Home - List All Discussions

Would like to change prochoicers minds without use of abusive language

by: coco

Hello to the prochoicers out there, I am not one of the liked ones on here because I dont fit the "prolife" mold. But just to let you know that I am "prolife", I am not here to attack those that dont agree with mystance, I would just like for those"prochoice" to hopefully keep an open mind and a listening ear and my goal is to HOPEFULLY change some minds in a positive manner. I DONT have the answers to ALL the questions you may have for me, (I am not asshamed to admit it) but in life you learn and you question things as you go on. I consider myself to be a good listener with an open mind and willing to learn. I have been through TOUGH times in my life and made PLENTY of mistakes so the self righteous B.S dont come from my mouth. Yes TECHNICALLY the embryo of a gestation period of 6-7 weeks is from the science stand point a "parisite" its life is being systained by the mother. But we are not talking about a tape worm or lice we are talking about a DEVELOPING human being. After 1 month of gestation you will find the beginings of ALL major organ systems and after 5 weeks of development the child is developing a central nervous system,cartiliage. You may argue that a tape worm or another form of parisitic being have a similar devlopmental stage similiar to a human embryo. This maybe true, but come on, thier is a TOTAL diffrence of value between a lice and a human. I am pro birthcontrol,pro adoption etc... but terminating a child is terminating a life.

reply from: coco

Hello, I am not sure if i welcomed you! Anyway human life is a human life, I can tell you this I (and I assume most other people that care about people)would rather have an animal killed in a life or death situation then any human. FYI, I am for animal testing for MEDICAL purposes ONLY!!

reply from: coco

I dont know how to answer that question, I thought I did in my last post. I dont know maybe because we as humans value other humans?? Like I said I would rather have my dog die then kill another human. do you see human life more important then anyother life, why or why not???

reply from: deannat

Hi coco! Nice to meet you.
I understand where you're coming from with regards to a developing human being. As a pro-choicer, I have never doubted that the z/e/f is human. However, as long as the z/e/f must reside inside the woman's body and rely on her bodily resources in order to survive, it is impacting the physical health and well being of the woman and it should be up to her as to whether or not a pregnancy should continue.

reply from: jadams

*** WALL OF TEXT ALERT ***
I agree with deannat ... since no person has the right to use another's physical bodily resources for survival without the provider's consent, then the provider has the right to determine how - or if - their resources are being used.
I'm not an advocate of legal abortion because I love the idea, but in my view, autonomy wins out. In addition, what would happen if it were criminalized? What would be the punishment? If abortion is murder, then both the pregnant woman and the abortion provider would have to be convicted of Murder 1 because of premeditation. That's 20 years to life, or the death sentence.
(Never mind the legal precedent of forcing someone to provide their bodily resources to another ... would organ donation be compulsory, even if the donor's not dead yet?)
Our prison / legal / judicial systems will be overwhelmed and taxpayer money would pay for it all. Never mind the thousands of children who would be left without a mother (or any parent, potentially), thrown into foster care, or just abandoned. Or, for that matter, the doctors and nurses who still believed they were providing a valuable service. Their incarceration will mean others will undoubtedly die as a shortage of health care professionals cripples our already broken health care system.
Or, we take a fraction of the $$ that would be needed for the above train wreck and educate our youth about sex, STDs, peer pressure, relationship building, decision making, birth control, and abstinence. Heck, let's take some more and provide universal health care and better job availability for pregnant women. (In other words, the things we're NOT doing now). Considering the causes of abortion, I would guess that this would help matters in a way that looks at the source, not the end result. Abortion goes down as a result of a more well-armed and educated population, and everyone's happy.

reply from: coco

Yes vixing I TOTALLY agree humans have done and still do most of the damage to the earth! But that doesnt mean that we should kill some of the unborn.What seperates us from animals is reason, youre right EVERYTHING has a reason and purpose, but I believe most people agree that humans are at the "top" of the chain. Vexing, You are free to believe what you will, but I just dont think that human embryos, etc should be put to death. And just for an added note, I also beleive that you should put your money were your mouth is I am NOT one of these prolifers that want abortions stopped but dont adopt a child that I want to "save".I HOPE to adopt a child that was brought into this world and the mother chose to adopt rather than abort.

reply from: coco

Hi nice to meet you too, you are right the z/e/f is in the womens body, but if it is not causing any physical helath concerns, she should care it to term and give it up for adoption. I just think that if you are not able to have a child then you should use 2 forms of birth control (condoms,b.c pills, spermacide,etc) just to make sure you will not get pregnant!! If you use 2 chances are you will avoid a pregnancy!!

