Home - List All Discussions

How did you become pro-choice or pro-life?

What influenced you to join your cause?

by: Smurfy

I'm sure everyone has has experiences that have pushed them one way or another.
Share with us the event(s) that made you a firm believer in your cause.

reply from: Faramir

I didn't have a clue until high school in 1972 when my teacher in my argumentation class brought a woman in to speak to us. She told us about the pending change in the law and how good it would be if abortion would become legal, since so many girls were killing themselves with coke bottles and glass, wire hangers, etc.
I bought it all, and it didn't occur to me at the time, that this teacher who was propogandizing us, did not even bring in someone from the opposite side, in an "argumentation" class, no less.
I probably leaned prochoice for awhile, but eventually began to lean towards prolife, and then when my first son was born, it occurred to me that this bulge in my wife's tummy actually contained my son. It hit me like a ton of bricks after he was born. Before he was born, I didn't really get it.
Later, I became a Catholic, and I had the support of my religion on top of what my common sense was telling me.
There are some who are "personally prolife," and I wish I could be that too, and just let the idea of abortion go away and leave me alone.
But I believe that an abortion is unjust, and that when there is an injustice, to look away and do nothing is to take part in the injustice.
So I have no choice to not only be personally prolife, but to work for abortion to be illegal.

reply from: Faramir

Someone made a comment that I found irritating, so I would like to add that there is ZERO motivation to "control" women or "punish" women.
It would be so much easier to NOT be prolife. It's a burden to be prolife. And it takes some couorage to stick your neck out. And I am both lazy and cowardly, so there's really nothing in it for me. I'm prolife because it's the right thing to do, and my conscience won't allow otherwise, as tempting as it is to ignore the issue.

reply from: sander

I didn't have an ephiphany. I can honestly say I have always been 100% pro-life.
The idea of RvW was as repulsive to me then as it is now. It was bad law then and it's remains bad law.
I was pregnant with my first baby in 1973, nobody had to convince me before or after that I wasn't carrying a tiny human being, that was totally dependant on my mercy.
As human beings we are suppose to, in good conscience, look out for one another, the best society nutures and protects it's most vulnerable. The society that won't goes to heck in a hand basket in due time. If we're to place the well being of others before ourselves then I couldn't understand and still don't why that excludes the child in the womb.
Abortion on demand has been abused and mis-used. It is what it has always been, a way to slip out of personal responsibility at the expense of another.
It's an un-natural act, it goes against the instinct of survival and in America we're a decent lot on the whole, we don't like injustices because we know collectively we are a blessed nation. We've been afforded the luxury of freedoms and prosperity so many other nations never have.
Imo, that's why the pro-life movement fights daily to see this injustice overturned.

reply from: yoda

The turning point in my life was the aborting of my child by my ex-fiance about 25 years ago, in spite of my offers to support her during pregnancy and raise the child by myself. I wanted that child very much, but that made no difference at all to her. When I pressed her for a reason, she said that being pregnant might "jeopardize her chances for a promotion on her job".
That came at a time when I had been apathetic about the subject of abortion. It was the worst pain I ever felt in my life, and was enough to open my eyes.

reply from: faithman

SSSSSSSOOOOOOO if borties decide to look away from the injustice of womb gay genocide, that still means they"take part in the injustice". that has been my point all along. Your statment here proves that you are willingly ignorant, and you most assuredly undrestand the point I was making. I have always been pro-life. But I got active when an abortion clinic opened where I live. I have always detested bullies, and have always stood up to them. Abortion is the ultimate act of bullyism. To kill an innocent child because they can't fight back is the act of a bully.

reply from: GodsLaw4Us2Live

Just living requires one to make a choice, one way or the other. The Bible says we are to become One. There was a song when I was young, "I am a rock, I am an Island'. That song is wrong. We all affect each other, we act as one body. What government/society approves of affects every young student in the classroom. If government says same sex couples should be given marriage licenses, that all should have an adequate supply of condoms and begin sexual activity young, the young learners will respond based on their educators. If educators say it is not a virtue to be responsible towards babies, then that's the way it will be! My first 30 years of life I got to see and experience the consequences of man's values and educational system. You see death, divorce, unfaithfulness and the neglect/diregard and poor treatment of young children. The last 20 years I have been working towards encouraging respect and dignity for fellow human beings; and promoting responsibility and obligations above self-absorption and selfish behavior. The death of my son over 20 years ago from pneumonia was a watershed event in my life and made me examine the purpose and meaning of life. My first wife, who was a deceiver and liar, promisuous and may have had multiple abortions, left at that time. I'm remarried and my spouse is carrying our 5th child now. I believe we are all here to make this a better world for everyone. I believe in following God's instructions to make that possible. I realize there are wild hell'uns on the loose. Killers such as yourself Smurfy. But, you probably think you are one of those evolutionary accidents. So, what's your point in life other than to eat, drink and be merry. I believe we were created to be rulers, to be co-inheritors with Christ. As such, regulating activities, such as abortion, is in our "genes". It's what we do. We make decisions, we judge, and we carry them out. Killing preborn children is, of course, an area that will be regulated. I am confident the correct decision is to not kill your young ones.
We, the people, are one Corporate entity. As a unit, that One entity must make the decisions regarding life.

reply from: Skippy

I was nine years old when Roe v. Wade was decided. I asked my Dad what he thought about abortion, and he replied, "It doesn't matter what I think. Why don't you do some research and decide for yourself?"
So I spent dozens of hours in the library over a period of several weeks. I think the librarian was rather amused by this precocious skinny little nine year old kid who kept bugging him to bring in all sorts of arcane reading material.
Finally, I went to my Dad, and said, "I think abortion is okay." And I never looked back. Recently, my significant other and his best friend have begun volunteering as clinic security. That scares the daylights out of me, but it also makes me proud.

reply from: faithman

I was nine years old when Roe v. Wade was decided. I asked my Dad what he thought about abortion, and he replied, "It doesn't matter what I think. Why don't you do some research and decide for yourself?"
So I spent dozens of hours in the library over a period of several weeks. I think the librarian was rather amused by this precocious skinny little nine year old kid who kept bugging him to bring in all sorts of arcane reading material.
Finally, I went to my Dad, and said, "I think abortion is okay." And I never looked back. Recently, my significant other and his best friend have begun volunteering as clinic security. That scares the daylights out of me, but it also makes me proud.
Proud that he protects the fasilitators of womb gay genocide! protecting the ultimate in gay bashing.....go figure.....

reply from: faithman

SSSSSSSOOOOOOO if borties decide to look away from the injustice of womb gay genocide, that still means they"take part in the injustice". that has been my point all along. Your statment here proves that you are willingly ignorant, and you most assuredly undrestand the point I was making. I have always been pro-life. But I got active when an abortion clinic opened where I live. I have always detested bullies, and have always stood up to them. Abortion is the ultimate act of bullyism. To kill an innocent child because they can't fight back is the act of a bully.

reply from: Skippy

Normally I don't respond to your posts, but your last couple have me wondering. Are you under some misapprehension that I'm gay?
Since I'm female, and the cuddle-muffin is male, I'd say the odds of us both being straight are pretty good.

reply from: faithman

Normally I don't respond to your posts, but your last couple have me wondering. Are you under some misapprehension that I'm gay?
Since I'm female, and the cuddle-muffin is male, I'd say the odds of us both being straight are pretty good.
SSSSSSSSSSOOOOOOOOOOOOOO as a straight person, you are all down with gay genocide? Moma phelps has the right to kill womb children as well?

reply from: nancyu

I don't think I really formed an opinion until listening to Dr Laura's radio program about 10 years ago She sort of woke me up by speaking out about abortion. I love children, especially my own two beautiful ones, but back in college days, I'm not sure that I wouldn't have considered abortion if I had become pregnant. The thought horrifies me now, that my attitude was what it was. Unfortunately this attitude is still all too common Roe needs to be overturned. This should not be a choice offered to women, many of whom are misled, misinformed, and deceived into making it.
P.S. Interesting that everyone here has a great pro life story except Skippy, who learned to be pro choice from reading it in books at the library. Very interesting....

reply from: Faramir

SSSSSSSOOOOOOO if borties decide to look away from the injustice of womb gay genocide, that still means they"take part in the injustice". that has been my point all along. Your statment here proves that you are willingly ignorant, and you most assuredly undrestand the point I was making. I have always been pro-life. But I got active when an abortion clinic opened where I live. I have always detested bullies, and have always stood up to them. Abortion is the ultimate act of bullyism. To kill an innocent child because they can't fight back is the act of a bully.
I believe abortion is an injustice and I believe supporting abortion rights is an injustice, so I've got it covered no matter how you slice it, even if I don't buy into your "womb gay" fantasies, and this is hardly an appropriate thread to be attacking my position. You've already derailed three or four other threads with this topic.

reply from: GodsLaw4Us2Live

Skippy has been trying to impress us with the fact that she was a child prodigy; carefullly studying and weighing the evidence for weighty matters as a nine year old. I think she also claimed to be a lawyer, although she supports lawlessness; allowing citizens to decide issues rather than imposing law through a governmental system.
When Roe v Wade decided, I was a teenager. I was paying absolutely no attention at the time; just as I was oblivious to Satan's religion (Islam) before 9/11. It took serious life affecting events to wake me up.
I now know Satan (Allah) authored a book (Koran) to bring about the destruction of mankind. I also know people of low moral character are murdering preborn babies. These evil people want to bring acceptance for baby killing to the next generation of unsuspecting kids, who do not yet know their left hand from their right.

reply from: Skippy

I think she also claimed to be a lawyer, although she supports lawlessness; allowing citizens to decide issues rather than imposing law through a governmental system.
You have said before that I claim to be a lawyer, and I keep correcting you. I am an engineer. I find the law fascinating, but have no desire to be an attorney.

reply from: faithman

SSSSSSSOOOOOOO if borties decide to look away from the injustice of womb gay genocide, that still means they"take part in the injustice". that has been my point all along. Your statment here proves that you are willingly ignorant, and you most assuredly undrestand the point I was making. I have always been pro-life. But I got active when an abortion clinic opened where I live. I have always detested bullies, and have always stood up to them. Abortion is the ultimate act of bullyism. To kill an innocent child because they can't fight back is the act of a bully.
I believe abortion is an injustice and I believe supporting abortion rights is an injustice, so I've got it covered no matter how you slice it, even if I don't buy into your "womb gay" fantasies, and this is hardly an appropriate thread to be attacking my position. You've already derailed three or four other threads with this topic.
No derailment here! Just showing that you are inconsistant in your posting. You understand my point perfectly when it is you making it. But you blew your "cover" by saying that one does not support womb gay genocide when they suport abortion on demand, and then show in this thred that to look away and do nothing about injustice make one guilty of that injustice. That is exactly what you and the borties are doing on this issue!!!! And it ain't just a fantacy Doofis. It is a very hot topic with Tv drama and news shows doing episodes on it almost daily. You don't understand the issue, because you don't want too. You are willingly ignorant to deffend an indeffencible position. You are just as purposely confused as the borties, just so your ego can claim some kind of intelectual superiority, in a "debate" where you get to set all the rules. you consistantly throw the womb child under the bus, to promote your hidden agenda of being smarter than anybody else. The scripture warns of such as you, professing themselves to be wise, they have become fools. You foolishly defend borties, and folk that apose personhood for the womb child just to protect their killers, and say that is some kinda "prolife" position? Then a pox upon the "movement" that is SSSSOOOOOOOOOO confused. I am pro-personhood. And I would advise anyone who truely wants to see the womb child protected from abortion on demand, should abandon being "pro-life", and take up the cause of pro-personhood.

reply from: Faramir

No, f-man, I did't throw anyone under the bus.
All abortions are unjust. All abortions should cease.
I don't need to buy into your "womb gay homophobe" hysterics to be opposed to all abortion for any reason. I don't need to call someone a "womb gay homophobe" to tell them I disagree with their support of abortion rights. I don't need an idiotic trick to make a case.

reply from: jujujellybean

I am like Sander. Being raised in a 100% pro life family and always having that around me, even at the age of six I understood that abortion was the killing of a baby. Just recently I have started researching and understanding more and more of our side, and trying to do all I can to stop the holocaust.

reply from: faithman

Niether do you have to apose a legitimate concern. But you do. niether do you have to apose the use of the term baby but you do. It is not "an idiotic trick", but a very current issue that has gotten a lot of play in the media as of late. And you most assuredly throw the womb child under the buss when you defend those who kill them. NOW THAT IS IDIOTIC!!!! By your very own admission here, you point blank state to ignore an injustice is to partake in it. Then you turn around and defend those who do exactly that. Showing once again you are more for your personal agenda of proving your "debating prowess" at the expence of truely deffending the womb child. You have on numerous ocassions thrown the womb child under your intelectual bus. You are a personal agenda sell out, and whether you have the courage to face it or not, you have become an opposer of womb child rights. You can not deffend the womb child's enemies, and claim to be their ally. this is about fighting for the womb child, and establishing personhood for them. Anything else is a distraction, most assuredly when you deffend their killers just to win a "debate".

reply from: Faramir

I disagree with your "womb gay accusations" but if you think that's a legitimate argument, fine.
You have made it clear in about 30 posts in about 5 threads.
It wasn't the topic of THIS thread.
Do you need to make every thread about this topic?

reply from: faithman

When your post here proves your inconsistancy on the issue, yes.

reply from: GodsLaw4Us2Live

Read your post this time. I only read a small fraction. Engineer, not attorney.

reply from: Smurfy

Faithman, there are plenty of 'gay genocide' topics on this forum.
This topic is for people to share the experiences that led them to become pro-choice or pro-life.
Please post you 'gay genocide' discussions on one of the aptly named topics, of which there are several, rather than turning this thread into another circus.
Thanks.

reply from: cracrat

Maybe you guys can help me out, because I've never quite figured out where I am on this debate.
I personally think abortion is wrong, except in the gravest of circumstances (rape, incest, etc.). I would advise anybody who asked me for my opinion that there is always another option. I once refused to go with a friend to a clinic when she had a scare because I couldn't be involved.
However, I absolutely would not have the arrogance to impose my view on another person through the law. It is important that the process be hard to represent the gravity of the decision. But it must be available to people if they want it because otherwise it would drive the procedure underground beyond the scrutiny of the authorities.
So, am I pro-life or pro-choice? When I know that, I'll see if I can tell you why.

reply from: faithman

You are trying to be a fence sitter. The issue is whether you believe ther womb child to be a person. If the womb child is a person, then it is wrong for killer mom to "force" her view of abortion onto her preborn child. your position is like you saying I don't believe in murder, but I am not going to force that view on murders by making murder against the law. It is you who needs to answere the question of whether a womb child is a person. It is not about just making abortion illegal, or mommy dearest's rights. It is about the fundamental right of all persons to live. If you believe a womb child is a person, then you are pro-personhood, and as such womb children have a right to life. All other issue are second to this.

reply from: Faramir

You are trying to be a fence sitter. The issue is whether you believe ther womb child to be a person. If the womb child is a person, then it is wrong for killer mom to "force" her view of abortion onto her preborn child. your position is like you saying I don't believe in murder, but I am not going to force that view on murders by making murder against the law. It is you who needs to answere the question of whether a womb child is a person. It is not about just making abortion illegal, or mommy dearest's rights. It is about the fundamental right of all persons to live. If you believe a womb child is a person, then you are pro-personhood, and as such womb children have a right to life. All other issue are second to this.
If you could make more brilliant responses like this one, you'd be dangerous.

