. Slovakia 0.02 per 1000 people
12. Czech Republic 0.02 per 1000 people
13. Estonia 0.01 per 1000 people
14. Latvia 0.01 per 1000 people
15. Macedonia, The Former Yugoslav Republic of 0.01 per 1000 people
16. Bulgaria 0.00 per 1000 people
17. Portugal 0.00 per 1000 people
18. Slovenia 0.00 per 1000 people
19. Switzerland 0.00 per 1000 people
20. Canada 0.00 per 1000 people
21. Germany 0.00 per 1000 people
22. Moldova 0.00 per 1000 people
23. Hungary 0.00 per 1000 people
24. Poland 0.00 per 1000 people
25. Ukraine 0.00 per 1000 people

All murder figures
1. Colombia 0.63 per 1000 people
2. South Africa 0.51 per 1000 people
3. Jamaica 0.32 per 1000 people
4. Venezuela 0.32 per 1000 people
5. Russia 0.19 per 1000 people
6. Mexico 0.13 per 1000 people
7. Lithuania 0.10 per 1000 people
8. Estonia 0.10 per 1000 people
9. Latvia 0.10 per 1000 people
10. Belarus 0.09 per 1000 people
11. Ukraine 0.09 per 1000 people
12. Papua New Guinea 0.08 per 1000 people
13. Kyrgyzstan 0.08 per 1000 people
14. Thailand 0.07 per 1000 people
15. Moldova 0.07 per 1000 people
16. Zambia 0.07 per 1000 people
17. Seychelles 0.07 per 1000 people
18. Zimbabwe 0.07 per 1000 people
19. Costa Rica 0.06 per 1000 people
20. Poland 0.05 per 1000 people
21. Georgia 0.04 per 1000 people
22. Uruguay 0.04 per 1000 people
23. Bulgaria 0.04 per 1000 people
24. United States 0.04 per 1000 people
25. Armenia 0.03 per 1000 people


Thanks, TGE. :)

Chicken, I have some more complete figures from the Canadian government (when in the course of their attempt to prove that there is a link between total homicide rates and gun ownership).

I'll see if I can get those up here. They admitted at a conference in Geneva that no such link could be proven.

Chicken, I have some more complete figures from the Canadian government (when in the course of their attempt to prove that there is a link between total homicide rates and gun ownership).

I'll see if I can get those up here. They admitted at a conference in Geneva that no such link could be proven.

That would be great. I suppose I'd better compare the two sets of figures and convert my ones into firearm homicides per 1000 population.

you probably never hear about partial birth abortion cuz the only ppl who would get it have good reasons, like the mother's health or something.

Actually most people that get an abortion don't require one. Everyone thinks its a quick fix but it isn't. There have been links of abortion to Breast Cancer as well as detremental to a woman's emotional health.

Bush is not as 'pro-life' as people think. He has no qualms with abortion in some instances- such as rape and incest.

That's fine but if you want my opinion, if there is an abortion, it should be decided by BOTH of the parties involved! That being the father AND mother. If the father is unknown then there better be a very good medical reason other than Morning Sickness and tiredness.

I did it and came up with similar results to TGE's figures, although America and Canada had murder rates of 0.05 per 1000, by my calculations. We can't really compare results, though, as he has data from a lot more countries than me and it seems to be from a much better source.

Ok, all of you who favour adoption, lets take a look at figures. Commando2, you provided 30 million abortions per year. Here (http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview?id=252596) you will find various numbers of adoptions not entirely consistent with each other, but at best, lets assume 500k, which is much higher than any mentioned number.
Now i want you pro-lifers to feed and care (and by that i mean more than industrialized foster homes, hugs and kisses and all a child needs as well) for all the other 29.5 million babies. Each year, that is.
Personally i think that there are way too many abortions in the US. Prevention is to be prefered, abortion as birth-control should be a last resort. Lack of education is to blame for the high numbers in the US imho.
Whatever, do as you wish, but dont bullshit yourself with the adoption strategy. Invest your time and money and adopt a child, at least you will help make a single life brighter. But most of the time pro-lifers dont care about the child once its born. There is no passage in the bible that you have to care about other peoples children and how miserable their life may be, after all.

That would be great. I suppose I'd better compare the two sets of figures and convert my ones into firearm homicides per 1000 population.