reply from: coco

nice to meet you jadams, you are SO SO SO right I TOTALLY agree with your 2nd comment, I am a prolifer that UNDERSTANDS if you want to decrease abortions you MUST up the social services for these child and families you are "saving". There is not 1 single solution to this "problem" people will have sex, there is NOTHING you can do or say to stop that it is apart of human nature, but education is a tool that could "curb the problem".

reply from: deannat

Hi nice to meet you too, you are right the z/e/f is in the womens body, but if it is not causing any physical helath concerns, she should care it to term and give it up for adoption. I just think that if you are not able to have a child then you should use 2 forms of birth control (condoms,b.c pills, spermacide,etc) just to make sure you will not get pregnant!! If you use 2 chances are you will avoid a pregnancy!!
Unfortunately, not all woman can use all forms of birth control. I know several women who can't take pills or use IUDs, for example. Condoms can break and spermacides are messy and unreliable. Even when a woman uses protection faithfully every time she has sex, birth control can still fail. In such cases, I think the woman should still have the option for abortion, if that's what she wants.
As for adoption, that is a viable option only if it's the baby that is unwanted and not the pregnancy. If it is the medical condition of pregnancy that is unwanted, adoption isn't going to solve the problem.

reply from: coco

dennat these women that are allergic to the pills can use condoms that contain spermicide and other forms of b.c. ,the withdrawl or even the rythum method. Point is if thier is ENOUGH education about sex THERE WILL be a decline in abortion rates.

reply from: jadams

You are preaching to the choir. It's the "pro-aborts" who are pushing for the services I listed above, for the purpose of preventing unwanted pregnancy (among other things, like it being the right thing to do). It is the "pro-life" contingent, on the other hand, that commonly http://www.vote-smart.org/issue_keyvote_detail.php?cs_id=V3489 that would allow for such education and other resources to exist. http://www.vote-smart.org/issue_keyvote_member.php?cs_id=V3489
As a result, we have "abstinence only 'education'" - which will kill our youth through the http://oversight.house.gov/Documents/20041201102153-50247.pdf, and objections to the HPV vaccine http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2007/feb/07020505.html, which will kill them out of sheer cruelty. To treat either one - pregnancy or STDs - as some kind of punishment for "irresponsible behavior" values neither the life of the woman nor the life she is carrying - only the pride of those who think their beliefs are better than everyone else's.

reply from: yoda

Your moral equation seems to be that the worth of a human life is less than the worth of ANY "impact" on a woman's "health and well being".
That about says it all..... that is the basis of the difference between our side and your side.... we value innocent human life a bit higher than that.

reply from: yoda

"Autonomy" for the mother justifies the death of the baby? Again, your scale of values is totally the opposite from ours... and that's no surprise.
What would happen? Well, the first thing that would happen is that fewer than 4,000 babies a day would be electively killed, for a start. Lives would be saved... although I'm not sure you care about that sort of thing.
Punishment? Why debate that here, why not let the states decide on that? After all, criminal laws are the jurisdiction of the states, for the most part. If we remove the artificial, arbitrary legal distinction between born and unborn, the we don't even need to answer the question... the laws are already on the books in all 50 states and the District of Columbia.

reply from: yoda

Elective abortions in this country are done for "health reasons" (mother OR child) less than 6% of the time. About 94% of them are done for "non-medical" (elective) reasons.
Let's concentrate on the elective ones and let the doctors decide on the "medical" ones, okay?

reply from: yoda

Instead of making broad, sweeping stereotyping characterizations of "proaborts and prolifers", why not discuss some specific legislation and let the posters HERE state their views on them?
Wouldn't that be more productive than trying to smear your opponents?

reply from: jadams

Instead of making broad, sweeping stereotyping characterizations of "proaborts and prolifers", why not discuss some specific legislation and let the posters HERE state their views on them?
Wouldn't that be more productive than trying to smear your opponents?
... which is why I provided links in my original post. Please read them.

reply from: yoda

... which is why I provided links in my original post. Please read them.
I don't think you understand my objection. We are not responsible for the contents or opinions expressed in your links. We are individuals with individual opinions, we are not "them".