reply from: faithman

You are trying to be a fence sitter. The issue is whether you believe ther womb child to be a person. If the womb child is a person, then it is wrong for killer mom to "force" her view of abortion onto her preborn child. your position is like you saying I don't believe in murder, but I am not going to force that view on murders by making murder against the law. It is you who needs to answere the question of whether a womb child is a person. It is not about just making abortion illegal, or mommy dearest's rights. It is about the fundamental right of all persons to live. If you believe a womb child is a person, then you are pro-personhood, and as such womb children have a right to life. All other issue are second to this.
If you could make more brilliant responses like this one, you'd be dangerous.
What makes me dangerous, is that I could care less what people think of me, or what I post. My objective is to fight for those who can not fight for themselves. Emotional groin kicks, and semantical eye pokeing are just fine with me, along with the occasional over hand right of undeniable truth. I really don't care how we win, we just simply must win, for if we don't, it is the womb child that is the big looser. My total alegiance is to the womb child on this issue. Anyone who wants to get in the way of that,....well..... God help them..... But they well find no mercy from me until they surrender form being the enemy of the womb child.

reply from: Faramir

IMHO, your words are much more powerful without all the insults and name calling. That only takes away from your message.
Do what you have to do, of course. That's just my observation and opinion.

reply from: AshMarie88

I've told my story over and over again so I'll skip it. But to put it short, since age 11 I've been actively debating and learning about abortion and its issues, and more and more I learn I become more pro-life.
And last year I found out I have an aborted brother that would be around the age of 28 right now. My momma regrets that coerced choice, and that there proves abortion hurts women, rather than helps them.

reply from: faithman

I will most assuredly take your words, and opinions into consideration. I never wish to censor anyone. But the next time you tuck one of your little ones in, or at least remember having done so if they are grown, just ask yourself what you would do to the fool who would dare try to chop them to pieces. When you feel the same about the womb child, then you will start to understand they way I feel about this issue. These are little helpless children who have no way of stopping cold blooded killers from pulling them apart for convieniance and/or money. It is high time we quit debating this issue, and start acting like a child really dies when they are aborted. If that don't fit in your abortion debate rules tuff nuggies. Life is way to precious to be waisted while we "debate".

reply from: carolemarie

I was going to work and ran into a group picketing a clinic (I didn't even know it was an abortion clinic) and saw those dead baby signs. I went to work bitterly complaining about the nazi's I ran into who were picking on women with those faked disgusting signs. My girlfriend who was prolife challenged me to prove they were faked. So I tried to do that and over a year came to the conclusion that those signs were true. (not the conclusion I wanted to come to)
Anyways, I had to change sides, and do something to help stop it because now I knew the truth. So I started going out to the clinics and God showed up and I got saved, so not only did I change positions on this issue, but God changed my heart and mind on everything else ....if I had taken another route, I guess I would still be prochoice and lost...thank God that I took the shortcut that day!
Carolemarie

reply from: Skippy

What's up with all these spineless women who have abortions they don't want? Haven't they ever heard of the word "No"?
And lots of people regret the choices they make. That doesn't mean those choices shouldn't be available to anyone else.

reply from: faithman

What's up with all these spineless women who have abortions they don't want? Haven't they ever heard of the word "No"?
And lots of people regret the choices they make. That doesn't mean those choices shouldn't be available to anyone else.
It does if that choice means a child dies scanc!!!!

reply from: Smurfy

And lots of people regret the choices they make. That doesn't mean those choices shouldn't be available to anyone else.
Exactly. Because this woman regrets having an abortion, it does not prove other women will regret having one.

reply from: faithman

And lots of people regret the choices they make. That doesn't mean those choices shouldn't be available to anyone else.
Exactly. Because this woman regrets having an abortion, it does not prove other women will regret having one.
Happy to be the one who informs you, but many woman are now comming forward and testafying to the fact they regret having murdered their child. Many know now that they were lied too about the life that was within them. The highest calling of a woman is to be a mother, as is the highest calling of a man is to be a father. Abortion denies these facts, and makes a woman nothing more than sexual sporting equipment, and men nothing more than male sluts looking for the next thrill. There are many regrets to the "choice/free sex" life style. One day the scanc and horn dog wake up alone, diseased, and childless, with no one to guard the IV bottle. Killer moms grow old realizing that they must face eternaty with the blood of their children on their hands.

reply from: yoda

See, here's the problem with that old, often repeated position: YOU already DO have the arrogance to impose your view on other people through the law, as it relates to BORN people.... laws against murder, rape, etc. But you stop short of allowing those same laws to protect unborn people because you don't think they are worth the protection of the law, do you?
Had you bothered to look up the word, you would've already known you are proabort/prochoice. Take your pick they mean the same thing:
pro-choice adjective advocating access to legal abortion: advocating open legal access to voluntary abortion http://encarta.msn.com/dictionary_/pro-choice.html

pro-a·bor·tion adjective - favoring legal access to abortion: in favor of open legal access to voluntary abortion http://encarta.msn.com/encnet/features/dictionary/DictionaryResults.aspx?refid=1861736813

reply from: yoda

No, sadly it does not. But then, some women who kill their born kids never regret their actions, either.
So?

reply from: AshMarie88

What's up with all these spineless women who have abortions they don't want? Haven't they ever heard of the word "No"?
And lots of people regret the choices they make. That doesn't mean those choices shouldn't be available to anyone else.
Are you really THIS ignorant? Wait... yes, you are.

reply from: kayluvzchoice

Godslaw: Why do you say that Islam is from "Satan"?

reply from: faithman

UHHH? maybe because it is?

reply from: GodsLaw4Us2Live

UHHH? maybe because it is?
I've read the book. In fact, I've read it twice. I've heard the complaints from the Muslims that I am not reading it in the original inspired language and therefore can not possibly sense the meaning. But the meaning was pretty clear to me. Every few pages the Koran called the Jews wrongdoers and the Christians deceivers. The Koran encourages Jihad, armed conflict for Satan's (excuse me, Allah's) cause. This book is meant to bring men into armed conflict; the goal is the extinction of mankind.
I've read many books and watched much material on Satan's deadly movement on the internet. The Koran's verses are the "Satanic Verses", to steal a title from Salman Rushdie's book of the same name. All good Muslims are suppose to kill Salman Rushdie when they see him, so declared a fatwa from a prior Ayatollah of Iran.
As for Christians being deceivers, the Koran sets the record "straight". Jesus was not the Son of God and did not die on the cross.
As for Jews, the Koran says they are always starting wars and their ultimate destiny is to be damned to the fires of hell.
What a lovely book.
It was so sickening looking into the mind of Satan that I barely could force myself to read the Qur'ans revulsive and destructive verses. Death to Allah. Death to the Qur'an.

reply from: carolemarie

Abortion isn't good for anyone. It makes women pit their interest against their children.
We are biologically wired to love and protect our children and when women violate that part of their nature it cost them a part of their humanity!
And besides, killing children is always wrong, no matter what your personal issues happen to be.

reply from: GodsLaw4Us2Live

UHHH? maybe because it is?
I've read the book. In fact, I've read it twice. I've heard the complaints from the Muslims that I am not reading it in the original inspired language and therefore can not possibly sense the meaning. But the meaning was pretty clear to me. Every few pages the Koran called the Jews wrongdoers and the Christians deceivers. The Koran encourages Jihad, armed conflict for Satan's (excuse me, Allah's) cause. This book is meant to bring men into armed conflict; the goal is the extinction of mankind.
I've read many books and watched much material on Satan's deadly movement on the internet. The Koran's verses are the "Satanic Verses", to steal a title from Salman Rushdie's book of the same name. All good Muslims are suppose to kill Salman Rushdie when they see him, so declared a fatwa from a prior Ayatollah of Iran.
As for Christians being deceivers, the Koran sets the record "straight". Jesus was not the Son of God and did not die on the cross.
As for Jews, the Koran says they are always starting wars and their ultimate destiny is to be damned to the fires of hell.
What a lovely book.
It was so sickening looking into the mind of Satan that I barely could force myself to read the Qur'ans revulsive and destructive verses. Death to Allah. Death to the Qur'an.
I forgot to mention Allah's faithful servant Muhammad; a true Jihadi he. With his faithful 9 year old wife at his side, Muhammad led 70 head chopping trench filling raids. Muhammad is said to have with his own hands beheaded hundreds of individuals, filling freshly dug trenches with their headless bodies. What a guy!

reply from: sander

I hope you're not just one of those post once to make your point to us pro-lifers and then never to be heard from again.
In the off chance you really do want "help"...here's one clue, you don't want abortion driven underground so it won't be beyond the "scrutiny" of the authorities.
IF that's what is holding you back, then welcome to the pro-life side because there is NO scrutiny by any authorities right now.
Do you want a list of the women who have died by "legal" abortion, or would you care to know that rapists and molestors are seldom if ever reported by abortion clinics?
Abortion so called rights are fiercely protected by authorities and they rarely can do any harm in the eyes of any government agency.
Do some research, just check past posts here if you don't want to look elsewhere.

reply from: Smurfy

Sounds rather like Samson killing a total of 4030 people, all by himself.

reply from: sander

Sounds rather like Samson killing a total of 4030 people, all by himself.
Ever heard of "context"?
Try reading the rest of the Bible.

reply from: Teresa18

I was born into a pro-life family. I was raised pro-life and Catholic. I also began to do my own research about a year and a half ago. I familiarized myself with the arguments of both sides, and that further confirmed my pro-life position.

reply from: cracrat

Yodavatar: See, here's the problem with that old, often repeated position: YOU already DO have the arrogance to impose your view on other people through the law, as it relates to BORN people.... laws against murder, rape, etc. But you stop short of allowing those same laws to protect unborn people because you don't think they are worth the protection of the law, do you?
I don't quite understand your point. Are you suggesting that to have laws against murder, rape, etc. is arrogant? Strikes me that these are perfectly sensible and necessary laws to allow people to function in society without fear of stepping out of their front door. However, when it is applied to the unborn child, it is a moral judgement as to whether or not that child constitutes a life. Some people, me and you included, think that yes it is a life and should be protected by the actions of it's carer, ie the mother/father. Other people do not view the unborn child as an independent life and is therefore not entitled to the same protections as the rest of us.
The law must be based on definate facts. Scientists cannot even agree on a suitable definition of life, let alone tell us as what point from conception onwards the feotus becomes 'alive'. The law of the land must therefore be written to maximise harm reduction to those we know are alive, in this case pregnant women. To make abortion illegal would mark a return to a situation I presume extisted before abortion was allowed (Roe vs Wade was 10 years before I was born, and abortion was allowed here in UK even longer ago) whereby women, probably mostly young women, who found themselves pregnant and unable to have a child for whatever reason, would be frightened, alone and thereby forced into the hands of a back-alley "Doctor" who would attempt to inflict enough harm on the feotus to force a miscarriage. Not a situation I would wish upon anyone.
A person must be allowed to form their own opinion through whatever means they choose. With the situation as it is, a person is allowed choose if they want to have an abortion or not for whatever reasons they can come up with, religious, moral, whatever. If the pro-life movement prevails, then that choice will be removed and the removal of another person's choice for your own reasons is what I find repugnantly arrogant.
Sander: I hope you're not just one of those post once to make your point to us pro-lifers and then never to be heard from again.
In the off chance you really do want "help"...here's one clue, you don't want abortion driven underground so it won't be beyond the "scrutiny" of the authorities.
IF that's what is holding you back, then welcome to the pro-life side because there is NO scrutiny by any authorities right now.
Do you want a list of the women who have died by "legal" abortion, or would you care to know that rapists and molestors are seldom if ever reported by abortion clinics?
Abortion so called rights are fiercely protected by authorities and they rarely can do any harm in the eyes of any government agency.
Do some research, just check past posts here if you don't want to look elsewhere.
I presume you live in the States and I don't really understand the situation there as it is 'on the ground' so to speak, I live in the UK and can only comment on what happens here. In order to get a abortion, a woman must speak to and get the approval of two separate doctors. Only then will she be allowed to have the procedure. Most medical care in this country is provide by the state (NHS) and is therefore subject to the scrutiny of the state. This at least provides a minimum standard of care and good practice and defined method of recourse if a patient feels these are not met.
I read the various topics on here for about 3 hours last night after posting on this thread. This forum has confirmed my mind as pro-choice. Whilst I notice there are people here given to intelligent, reasoned debate, there seem to be at least as many given to wanton, foaming mouthed, profanity laced ranting. The latter really do not help your cause.

reply from: Smurfy

Oh, there are a variety of suitable definitions of life, though there isn't one that's agreed upon by all. I'd hazard a guess that life beings at a point past conception where the nuclei of the sperm and egg fuse and cell division starts to occur. That's essentially what primitive amoeba's do, which I think we would agree are alive.
Then again, one could argue that a sperm and an egg are alive, since they are complex cells that contain RNA and various other functions seen in other cells, which are most certainly alive. Seeing the activity of sperm, it would be hard to deny that they are alive. A virus is less complex than human sperm, yet a virus is also alive.
One could then argue that life begins in the ovaries and testes and that every sexual act on behalf of the man kills millions of human lives. It could be argued that since sperm only contain 50% of the genetic code of a human, then it is not human life. However, do we consider double, triple or quadruple amputees not to be human because they have half the limbs we have or less? Do we consider XXY people not to be human because they have an extra chromosome?
If our ideal of human is based on how 'complete' we are, then are we not discriminating against those who are less complete than us?
I'm curious as to why it's okay for millions of sperm to die, and why it's okay for 80% of all pregnancies to fail without intervention, yet this isn't seen as a terrible loss? If 80% of born children were dying, then the world would be in an uproar! Yet nothing is being done to save these innocent babies who haven't yet been born.
Pro-lifers would have us believe that they care about unborn children, yet they are doing nothing to prevent this horrific loss of human life, claiming that it is 'natural'.
Well it's natural for predators to kill something as weak and flimsy as a human being without us using artificial means to protect ourselves. One wonders why then they are so against any artificial means of preventing or terminating a pregnancy?
Pro-lifers: if you think this 80% loss of life is 'natural' and therefore okay, then please get off your computers, take off your clothes and survive in a forest, free of all the 'unnatural' trapping created by our species.