I think the problem with some nations (including the US) is
a) not all murders are committed with firearms
b) not all violent crime is committed with a firearm
c) all countries vary in private gun ownership.

The Canadian study had the breakdown for:

firearm murders per 100,000 per year
violent crimes per 100,000 per year
guns owned per household

Much to their dismay, they couldn't find a connection between firearm murders per year and guns owned per household. Nor a connection between violent crimes per year and guns owned.

By the stats, Luxembourg sounds like the Wild West. Guns aren't legal at all, but more people are killed per year per 100,000 than the US. Killed by guns, that is.

Ok, all of you who favour adoption, lets take a look at figures. Commando2, you provided 30 million abortions per year. Here (http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview?id=252596) you will find various numbers not entirely consistent with each other, but at best, lets assume 500k, which is much higher than any mentioned number.
Now i want you pro-lifers to feed and care (and by that i mean more than industrialized foster homes, hugs and kisses and all a child needs as well) for all the other 29.5 million babies. Each year, that is.
Personally i think that there are way too many abortions in the US. Prevention is to be prefered, abortion as birth-control should be a last resort. Lack of education is to blame for the high numbers in the US imho.
Whatever, do as you wish, but dont bullshit yourself with the adoption strategy. Invest your time and money and adopt a child, at least you will help make a single life brighter. But most of the time pro-lifers dont care about the child once its born. There is no passage in the bible that you have to care about other peoples children and how miserable their life may be, after all.

I agree, adoption is a viable alternative and does a world of good for the affected child.

EDIT:
Nsendalin said the exact same thing. Oops.

didn't mean to repeat arguments... my bad... and good call nsendalin

if Jesus were here he'd be in a fit at all these moronic primates who are using His name to do awful, rotten things to people.

Yes, i think adoption is a nice alternative to abortion but i will defend my right to get rid of a baby if i get raped or knocked up. The government can dictate my life outside my body but they can keep their grubby hands outta my womb.

First of all, the only moronic primate around here is you - I'm glad you assume that you know how Christ, the redeemer of humanity would think. When you're refering to Iraq you realize they were being rescued from a murderous psychotic dictator... no big deal I guess we're just psychos right? However, I've got a news flash for you - you have no idea how Christ feels about thinks so don't throw that around in a response assuming he would be for or against the Iraq war. And don't assume under whatever pretenses of knowledge you claim to have are legit-because they most likely are not. Especially with your view about the govt. keeping their grubby hands off the HUMAN BEING that would be in your woman when you're pregnant. It doesn't matter that it's your womb, it's their LIFE. Don't be so pretentious, please get over yourself.

I agree, adoption is a viable alternative and does a world of good for the affected child.
I assume you can read. But you obviously dont come to the same conclusions as myself, even if they are very logical and presented in the most blunt way. Once again, adoption is no viable option, since the number of still unwanted babies would outnumber those adopted by sixty times at least. In 8-9 years the population of the US would be doubled, than nearly 50% would be kids no one wants, taken care off by foster homes. How can that be an option?

[QUOTE=Commando2]I think anyone dying is horrible.[QUOTE]
Then why do you support good ole' Dubya? Who took us into a war with highly questionable motives and causes? Why, Georgie the Warmonger!


On the abortion issue though, I agree that abortion is wrong. But Commando, Jesus taught that killing in general is wrong. Not just certain people. He didn't say, "It is wrong to kill, except for the following..." (Which, now that I think about it, sounds like the Crusades popes and Muslim terrorists) Instead He taught us to forgive each other. Commando, you cannot extoll execution and praise Christ at the same time. To your (and anyone else's) favor though, in a chance to prove me wrong, find somewhere in the Gospel where Jesus says it is ok to kill at all. If you can find a legit place, let me know and I'll shut up.

/Christian moderate fed up with the Christian right-wing

Ok...Pro-Bush and Anti-Bush persons...STOP acting like you know what Christ would say and how He'd stand in United States politics and policies. Please, stick to what the Bible says about Jesus.

That's fine but if you want my opinion, if there is an abortion, it should be decided by BOTH of the parties involved! That being the father AND mother. If the father is unknown then there better be a very good medical reason other than Morning Sickness and tiredness.

That being the father AND the mother. And if the father is unknown, if he's vanished from the scene and if the mother is facing the prospect of raising the little bugger alone, then father's unknown but assumed wishes, in his absence, should override the very known wishes of the very pregnant mother.