reply from: jadams

So a ZEF has more rights than a born human? The weak have the right to use the bodily resources of the strong? What precedent does this set? ZEFs and women cannot have equal rights. One has to be held inferior to the other because of the unique biological relationship that exists.
Some may be saved. However, illegal abortions will STILL happen. Your precious fetuses ... and their mothers, now ... will STILL die. So then what? Would you THEN look to education and birth control to address the cause of the problem? Seeing as how the GOP dominated congress and the God fearing president refused to do anything about it, why don't you switch gears and focus on things that will have a chance of happening?
I know it makes you feel better to think I want thousands of babies killed ... but if you read my posts, you'd see that what I am recommending would result in fewer abortions than your sacred cow of criminalization ever could. Ever wonder why half of the abortions done in the world are illegal? Another solution has to be implemented.
So in other words, you're advocating the train wreck I described above with no acknowledgment of the source of the problem. That's pretty sad.

reply from: jadams

Understood - I should have said "pro choice" / "pro life" legislators. And I think it's pretty telling that so many of them have the same point of view on such preventative measures.
If you DO believe in prevention and education, then there are bridges we can build. But the name calling and moral-high-horse stuff has got to stop.

reply from: yoda

Is that a personal "you" or a collective "you"?
Speaking for myself, I do try to limit name-calling. But as far as morality goes, I will continue to stress the moral aspects of abortion, because I think that is the only rational secular objection to elective abortion.

reply from: yoda

In the case of gestation, yes they do. Gestation is a totally unique human experience, not comparable to any experience we have as born humans.
True, but in much smaller numbers, IMO. And that matters, to me. Besides, murder has been illegal for centuries, and it STILL happens!
What's sad to me is that you don't even seem to have a moral objection to elective abortion.
"Morality cannot be legislated, but behavior can be regulated. Judicial decrees may not change the heart, but they can restrain the heartless".
-Dr. Martin Luther King

reply from: coco

You are preaching to the choir. It's the "pro-aborts" who are pushing for the services I listed above, for the purpose of preventing unwanted pregnancy (among other things, like it being the right thing to do). It is the "pro-life" contingent, on the other hand, that commonly http://www.vote-smart.org/issue_keyvote_detail.php?cs_id=V3489 that would allow for such education and other resources to exist. http://www.vote-smart.org/issue_keyvote_member.php?cs_id=V3489
As a result, we have "abstinence only 'education'" - which will kill our youth through the http://oversight.house.gov/Documents/20041201102153-50247.pdf, and objections to the HPV vaccine http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2007/feb/07020505.html, which will kill them out of sheer cruelty. To treat either one - pregnancy or STDs - as some kind of punishment for "irresponsible behavior" values neither the life of the woman nor the life she is carrying - only the pride of those who think their beliefs are better than everyone else's.
You know what that is were I STRONGLY believe that people that want sex ed should have it taught to thier kids and the ones that dont have a parent write a note and they would be excused from class!! I think parents NEED to understand that little Suzy and Johnny are going to be sexual intimate if they choose to REGAURDLESS of what mommy and daddy say!! My mother is thinks that I am a horriable person for saying that when my sons are of age I WILL give them the approriate sex education INCLUDING a condom deminstration and I will ALSO buy condoms for them if THEY are too embarissed. I would rather have my sons come to me and have the "condom" talk then come to me telling me that they have HIV.

reply from: coco

Instead of making broad, sweeping stereotyping characterizations of "proaborts and prolifers", why not discuss some specific legislation and let the posters HERE state their views on them?
Wouldn't that be more productive than trying to smear your opponents?
Yoda I think that he is stating from a political standpoint that those the GENERALLY vote for abortion restrictions tend to vote against ways to curb unwanted pregnancies. You know what he or she is TOTALLY right, those that do tend to sway away from LEGAL abortion DO want to restrict sex ed and avalibility of bc pills.

reply from: jadams

Yes, but punishment for murder actually decreases its occurrence. Half of the abortions in the world are illegal. If 100% were legal, then I'd agree that criminalization would make a difference ... but it won't. Africa is an example of the "abstinence only" policies and their effect on the local population.
Again ... how would you deal with the illegal abortions that will still happen here? How would you address the overwhelming surge of new "criminals"? Would you rather spend your money on punishment, or preventing the problem in the first place? With your solution of outlawing abortion, babies will still die, as will the women carrying them. There is a more effective way.
I do, actually. I want every pregnancy to be wanted. And, if a friend or loved one were pregnant, I would do everything I could to make sure they had the resources to provide for their pregnancy and child rearing without fear for poverty, abuse, or physical harm. I would want them to choose not to abort.
But, for as much as I would personally dislike it, I concede that it still remains her choice terminate the pregnancy if she wishes. Is it a life? Yes. But life is a developmental continuum; I can't look at a fertilized egg and see a person any more than I can look at a ball of yarn and see a sweater. You do, and that's where our points of view differ. For as much as I acknowledge that there are two lives we are discussing, I believe the rights of the born outweigh the rights of the unborn.