reply from: cracrat

Is a virus really alive? It cannot reproduce itself without hi-jacking the reproducive machinery of another cell. They can be crystallised and stored almost indefinately, only to be 'reactivated' by dissolving in an appropriate solvent at a later date. I'm unaware of any lifeform that has such an ability. There are chemical systems that can self-assemble into fantastically complex arrangements and, to a limited degree, catalyse the synthesis of copies of themselves provided the appropriate starting materials are present. Are these alive? I'm not poking holes, merely trying to demonstrate the difficulty in defining something as defuse and varied as 'life'.
Humans have become the dominate creature on this planet because of our ability to out think our natural competitors. No, we don't have sharp teeth, claws or dirty great horns to defend ourselves from predators but we use tools, our brains and teamwork to overcome nearly any obstacle. To invite a person of 21st century westernised culture to attempt to survive in the wilderness without the 'unnatural' aids we use everyday is non-sensical. We are adapted with tool and knowledge to cope with the problems we encounter everyday. However, for hundreds of thousands of years, humans did have to survive in a harsh wilderness and managed to quite successfully. There are people and cultures alive today who can still do just such a thing, because they have the skills and knowledge to do so.
Naturally hundreds of children ARE stillborn or do not survive their 5th birthday, just view the child mortality figures in the developing world, or the number of child-size graves in old churchyards. It is only through modern medicine that the death of a born child is so unusual. Such advances were made BECAUSE there were (and still are) people who think such a thing is a scandle. You say 80% of pregnancies fail without intervention. OK. Without our medical technology, we are little more than animals in that instance. As alluded to above, before the advent of modern techniques, millions of children did die too young. But there was no alternative, it was a part of life. It is only with the modern option of this not being the case that we can say how horrific a situation it must have been. Look to the natural world to see that we're not so different. A green turtle may lay hundreds of eggs in one year, perhaps 1% of them will survive the trials of life to breed in turn. Nature understands how hard it is to survive to adulthood, so stacks the odds by creating many many youngsters to begin the journey. The sperms thing is exactly the same, to maximise the chances of copulation being successful, millions of sperms start out on a journey that only one will succeed.
And pro-lifers claim they are pro-life yet think it is acceptable to attack or even kill people in pursuit of their aims. Go figure. Both sides of this arguement have holes and hyprocrisies. I try to wait and see what they say or do before I decide if I what to engage with them.

reply from: yoda

No, cracat, I used the word "arrogant" because you used it to apply to protecting the unborn, as if any sentiment of kindness, compassion, or a desire to protect unborn life was "arrogant". It was YOUR word, remember?
Sorry, that just will not fly. You know quite well, as does every other sane person, that the "doubts" about the status of the unborn are no more than transparent lies told to construct a fig leaf for the killing of babies. Do you honestly expect me to believe that there are sane people out there who think that a normal unborn baby is "not alive"? No, of course you don't, right? So how can a living baby not be a "life", as you put it? ANSWER: It is NOT possible! Oh, and the word "independent" has zero bearing on the subject of whether a creature is alive or dead, don't you realize that? It means ABSOLUTELY NOTHING in that regard. Look it up!
Nope. There are plenty of valid definitions of "life", but IF you want to try to use the ambiguity of our scientific understanding of life as an excuse to justify killing babies, then you must also admit that you cannot prove that YOU are alive! No, that assertion is pure BS, because we know for a FACT that life does NOT come from "non-living" material.... EVER!! "Life" is a continuum.... it DOES NOT stop and start again! So to sum up, you are clinging to a transparent fig leaf in this matter, which does not cover your desire to justify the slaughter of innocent unborn babies.
Once again, you do NOT know any more about the "living status" of born people than you do about unborn people. You are simply attempting to immorally discriminate against the unborn for the purpose of justifying their slaughter.
Listen up, cracat....... we prolifers do NOT perform abortions, legal or otherwise...... so don't blame us for what YOUR SIDE does in the name of "reproductive freedom". It will be YOUR SIDE that will be killing women in "back alleys", not ours.
Ha!! I'll bet you also find it "repugnantly arrogant" that most of society seeks to remove the "choice" of child molesters, rapists, and murderers, right? No? You're down with that? So it's not arrogant to want laws that protect born people, but it is "repugnantly arrogant" to want the SAME LAWS to be applied to unborn people???
If there's any arrogance here, cracat, it is in YOU, and people like you who turn your noses up at the value of innocent life in the womb, and sneer at the blood of the 4,000 innocent unborn babies killed in this country every day.
Now, that's REAL arrogance!

reply from: yoda

Come on Smurfy, give us a break! You're not really THAT stupid, are you? Fess up now, you're just pretending to be as ignorant as a stump to try to justify killing babies, aren't you?
You know quite well that "life" is a continuum, and does NOT "stop and start again, don't you?
Come on, stop the pretense of ignorance and fess up!

reply from: yoda

No you're not. You're attempting to create enough confusion so as to fabricate a smoke screen, behind which you can hide.
We DON'T CARE whether viruses are alive or not.... do we? We KNOW that all healthy human beings ARE ALIVE, regardless of their age, developmental stage, or birth status!! YOU can no more prove that YOU are alive than a baby, born or unborn can be proven to be alive. LIFE is self-evident by it's activity, and no complicated manipulations of terminology is needed or helpful in this discussion.
Has anyone on this forum threatened to attack or kill you, cracat? Has anyone on this forum threatened to attack or kill anyone? No?
Well then, I think it's safe to say that you are THROWING A RED HERRING ARGUMENT into the fray, aren't you?
Why don't you take your stinking fish back to where it came from, sport?

reply from: jujujellybean

HMMMMMM.....well, if you don't think it is absolutely wrong and would tell someone about it, pro abortion seems the obvious road here!!!!

reply from: jujujellybean

Did you know that ninety three percent of women regret abortion? Big numbers!

reply from: jujujellybean

You must have met LOTS of pro lifers!!! How can you assume that? That's terrible! I know some people may, but I would never justify killing to stop the killing. I know many people agree with me there. Stop making assumptions. I've been here for months, where as you have been here a day or two. Now either debate or don't, just leave bad assumptions out of it!

reply from: cracrat

Sorry, that just will not fly. You know quite well, as does every other sane person, that the "doubts" about the status of the unborn are no more than transparent lies told to construct a fig leaf for the killing of babies. Do you honestly expect me to believe that there are sane people out there who think that a normal unborn baby is "not alive"? No, of course you don't, right? So how can a living baby not be a "life", as you put it? ANSWER: It is NOT possible! Oh, and the word "independent" has zero bearing on the subject of whether a creature is alive or dead, don't you realize that? It means ABSOLUTELY NOTHING in that regard. Look it up!
There are plenty of people in the world who view the unborn child as not a human life and therefore not eligible for the protection of the law, if there weren't, there'd be no debate and no need for this group. There are points during pregnancy at which the heart starts beating, the clump of cells becomes recognisable as a child, at which the neurons in the brain start to fire and presumably thoughts first occur. Any one of these could, with validity, be argued at the point at which the feotus becomes human and therefore gains the rights accorded to everyone else in the nation.
Nope. There are plenty of valid definitions of "life", but IF you want to try to use the ambiguity of our scientific understanding of life as an excuse to justify killing babies, then you must also admit that you cannot prove that YOU are alive! No, that assertion is pure BS, because we know for a FACT that life does NOT come from "non-living" material.... EVER!! "Life" is a continuum.... it DOES NOT stop and start again! So to sum up, you are clinging to a transparent fig leaf in this matter, which does not cover your desire to justify the slaughter of innocent unborn babies.
I'm not trying to use scientific ambiguity to justify abortion. Merely pointing out that at this time, it is impossible for us to say for sure at what point the fertilized egg becomes an unborn child from a scientific, unemotional, standpoint.
And rubbish that life doesn't come from the non-living. Every atom of your being originated not of this Earth, will have spent time in other living entities and as non-living entities. There a cycles for all the elements and all the elements spend time in all environments her on Earth. If you're refering to the soul, then I'm not qualified to get involved in that arguement.
Once again, you do NOT know any more about the "living status" of born people than you do about unborn people. You are simply attempting to immorally discriminate against the unborn for the purpose of justifying their slaughter.
Listen up, cracat....... we prolifers do NOT perform abortions, legal or otherwise...... so don't blame us for what YOUR SIDE does in the name of "reproductive freedom". It will be YOUR SIDE that will be killing women in "back alleys", not ours.
Ha!! I'll bet you also find it "repugnantly arrogant" that most of society seeks to remove the "choice" of child molesters, rapists, and murderers, right? No? You're down with that? So it's not arrogant to want laws that protect born people, but it is "repugnantly arrogant" to want the SAME LAWS to be applied to unborn people???
If there's any arrogance here, cracat, it is in YOU, and people like you who turn your noses up at the value of innocent life in the womb, and sneer at the blood of the 4,000 innocent unborn babies killed in this country every day.
Now, that's REAL arrogance!
A person must be allowed to decide for themselves in what direction their moral compass points. Your's tell you that it is not acceptable to bestow any harm upon the unborn child. Fine. Other people's will tell them that until the child is born, it is a part of their body to be treated as they choose. Not fine, but they are entitled to their view. For a minority such as you and your ilk to make this decision for everybody else is what I find arrogant.
There is no our side/your side, good guys/bad guys, jut people trying to muddle through what must be an extraordinarily difficult decision. You're may be right in saying that pro-lifers won't be performing operations; but there are those amongst you who picket clinic, bully the workers, intimidate visitors and generally make life miserable for anyone conected to the industry. There really isn't a moral high-ground on either side of this arguement.
Of course I don't support the right of child molesters, rapists or murderers to do what they do, that's just patently absurd.
But the law must be realistic. IF abortion were to be banned again it would not make demand disappear, just as banning marijuana hasn't made demand for that go away. Demand can be reduced through education though. Teach children and young people the likely consequences of their actions and they might think twice. Shriek at them what evil ba****ds they are and they'll never listen to you.

reply from: cracrat

You must have met LOTS of pro lifers!!! How can you assume that? That's terrible! I know some people may, but I would never justify killing to stop the killing. I know many people agree with me there. Stop making assumptions. I've been here for months, where as you have been here a day or two. Now either debate or don't, just leave bad assumptions out of it!
I missed out a 'some' there. I apologise, that was my mistake. I never intentionally tar everyone with one brush.

reply from: sander

Well, Cracrat at least you came back. But, you weren't really on the fence were you? Don't worry, it isn't any surprise.
I'm glad the powers that be don't take your attitude in creating and enforcing laws. Just because people continue to do something illegal doesn't make for a very good reason to make it leagl now does it?
I'm ALL for educating, but when it comes to abortion very little if any of the adverse consequenses are part of the "education".
As soon as the lopsided support for abortion on demand is changed to a balanced view, we can talk.

reply from: carolemarie

Arrogence is deciding that your child must die so you can live as you please.
Abortion is an insane decision.

reply from: faithman

It is also insane to proclaim intentions of fighting personhood for the womb child, and then contend that you are "pro-life".

reply from: cracrat

I'm glad the powers that be don't take your attitude in creating and enforcing laws. Just because people continue to do something illegal doesn't make for a very good reason to make it leagl now does it?
I'm ALL for educating, but when it comes to abortion very little if any of the adverse consequenses are part of the "education".
As soon as the lopsided support for abortion on demand is changed to a balanced view, we can talk.
I never said I was on the fence, I just didn't know if I'd be considered pro-life for my personal view or pro-choice for my pan-societal view.
If people are likely to continue a banned activity, regardless of its legal status, to teir own detriment, it makes sense to me to bring it out in the open and impose checks, balances and regulations.
And before someone suggests it, I'm not advocating rape, murder, child molestation or any other horrible crime you can think of.
If there are flaws in the education, perhaps effort should be directed toward changing it. As I've said before, I live on the other side of the pond so don't know things like the state of such education in schools.

reply from: Skippy

Did you know that ninety three percent of women regret abortion? Big numbers!
What is the source of that statistic?

reply from: faithman

Did you know that ninety three percent of women regret abortion? Big numbers!
What is the source of that statistic?
Certainly not the same butt the prodeath side pulls theirs out of.

reply from: AshMarie88

Oh yea I forgot to mention, I'm also pro-life because of BIOLOGY!

reply from: AshMarie88

100% pro-life by the way, NO exceptions, NO apology, NO regrets!

reply from: 4given

Are you comparing a virus to a human being?
What is most difficult to fathom is the mothers that sacrifice their defenseless young to the sharp teeth, claws and dirty great horns of their known/hired predator- the abortionist.
Are you implying that it is better to kill ones offspring to avoid their potential for natural death?
What pro-lifers? It is the choice side that finds it acceptable to attack- KILL people in pursuit of their aims. That is however, what choice/abortion is about. Perhaps you should not waste our time here, as I am quite sure you do not have an argument that has not already been addressed. Do you find any reason to abort justifiable?

reply from: yoda

That's very close to what Mother Teresa said:
"It is a poverty that a woman should kill her baby so that she may live as she wishes".

reply from: Smurfy

Where did you get this stat form?
Source, thanks.

reply from: Smurfy

You do know that there are many living organisms that can survive being frozen (stopped) then be thawed out (start) and live again?
Apparently you don't.
Which is curious that you don't know, since this can be done to humans not long after conception. I though you would have been aware of that.
What pretense of ignorance?

reply from: Beprolifewithme

Wow! This was a great thread to start, personally I was raised in a very prolife catholic household. Now that I actually understand what abortion is (compared to when I was younger) I'am doing more to stop this awful continuing murder.
Cracat: From what I've read (not quite all of your posts) it sounds to me as if you've gone over to the prochoice side b/c of Faithman's choice of words. IF this is the case, I'am sorry but that's kind of a stupid reason. You must decide yourself if you are for the killing of innocent children or not. We are all here to help you with questions, but don't base support for human slaughter off of people's words. It's unfortunate that Faithman has to post that way (and several others) but there are many many nice people on here. I hope that you rethink this carefully.

reply from: cracrat

It wasn't faithman's attacks that hardened my position, I quite enjoy reading his responses - they amuse me greatly. I maintain that I would absolutely advocate against abortion to anyone who asked but I would also absolutely defend a person's right to make up their own mind.
It is an opinion, not a fact, that the unborn feotus is a separate human life, possessing of its own rights and responsibilities. Therefore, the manner in which you treat the unborn feotus and the protections, or not, you extend to it must also be a matter of opinion.

reply from: Smurfy

I disagree.
Every person has different ideals of what their 'highest calling' is.
Being a mother is only one option.

reply from: yoda

But they DON'T DIE DURING BEING FROZEN...... they are still ALIVE, in a state of SUSPENDED ANIMATION......
AND MORE TO THE POINT....... THERE IS NO FREEZING TEMPERATURE IN THE WOMB!!
What pretense of ignorance?
Ah, okay...... my mistake.... it's genuine. Sorry!

reply from: yoda

Absolute HOGWASH!! JIBBERISH!!
There are people who think that Jews are NOT people, and by your vapid reasoning it's perfectly okay to let those people kill all the Jews they wish to.
What an idiotic sham of an excuse for the violent slaughter of innocents.

reply from: carolemarie

I disagree.
Every person has different ideals of what their 'highest calling' is.
Being a mother is only one option.
I agree with that as well. Each of us in unique and has different giftings. Not every woman is a great mother. Some shouldn't be mothers, which is why adoption is a option, along with sterilization. But killing babies to not have to raise them is a horrible solution!

reply from: yoda

I agree with all of that, but I also agree that being a good mother is the highest calling a woman can answer. And being a good father is the highest calling a man can answer.
There simply is no more noble avocation than being a good parent, IMHO.

