Leave Sex Ed out of school-isn't that what they keep whining about?

Threedee said:
Pro-deathers routinely take their children of that age to pro-abortion rallies.
Click to expand...

Ahem. I'm creating a new analogy and letting it debut on this board.

It's called Roeder's Law and will be the equivalent of Godwin's Law. (I would have called it Terry's Law but that would confuse it with Terry v. Ohio.)

For those who haven't heard of Godwin, it's a theory that the longer a thread got, the more likely it was that a Nazi comparison would be dragged into the discussion. Roeder's Law will follow that format except substituting abortion for Nazis.

Congrats, Threedee, you inspire me. :cof1:
 
PostmodernProphet said:
amazing.....47 million women have needed their lives saved since Roe v Wade......and no one here thinks your a liar, really......
Click to expand...
Don't change the subject. We aren't talking about abortion. We're talking about intact D&E which you brought up using the misnomer "Partial Birth Abortion". The very fact that you used that phrase is a strong indicator that you don't know what you're talking about.
 
apple0154 said:
You're on a roll today, Mott!

Perhaps we should combine it and ask how old a child should be before we tell them the reason the church is against abortion is because we need an ample supply of young men so we can send them to be slaughtered in war.

We can refer to the deal between Napoleon III of France (not the Bonaparte dude) and the Pope in 1869. France had a shortage of eligible young men (soldiers) so in exchange for Napoleon telling the world the Pope was infallible the Pope would declare God was against all abortions. That way the Pope's influence would get a huge boost and France's female population would bear lots of children providing young men to be slaughtered later on.

Truly a deal made in HELL.
Click to expand...
Exactly. That was the hypocrisy I was pointing out. The majority of the conservatives on this board who so vocally oppose abortion as the killing of baby's were the same people who had no compunction of consciousness for beating the war drums to send our young men and women over to Iraq to die in an immoral war that also killed thousands of innocent Iraqi's. If they could at least be consistent with their "holier then though" attitudes I'd give them credit but most of them are simply hypocritical as hell.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
Exactly. That was the hypocrisy I was pointing out. The majority of the conservatives on this board who so vocally oppose abortion as the killing of baby's were the same people who had no compunction of consciousness for beating the war drums to send our young men and women over to Iraq to die in an immoral war that also killed thousands of innocent Iraqi's. If they could at least be consistent with their "holier then though" attitudes I'd give them credit but most of them are simply hypocritical as hell.
Click to expand...
Yes, it is! They don't care about them once they leave the wound, this has been proven over and over! In fact, there are some people that think that is what lower class humans are made for, to do labor and fight wars!
 
Rana said:
Yes, it is! They don't care about them once they leave the wound, this has been proven over and over! In fact, there are some people that think that is what lower class humans are made for, to do labor and fight wars!
Click to expand...

in all fairness, there is (was?) a group in orange county ca that offered the following to pregnant women as an alternative to abortion

prenatal care
natal care
post natal care
adoption service to those that did not want to keep their baby

they put their money where their mouth was :)

the rest as you say, do not care once the baby is born :(
 
apple0154 said:
I'm sure you consider yourself much wiser than the people in the past but I can assure you our ancestors understood pregnancy and birth was a process. Considering the majority of them hunted/butchered and farmed they probably knew much more about the process than most people today and one thing they knew was one pregnant cow was just one cow and they didn't have two cows until there was a birth. And they didn't count their chickens until the eggs hatched. And three children and a pregnant wife was not the same as four children and a wife.

Talk about getting a clue. Do try.
Click to expand...

not all of them......you certainly, but there would be some wiser than I.....and I hate to burst your bubble, but I know for a fact that a cow expecting a calf used to cost more than one that wasn't.......still does, actually....which just goes to show you that the average cow is worth more than your bull.......
 
apple0154 said:
Study your history. Or Google the time line on abortion.

From souls entering the fetus at different times for males and females to quickening (the first movement of the fetus) indicating a human being had just popped into existence there has been all kinds of absurd, wacky ideas throughout history.

Now, all the rage is a fertilized cell of pin head size is a human being. The only pin heads that are human beings are the ones who subscribe to such nonsense.
Click to expand...
silly apple....we've heard your arguments about abortion before.....we all know history has never shown us a belief as absurd as your own.......
 
Mott the Hoople said:
Don't change the subject. We aren't talking about abortion. We're talking about intact D&E which you brought up using the misnomer "Partial Birth Abortion". The very fact that you used that phrase is a strong indicator that you don't know what you're talking about.
Click to expand...

yawn.....not a change of subject.....just pointing out the rarity of an abortion done because of the health of the mother.....
 
Onceler said:
That's such a boring, predictable bomb to try to throw.

I'm sorry you think it's "murder." The court didn't, and most people don't, for many decades now. Because it isn't.
Click to expand...

I do think it's murder but that's a different argument....as you will see, I used the word kill, which is unarguably accurate....
 