reply from: jadams

Thank you ... that was my point. If you look at the POV of these folks in Congress, you will see a very strong correlation between "pro-life" views and their opposition to BC, sex ed, and even some aspects of welfare reform. That was the point I was getting at - and it was the reason why I switched sides. If they hate abortion so much, why are they ignoring the ways to decrease it?

reply from: coco

Jadams, I understand that abortions just as you pointed out about murder, will NEVER be TOTALLY erased. As for the punishment for these people that assist in abortion and those that have them, I am not sure what the punishment for them should be. I "sit on the fence" about the whole death penalty, so I am not sure, as I stated before I dont know ALL the answers. As far as your argument about the whole ball of yarn, I understand what you point is but I think that there is a HUGE diffrence between a z/e/f and a ball of yarn.
FYI I didnt read the whole thread, I just seen your "building bridges" comment.

reply from: coco

Thank you ... that was my point. If you look at the POV of these folks in Congress, you will see a very strong correlation between "pro-life" views and their opposition to BC, sex ed, and even some aspects of welfare reform. That was the point I was getting at - and it was the reason why I switched sides. If they hate abortion so much, why are they ignoring the ways to decrease it?
That is why I say that I dont fit the "mold" when people think of a "prolifer". I understand that abortions are wrong because I feel that they violate a persons (unborn) rights, but I also think that if you want to ban abortions you must also INCREASE funding for those that are going to be born so you MUST increase spending on welfare,healthcare,daycare, and education. These are the services that would be used by those that are "saved" from the death by vaccum. And your right the political leaders that are "prolife" GENERALLY cut such NEEDED programs which is A** backwards (you want to 'save kids" but you dont want to let them have the BASIC nessicities of life, A** backards ideology). Anyway we agree, but then you have those that are religious and say "this is not what the bible teaches" and I think that the bible has NO place in OUR country because not ALL of this nations citizens are judeo-christians!!

reply from: jadams

I don't mean to give you a hard time, since I think we are in agreement in many ways ... but I want to emphasize that the punishment issue is one of the hearts of the matter.
I have heard some abortion opponents (especially in the political world - I think Fred Thomson was one) say they would fine or otherwise penalize doctors for providing abortions, potentially letting the woman go unpunished. Why? Why would there be such a light punishment for what they believe to be murder? It is either a life or it is not. Unless they believe, as we "pro-aborts" do, that there IS a difference between a ZEF and a born person.

reply from: GodsLaw4Us2Live

God says it is illegal to murder another human being because we are made in God's image, we are children of God, and we are commanded to be like him. Since God is love, we are commanded to be love.
In your evolutionary thought, you seem to be proposing that ending the life of a plant is equivalent to ending the life of a toddler. In fact, you seem to suggest it's worse, for, you say, a human will damage the earth whereas the plant will commit no such atrocities. Kill the humans to save the planet seems to be your motto.
God says Satan is the ruler of this earth, and his sons are about the business of murder and damaging this planet, that much is true. The majority of people are selfish and destructive. Unless they consider their ways and chart another course, these people are fugitives and vagabonds on the earth; ultimately, they shall be evicted.
A human life is of incalculable value. We have the potential to live forever and bring life, peace and happiness to the Universe as co-inheritors with Christ.

reply from: yoda

I won't argue that point, because it's totally irrelevant to anything we are discussing here.
We are all individuals, and we are not responsible for how "certain legislators" vote on anything. And since those legislators are not here on this forum to respond, I think we ought to stick to what is actually said by the actual posters here.
Don't you think that would be a good idea?

reply from: yoda

So do laws against abortion, according to a study done by a Harvard-MIT group: http://www.prolifeamerica.com/fusetalk/forum/messageview.cfm?catid=7&threadid=3132&enterthread=y