Corn, what the hell are you talking about?

Ok...Pro-Bush and Anti-Bush persons...STOP acting like you know what Christ would say and how He'd stand in United States politics and policies. Please, stick to what the Bible says about Jesus.
Is it okay to assume, given that he was a Jew, he followed the same traditions of the Jews of his time? If so, then Jesus would allow abortions during the first forty days of pregnancy for any reason, and would allow abortions later given a serious health threat (either physiological or psychological) posed to the mother. He would allow this, because a fetus does not have a soul until it draws breath. Which happens at birth.

That's fine but if you want my opinion, if there is an abortion, it should be decided by BOTH of the parties involved! That being the father AND mother. If the father is unknown then there better be a very good medical reason other than Morning Sickness and tiredness.
I suppose that would be fair, if the father had the baby growing inside his body simultaneously with the woman, but one of the issues early feminists fought for was the right to control their own body, rather than being the property of their husband. It is my stance, that in keeping with the principles the Founding Fathers claimed to believe in, every citizen of the U.S. has the right to control his or her own body. Abortion is the right to expel an alien entity from a person's body.

That being the father AND the mother. And if the father is unknown, if he's vanished from the scene and if the mother is facing the prospect of raising the little bugger alone, then father's unknown but assumed wishes, in his absence, should override the very known wishes of the very pregnant mother.

Corn, what the hell are you talking about?

ADOPTION!!!!!! I like to know where you inferred that the mother should raise the kid alone. If she can't then she shouldn't be engaging in pre-marital sex to begin with. Barring marriage then the mother should put it up for adoption.

I suppose that would be fair, if the father had the baby growing inside his body simultaneously with the woman, but one of the issues early feminists fought for was the right to control their own body, rather than being the property of their husband. It is my stance, that in keeping with the principles the Founding Fathers claimed to believe in, every citizen of the U.S. has the right to control his or her own body. Abortion is the right to expel an alien entity from a person's body.

That "alien entity" is a living child. It is nice that you can decide to kill the unborn without hesitation because "it's my body!" How selfish is that? You don't want the responsibility so murdering your unborn child, your own flesh and blood is the answer. I really can't understand it.

Is it okay to assume, given that he was a Jew, he followed the same traditions of the Jews of his time? If so, then Jesus would allow abortions during the first forty days of pregnancy for any reason, and would allow abortions later given a serious health threat (either physiological or psychological) posed to the mother. He would allow this, because a fetus does not have a soul until it draws breath. Which happens at birth.

I don't think he would've. Jesus loves children and I sincerely doubt that he would want harm to come to them. We don't know this so it is best not to assume what he would or wouldn't support. Regarding abortion, I guess you haven't seen the studies linking depression, Breast Cancer, and other mental and physical health disorders among women who have had abortions. Even Roe (the lady that kicked this all off) is against Abortion.

I suppose that would be fair, if the father had the baby growing inside his body simultaneously with the woman, but one of the issues early feminists fought for was the right to control their own body, rather than being the property of their husband. It is my stance, that in keeping with the principles the Founding Fathers claimed to believe in, every citizen of the U.S. has the right to control his or her own body. Abortion is the right to expel an alien entity from a person's body.

It takes 2 to tango. The father should have a say too. As to the founding fathers, would you care to show me that they believed this? Nowhere do I see evidence pointing to this in any of their writings.

ADOPTION!!!!!! I like to know where you inferred that the mother should raise the kid alone. If she can't then she shouldn't be engaging in pre-marital sex to begin with. Barring marriage then the mother should put it up for adoption.

I'm inferring nothing. The passage of yours I quoted last post stated that if the mother and father agree on the abortion, then it is an option. However, with no father on the scene, you say that the woman better have a very good medical reason for an abortion.

Why can a father and mother decide better than a mother on her own? Why should a couple be permitted an abortion while a lone mother has to go the adoption road?

All I'm inferring is that you've got some consistency issues, homes.

I don't think he would've. Jesus loves children and I sincerely doubt that he would want harm to come to them. We don't know this so it is best not to assume what he would or wouldn't support. Regarding abortion, I guess you haven't seen the studies linking depression, Breast Cancer, and other mental and physical health disorders among women who have had abortions. Even Roe (the lady that kicked this all off) is against Abortion.