Mott the Hoople said:
Exactly. That was the hypocrisy I was pointing out. The majority of the conservatives on this board who so vocally oppose abortion as the killing of baby's were the same people who had no compunction of consciousness for beating the war drums to send our young men and women over to Iraq to die in an immoral war that also killed thousands of innocent Iraqi's. If they could at least be consistent with their "holier then though" attitudes I'd give them credit but most of them are simply hypocritical as hell.
Click to expand...

shoe......foot......it's okay to kill 47 million over forty years because thousands got killed by the terrorists we are trying to stop..........I'm sorry I'm immoral and that I'm not as holy as you........now will you stop killing unborn children?.......
 
Don Quixote said:
i tried the above web site and my security software warned that the site is dangerous because it has malware associated with it and that i should not open it :(
Click to expand...

lol.....you've got to be kidding me.....it's a search engine that provides information on adoption agencies.....Catholic adoption agencies, Jewish adoption agencies, Morman adoption agencies.....Baptist, Lutheran, Adventists......shucks if there was such a thing I bet they would even list atheist adoption agencies.....not that there would be much chance of such a place existing of course.......
 
PostmodernProphet said:
yawn.....not a change of subject.....just pointing out the rarity of an abortion done because of the health of the mother.....
Click to expand...
No, I pointed out that you don't know what you are talking about when it comes to the medical procedure known as intact dilation and extraction or you would know that it is not a form of abortion.
 
PostmodernProphet said:
shoe......foot......it's okay to kill 47 million over forty years because thousands got killed by the terrorists we are trying to stop..........I'm sorry I'm immoral and that I'm not as holy as you........now will you stop killing unborn children?.......
Click to expand...
Well then I'm sorry for calling you a hypocrite then. You're just plain stupid. Not one 911 terrorist came from Iraq nor did Iraq present a clear and present danger to our nation. Never did nor were they ever a terrorist threat until the USA invaded Iraq. The fact that you advocate killing innocent Iraqi's because you were stupid enough to believe a pack of lies that were fed to you doesn't make you any less immoral for advocating the killing of innocent Iraqi's. Which means you are no better then those who advocate abortion on demand as a form of birth control.
 
Dixie said:
Biological facts don't lie. Once the sperm and egg conceive, human life is formed. You can debate viability, worthiness of consideration, stage of development, size, etc., but you can't debate the biological facts. Well... YOU can, because you're a stupid uneducated idiotic moron, but normal educated people can't.
Click to expand...

It is not a human being, you Doofus. Human beings are visible to the naked eye. Human beings do not live inside each other. Our entire form of government and social understandings are based on human beings as individual entities.

As for the start of life that's another bogus argument. The egg is alive and the sperm is alive. When combining two things that are alive of course the result is going to be something alive.

DNA is ONE way to classify something and when it comes to DNA it can't tell the difference between a dead person and an alive person. Also, in some cases, a person has two sets of DNA.

Why use such a general "test" to determine what is and what isn't a human being thereby restricting the most basic rights of women?

Furthermore, from the New England Journal of Medicine, (Excerpt) High rates of successful pregnancy after in vitro fertilization depend on placing more than one embryo into the mother, a practice resulting in a 30-to-35-fold increase in dizygotic-twin deliveries. Increased frequencies of twin-associated anomalies might also therefore be expected. Chimerism, the presence in a single person of cells derived from two or more zygotes, is one such rare anomaly. It is usually ascertained through anomalous blood-grouping results or (for XX/XY chimeras) sex reversal or intersex.

We used DNA polymorphisms to investigate a 46,XX/46,XY hermaphrodite conceived by in vitro fertilization. We found not only that the child is a chimera, but also that he must have resulted from amalgamation of two embryos, each derived from an independent, separately fertilized ovum. (End) (Emphasis added)

The bolded part shows not only can an individual have two sets of DNA but, additionally, the person is made from the combining of two embryos. According to you, if an embryo is a human being that means the human being discussed here is actually two human beings in one.

Question. Is this one of the first movies you watched during your formative years?
 
Trying to figure that out.

These people are so misguided, and I don't want to silence her.

I don't want to silence her, I want you to hear her.

I want you to ask yourself, do you believe that? That mothers kill their children because they care about motherhood?
 
PostmodernProphet said:
silly apple....we've heard your arguments about abortion before.....we all know history has never shown us a belief as absurd as your own.......
Click to expand...

Really? Like the soul entering male fetuses before female fetuses. I can picture two souls having a beer together and one lamenting it has to enter a female. That must have been a drag considering the way women were treated in those days. I suppose that explains why souls entered females later. I bet those poor souls waited until the last minute. :(

Then there's "quickening" when it was said the soul entered the fetus. That would be analogous to "last call" at the pub. While some were saying, "One for the road" others mumbled "I'll take one for the uterus."

Yep, can't say history had absurd beliefs. Perhaps you prefer the term bizarre? Ludicrous? Psycho?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top