It's pretty simple, really. Once you remove the arbitrary, false legal distinction between born and unborn, no new laws are needed.
Interestingly, the ONLY way to achieve that goal is to make sure that all "unwanted" pregnancies are aborted. So that's you goal, right?
It doesn't matter, really. You're not a biologist or a medical researcher who is being asked to identify the species of a fertilized egg, so why is that important to you? You know that scientifically a fertilized human egg is a member of the same species as you, so you know it's a human being.
See, there's that old "euphemistic phrase" again. You try to make killing a baby sound less objectionable by saying that a woman's rights "outweigh" a baby's rights..... as if we didn't know what you meant. We do.
But this is the only instance in all of human experience, as far as I know, where it is alleged that the possession of "more rights" by one individual entitles that individual to kill the possessor of "lesser rights".
Don't you find that just a tiny bit disgusting? A tiny, tiny little bit?

reply from: Hereforareason

"So a ZEF has more rights than a born human? The weak have the right to use the bodily resources of the strong? What precedent does this set? ZEFs and women cannot have equal rights. One has to be held inferior to the other because of the unique biological relationship that exists."
An unborn child does not have more rights than it's mother, it has the right to live. Neither is inferior. You are starting with a false view.
"I think parents NEED to understand that little Suzy and Johnny are going to be sexual intimate if they choose to REGAURDLESS of what mommy and daddy say!!"
Saying that "they are going to do it before marriage anyway, so give them "safe" options" is the same as saying "They will drink and drive so let's put some special device in their car to help them get home drunk."
That encourages the action. They have birth control/condoms, they are told it can be done safely so they go for it. If people thought they could drive safely drunk more would do it. Because woman think that abortion is legal and safe, more have them and more of them die.
When you boil it down, kids need to be taught to respect authorities and we need to tell them the truth. It is wrong to have sex outside of marriage. That is a special covenant for a husband and wife. It is also dangerous to have sex outside of marriage. Don't tell them not to do it and then say "I know you will do it anyway, so here, be careful, have fun!"
Amber

reply from: angell

Sex is made for husband and wife. We are on this earth to make babies and raise them to be God's children. When people sleep around they are always guaranteed to have a disease. Aids is the best one ever. You can't find a cure for it. I wonder why...

reply from: deannat

The problem with waiting until marriage before having sex is that you don't find out if you're incompatable until it's too late. You and your partner should at least learn what is expected from each other in that regard before making a lifetime committment.

reply from: coco

If YOU choose to wait that is on YOU, but not everyone does!!! In marriage people cheat and bring STI's to thier spouses!

reply from: coco

Vexing, I cannot believe that some think that the "certificate" is a magical paper that ensures a couple to remain faithful, if thats the case why did Halie barry marriage not work out with Eric Bennet the sex addict?? HUH maybe cause he was gettin some booty on the side??

reply from: Hereforareason

"What a load of bull. There is nothing wrong with sex outside marriage."
We obviously have different views on marriage. In case you wanted to ask, yes my foundation for sex being wrong outside of marriage is from the bible. (People were put to death if they had sex outside of marriage) It is a special thing God created for 1 man and 1 woman to share.
"It's dangerous to have sex if you haven't been educated about the risks and you get unlucky. Fortunately, most of us have a few braincells and can pick who NOT to have sex with pretty quickly."
So you can't get unlucky even if you choose carefully?
"And sex outside of marriage is dangerous? Hell, sex IN marriage is dangerous. Do you know how many married American men in chatrooms ask me to fly over there and have sex with them? Marriage isn't safe. Human beings are still irrational hormone-driven beings, regardless of a piece of paper and saying 'I do!'"
That is called adultery. That is a man who is not willing to be committed to his wife under any circumstances. He is willing to break his vow to his wife and before God in order to have sinful pleasure for a season.
"I know a couple of guys who could do with a decent shag, to boost their confidence, otherwise they'll never have the balls to ask a girl to marry them."
That is not how to boost their confidence. What ever happened to honor, courage, commitment? If someone doesn't have the courage to ask for my hand in marriage and promise faithfulness without sleeping with another girl first, I don't want him. If they start out by sleeping around first, they are paving the way to do it after.
"I've slept with plenty of people and my last checkup at Family Planning was completely clear."
I would be suspicious seeing that they have a track record for lying, but does that mean that you won't get STDs?
"Let me guess, you've either never had sex or only ever had sex with one person... "
You say that like it is a bad thing. How committed can you ever be if you just hop from guy to guy whenever you want?
"Oh, and if sex is made for husband and wife, why don't we see weddings for cats, horses, dogs, chimps, rabbits, etc etc? "
They aren't husband and wife, they are mates. That question should really be below you.
"The problem with waiting until marriage before having sex is that you don't find out if you're incompatable until it's too late. You and your partner should at least learn what is expected from each other in that regard before making a lifetime committment."
If that is what someone is willing to base a commitment to me on, I don't want it.
"If YOU choose to wait that is on YOU, but not everyone does!!! In marriage people cheat and bring STI's to thier spouses!"
So just because someone may do wrong, we should drop the standards? That is wrong. Cheating is wrong, so is "safe" abortion.
"Not only that, if the sex does not meet their expectations (which may have been unrealistically built up from waiting) then it will cause unhappiness, depression, marital problems and likely cause the one (or both) of the partners to involve themselves in an extra-marital affair.
Men use sex for pleasure. Women use it to bond. "
If that is the case, they have been dwelling on the wrong things. Marriage is not just for sex. It is a union of man to woman for life. Sex can play a large part in the marriage, but if a guy wants me for sex alone, (or even mostly) He is not worth it. That is not commitment.
"Vexing, I cannot believe that some think that the "certificate" is a magical paper that ensures a couple to remain faithful, if thats the case why did Halie barry marriage not work out with Eric Bennet the sex addict?? HUH maybe cause he was gettin some booty on the side??"
Very true. The paper means nothing if the convictions and will is not there to back it up.
Amber