Can you prove that Jesus loves children? More to the point, can you prove that he loves foetuses? More to the point, can you prove that Jesus had any inkling of what a foetus actually was?

It's not in scripture. There is no place where Jesus questions current thinking about abortion or foetuses - despite the many other topics he DID choose to discuss.

So - it is fairly safe to assume that this issue was worthy of no mention - in other words, that Jesus accepted the thinking of his time.

And, even ignoring other sources, within the frame of the bible, there is clear precedent for the allowance of abortion, provided that the 'father' doesn't object and that the mother isn't harmed.

It's an Old-Covenant/New-Covenant thing. If Jesus didn't revoke it, it stands.

That "alien entity" is a living child. It is nice that you can decide to kill the unborn without hesitation because "it's my body!" How selfish is that? You don't want the responsibility so murdering your unborn child, your own flesh and blood is the answer. I really can't understand it.
this whole abortion deal is like peta, i would be surprised if mab (mothers agaisnt abortion, it probably exists theres always a mother against something) signed a deal with peta for protesting abilities. they both like irrationally stand around shouting about rights of things that arnt exactly people. the unborn "living child"'s "rights" supercede wishes of the mother, abortions are not just performed in back alleys on whores and skanks, though it will be if the people fanatics claiming to be the good guys get their way, people need to grow the fuck up and take off their ridiculous "right to life" shit and go protest something that actually effects them and shit they should give a fuck about like the destruction of their personal rights by an obtrusive fanatic government, instead they stand around with signs and shirts yelling about how unborn children are children too and have rights that shit, born children dont have half the damn time

I'm inferring nothing. The passage of yours I quoted last post stated that if the mother and father agree on the abortion, then it is an option. However, with no father on the scene, you say that the woman better have a very good medical reason for an abortion.

Correct. There has to be a medical reason to abort a living being.

Why can a father and mother decide better than a mother on her own? Why should a couple be permitted an abortion while a lone mother has to go the adoption road?

The father should have a say. After all, he helped create the life so shouldn't he have a stake into what happens to the life that was created? As for the mother going the adoption route, I guess you missed the part about there being a legitament medical reason to have an abortion.

All I'm inferring is that you've got some consistency issues, homes.

Actually I don't!

The father should have a say. After all, he helped create the life...


Yes - because, after all, she only has to share her body and resources with it for nine months.

HE had to do the HARD work... those 3 minutes of poorly lit squirming...

That's fine but if you want my opinion, if there is an abortion, it should be decided by BOTH of the parties involved! That being the father AND mother. If the father is unknown then there better be a very good medical reason other than Morning Sickness and tiredness.

This is what you wrote. In this paragraph, you say that a father and mother can opt for an abortion, whereas a mother with an absent babydaddy needs a very good medical reason.

This certainly seems inconsistent to me, but if you're confident that you've got a consistent view of your beliefs, it may be you're just not communicating them clearly.

When a man can take over carrying the fetus then- well let him- because otherwise he gets no say in my decision of what to do with said fetus.

That was one of the funiest things I've read in a long time.

Can you prove that Jesus loves children? More to the point, can you prove that he loves foetuses? More to the point, can you prove that Jesus had any inkling of what a foetus actually was?

hmmm did you read my post after I said this? No I guess you didn't. But since you brought it up, Yes I can prove it.

13)People were bringing little children to Jesus to have him touch them, but the disciples rebuked them. 14)When Jesus saw this, he was indignant. He said to the, "Let the little children come to me and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of god belongs to such as these. 15)I tell you the truth, anyone who will not receive the kingdom of God like a little child will never enter it." 16)And he took the children in his arms, put his hands on them and blessed them.

As for harming a fetus, they had full knowledge of what a fetus was.

21)If men who are fighting hit a pregnant woman and she gives birth prematurely but there is no serious injury, the offender must be fined whatever the woman's husband demands and the court allows. 23)But if there is serious injury, you are to take life for life, 24)eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, 25)burn for burn, wound for wound, brusie for bruise.

Also, you can read Psalm 139

It's not in scripture. There is no place where Jesus questions current thinking about abortion or foetuses - despite the many other topics he DID choose to discuss.

Well probably because there wasn't abortions back then maybe? That could be way. Judging by what Jesus has talked about, I'm sure that he would've talked about abortion if it was a big issue back then.