reply from: cracrat

Absolute HOGWASH!! JIBBERISH!!
There are people who think that Jews are NOT people, and by your vapid reasoning it's perfectly okay to let those people kill all the Jews they wish to.
What an idiotic sham of an excuse for the violent slaughter of innocents.
And in the same way that it is extraordinarily difficult to convince a holocaust denier that it really happened, an anti-semite that Jews are people too and a staunch racist bigot that black really aren't just a bunch of criminals, it will be impossible for me to convince many of the people on this forum that a feotus' personhood, or not, is a matter of personal opinion.
The vast majority of people accept that Jews are people, the holocaust happened and black people can and do contribute to society, it is therefore unacceptable to society to treat these people in any other way. However, there is no majority of society that accepts that a feotus is a person too and thus should be protected under law. Until there is such a majority, your comparisons are at best facetious and at worst liable to set back your stated aims.

reply from: MC3

Cracrat says, "It is an opinion, not a fact, that the unborn feotus is a separate human life, possessing of its own rights and responsibilities. Therefore, the manner in which you treat the unborn feotus and the protections, or not, you extend to it must also be a matter of opinion."
Only a moron could suggest something this abysmally ignorant.
To imply that the unborn is part of the woman's body is the same as saying that when a woman is pregnant she has 4 arms, 4 legs, 2 heads, 2 hearts, 2 brains, etc. It also suggests that, if her child is a boy, for nine months of her life she has a penis.
The reality is, the unborn child has its own genetic code, blood type, fingerprints, brain, nervous system and internal organs. That means that if it were possible for an unborn child to commit a crime, it has everything necessary for any competent forensic expert to identify it in a court of law. Further, there is no possibility that this identifying evidence could point to anyone other than the unborn child from whom it was taken - and that includes the mom.
In 1999, an event took place that shows just how laughable Cracrat's thought process is. A Tennessee physician had just completed an operation on an unborn child who had been temporarily removed from the mother's womb and was in the process of closing the incision in the mom's abdomen. Before he could do so however, the child punched his arm through the incision and wrapped his hand around the doctor's finger. Photographer, Michael Clancy was photographing the surgery for Life magazine and he immediately snapped a picture which ended up on magazine covers and television sets around the world. The question is, if the unborn is not a separate human being from the mother, who was it that grabbed the doctor's finger?
The point is, there is simply no rational way to deny that the unborn child is a separate and unique individual. And that is not "opinion" as Cracrat claims, it is a biological fact.
But having said all that, for those of you who still subscribe to this idiotic "baby as part of the woman" philosophy, I ask you to imagine a photo of conjoined (Siamese) twins and answer this simple question: Is that a picture of one person or two?
Before you answer, understand that, from a biological standpoint, conjoined twins are far closer to being one person than is a mother and her unborn child. Conjoined twins are always the same sex, always have the same DNA, always the same blood type, always share at least one external body structure and often share several internal organs. And as long as they are joined, if one dies they both die.
But none of that is true about a mom and her unborn baby. They are the same sex only about half the time, often don't have the same blood type, never have the same DNA and do not share any external body parts or internal organs. Moreover, it is not only possible for one to survive when the other one dies, it is common.
The bottom line is, while it would be biologically incorrect to claim that conjoined twins are not two distinct individuals, even that argument would be more grounded in scientific reality than the claim that a mother and her unborn child are not two distinct individuals.
By the way, what the "vast majority of people" believe is not the issue. The issue is: What is true? There are many examples in history where consensus simply meant that all the fools were on one side.

reply from: sander

Very well said, MC3!!
It is stunning the depth of denial proaborts live in.
I've always contended that they must, after all, they have to sleep too.
And by so doing, I can attribute at least some humanity to these people.

reply from: cracrat

I'm not suggesting that the current mass opinion is right or wrong. But the current mass opinion is what influences the law-makers, particularly in a democracy. I notice that from states with a strong catholic/evangelical christian element, senetors/representatives tend to be pro-life, but from those states amusingly described as 'progressive' (california, new york, etc), the congress(wo)men seem to be more pro-choice.
If you want to affect a change in the law, you must affect a change in public opinion. Photos in Life like the one you describe probably do that. What you must also do is portray yourselves as the reasonable side of the arguement. Some people who post here do that very well, others do not. Public opinion, rightly or wrongly, maintains that a feotus is an extension of the mother's body and therefore hers to treat as she will. Change that perception and the law will change too.

reply from: MC3

You'll have to forgive me, Cracat, if I don't value advise about how to end this holocaust from the moral degenerates who defend it.
By the way, America is a republic not a democracy. And there is a difference.

reply from: faithman

And a constitutional republic at that. All it takes is for a pro-personhood congress to vote thru the LIFE AT CONCEPTION ACT, and a Presidents signature. Then all the laws already on the books that protect persons would aply to the womb child. I prepose that we quit calling ourselves "pro-life" with all of its decption, double speak, and corupted leadership, and start calling ourselves pro-personhood. It was personhood denied that started this mess, and it is established personhood that will end it.

reply from: sander

So, what are YOU doing to change this so called, "perception"?
Or is the real truth you don't want this "perception" changed?

reply from: cracrat

So, what are YOU doing to change this so called, "perception"?
Or is the real truth you don't want this "perception" changed?
I'm not doing anything to change this perception. I belive it is important for everybody to make up ther own mind.
On a similar note, I did write to my MP detailing my concerns about embryo stem cell research relating to the current Embroyology and Reproduction Bill going through the House of Commons.

reply from: cracrat

Apologies, you're right about that. My mistake. You are indeed a Republic.
Moral degenerate? I expected a rather more intelligent thrust and parry from you

reply from: sander

At least you're an honest slacker, but then why on earth bring it up?
What were your "concerns", do tell.

reply from: sander

Apologies, you're right about that. My mistake. You are indeed a Republic.
Moral degenerate? I expected a rather more intelligent thrust and parry from you
It IS an intelligent response.
Only a moral degenerate would approve and or partake in the wholesale slaughter of mulitple millions of human beings whose only crime was being concieved.
And worse, imo, is someone who believes it's wrong but not wrong for others, quite the paradox.

reply from: cracrat

At least you're an honest slacker, but then why on earth bring it up?
What were your "concerns", do tell.
I was concerned that equal priority would be given to embryo stem-cell research as to adult stem-cell research despite the fact that there have been no treatments or advances so far made with embryo stem-cells. All the advances made with such treatments have been made with adult stem-cells. I think the ethical implications of this are quite clear, to follow the embryo stem-cell research line, the hysteria generated would risk derailing all such research for nobody's gain. To prioritise adult stem-cell research avoids the hysteria and any accompanying slow down in the research.
I brought it up to try and highlight the magnitude of the task you all face if you want total success as it appears from this forum. And to offer a little constructive criticism. Of course, MC3 spitting it back in my face really convinced me of the maturity of the people involved in your struggle.

reply from: sander

Equal priority, so you have no problem with embryo stem-cell research?
If that's the case, then it would have to be in the face of the fact it's the adult stem research that shows the best results. Puzzling.
The people involved in our struggle have had to helplessly stand by and watch the wholesale slaughter of innocent human beings, so you'll have to forgive us if we don't take a proaborts criticism as constructive. We really don't care what you think about the level of maturity. Our primary focus is the baby, everything else is secondary.
Sometimes the truth is hard to take, we understand your problem with that.

reply from: GodsLaw4Us2Live

Moral degenerate? I expected a rather more intelligent thrust and parry from you
Huh? The wicked who kill babies don't realize they are moral degenerates. When the Bible talks about the wicked and evil people, it's talking about you, if you defend killing young human beings. Don't you get it?

reply from: cracrat

Equal priority, so you have no problem with embryo stem-cell research?
If that's the case, then it would have to be in the face of the fact it's the adult stem research that shows the best results. Puzzling.
I don't think you read my statement properly. My concern is that if equal priority is given to both lines of research then the ensuing hysteria generated would slow down both lines of research . Taking this, and the fact that so far not one advance has been made with embryo stem-cells, into account, itstrikes my as rather pointless to allow such research to go ahead for at least the forseeable future.

reply from: Smurfy

Precisely; the same can be said for sperm or an egg. Or a particular strain of bacteria, or many other types of germ culture. There are even fully grown insects that can survive being frozen completely.
I think everyone is quite aware of that. Calm down. You'll give yourself an aneurysm!
Everything about me is genuine.

reply from: yoda

I've never seen such a dishonest, sewer-scum of an argument in my entire life. And that's a long time.
You must think we all fell off the turnip wagon yesterday, right? We know (already) what the word "person" means, did you imagine that we don't have dictionaries in this country, or can find them on the internet?
So NOW you want to CHANGE the terms of the argument to "person", rather than the previously mentioned "separate human life,", eh? What's the matter, did you give up already?
Okay, I'll take your surrender and move on to "person". The word has two basic usages, one is legal and the other is the much older, much more common vernacular usage. Since we're not making legal arguments here, I'll just post the vernacular meaning:
per·son (plural peo·ple per·sons (formal)) noun 1. human being: an individual human being 2. human's body: a human being's body, often including the clothing
http://encarta.msn.com/dictionary_1861725217/person.html

per.son Pronunciation: (pûr'sun),-n. 2. a human being as distinguished from an animal or a thing. 6. the body of a living human being, sometimes including the clothes being worn: He had no money on his person. http://www.infoplease.com/ipd/A0584644.html

Main Entry: per·son 1 : HUMAN: 4 a archaic : bodily appearance b : the body of a human being; http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=person&x=16&y=16

Person: Pronunciation puhr sEn Definition 1. a human being. Definition 2. the body of a human being. Example the clothes on his person. http://www.wordsmyth.net/live/home.php?script=search&matchent=person&matchtype=exact

The ONLY authority we have on what the "vast majority of people" accept with relation to the word "person" is dictionaries. REAL dictionaries, not the made-up ones that you proaborts keep in your anal cavities......

reply from: faithman

Equal priority, so you have no problem with embryo stem-cell research?
If that's the case, then it would have to be in the face of the fact it's the adult stem research that shows the best results. Puzzling.
The people involved in our struggle have had to helplessly stand by and watch the wholesale slaughter of innocent human beings, so you'll have to forgive us if we don't take a proaborts criticism as constructive. We really don't care what you think about the level of maturity. Our primary focus is the baby, everything else is secondary.
Sometimes the truth is hard to take, we understand your problem with that.
BOO Hoo, the bloody little brit called us inmature. What will the maggot punk scum bag death scancs think of next? It ain't about all your stinken bean wind mate. It is about the personhood of the womb child. Once established, all this craziness goes away. So pro-personhood folks just need to ingnore prochoice/prolife and keep the focus on personhood for the womb child. Anything else is a distraction, and ultimatly deadly to our preborn brothers and sisters. They are who we fight for, and there is where our loyalty belongs, not to a "movement" that has sold them out, and cares more about looking good, than saving BABIES lives. This is 1st last and always about the child in the womb. This is not about all the neo-prolifers that have personal aggendas, who have even point blank said on this forum that they would fight presonhood tooth and nail just to keep future killers out of Jail. Pro-personhood folks need to quit being bogged down in emotionalism, and realize the guilty should be prosicuted. That no new laws will have to be legislated when personhood for the womb child is established. The ones already there will work just fine, and a jury of 12 citizens have the final say. Pro-personhood people need to elect state legislators that will establish personhood at the state level, then let them graduate to the federal level to get the job done there as well. WE THE PEOPLE need to speek loud and often. It is time we quit asking, and demand action on behalf of children in the womb. Or we can continue to play stupid little semantical games and watch the children die another 3 plus decades.

reply from: yoda

And therein lies the difference between our two sides..... we CARE about what is right and what is wrong above all else..... and you apparently don't.
Let me see now, someone who is highly supportive of the right to electively kill a healthy, innocent unborn child is giving we prolifers advice about how to bring about a change in the law....... now, what are the chances that the advice will be good?

reply from: yoda

EXCEPT your willingness to debate honestly.

reply from: sander

I read it right, you just gummed it up with so many words. And you want to argue over the use of one little word, "baby".
Sheesh, you do like to hear yourself talk.
In any event, you seem to be on the right side of that argument, guess that's something...I think.

reply from: faithman

I read it right, you just gummed it up with so many words. And you want to argue over the use of one little word, "baby".
Sheesh, you do like to hear yourself talk.
In any event, you seem to be on the right side of that argument, guess that's something...I think.
It is about the personhood of the womb child. Once established, all this craziness goes away. So pro-personhood folks just need to ingnore prochoice/prolife and keep the focus on personhood for the womb child. Anything else is a distraction, and ultimatly deadly to our preborn brothers and sisters. They are who we fight for, and there is where our loyalty belongs, not to a "movement" that has sold them out, and cares more about looking good, than saving BABIES lives. This is 1st last and always about the child in the womb. This is not about all the neo-prolifers that have personal aggendas, who have even point blank said on this forum that they would fight presonhood tooth and nail just to keep future killers out of Jail. Pro-personhood folks need to quit being bogged down in emotionalism, and realize the guilty should be prosicuted. That no new laws will have to be legislated when personhood for the womb child is established. The ones already there will work just fine, and a jury of 12 citizens have the final say. Pro-personhood people need to elect state legislators that will establish personhood at the state level, then let them graduate to the federal level to get the job done there as well. WE THE PEOPLE need to speak loud and often. It is time we quit asking, and demand action on behalf of children in the womb. Or we can continue to play stupid little semantical games and watch the children die another 3 plus decades.

reply from: cracrat

I've never seen such a dishonest, sewer-scum of an argument in my entire life. And that's a long time.
This was not intended as an argument, more a statement of how surely you all hold your opinons.
The ONLY authority we have on what the "vast majority of people" accept with relation to the word "person" is dictionaries. REAL dictionaries, not the made-up ones that you proaborts keep in your anal cavities......
It was not a deliberate change in the terms of the argument. Other than that, I don't quite understand the significance of your post.

reply from: cracrat

I read it right, you just gummed it up with so many words. And you want to argue over the use of one little word, "baby".
Sheesh, you do like to hear yourself talk.
In any event, you seem to be on the right side of that argument, guess that's something...I think.
Apologies, the more I post, the more I find it important to remove as much ambiguity as I can from my statements. Do you realise there are people here given to twisting what other people say?

reply from: sander

You're kidding, right?
We're MORE than use to the twisting of logic and words by the proaborts that frequent this site.
The proaborts cornerned that market long ago.
In this country the proaborts made a pointed purpose of twisting verbage to suit their cause.

reply from: Smurfy

There's plenty of that going on in both camps.
It often happens when two diametric opposite factions clash.

reply from: GodsLaw4Us2Live

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,344409,00.html
The Imam said, "I must have hatred for everything non-Muslim."

reply from: NewMom

Back to the origional question in the thread. How did I become prolife?
Abortion is always something I had a hatred for, even as a child. I could never understand how someone could not want a child; children are our future. Before I could somewhat understand how someone could do it but I could never agree with it. As I grew up and became more educated, the real turning point for me was in College. I was taking the Educational Assistant/Special Needs Support course at Niagara College, and we had a sociology-type advocacy course where we were given topics to debate. I think I got a topic about the ethical issues surrounding assisted euthanization, but my fellow classmates got abortion.
They were assigned sides, and our teacher insisted that it wasn't going to be a reflection of our own views, we just had to argue the topic and our marks were based on how well the points went across. A friend of mine who was incredibly Christian and prolife was given the opposition proabort side, and she refused to even argue it, and ended up taking a 0% for the whole thing because she couldn't even bring herself to state even falsely that she supported abortion.
My friend K (we'll call her) started off her presentation with a video of her ultrasound - K was a young mother, her son was 2 at the time. And she brought her son in that day with permission. We saw his little heart beating on the ultrasound video and him squirming around in there, and then we seen him standing there next to her, blonde and blue-eyed and the sweetest little boy ever. I can remember her asking our class, "How can you argue that this isn't a little person?" And no one could even come up with anything close to support abortion.
Something in my head clicked that day, and a week later I joined a prolife group in the Niagara region. I just couldn't stop thinking about it and knew in my heart I had to do something to help.