reply from: joe

God joins man and woman, they become one. You have corrupted love making and the result is the murder of preborn babies. Your day of judgement will come and your own aborted children will testify against you with their blood. I don't care if you don't believe it, just wait your turn.

reply from: coco

Who sleeps with who is THIER business not YOURS, as long as they dont VIOLATE anyones rights!! If your church tells YOU not to sleep around then DONT, if someone wants to screw every tom, *****,daryl, sandra,jane,julie,sam and harry that is THIER porogitive not yours. Keep your nose in your business and out of OTHERS!! Marriage and sex depends on ones PERSONAL definition!!

reply from: joe

coco you sound offended, maybe a little guilt. Look, I don't care about your personal life or beliefs, but when your lifestyle leads to the death of preborn babies, you better accept it. First outlaw abortion then live the way you want at least then your lifestyle choices will be accounted for. This is not about beliefs this is about life.

reply from: sheri

Statistics report married couples have better more satisfiing sex then their fornacating conterparts. Yet it seems silly to put so much emphasis on sex. I know people in sexless relationships that are more in love now then when they were first married. Sex should renew, not tear down.

reply from: 4given

When innocent lives are the sacrifice because of reckless behavior, one has the right to observe, judge and relinquish an opinion based on what you just said. Who one fornicates with is not my business. I would rather not know. I don't want to judge. My business is with the aftermath of reckless and rebellious choices- the sudden, unplanned people (pregnancies). If one can educate, hence have an impact the promiscuous or sexually immature behavior of the generations at risk, then there is a hope for our future.

reply from: joe

Vexing prove it, you can't so don't try to convert me to your religion of death. I can't imagine one willing to waste their life on this earth and pay for it in the next life, even if you don't believe it doesn't matter. You really seem unhappy, I would have thought your corrupted lifestyle would have made you happy by now.

reply from: coco

this post was suppost to be one MINUS the harsh words but I guess that is not possible!! My lifestyle has not lead to ANY abortions, I have gotten pregnant and kept my kids, I stepped up to the plate!! Gulity of what not living my life in YOUR self rightoues manner JOE?? Look MY god cares LESS about who you sleep with and if you are not married, my god LOVES EVERYONE even those that had abortions!! I dont need to go to a church to tell me about god, you can take a walk out your front door and learn about god more than ANYONE that sits or stands on a podeum!

reply from: yoda

Gee coco, you seem to be taking that last post (to vexing) very personally, as if it was meant for you. Did you misunderstand to whom it was directed, or do you just feel a need to defend "corrupted lifestyles"?

reply from: coco

Gee coco, you seem to be taking that last post (to vexing) very personally, as if it was meant for you. Did you misunderstand to whom it was directed, or do you just feel a need to defend "corrupted lifestyles"?
Does this sound like it was ment for me ?????? Do me a favor NEXT time you TRY to reply with a smart remark, dont make yourself to look like a fool, READ the thread!!

reply from: yoda

Wow...... you stopped reading my post half way through.....
The last part said "or do you just feel a need to defend "corrupted lifestyles"?
Well, do you?