So - it is fairly safe to assume that this issue was worthy of no mention - in other words, that Jesus accepted the thinking of his time.

Because there asn't abortions back then. The bible says that all life is precious. Read Psalm 139

And, even ignoring other sources, within the frame of the bible, there is clear precedent for the allowance of abortion, provided that the 'father' doesn't object and that the mother isn't harmed.

Read up on the studies done on women that have had abortions. Breast Cancer is up among this group as well as emotional health problems.

It's an Old-Covenant/New-Covenant thing. If Jesus didn't revoke it, it stands.

And can you point it out to me since I don't seem to see it in the concordance.

Women figured out ways to cause miscarraige long before surgical abortions were available. During medeival times there were different amounts of penance required depending on how far along the pregnancy was and the sex of the fetus.

Read up on the studies done on women that have had abortions. Breast Cancer is up among this group as well as emotional health problems.- There have been several studies in this area and they all seem to come to different conclusions.

Women figured out ways to cause miscarraige long before surgical abortions were available. During medeival times there were different amounts of penance required depending on how far along the pregnancy was and the sex of the fetus.

Hmmm, I'm going to question the last line here! How did they know the sex of the fetus in the Middle Ages?

Read up on the studies done on women that have had abortions. Breast Cancer is up among this group as well as emotional health problems.- There have been several studies in this area and they all seem to come to different conclusions.

Most of the one that were made public indicate that there is an increase chance of Breast cancer and mental diorders. Haven't seen anything else to the contrary.

Hmmm, I'm going to question the last line here! How did they know the sex of the fetus in the Middle Ages?

Well, since it was only for determining penance, I'd say they'd look when it was out.

Well, since it was only for determining penance, I'd say they'd look when it was out.

Yea! DuH!!!! LOL!!! half asleep here!!! LOL

*hands you a mug full of steaming liquid*

Behold! The Power Of Coffee!

*hands you a mug full of steam liquid*

Behold! The Power Of Coffee!

*Takes it*

Thanks my friend!

Abortion has claimed over 30 million children. These stupid whores who can't control themselves decide to act immoraly and then when they get pregnant decide to have their baby butchered.
30 million POTENTIAL children. I don't call a week-old cluster of cells a person. And how can you assume that all aborted fetuses come from reckless sex? Birth control products can fail. Funny that you mentioned Hitler above--his mom seriously considered getting an abortion.

*hands you a mug full of steaming liquid*

Behold! The Power Of Coffee!
I'm wearing a shirt with a caffeine molecule printed on it!
Yaaay!
A friend of mine had caffeine pills with her today and I borrowed some to stay awake. Unfortunately, I can *feel* my will breaking and my addiction returning.
Oh well. Who cares? GO CAFFEINE!

this whole abortion deal is like peta, i would be surprised if mab (mothers agaisnt abortion, it probably exists theres always a mother against something) signed a deal with peta for protesting abilities. they both like irrationally stand around shouting about rights of things that arnt exactly people. the unborn "living child"'s "rights" supercede wishes of the mother, abortions are not just performed in back alleys on whores and skanks, though it will be if the people fanatics claiming to be the good guys get their way, people need to grow the fuck up and take off their ridiculous "right to life" shit and go protest something that actually effects them and shit they should give a fuck about like the destruction of their personal rights by an obtrusive fanatic government, instead they stand around with signs and shirts yelling about how unborn children are children too and have rights that shit, born children dont have half the damn time

You obviously aren't real big on kids are you? I don't understand your hateful ramble of why I shouldn't care about the unborn. I'm sorry if that isn't a priority of yours. The fact is that abortion is only about convienience, so people can avoid responsiblity. I'm pregnant? Ooops, I'll take care of it. I would feel much better if it is a heartwrenching decision instead of a casual affair of going to the doctor to get a parasite removed. You don't care about this issue. Fine. Perhaps you can give an arguement instead of cursing every other word? Try it so maybe people will try to listen to you.

The fact is that abortion is only about convienience, so people can avoid responsiblity.
bullshit like that is the cause of my hateful ramble

bullshit like that is the cause of my hateful ramble

The truth can be hard to swallow. That is why most people get abortions. To avoid having the kid.