reply from: sander

This is the sole reason abortion clinics will not allow the mother to see the ultra-sound.
Can you imagine a health class using this to demonstrate pregnancy?
The proaborts will accuse us of using "emotion". How dare we let our hearts be stirred. How dare we allow truth to interfer.
Thanks for sharing your story, Newmom.

reply from: NewMom

Anytime We (at my advocacy group) are working like busy bees around here to get more videos and pics of ultrasounds into health classes. What I don't understand is you can show kids ugly pictures of genitals with STD's/STI's, but not pictures/vids of ultrasounds? We've all seen those "How Babies are Made" videos from the 80's - what I'm concerned about in today's educational system is that they are still showing those old school videos. Understandable, not much has changed about how human beings are made and born, but come on! Thanks Planned Parenthood! Society needs a shake and a much needed update on how we are relaying all this info back to our youth half-assed!

reply from: lukesmom

Haven't been on this board for a couple of days, my heart just wasn't "in it". Anyway, I found this thread relevant after the last few days. March 31 was the anniversary of our D-day (diagnosis day). It was 5 yrs ago that we were told our 16 week old "fetus" (cold word for our son) was going to die. I don't care that scientifically he was a fetus, he was our son, my other children's brother. He was a human being. Funny thing is he was not initially wanted by me or his father. It hurts to say that but it is the truth. We had 4 other kids and didn't want and couldn't really afford another. But dispite that he was already here with us and our responsibility and gradually we fell in love with him. Sorry if this is emotional but this is alwas the worst time of year for me.
I haven't been prolife in the antiabortion sense all my life. There was no such thing when I was growing up. If someone would have had a illegal abortion at that time it would have blown our small town society away! No one even thought that way! There were several pregnant girls in high school and they all went on to have happy and fulfilling lives with their child. It wasn't such a "me" society then and it was a much better and happier world IMHO. Then Roe vs Wade came into the picture. I was a young adult and just couldn't concieve that a woman could decide if her child would live or die. To me pregnancy=baby, that had been obvious all my life but Roe vs Wade changed the words and slowly changed how people thought. Looking back now it looks like mind control. Change the wording to make it all seem more appealing, it's not a baby, its an embryo, fetus, clump of cells and you (the mother) is most important, etc, etc, etc. The beginning of political correctness. I come from a small farming community and none of this made any sense. We lived from the land and we didn't have time for "mind games" or word trickery. We ignored the "windblowers" and continued on with life. We lived and believed in "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you". and that included the unborn, wanted or unwanted. Unfortunantly this attitude of rural, small town America cost us all and the pc attitude of legalized abortion and the subsequent dehuminazation and abuse of unborn, infants and children overtook us.
Now, I am prolife because of that time, because of the respectful, forthright way I was brought up, not only by my parents but by my community and society as a whole. It all comes down to: pregnancy=baby=child=adult=elderly, all human life worthy of respect and life. Rights we never even considered arguing about 45 yrs ago.

reply from: NewMom

I feel what you are saying lukesmom. Yesterday (April 1st) meant that I would have been 8 months pregnant and there's no words to even describe how it feels. The only thing we can do is look to the future but its easier said than done. May 1st was my expected due date, and is now our moving date, but that doesn't dumb down the fact my fiance and I are going to be hurting that day. I had a thought in the tub earlier today that May 1st will always be his birthday - 20 years from now I'll be thinking on May 1st he would have been turning 20. I'll never get to see the colour of his eyes or hear his voice, and its things like that, that eat me up every day.
Then growing from those thoughts I become even more angered that someone could dehumanize the very thing we felt moving inside us. My heart for a long while wasn't in to listening/reading people dehumanize the very thing I just lost. The very moment I found out I was pregnant it became a human being; when I found out it was a boy it was my son - no one can ever take that away from us. Somehow despite everything some days I feel like crusading the nation, others I don't.
But its what we stand for that makes all the difference.
Take time off from the board if you have to, I came to the realization that its not a moral obligation of mine to post - spend time with your family. And if you need to chat, let me know I'm here for you.
~*Ash

reply from: lukesmom

thank you Ash,
The first year is the worst. Every holiday change of season is the first without. The second is a little easier. Please have hope for the future. There is a constant grief in life after losing your child but that grief lessens over time or maybe you just become so used to it it is part of your life. I haven't figured that one out yet. After 5 years the open wound on my heart has healed to a scar but every year around diagnosis day, that scar bleeds a little. We are parents of angels that watch over us every moment of every day. Not everyone is so blessed! Mixed blessing I could have done without but that wasn't our choice. Today is finally a nice day and the snow is mostly gone. I think I will make a trip to the cemetary as I haven't been all winter.
Hold secure in the fact that you son was a person and he mattered. I don't care what "others" may say. You know the truth. Be easy on yourself the next couple of weeks and allow yourself whatever emotions you feel. None of this is easy. I am also here to talk if you need to. I'll be in a better place emotionally in a day or two. Feel free to pm me, I actually have done a lot of support work on line and nothing helps more than just plain listening IMHO.
may God's peace surround you,
remembering our boys, Sue Luke's mom

reply from: Beprolifewithme

It wasn't faithman's attacks that hardened my position, I quite enjoy reading his responses - they amuse me greatly. I maintain that I would absolutely advocate against abortion to anyone who asked but I would also absolutely defend a person's right to make up their own mind.
It is an opinion, not a fact, that the unborn feotus is a separate human life, possessing of its own rights and responsibilities. Therefore, the manner in which you treat the unborn feotus and the protections, or not, you extend to it must also be a matter of opinion.
Since when do prolife people shove pregnant women into childbirth. we only help and suggest to let a baby live!!!! And what pushed you to the prochoice side?

reply from: cracrat

It wasn't faithman's attacks that hardened my position, I quite enjoy reading his responses - they amuse me greatly. I maintain that I would absolutely advocate against abortion to anyone who asked but I would also absolutely defend a person's right to make up their own mind.
It is an opinion, not a fact, that the unborn feotus is a separate human life, possessing of its own rights and responsibilities. Therefore, the manner in which you treat the unborn feotus and the protections, or not, you extend to it must also be a matter of opinion.
Since when do prolife people shove pregnant women into childbirth. we only help and suggest to let a baby live!!!! And what pushed you to the prochoice side?
A week ago, if someone had asked me, I would've said I was pro-life. 3 days ago I joined this forum to learn and to ask questions. It took less than 24 hours for the comprehensive attacks of me, my character and my position to come rolling in. I didn't decide I was pro-choice, you lot did.

reply from: AshMarie88

Since when should attacks make you decide to be pro-choice? And altho some here may attack right away, not all of us are that way.
www.abortionno.org If you think you're pro-choice...

reply from: cracrat

The attacks demonstrated to me that my dissent from 'the party line' would not be tolerated. I can not imagine I'd get a much different response from other similar groups. The 'you're either with us, or against us' mentality that I've noticed associated with this debate ensures that I am unlikely to find agreement with either side. I don't give a monkey's though, quite happy to strike my own path.
And that is about the most horrifying video I have ever seen. "WARNING: Graphic Abortion Video begins in 10 seconds" really doesn't cover it IMO. I would question the taste of whoever postioned the little hands gripping the coin, rather than just laying them next to it. Show that in schools, followed by a stern 15 minute chat about condoms and I dare say teenage pregnancy rates would drop off by 99%.

reply from: NewMom

To me there is no such thing in prochoice. It is not a stance, its supporting proaborts. Either you are prolife or proabort. I don't believe in prochoice. Prochoice is a sad phrase to me and a poor explanation.

reply from: cracrat

I understand that pro-choice and pro-abort are mostly seen as completely interchangeable terms. To me it means that I have decided for myself and I am willing to allow others to make the same decision for themselves. I will try to sway them, but if they disagree with me then I will respect that.

reply from: sander

Just *****g spare us! What a croc!
What are you, nine years old? You held a pro-life position for how many years? And coming here changed all that in 3 little days!
And here I at least was giving you credit for being honest. When will I ever learn not to trust anyone who can't see the evil in killing a child in the womb!!!
We're not going to own what you allready believed in long before you got here.
Trying taking some personal responsibility, oh wait...that goes entirely against the proabort position in the first place.

reply from: MC3

Cracrat:
You said: "A week ago, if someone had asked me, I would've said I was pro-life. 3 days ago I joined this forum to learn and to ask questions. It took less than 24 hours for the comprehensive attacks of me, my character and my position to come rolling in. I didn't decide I was pro-choice, you lot did."
I don't have the time or patience to mince words so I'll just cut to the chase.
You are a liar.
While it is certainly your right to think that pro-lifers are not the brightest people on earth, I can assure you that we are not stupid enough to buy this, "I-was-pro-life-until-you-people-were-mean-to-me drivel. Moreover, if you think that you invented this little game, you are wrong. We have dealt with phonies like you many times since launching this forum. I suggest you check-out NYKAREN.
The point is, most of us have been at this for many years and, if we don't know anything else, we know how to recognize a pro-lifer.
Now, if you are wondering what gave you away, let me explain.
Being pro-life is not just some self-serving political position or a casually embraced belief. It is a core value that no pro-lifer is going to abandon simply because some other pro-lifer treated them badly. If that were the case, there would be no pro-lifers left. I can tell you that, in my case, some of the most cruel, untrue, and mean-spirited things ever said about me have come from other pro-lifers. The same is true of many pro-lifers with whom I have discussed this issue. But make no mistake, that would never cause even one of us to question, much less renounce, our position.
What people like you don't seem to understand is that, if we won't abandon the unborn because of the things said about us by the godless media and those of you in the Choice Mafia, we are certainly not going to do so because of things our fellow pro-lifers say.
That same philosophy would have applied to you - had you been pro-life. So you see, picking you out as a fraud was not really that difficult. All we had to do is listen to what you said.
I understand that this may be a difficult phenomenon for you to understand. After all, as someone who is pro-choice, you don't have a reference point for the concept of people taking positions based on moral principles. If that were not the case, you would have never even tried to run this "I-used-to-be-pro-life" nonsense past us.
In the final analysis, while you might fool us on a lot of things, you will never be able to trick us into believing that you once had a heart for the unborn but dropped them in the grease because some of us were unkind to you. You know that didn't happen and we know that didn't happen.
The fact is, as I once told your predecessor, NYKAREN, you are nothing more than a garden-variety pro-abort. And nothing we did made you that way.

reply from: cracrat

Just *****g spare us! What a croc!
What are you, nine years old? You held a pro-life position for how many years? And coming here changed all that in 3 little days!
And here I at least was giving you credit for being honest. When will I ever learn not to trust anyone who can't see the evil in killing a child in the womb!!!
We're not going to own what you allready believed in long before you got here.
Trying taking some personal responsibility, oh wait...that goes entirely against the proabort position in the first place.
My position hasn't changed in a long time, certainly not since before I went to uni 5 years ago, I can remember having a stand up row with someone in my first few days there. I take complete resposibility for my ideas. I draw on what I learn from others to form them, but they are my ideas. It's just that I wouldn't have described myself as pro-choice until my experience here.

reply from: sander

Okay, I admit...MC3 said it a whole lot better than I did!
Thanks, MC3!

reply from: cracrat

I'm afraid you'll have to go out on a limb and believe me when I tell you there was no intention of fraud or deception on my part in describing, myself as pro-life. I did not perform a volte face because I couldn't cope with the bigger boys being mean to me. I did not realise that in order to describe oneself as pro-life one must have a desire to impose your own moral values upon others, whether they want it or not.
Describing myself as pro-life for all these years was a mistake born of ignorance, not deceit.

reply from: lukesmom

You have got it all wrong in your ignorance. Being pro-life means supporting the unborn's inalienable right to remain alive and not be killed by his/her own parent. Moral values are principles of right and wrong in behavior. As a society we consider murder wrong. Science has proven embryos and fetus' are living humans in an early state. No informed proabort disputes this, instead they don't care because they feel the mother "trumps" her innocent unborn child and therefore killing that child in it's early state is ok. Prolifers keep the truth upfront instead of playing word and mind games.

reply from: Skippy

There are other places on the internet where it is okay to be pro-life for yourself, and pro-choice for everyone else. PM me if you'd like some links.

reply from: cracrat

Thanks, but I'm happy enough here for the time being. To have my opinions challenged tests their validity. If they don't stand up to scrutiny, then I'll need new ones. To hide amongst those who'll just agree with everything I say strikes me as being rather craven.

reply from: MC3

Cracrat:
If you are seriously interested in dialog, answer the questions I raised before. I'll simplify and repeat them.
If the unborn is not a separate individual from the mom ...
(a) are you saying that when a woman is pregnant she has 4 arms, 4 legs, 2 heads, 2 hearts, 2 brains, etc.?
(b) are you also saying that if her baby is a boy, for nine months of her life this woman has a penis?
(c) how do you explain the biological fact that the unborn child has a genetic code, blood type and fingerprints that do not match the mom's?
(d) in the 1999 Michael Clancy / Life Magazine photo, who was it that grabbed the doctor's finger as he returned the patient back into its mother's womb after surgery?
Finally, please address the issue I introduced about whether a photo of conjoined (Siamese) twins is a picture of one person or two. And again, keep in mind that conjoined twins are biologically closer to being one person than is a mother and her unborn child. They are always the same sex, always have the same DNA, always have the same blood type, always share at least one external body structure, often share several internal organs and, as long as they are joined, neither will survive if the other one dies. On the other hand, none of that is true about a mom and her unborn baby. They are the same sex only about half the time, often don't have the same blood type, never have the same DNA and do not share any external body parts or internal organs. Moreover, it is not only possible for one to survive when the other one dies, it is common.
The ball is in your court.

reply from: Faramir

MC3,
I have been on a board where a very militant prochoicer who is allegedly a doctor, would emphatically and without reservation answer "yes" to questions A and B.
Could you give a link to that photo? That would be a powerful image.