reply from: joe

coco I agree with your statement that finding God is a personal issue and applaud you for being responsible. But some need laws to make them accountable (drug users, rapist, etc.) and to include abortionists is the only logical solution. Poor Vexing still trying to convert, give it up your bitterness is obvious, there is no way I would follow your religion. If you believe your end will be meaningless, great it will end like you said. I don't my ending is the beginning and I will see God.

reply from: joe

Vexing = Intelligence. Are you serious???????? If you are I can get you some help.

reply from: jujujellybean

What am I trying to convert to?
As I said, we wouldn't want you in my religion; which I suppose you could call the 'Realtheists'. We prefer intelligent 'members' in our dark cult of the brooding underworld(TM)
intelligent? We are intelligent, have you ever heard of projection? It is when you call names that really describe you! Pro aborts do it often.
Christians shaped our world. Catholics, originally. The Jesuits were the smartest people around. They are and were very intelligent; do you want them in your 'cult?'

reply from: coco

Well joe I agree that children should not have thier life ended, but I also believe that people should live thier life how THEY see fit, as long as they dont VIOLATE anyone elses rights. I dont think vexing is bitter, I think that she or he seeks pleasure in things that some dont, she is not VIOLATING anyones rights (in my opinion, unless she aborts) I think as an adult she should be allowed to live however she wants , I am not to judge her or anyone for that matter I am just a person as she is. Of course as a friend I would give her advice and HOPE she would do good but I cannot hold a gun to anyones head and make them believe what I believe in.

reply from: joe

My main concern is the right of the unborn. If your lifestyle infringes on that right, I will judge to the fullest extend with no apologies. I don't give advice and hope, it is a life not a small problem. Vexing is violating the rights of the unborn by defending abortion and I will judge her and her lifestyle that leads to that conclusion. Vexing to me is a joke, a bitter bigot promoting her religion of death. It might be hard to understand but lifestyle choices are the cause of abortions. Bottom line is outlaw abortions so there will be no reason to judge.

reply from: joe

The rights of the unborn will be recognized. The religion of death will be outlawed. Poor Vexing using outdated arguments to make useless points again.

reply from: yoda

"Morality cannot be legislated, but behavior can be regulated. Judicial decrees may not change the heart, but they can restrain the heartless".
-Dr. Martin Luther King

reply from: joe

Vexing, again using useless points. Your movement is exposed, its only a matter of time. Go back to your cult.

reply from: yoda

That's why many of us have stopped reading her posts, joe.

reply from: xLoki

Coco, have I told you how awesome you are lately? Probably not, but seriously. You are one of the most rational pro-lifers I've encountered on "teh internets". I say this with no trace of sarcasm.

reply from: joe

That I understand yodavater. Born women (and men) have the right to live protected, the unborn don't. So talk to me about your "rights" after you give the fundamental right to live to the unborn. I hope you can understand that or did I confuse you again.

reply from: joe

Vexing, just in case you didn't understand that point about rights is for you. I thought I had to clear it up, we all know how Vexing gets confused.

reply from: coco

thanks xloki, I would hope that other pro choice would have the open mind and listen to my objection to abortion. I thank vixing and others for allowing the oppurtunity to explain MY position, I also hope that you would take the time and think about what I have to say. I am NOT against sex,birth control, or anything that you do as long as you dont VIOLATE someones rights, and I just think that abortion VIOLATES the unborn and that is why I am against that procedure.

reply from: coco

Joe it sounds to me that vexing is taking birthcontrol so I am assuming that she is taking control of "procreating" so she would not have to get an abortion. I think that is responsible, I think that if more women would use 2 forms of birthcontrol(choose from the many INCLUDING natural) that would ENSURE unwanted pregnacies and abortions will DRASTICLY reduce!! Lets be honest, SADLY abortions will NEVER go away even when they were outlawed women still seeked them out. I dont think she is promoting a religion, because she hasnt mentioned god, at least from what I can remember, she is just sounding her opinions. I HOPE one day that prochoicers would understand that a z/e/f is a DEVELOPING human being inside a woman and view that if she seeks an abortion she would be destroying a life.

reply from: joe

coco I agree on most points except one. You mention your hope they realize its a life, I expect the strong to protect the life. I don't care what they name the child (z/e/f) in their little word games to dehumanize what is obviously a life. I am stating one thing, outlaw abortions so this choice to kill does not exist legally. Illegal activities always exist, that is not my concern (it will be law enforcements concern). It will decrease abortions. Those seeking unsafe alternatives, that will be there choice to break the law and handle the consequences of their actions. Their movement is a religion on the basis of their brainwashed rhetoric. They cannot respond to scientific or emotional reasoning, they always come back to their "right" to murder. The "right" their religion preaches.