The truth can be hard to swallow. That is why most people get abortions. To avoid having the kid.
yes im sure you have plenty of medical evidence to back that up...from doctors of religious studies

yes im sure you have plenty of medical evidence to back that up...from doctors of religious studies

Why the hell else do women get abortions? Circumstances like rape and incest are in the very minority. Women get pregnant the regular way. They get an abortion. They don't want the baby. Is there something I'm missing?

The truth can be hard to swallow. That is why most people get abortions. To avoid having the kid.

Collective cry of the intelligent:

Well duh.

Why the hell else do women get abortions? Circumstances like rape and incest are in the very minority. Women get pregnant the regular way. They get an abortion. They don't want the baby. Is there something I'm missing?
there are two things that will happen when we outlaw abortions to appease the "morally just"

1) abortions will happen in back alleys and people willd ie from it
2) population will increase exponentially and not to nice rich families who can afford it

hmmm did you read my post after I said this? No I guess you didn't. But since you brought it up, Yes I can prove it.

As for harming a fetus, they had full knowledge of what a fetus was.

Also, you can read Psalm 139


It doesn't say that Jesus loved children, does it... it says he told the people that children would get into the kingdom of heaven (maybe, if you interpret it that way), and that he laid hands upon them... but it doesn't set them in any fashion as more beloved than, for example, a leper.

Unless your argument is that Love is Leprosy... or maybe that children are a disease..

Further - just because 'they' knew what a foetus is... as in the verse you posted... doesn't mean that the man called Jesus had any idea. I know what a 'shamshir' is, but you'll find many people who don't.


Well probably because there wasn't abortions back then maybe? That could be way. Judging by what Jesus has talked about, I'm sure that he would've talked about abortion if it was a big issue back then.

Because there asn't abortions back then. The bible says that all life is precious. Read Psalm 139


There clearly were abortions back then.. the very verse you posted describes an abortion - not only that, but it says it's okay, provided the mother isn't harmed, and the father doesn't object.

Go back and read it if you wish.


Read up on the studies done on women that have had abortions. Breast Cancer is up among this group as well as emotional health problems.


And I personally knew a girl who committed suicide because she HAD the child she wanted to abort... personally, I think potential breast-cancer could be argued as less 'life-threatening' than suicide.


And can you point it out to me since I don't seem to see it in the concordance.

What is it you want me to show you? The fact that Jesus revoked certain parts of the Old Covenant?

If you need help finding THAT in scripture, you are beyond MY capacity to help.

IMO, that is just dead wrong.

Another blind Bush hater...

Jesus would think our good deed in Iraq a noble one.... freeing a people from a ruthless dictator is good work undoubtedly in Jesus' eyes.


but at what cost? So many civilian lives were either taken or destroyed that the freedom is a bit of a moot point now..

It doesn't say that Jesus loved children, does it... it says he told the people that children would get into the kingdom of heaven (maybe, if you interpret it that way), and that he laid hands upon them... but it doesn't set them in any fashion as more beloved than, for example, a leper.

Unless your argument is that Love is Leprosy... or maybe that children are a disease..

Further - just because 'they' knew what a foetus is... as in the verse you posted... doesn't mean that the man called Jesus had any idea. I know what a 'shamshir' is, but you'll find many people who don't.



There clearly were abortions back then.. the very verse you posted describes an abortion - not only that, but it says it's okay, provided the mother isn't harmed, and the father doesn't object.

Go back and read it if you wish.



And I personally knew a girl who committed suicide because she HAD the child she wanted to abort... personally, I think potential breast-cancer could be argued as less 'life-threatening' than suicide.



What is it you want me to show you? The fact that Jesus revoked certain parts of the Old Covenant?

If you need help finding THAT in scripture, you are beyond MY capacity to help.

I've always thought the reasoning behind the whole "a child will lead you into heaven" was because children are generally unbiased (unless someone teaches them otherwise)...is this remotely similar to anyone else's interpretation?

Hm, i am still waiting for an answer about how adopting all unwanted children should work. Come on pro-lifers, its just 30 million kids each year... ;)

Hm, i am still waiting for an answer about how adopting all unwanted children should work. Come on pro-lifers, its just 30 million kids each year... ;)

We'll draft in the Easter Bunny and Santa to deliver them to childless parents.

I propose that we legalize non optional 300'th trimester abortions. Just think of all the money we would save :)