reply from: sander

http://conservativethoughts.us/2007/04/05/tv-show-house-shows-unborn-child-grabbing-docs-finger/

reply from: itsmychoice

Skippy has been trying to impress us with the fact that she was a child prodigy; carefullly studying and weighing the evidence for weighty matters as a nine year old. I think she also claimed to be a lawyer, although she supports lawlessness; allowing citizens to decide issues rather than imposing law through a governmental system.
When Roe v Wade decided, I was a teenager. I was paying absolutely no attention at the time; just as I was oblivious to Satan's religion (Islam) before 9/11. It took serious life affecting events to wake me up.
I now know Satan (Allah) authored a book (Koran) to bring about the destruction of mankind. I also know people of low moral character are murdering preborn babies. These evil people want to bring acceptance for baby killing to the next generation of unsuspecting kids, who do not yet know their left hand from their right.
wow, GodsLaw4Us2Live, I never knew that Islam was Satan's religion. Did you make that up on your own or does is it actually mentioned in the Bible?
It seems kind of silly for you to accuse Skippy of supporting "lawlessness" when it is actually you that supports lawlessness. There are laws concerning abortion right now, and, last time I checked, abortion is legal. I don't know what antiabortion law you think pro-choicers are violating.
When I was younger, I did not understand why people would want to abort their fetus. However i realized why as i grew older.
My mom is a single mother with four children and i witnessed that raising children is a very important job and very difficult. I see that my father does not have to take any part in our upbringing so my mother must do it alone. She never had an abortion because she wanted to have us and was very eager to make sacrifices for us.
Because pregnancy takes a huge tole on a woman's body, and a young girl that has ends up pregnant because of a rape should not have to birth and rear a child it if she does not want to and there is another solution.
The idea of taking a woman's right to abortion away angers me. I do not think that we should control other people's lives and make life altering choices for them. I believe that abortion is a woman's right. I believe that we live in a democracy where we are not supposed to make laws restricting people on the ways they live their life and that making abortion illegal is restricting given rights

reply from: 4given

Every moral and ethical "law" honest people enstill into the hearts and minds of their children-
So as a child, you were pure of heart and recognized evil for what it was- as your conscience was seared, your mind came to justify every atrocity conjured up- hence, the abortion remedy.
Is that your argument? Rape? So abortion is justified if a woman is raped and impregnated?
The idea of mutilating a defenseless, innocent human being because of selfish gain is what angers me- So do the feeble attempts to justify such a violent and selfish end- you.
Given rights- right. Like the right you have to fill the pages of a forum with your mindless drivel- You seem familiar. Coco? Anyway- Laws restricting people on the ways they live their life? How do you explain laws against drug abuse, child abuse and murder? Would you prefer a lawless society?

reply from: joe

Nobody has the right to kill an innocent human being.
Your argument of control is hypocritical since you do support laws restricting criminals.
Same rhetoric....same lies.

reply from: faithman

Skippy has been trying to impress us with the fact that she was a child prodigy; carefullly studying and weighing the evidence for weighty matters as a nine year old. I think she also claimed to be a lawyer, although she supports lawlessness; allowing citizens to decide issues rather than imposing law through a governmental system.
When Roe v Wade decided, I was a teenager. I was paying absolutely no attention at the time; just as I was oblivious to Satan's religion (Islam) before 9/11. It took serious life affecting events to wake me up.
I now know Satan (Allah) authored a book (Koran) to bring about the destruction of mankind. I also know people of low moral character are murdering preborn babies. These evil people want to bring acceptance for baby killing to the next generation of unsuspecting kids, who do not yet know their left hand from their right.
wow, GodsLaw4Us2Live, I never knew that Islam was Satan's religion. Did you make that up on your own or does is it actually mentioned in the Bible?
It seems kind of silly for you to accuse Skippy of supporting "lawlessness" when it is actually you that supports lawlessness. There are laws concerning abortion right now, and, last time I checked, abortion is legal. I don't know what antiabortion law you think pro-choicers are violating.
When I was younger, I did not understand why people would want to abort their fetus. However i realized why as i grew older.
My mom is a single mother with four children and i witnessed that raising children is a very important job and very difficult. I see that my father does not have to take any part in our upbringing so my mother must do it alone. She never had an abortion because she wanted to have us and was very eager to make sacrifices for us.
Because pregnancy takes a huge tole on a woman's body, and a young girl that has ends up pregnant because of a rape should not have to birth and rear a child it if she does not want to and there is another solution.
The idea of taking a woman's right to abortion away angers me. I do not think that we should control other people's lives and make life altering choices for them. I believe that abortion is a woman's right. I believe that we live in a democracy where we are not supposed to make laws restricting people on the ways they live their life and that making abortion illegal is restricting given rights
Then let me be the one to really piss you off. You are dead wrong on many accounts in your post. First of all we do not live in a Democracy, we live in a constitutional republic. secondly, no where in our constitution does it say that a woman has the right to cold bloodedly kill their womb child by abortion. Thirdly we have many laws that govern how people live their lives, as a matter of fact every law governs the way people live their lives. It is obvious by your post that you are very young, and really don't know what you are talking about. I sugggest you take time to look at the pictures by clicking on the site in my sig. At least look the womb child in the eye before you condemn them to die.

reply from: carolemarie

It wasn't faithman's attacks that hardened my position, I quite enjoy reading his responses - they amuse me greatly. I maintain that I would absolutely advocate against abortion to anyone who asked but I would also absolutely defend a person's right to make up their own mind.
It is an opinion, not a fact, that the unborn feotus is a separate human life, possessing of its own rights and responsibilities. Therefore, the manner in which you treat the unborn feotus and the protections, or not, you extend to it must also be a matter of opinion.
Since when do prolife people shove pregnant women into childbirth. we only help and suggest to let a baby live!!!! And what pushed you to the prochoice side?
A week ago, if someone had asked me, I would've said I was pro-life. 3 days ago I joined this forum to learn and to ask questions. It took less than 24 hours for the comprehensive attacks of me, my character and my position to come rolling in. I didn't decide I was pro-choice, you lot did.
I agree that some of the pro-lifers who post here can be hateful and mean and just plain ugly. But that shouldn't make you switch your position to pro-choice. If you are against abortion, you are prolife. Period. As for not shoving your morality on someone else, I think you can tell people the truth without being hateful and ugly. And if they choose abortion, you can still care about them and pray for them and be their friend. People make mistakes, that doesn't mean we turn our backs on them...
Blessings
Carolemarie

reply from: joe

It wasn't faithman's attacks that hardened my position, I quite enjoy reading his responses - they amuse me greatly. I maintain that I would absolutely advocate against abortion to anyone who asked but I would also absolutely defend a person's right to make up their own mind.
It is an opinion, not a fact, that the unborn feotus is a separate human life, possessing of its own rights and responsibilities. Therefore, the manner in which you treat the unborn feotus and the protections, or not, you extend to it must also be a matter of opinion.
Since when do prolife people shove pregnant women into childbirth. we only help and suggest to let a baby live!!!! And what pushed you to the prochoice side?
A week ago, if someone had asked me, I would've said I was pro-life. 3 days ago I joined this forum to learn and to ask questions. It took less than 24 hours for the comprehensive attacks of me, my character and my position to come rolling in. I didn't decide I was pro-choice, you lot did.
I agree that some of the pro-lifers who post here can be hateful and mean and just plain ugly. But that shouldn't make you switch your position to pro-choice. If you are against abortion, you are prolife. Period. As for not shoving your morality on someone else, I think you can tell people the truth without being hateful and ugly. And if they choose abortion, you can still care about them and pray for them and be their friend. People make mistakes, that doesn't mean we turn our backs on them...
Blessings
Carolemarie
I wonder why Carolemarie? Could it be because some actually love the unborn and will fight for them with their last breath.
You irritate me to the same level as the pro aborts and maybe returning the "ignore button" favor would provide mutual benefit.

reply from: faithman

You know what is mean and ugly? A woman who kills three of her own, then has the audasity to say they are pro-life while giving her word that she will fight personhood for the womb child because it would rightfully land future killer moms in jail. Actually CM has done me a huge favor!!!!! She has provided the final straw to get me to quit being "pro-life". If ugly mean people like killer moms, are pro-life, then I want nothing to do with it. I am Pro-personhood from now on. And as a pro-pesonhood activist, I have come to realize that much in "pro-life" is the enemy of womb children. And if you are the enemy of the child, then you are mine as well. If you are the friend of the womb child, and you stand for their personhood, then I will personally do everything I can to help you be successful. If that makes me "mean and ugly" I wear the badge proudly. I don't mind looking ugly if it establishes personhood for the womb child. But me thinks I would win any beauty contest against anyone who is anti-personhood like CM.

reply from: Faramir

I think that at least here in the US "prolife" implies more than being "personally" prolife. There are many politicians like that in the US who try to have it both ways, and say they oppose abortion, but would allow each woman to choose, so they are essentially prochoice.
I would not consider you to be prolife unless you also wanted abortions banned by law.

reply from: cracrat

MC3,
(a) + (b) I have never disputed the separateness of the unborn child from the mother. The mother is, in effect, a vessel that provides support for the child during it's initial development, rather like the home could be considered a vessel which (normally) provide support during the child's next phase of development. I understand that, in princicple at least, it would possible for a woman to carry the child of a completely different couple. The mechanisms that prevent the woman's immune system from attacking the foreign body of a feotus don't just protect the "father's half".
(c) The different genetic structure is based on the fact that half the chromosomes come from the mother and the other half from the father. Within that code there will be the genes required for life in general (we're all something like 75% identical to a banana) and there will be the genes that make it human, it does not matter which side these come from as they're the same in the mother and father. The rest, the genes that determine height, hair, eyes, intelligence, etc. are what vary from person to person and are the product of combining both sets of parental DNA.
(d) It was the baby. Plain and simple. I suspect the picture would make a fine poster, with some appropriately sympathetic but witty caption. I'd quite like to see a picture of the doctor's face at that moment too.
As I understand it, identical twins occur when the initial fertilised egg splits into two and each half forms a seperate feotus. Up until the moment of birth, the feotuses are identical to each other in every way, they are essentially clones of each other. Conjoined twins occur when this separation process is incomplete and the feotuses develop attched to each other. I would say they are two separate people, capable of independent thoughts, dreams, loves and hates. I suspect it could be argued that on some level they are one person, but I don't know enough to recognise the validity of such arguments and either way they probably wouldn't wash with me.

reply from: cracrat

I haven't changed my positions in years. I mistakenly described myself as pro-life. Had I known more, I would have described myself as pro-choice from the beginning. I do try to persuade people that there is always another option that doesn't involve killing the child, but sometimes they will disagree and I will respect that. Happily, sometimes they agree with me, whether that would hold true when the chips are down and they find themselves in a difficult position, I don't know. I can only hope it does. A person can only try their best, nobody can ask any more of them than that.

reply from: cracrat

I understand that now and have apologised repeatedly for my mistake. It is just one of many things that I have learned since I joined this forum a few days ago.

reply from: yoda

And we should consider the statements of a radical, foaming at the mouth proabort "doctor" important because.............??????

reply from: yoda

Yes, I'm sure it does.
And I'll bet the idea of not allowing a woman to kill her newborn just enrages you too, doesn't it?
Wow..... you're one really dedicated killing machine!!

reply from: yoda

It didn't. This person is simply attempting to unload a "guilt trip" on us. I for one, feel no guilt at all.
This person was never prolife to begin with, because s/he never opposed the legal status of abortion..... period, end of debate.

reply from: sander

It didn't. This person is simply attempting to unload a "guilt trip" on us. I for one, feel no guilt at all.
This person was never prolife to begin with, because s/he never opposed the legal status of abortion..... period, end of debate.
Not to mention he found a new place to hear himself talk, talk, talk, talk,...sheesh.
And to say what???? Abortion should be legal. Could have saved us all alot of time and nonsense.
I don't do guilt either, Yoda.
I think he was just trying to foist his own guilt on to us in the first place...nice try.

reply from: cracrat

It didn't. This person is simply attempting to unload a "guilt trip" on us. I for one, feel no guilt at all.
This person was never prolife to begin with, because s/he never opposed the legal status of abortion..... period, end of debate.
I am unloading no guilt upon anyone. I am grateful to you all for helping me to understand this issue better. I am glad that I will no longer misrepresent myself to anyone who asks.

reply from: MC3

Cracrat:
In the post to which I originally responded, you said, "It is an opinion, not a fact, that the unborn feotus is a separate human life, possessing of its own rights and responsibilities. Therefore, the manner in which you treat the unborn feotus and the protections, or not, you extend to it must also be a matter of opinion."
Now, in your convoluted answers to my questions, you are clearly conceding that the individuality of the unborn is, indeed, fact and not opinion. Yet that doesn't alter your view that other people should be allowed to execute these individuals by the millions if they choose to do so.
Your participation on this forum is valuable in that you are proving something I have repeatedly told the pro-life community for years.
The ability of people like you to ignore biological and moral truths can be debilitating for pro-lifers. I have even known some who have dropped out of the movement only because they could no longer take this sort of frustration. They conclude that are failures - not because their arguments are ineffective but because they are dismissed as irrelevant. As wrong as they are, their sentiment is certainly understandable. After all, on one hand you people will argue that abortion is acceptable because it is not the killing of a living human being. Then, after that argument is blown out of the water, you are fully capable of responding that the humanity of the unborn doesn't matter. In modern society, you have become the sole category of human beings who contend that another category of innocent human beings has no right to life.
What I have attempted to show my brothers and sisters in this battle is that there is no need to become discouraged by this phenomenon. The fact is, the pro-life position is one founded in a moral principle and, as we've seen demonstrated here on many occasions, people who support legal abortion are immune to arguments based on moral principles. In a nutshell, those who identify themselves as pro-choice are not immoral, they are amoral. And between the two, amoral is far worse.
Having recognized that many years ago, I embraced two philosophies under which I still operate. First, this is not a war between us and the Choice Mafia, it is a war between the Choice Mafia and the unborn. We are just soldiers who signed up to fight on the side of the babies. Second, like soldiers in any other war, our goal is not to convert the enemy but to stop them.
For those two reasons, I did not create this forum to win anyone over but as a vehicle for pro-lifers to communicate with each other, share ideas, and stay informed. From the beginning, I have always made it clear that abortion apologists like you would be tolerated on this forum only to serve as foils for our amusement and exercise to keep our skills sharp.
Your posts have been a textbook example of why I adopted this approach.

reply from: faithman

Stupid little brit don't understand when he has had is bloody bum kicked ole chap. I see becomming an old fart hasn't dulled the gray matter mate.

reply from: carolemarie

How totally silly! I was trying to be nice and give him the benefit of the doubt...I should learn it is a waste of time on this board....noted in the PDA

reply from: cracrat

MC3: I'm not an amoral or immoral person. It is an opinion not a fact that the unborn child is a separate life form. My opinion is that it is, and should be protected. I recognise other people don't share that opinion.
Whatever other differences we have, the one I find most distressing is your combative attitude. What is it about Americans that you must declare war on things you disapprove of? I do not seek to fight people, I do not see myself as a soldier on any battlefield. Your combative stance is what breeds the attacks on clinic staff and their families. No doubt most of your comrades deplore such action, but those attitudes start somewhere very similar to where you appear to be.
My goal is to see the number of abortions to be counted in dozens, reduced to the point where the are discussed in hushed tones away from company, seen as a tragic consequence of some invasive medical treatment of a disease. I do not, and will never, believe that the way to achieve this goal is to square up to my opponent and see who's balls are bigger. I have and will continue to approach any and every debate I get into on the topic from a rational perspective backed up with indisputable facts. I have never exploited a person's natural desire to be a parent to win an argument. I have never shown somebody some of the grotesque images found in the pro-life literature. Call me cold, attack my methods if you will, it will make no difference to me. I shall continue as I have thus far.
In respecting people's right to make their own choice, I am able to influence their decision. To be viewed as 'one of those nutters who took away my right to decide', I would be unable to engage any but the most argumentative, ardent pro-abortionist.
I am glad that I have so far proved useful to you and your associates. Not sure how much success you'll have though if you can't win over someone who broadly agrees with you and shares most of your aims.