reply from: 4given

The life of the mother has always been protected in regard to a pregnancy/abortion. Supporting the "choice" to end a life does not really have anything to do w/ the rare health-related abortions.
Edit to include: Ending a life for the health of the mother is a pro-lifer w/ exceptions. Not uncommon. I don't agree, but it has never been a legal issue. Or a medical issue. (aborting a life to preserve another) Not that I am aware of anyway.

reply from: coco

Well you know what we are realizing that we agree on some points so that is one step forward, which is ALWAYS a positive! Yes SADLY thier hasnt been a 100% way to prevent pregnancy. but like I said if you use to forms that should do the "trick". Anyway I am glad you all let me have the chance to voice my opinion, THANKS a MILLION!!

reply from: yoda

Mark Crutcher and everyone at Life Dynamics (owners of this forum) have given you that chance, coco.... not any posters here.

reply from: MC3

Let me make it clear that I am in no way looking for any praise related to providing this forum. I started it only because I felt that it would be a service to the pro-life community. However, I feel obligated to respond to Vexing's idiotic assertion that forums are easy to set up and that "11yr olds can create and host forums vastly superior to these."
To begin with, the software alone for this forum cost in excess of $7,000 and that did not include the cost for the technical support to get the site up and running. As I recall, that was, approximately, another $4,000. And while it is true that, once a forum is hot, it requires relatively little effort to keep it going, the additional servers necessary to handle the capacity we can accommodate are a little over $350 per month. There are also maintenance, upkeep, and upgrade costs but, so far, they have been relatively inconsequential.
It is starting to appear that, in addition to her moral bankruptcy, Vexing may be one of those pathetic souls who never did anything with her life and can only feel good about herself by criticizing and belittling what others do. On the other hand, if she is sincere about what she said, I cannot understand why she is not infesting one of these other "vastly superior" forums. I could be wrong, but I don't get the feeling she would be missed here.

reply from: joe

Retarded Vexing. No logic and no heart.

reply from: joe

Thats exactly how your movement plays games, I am glad you demonstrated for all to see.

reply from: joe

Go play your World of Warcraft game. I don't understand your cause, why argue for death. You say your logical yet you preach repetitive rhetoric against science. Is this some sick fun your having, go take your pills.

reply from: joe

I have to talk on your level, you at least seem to understand it. Logical arguments are beyond your realm of comprehension.

reply from: joe

Keep telling yourself that Vexing. Keep repeating that until you believe it, like you believe the vile rhetoric your movement preaches.

reply from: joe

Good girl, you get a treat.

reply from: republicanhippiechic

I love my hampsters though!
LOL

reply from: Darkmoon

Thanks for trying to be fair-minded coco. Unfortunately I think that you'll get better results on a less biased site, where both sides can express themselves without threats of violence or abuse going unchecked. Ehealth would be a pretty good place to start. Try to avoid any sites labled "prochoice" or "prolife" this-or-that because you'll always see favoritism toward one or the other and opposition is generally heavily moderated or physically threatened. If you don't want your conversation being derailed by mudslinging then sites that strive to be as non-biased as possible are probably your best bet. I for one appreciate the effort.

reply from: yoda

She does spread her "warmth" to some other forums, but I suspect that it feeds her ego to think that she is in some small way disrupting the normal activities on this one. Apparently, being "vexing" to other people, especially prolifers, is her only source of "pride".
Personally, I'm thankful for the ignore function on this forum.

reply from: coco

DarkMoon, thanks for the info about the other sites, I appreciate that you understand what I am trying to do and I think in some ways I see that there can be a comming together of ideas. but this is such a emotional topic that it REALLY envokes alot of feelings. To be honest with you I really like to change peoples minds with logic and understanding instead of daming them and down talking I think you reach people better that way.

reply from: yoda

Religions are not restricted to those who mention "god".
Main Entry: re·li·gion Function: noun
2 : a personal set or institutionalized system of religious attitudes, beliefs, and practices
3 archaic : scrupulous conformity : CONSCIENTIOUSNESS
4 : a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith


2017 ~ LifeDiscussions.org ~ Discussions on Life, Abortion, and the Surrounding Politics