reply from: cracrat

I appreciated your relatively kind words. Wasn't really sure what an appropriate response would have been though.

reply from: yoda

Outstanding!! Couldn't have said it better myself!!

reply from: yoda

That's a matter of opinion, and in my opinion you are one or the other.
What's the difference between those two? Isn't every fact an opinion in someone's mind? Isn't every opinion a fact to the person who holds that opinion? You make no sense in trying to distinguish between those two things, and I doubt that you really know what either of them is.
This is probably what you think of as a "fact": 5: a piece of information presented as having objective reality. http://www.merriam-webster.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=fact

DID you notice that it says "presented as"??? Do you understand the significance of that terminology?
And this is probably what you understand an "opinion" to be: 1 a: a view, judgment, or appraisal formed in the mind about a particular matter http://www.merriam-webster.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=opinion

DID you notice that there is no REAL difference between those two definitions???????
BUT NOT BY LAW.......... right? "Protected" how, exactly??? By your flowery and profuse expressions??? What sort of protection do you propose for the 4,000 babies being slaughtered every day........ your best wishes?????
That's real, real simple to explain.... he CARES about babies.... he doesn't just discuss them academically, as if we were talking about mathematics or physics...... he has ACTUAL PASSION for them, and is disgusted by those who claim to be on the side of unborn babies, but will not even agree to allow standard criminal law to be used to protect them. No, you insist that they remain UNPROTECTED AND VULNERABLE....... to all who would slaughter them!
Aw, you poor baby!! Did the big bad images hurt your widdle feelings??? Are you angry at us for showing the world what the baby killers do to babies? Do you want us to help them KEEP IT A SECRET??? Do you want us to help them to COVER UP THEIR HORRIFIC DEEDS??? Yeah, you're a real "friend" of unborn babies, all right.......
How many have you won over so far? How has your "make friends with all the baby killers" strategy worked? We don't care what they think about us, we have sacrificed our egos, our vanity, even our pride at times for the sake of getting the truth out about unborn babies...... but we certainly wouldn't want someone like you to lose a proabort friend over something as trivial as the truth about abortion, now would we?

reply from: Faramir

And we should consider the statements of a radical, foaming at the mouth proabort "doctor" important because.............??????
Do you misrepresent on purpose or because you just don't know any better?

reply from: yoda

WHAT "misrepresentation"? What's the difference between "militant prochoicer" and "radical, foaming at the mouth proabort"?
WHAT exactly IS the difference?????

reply from: Faramir

WHAT "misrepresentation"? What's the difference between "militant prochoicer" and "radical, foaming at the mouth proabort"?
WHAT exactly IS the difference?????
Are you really so dense as to not know what I meant by "misrepresent" and WHO was misrepresented or are you playing games?
You misrepresented me once more by taking my quote out of context and questioning it as if I applied an "importance" or validity to what the abortion advocate said.

reply from: yoda

Of COURSE you applied an "importance" to what the proabort doctors said....... you QUOTED him here, didn't you?
IF what he said wasn't important (to you), you wouldn't have trotted it out to "prove your point", would you?
OR are you in the habit of spouting off "unimportant" things?

reply from: Faramir

You are either a blithering idiot or you get some kind of weird pleasure out of being consescending and self-righteous about ideas someone DIDN'T express.
So what is it? Are you stupid or are you dishonest?

reply from: NewMom

Faramir,
When the proaborts/prochoicers have no other way to to attempt to prove to us they have validated reasons for condoning the murder of the innocent they start spouting off nonsense to try to trick us into a battle of he said/she said. And yes, blithering and self righteous to the max!

reply from: NewMom

Wonderfully put. The only people who are immune to basic human decency and morals are those who kill and think nothing of it.

reply from: jujujellybean

I am sorry if you experienced attacks. I try to stay away from those. They do nothing for anyone, the babies or the argument.
And we didn't decide you were pro choice. We looked at what you believed a realized that it wasn't pro life. It's like a human can decide it is a donkey, but is it really a donkey??

reply from: NewMom

Is it an opinion and not a fact that my son shared separate DNA, a combination of mine and his fathers?
Is it an opinion and not a fact that he had a separate blood stream inside my body than mine? An opinion that on the ultrasound I watched his little heart beat? Not factual?
Its factual that the unborn child is a separate life form. When you were inside your mother (yes, you were that small once!) I'm fairly sure you can't tell me you are not a separate life form from your mother!

reply from: Faramir

I made a post to demonstrate that there are some prochoicers who really do go so far as to say that the pregnant woman has four arms, four legs, two hearts, ect. In context, it was obvious I was not saying that is a valid position.
However, Yodabaiter, as he has done on NUMEROUS occasions with my posts, took it out of context to give it a different meaning, and he criticized the meaning he gave it but that was not intended.
That is very dishonest and I'm not going to put up with further harrassment from him.

reply from: NewMom

I made a post to demonstrate that there are some prochoicers who really do go so far as to say that the pregnant woman has four arms, four legs, two hearts, ect. In context, it was obvious I was not saying that is a valid position.
However, Yodabaiter, as he has done on NUMEROUS occasions with my posts, took it out of context to give it a different meaning, and he criticized the meaning he gave it but that was not intended.
That is very dishonest and I'm not going to put up with further harrassment from him.
Yoda is a very intelligent guy, and he wouldn't pick apart what you said unless he found some sort of flaw in it. Its never intended to be personal on here... I take things ridiculously personal and out of context all the time due to my raging mess of hormones as they return to normal. Remember that its not a fight/argument between prolifers, we are united together because we are prolifers.

reply from: NewMom

Howwwwever. As I see it from Yoda's side, how can you trust the words of a murderer or a doctor (even if its within the context of a forum of a person who is claiming to be such. Perhaps you should be clearer when you speak about a militant prochoicer who is a doctor. Unclarity causes me to believe your stance on the subject is unclear. So what do you think? What do you stand for? Lay it out for us.

reply from: cracrat

For sure the guy's extremely intelligent. It's just that his debating/arguing technique (if it could be called such a thing) is incredibly manipualtive, relying on twisting words, changing contexts and occasional name calling. It's sad, because there is really no reason for him to resort to such manouvres.
And if Faramir is pro-life, why is his (her?) name on the title of a thread also aimed at me?

reply from: NewMom

And you never twist anything to suit your argument right?
If there's flaw in your argument and the slightest bit of wavering unclarity, don't think you won't get pointed out!

reply from: NewMom

Dearest cracrat,
How about you answer my question about opinion and fact? And please don't confuse the two!

reply from: cracrat

OK.
It is a fact that the unborn child is a genetically different entity from its mother. The possibilty for divergence between a mother and her unborn child is almost as limitless as that of the variety of the whole species. At no point from ovulation, through conception and then pregnancy is the child a part of the mother's body.
However, for a significant portion of the pregnancy (I believe the earliest surviving premature baby was born at 22 weeks, you might have to correct me on that) the child is completely dependent on the mother for its sustenance and removal of excretia. Without the protective and supportive surroundings of the mother's womb, for at least the first 22 weeks (again, open to a correction on that number) the child would almost certainly die. There are people in the world (that don't include myself) who take this to mean, and therefore their opinion is, that the child is an extension of the mother's body and therefore hers to choose how to treat.

reply from: Faramir

If you read the post in context, considering the post that preceded it, and not the edited and out-of-context version from Yodabaiter, you would see I was in no way presenting that as a valid position.
If this was just one misunderstanding, I would let it go, but Yodabaiter has a bad habit of taking things out of context and twisting them to make them into something they are not, and then making huffy and indignant responses to something he made up.

reply from: yoda

Obvious to whom? Certainly not to me, did anyone else think it was "obvious"?
Oh my, I'm just shivering in my boots!! Please, everyone, gather around me and protect me from that nasty half-bort Fartmir!!

reply from: yoda

He isn't. I thought everyone knew that by now. Can't you keep up?

reply from: yoda

There are people in the world who say the earth is flat, too.
So what?

reply from: yoda

Oh, you poor half-bort baby..... do you need a crying towel, or would you like some cheese with that whine maybe?

reply from: yoda

Just curious..... did your cat walk across your keyboard when you took that screen name?

reply from: cracrat

Just curious..... did your cat walk across your keyboard when you took that screen name?
At least let the guy (or girl) say something with any substance before you start picking on him (her).

reply from: Smurfy

Just curious..... did your cat walk across your keyboard when you took that screen name?
I think you'll find that it's French.

reply from: yoda

You mean s/he didn't already in his/her first post? What?
Are you saying that s/he posted his/her post WITHOUT any "substance"?
OH MY......... WHY ARE YOU PICKING ON THAT POOR POSTER????

reply from: yoda

Nah, because I'm not gonna look..... but I'll take your word for it.... I know a proabort wouldn't lie.....

reply from: cracrat

You mean s/he didn't already in his/her first post? What?
Are you saying that s/he posted his/her post WITHOUT any "substance"?
OH MY......... WHY ARE YOU PICKING ON THAT POOR POSTER????
You're taking the piss out of their name for pity sake. At least you decided you disliked me before you mocked mine.

reply from: yoda

Um.. is that a Brit expression? You'll have to explain that one, if you want us to follow along....
Oh, and btw, all I said about yours was to ask why you took the "k" out... you may be thinking of someone else who mocked you.....

reply from: cracrat

Um.. is that a Brit expression? You'll have to explain that one, if you want us to follow along....
Oh, and btw, all I said about yours was to ask why you took the "k" out... you may be thinking of someone else who mocked you.....
Yes, a Brit expression. To mock, belittle, make fun of.
Sorry, I was refering to you the forum. I need to be clearer on that.

reply from: yoda

Oh well, I'm sure he can "put the piss back in it"..... since his first post was rather blase.......

reply from: Faramir

He isn't. I thought everyone knew that by now. Can't you keep up?
I suppose it's more "honest" of you now to be a liar instead of being sneaky about it.
Cracrat, I am thoroughly prolife. I oppose abortion for ANY reason from conception until birth, and I wish to see legislation passed which would make abortion illegal. I am a practicing Catholic and as a Catholic am morally opposed to abortion to the extent that because of the grave injustice, I must also do my part in seeing that it becomes illegal, the least of which being that I vote only for prolife legislators.
Yodabaiter is unfortunately a master of twisting arguments, and generously uses "ad hominem" tactics instead of making valid points.
I do not doubt that he is prolife and I take him at his word for that, in spite of the fact that his pride and desire to demonize prohibits him from returning the favor.

reply from: yoda

You know, I actually own you an apology for that. In my senile stupor, I mistook you for cracrat, who is obviously not prolife. So, I apologize. Yes, since you have expressed your desire to see abortion made illegal again, you qualify for the label "prolife". But that's about as far as we agree on anything, of course, Fartman.

reply from: Faramir

You know, I actually own you an apology for that. In my senile stupor, I mistook you for cracrat, who is obviously not prolife. So, I apologize. Yes, since you have expressed your desire to see abortion made illegal again, you qualify for the label "prolife". But that's about as far as we agree on anything, of course, Fartman.
I accept your apology.
We could peacefully coexist if you would stop twisting what I say and changing the meaning.

reply from: Smurfy

I'm glad we've cleared that up.

reply from: 4given

Ce qui n'amuse pas, est que vous préconisez le meurtre des vies innocentes.
And it is pitiful that you would find discussing the mutilation of an innocent being entertaining.

reply from: 4given

It means playing with the insane.. I suspect she came to join her fellow pro-aborts- because discussing the dismemberment of innocent human beings is a game to them..

reply from: 4given

Votre entretien des "handjobs" verbaux sont a loin de la réalité démoniaque des "travaux de life/death" qui se produisent avec l'avortement. Comprenez-vous l'anéantissement ? Pourquoi êtes-vous la pro-mort ?
How and why are you against life/pro-abortion?

reply from: sander

Can I take this to mean you are a part of pro-abortion web sites and regularly particpate as to influence their decisions?
Or do you personally meet with women who are in the process of deciding?
What exactly do you do to promote your stand on abortion? How exactly do you put your money where your mouth is?
What are you doing to make abortions number in the dozens and spoken of in hushed tones?

reply from: 4given

Can I take this to mean you are a part of pro-abortion web sites and regularly particpate as to influence their decisions?
Or do you personally meet with women who are in the process of deciding?
What exactly do you do to promote your stand on abortion? How exactly do you put your money where your mouth is?
What are you doing to make abortions number in the dozens and spoken of in hushed tones?
Good questions. How exactly are you "able to influence their decision".. and in turn respect their choice. If you truly respect one's choice, why would you feel compelled to influence it?

reply from: cracrat

Can I take this to mean you are a part of pro-abortion web sites and regularly particpate as to influence their decisions?
Or do you personally meet with women who are in the process of deciding?
What exactly do you do to promote your stand on abortion? How exactly do you put your money where your mouth is?
What are you doing to make abortions number in the dozens and spoken of in hushed tones?
No, this is the first such website I've joined. To be honest I'd never thought of this as a platform for debate, don't really know why. I discuss the issue with people face to face, though never with someone who is in the process of deciding. I haven't had such an opportunity. Some people have agreed with me and come out in favour, others have disagreed. But then some people respond as you want to your arguments and others don't. Quantifying who is more successful is impossible.
To promote my stand I have taken part in debates at university, I have signed petitions to the government, I have written letters to my previous MPs, though not to my current one, detailing what I believe to be the fundamental need to improve education about these matters for everyone but particularly school children.
There isn't the same all consuming protesting mentality regarding this issue in the UK. There aren't regular picket lines outside clinics, there have been no recorded pro-life related incidences of violence, there has been no 'Million Man March' on London like there was beofre the Iraq war. I'd like to say it's because we're more moderate and seek a more conciliatory solution but I suspect it's more to do with apathy.

reply from: cracrat

I attempt to make them see the issue from the other side, from the child's side if you will. I try to tell them that a child is never a punishment or mistake. I try to make them see that there is always another option. I explain the simplicity of modern contraception, such that there is no need for them to have to make such horrible decisions.
But if they disagree then they disagree and I respect that.

reply from: yoda

I think that the problem, from my perspective, is that sometimes you just aren't clear as to your meaning, and at other times you simply misunderstand my meaning. I really don't have the time or energy to worry about twisting anything.

reply from: yoda

Ah, just the typical proabort, here for fun and games and to laugh about the image of a shredded, mutilated baby's corpse..... I get it.

reply from: yoda

Don't worry, Faramir says we don't debate here anyway.

reply from: yoda

In other words, you don't really know that you've ever changed a single mind, right?
Have you ever considered that a more fertile ground might be the minds that are actually still open somewhat? For example, there are many who lurk at forums such as this one, but never post either way. I've almost never seen a true proabort convert, but I'm aware of some lurkers who have. So, rather than tailor my message to "not offend the proaborts", I simply do my best to defeat everything they say, in hopes of reaching a lurker. And I don't care what a proabort thinks of me in the process.

reply from: Smurfy

Can everyone please restrict the debating to a more appropriate thread?
This one is for information and sharing - with regard to how you 'obtained' your stance on pro-life or pro-choice.
Thanks.

reply from: cracrat

In other words, you don't really know that you've ever changed a single mind, right?
Have you ever considered that a more fertile ground might be the minds that are actually still open somewhat? For example, there are many who lurk at forums such as this one, but never post either way. I've almost never seen a true proabort convert, but I'm aware of some lurkers who have. So, rather than tailor my message to "not offend the proaborts", I simply do my best to defeat everything they say, in hopes of reaching a lurker. And I don't care what a proabort thinks of me in the process.
Sorry Smurfy, I haven't yet figured out how to move quotes from thread to thread.
No Yoda, I don't know if I've saved a single life. I have engaged in the argument with more people than I can remember. As I said, some have come to agree with me and others have remained in disagreement. The real litmus test is to view their actions when they are faced with the decision I am trying to influence and I've never known someone to have an abortion let alone somebody I've argued with about it. How many lives can you hand on heart say that you know it was YOUR influence that spared them? If the answer is one or more then my heartiest congratulations to you. I can only hope to one day be your equal.
I am fortunate in that my peers are still of an age where they are forming their views on the world. I have noticed that in general, the older a person is, the harder it is to change their mind. But not impossible, which is why I will always try my best to do so.

reply from: Smurfy

I'm somewhat disgusted...is this a competition as to 'how many baibies i has saveded!' or is about how you 'chose' your faction in this debate?
Ridiculous.
Please, back on topic.

reply from: faithman

In other words, you don't really know that you've ever changed a single mind, right?
Have you ever considered that a more fertile ground might be the minds that are actually still open somewhat? For example, there are many who lurk at forums such as this one, but never post either way. I've almost never seen a true proabort convert, but I'm aware of some lurkers who have. So, rather than tailor my message to "not offend the proaborts", I simply do my best to defeat everything they say, in hopes of reaching a lurker. And I don't care what a proabort thinks of me in the process.
Sorry Smurfy, I haven't yet figured out how to move quotes from thread to thread.
No Yoda, I don't know if I've saved a single life. I have engaged in the argument with more people than I can remember. As I said, some have come to agree with me and others have remained in disagreement. The real litmus test is to view their actions when they are faced with the decision I am trying to influence and I've never known someone to have an abortion let alone somebody I've argued with about it. How many lives can you hand on heart say that you know it was YOUR influence that spared them? If the answer is one or more then my heartiest congratulations to you. I can only hope to one day be your equal.
I am fortunate in that my peers are still of an age where they are forming their views on the world. I have noticed that in general, the older a person is, the harder it is to change their mind. But not impossible, which is why I will always try my best to do so.
Well you ain't out to change a womb child's mind, just suck it out of their scull before they are born.

reply from: Smurfy

They are incapable of rational thought. A kitten has greater cognitive abilities than a 7 month fetus.

reply from: yoda

Good luck with that, smurfy..... thread drift is a fact of life.

reply from: Smurfy

Good luck with that, smurfy..... thread drift is a fact of life.
Yet you complain when thread drift occurs and use it as a defense.
How very ironic!

reply from: faithman

They are incapable of rational thought. A kitten has greater cognitive abilities than a 7 month fetus.
SSSSSSSSSSSOOOOOOOOOOOOOO that justifies sucking their brains out? HHHHHHHHMMMMMMMM very telling.

reply from: yoda

One. I was told of a woman who changed her mind about coming to the local abortion clinic because of my presence there with my camera. She went instead to one about four hundred miles away, and said later that the extra time it took to drive that far gave her time to change her mind.
Where I go to protest, we are kept at least 150 feet away from those entering the abortuary, so we don't really have a chance to make conversation with them. There may be others, but most of us never find out about it. It's only rarely that we get feedback.
But anyway, my point is that we don't need to change the minds of the activists on the other side, we just need to influence public opinion enough to stop the killing. That's my goal, not converting the unconvertible.

reply from: yoda

Yeah, I can see how the topic of saving babies would be "disgusting" to you, smurf. How many have you personally caused to be killed?

reply from: Smurfy

Yeah, I can see how the topic of saving babies would be "disgusting" to you, smurf. How many have you personally caused to be killed?
I'm somewhat disgusted...is this a competition as to 'how many baibies i has saveded!' or is about how you 'chose' your faction in this debate?
Ridiculous.
Please, back on topic.

reply from: yoda

No, they are fully capable. Their capability is just not matured yet. What's the awful rush to kill them?

reply from: yoda

Topic title, page number, or link please?

reply from: Smurfy

Your post in nonsensical. Please, go back to school, then respond to me.

reply from: yoda

Sorry, smurf ole boy, until I see a moderator's tag on your name, I will post as I please here. You, on the other hand, can put me on ignore and not have to read my awful posts!

reply from: yoda

Oh, you understood him all right. You just don't want to comment on the process of sucking a baby's brains out in a partial birth abortion.
What's the matter, stomach a bit queasy this morning?

reply from: Smurfy

Oh, you understood him all right. You just don't want to comment on the process of sucking a baby's brains out in a partial birth abortion.
What's the matter, stomach a bit queasy this morning?
Why are you trying to derail the thread? Are you ashamed of trying to control your ex and forcing her to gestate? We know you tried- and failed.
Please, we have heard your sordid story. Let's keep this thread clean and on topic.
There are plenty of other threads for you to vent your displeasure with your ex and her choice.

reply from: Smurfy

A brilliant idea. You can join Sander in my personal sin-bin - both of you seem to thrive on insults, bigotry and idiocy...so it's on;y fair I lump you together.
Bye!

reply from: faithman

A brilliant idea. You can join Sander in my personal sin-bin - both of you seem to thrive on insults, bigotry and idiocy...so it's on;y fair I lump you together.
Bye!
ME TOO!! ME TOO!! ME TOO!!

reply from: Smurfy

You're too ineffectual and amusing.
Your comedic value in undeniable.

reply from: faithman

Glad to be of service baby killer.

reply from: Smurfy

Most excellent.
How many babies have I killed?

reply from: yoda

Just for the heck of it, baby killer.

reply from: yoda

Ah, but you're easily amused, smurfy..... even a partial birth abortion is funny to you...

reply from: yoda

We don't know who you are, baby killer, so how can we be expected to know that? Why don't you tell us?

reply from: Smurfy

Waiting on a figure.
How many?

reply from: faithman

http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/flash/youare

reply from: Smurfy

How many?
Back up your claims.

reply from: faithman

All who think smurfy is a baby killer'....http://www.armyofgod.com/Baby12.html

reply from: tulip

when I was 12 yrs old,while sitting with my family in the livingroom.we heard
a tires scheaking out front of our house,along with loud provanity, we heard a
loud thud on the front porch, I jumped up to the window to see who or what the noice was,I saw 4 women in a automoble, the woman in the back of the car
was looking at our house and appeared sad,upset.
Mom made my brother and I go to bed.
The next day I got up,got dressed and ran downstairs to get out on the front porch as I remembered the loud thud from the nite before.
And there before me was something lying on the porch,I ran over to it,looked down and saw movement, I had never seen a newborn baby or anything newborn.
But this was beautiful to me ,it had a head with little eyes,nose,mouth,ears,little hands,and legs with feet.I thought it was cold cause it would jerk here and there..
it was in something,,I didn't know what,not a towel, it looked so pityful and helpless,I had just started babysitting ,so I knew it was a baby,a boy, I reached down to pick him up,as my mother asked me what I was doing, I reply with I'm gonna cover him up,he's cold. Mom told me not to touch it,my brother appeared
on the porch.Mom told my brother to do something with it,...
I later learned he buried it in the back by a neighbors house.
Also the story that was told later,the baby was my stepfathers child.
I latered learned the baby was about 6-7 months old.
Had he lived,he would have been 47 yrs old.
Whom ever toss a beautiful baby out of a moving vehicle at nite,onto a hard
wood porch unprotected without even a towel,something to keep him warm,
and left him out for any animal to venture upon is beyond me. This is why
I am 100 per cent prolife. I will never forget what someone threw away or
the chance to a life they took from that beautiful baby boy.

reply from: 4given

How traumatizing! How sad! So how old are you? When did this happen? What happened to the little buried boy? How did you find the forum? That is such a sad, yet odd tale. I am sorry you lived through that. I can't imagine- I know God mourns for His every child created. What happened after that day? Have you shared your story before?

reply from: tulip

I have been trying for yrs to complete and finish a book,I've also written a poem.
I had it published,the title is Mamma, may I Speak. I'm a grandmother this yr.
My brother became a grandfather this yr.also.
I was taught children were to do as told,children were to be seen not heard until spoken to.
My mother divorced my step-father shortly afterthat,I have reason to believe he was the father. I was sent away later,my brother joined the Marines.

reply from: tulip

I'm very sorry for people who think my story is an odd tale. That's why I've only shared it with a few. I am Pro Life. I was a child at the time this happened.
People like to talk, we need more action taken to overturn Roe / Wade.
And Make those accountable for abortion. Eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth.
You people have a nice life, thank you for allowing me to join your Forum.
More than talk is needed to stop abortion.

reply from: sander

Welcome back, Tulip.
You're right, we do need more action. Check out some of the threads that Faithman has started, he has some great ideas.

reply from: joe

When we Christians take up our crosses, abortion will stop.

reply from: Teresa18

I'm sorry you had to experience that, Tulip. Even if your mother was ashamed that your stepfather had a child with another woman, how could she take it out on the child? Were the authorities ever notified? Did anyone get in trouble? What does your stepfather think of this? Pardon my questions, but we do get a lot of trolls here, and I'm trying to figure out it this is another pro-abort prank.

reply from: 4given

I assume you are directing this statement to me, as I am the only one that responded to your post. Your situation/story is odd. It is equally sad. Again, I am sorry you had to live through that- at such a young age, it must have had such an odd effect on your life.
What are your ideas? Do you have any? An eye for an eye- the abortionist? IS that literal? What exactly do you mean? What are your thoughts on ending abortion?

reply from: sander

X, you need to get over yourself.
He had a right to ask the woman to keep the baby, you stupid little ego maniac.

reply from: galen

no but someone like Yoda... should she NOT abort is forced to pay child support for 18 years.
Though in this case ( yoda) i do believe he would have gladly done so.

reply from: galen

So what type of conversation do you have at that precise moment?
Seriously.
BTW what does your name mean? mutant death lilly?

reply from: galen

i'll remember that when i go to the parole board hearing for the guy who raped me 17 years ago.
After that... i NEVER slept with anyone who i ws not married to.
But I digress.....

reply from: sander

How the heck do you know he didn't?
You got some secret mind reading powers?

reply from: galen

ty
Yes i did have a choice... i chose to deliver and raise my child..
As for your comment on rape... let me tell you that from all the ones i've counseled... the ones who chose abortion after rape , rather than adoption or raising the child... those moms who chose to terminate had the happy experience of being violated all over again. Anesthsia does not stop someone from having to examine you.. and belive me... that's the Last place you want to be touched. it makes the healing after the rape that much harder. You also end up with no good outcome... just a violation. A woman who has the child and gives it up has at least the happy notion that she has not ruined a life in turn.

reply from: galen

Sorry to hear that... sorrier still if you end up with problems later on. I hope you get counseling when you come upon menopause....
I have not met someone yet that has not had that choice adversely affect them later on. sometimes 40 years on... ( yes i know it was illegal then)

reply from: sander

Try and remember that when you look into the eyes of the child you do deem worthy of life...the one you killed will be looking back at you.

reply from: galen

Yep
'i know' statements happen a lot to people... then they realise there is no way to 'know' what will happen to a person untill it happens....

reply from: 4given

I thought you stated your experience w/ abortion was 2nd hand- gals you knew.. I will find it. Until then, you never did answer this question:
How exactly? Please explain.

reply from: faithman

I pity the children who would have a killer scanc like you for a mom.

reply from: GodsLaw4Us2Live

It was the right thing to do for you? How about the baby? Is getting turned into a rotting corpse and back into dust the "right thing" for that person?

reply from: galen

no she thinks the baby went to heaven... or limbo... same thing poor psychotic susan smith thought.

reply from: carolemarie

I can understand how it seemed that way at the time. Except that there were two people who's lives were affected that day. Either way, yours would go on. Perhaps less pleasant and much more difficult, but you would continue to live. Your baby however had to die, just to make your life easier. There is something fundamentally wrong about children dying to make their mother's life easier....
There is nothing good about that and nothing can make it okay. And when you do have children, you will remember. Abortion is never a healthy or a good decision for anyone.
I mean, If it was so okay, why would you feel a need to ask the "Gods and Godesss to take her back" what difference would it make what happen to that person as long as your life was not made difficult? IMHO the fact you tack that on, is because on some level you recognize that it was basically a selfish and self-centered decision and feel a need to pretty it up.

reply from: faithman

I can understand how it seemed that way at the time. Except that there were two people who's lives were affected that day. Either way, yours would go on. Perhaps less pleasant and much more difficult, but you would continue to live. Your baby however had to die, just to make your life easier. There is something fundamentally wrong about children dying to make their mother's life easier....
There is nothing good about that and nothing can make it okay. And when you do have children, you will remember. Abortion is never a healthy or a good decision for anyone.
I mean, If it was so okay, why would you feel a need to ask the "Gods and Godesss to take her back" what difference would it make what happen to that person as long as your life was not made difficult? IMHO the fact you tack that on, is because on some level you recognize that it was basically a selfish and self-centered decision and feel a need to pretty it up.
You "pretty" your youthful mistakes up all the time. You play done your act of murder quite often. How nice of you to be SSSSOOOO condisending of others when you have done three times worse, then use God as a patsy to excuse yourself. Then you would have others believe that you are pro-life when you agree with the abortion loby that womb children are on a lower level than born children? That you would fight efforts for personhood because it would mean killers of womb children like you would have to go to jail, even though you think killers of born children should not? How does a hipocrit dare talk to anyone about being selfish?

reply from: AshMarie88

I'm sure your child that's dead and rotting in some dark dumpster was ready to be born... And I'm sure he/she is hurting.

reply from: carolemarie

I can understand how it seemed that way at the time. Except that there were two people who's lives were affected that day. Either way, yours would go on. Perhaps less pleasant and much more difficult, but you would continue to live. Your baby however had to die, just to make your life easier. There is something fundamentally wrong about children dying to make their mother's life easier....
There is nothing good about that and nothing can make it okay. And when you do have children, you will remember. Abortion is never a healthy or a good decision for anyone.
I mean, If it was so okay, why would you feel a need to ask the "Gods and Godesss to take her back" what difference would it make what happen to that person as long as your life was not made difficult? IMHO the fact you tack that on, is because on some level you recognize that it was basically a selfish and self-centered decision and feel a need to pretty it up.
You "pretty" your youthful mistakes up all the time. You play done your act of murder quite often. How nice of you to be SSSSOOOO condisending of others when you have done three times worse, then use God as a patsy to excuse yourself. Then you would have others believe that you are pro-life when you agree with the abortion loby that womb children are on a lower level than born children? That you would fight efforts for personhood because it would mean killers of womb children like you would have to go to jail, even though you think killers of born children should not? How does a hipocrit dare talk to anyone about being selfish?
I never said I wasn't selfish and that I wasn't wrong. I only said I was very young.
And I don't think I am being condesending to her. I am just pointing out her own words show that she has some doubts about her decision. Try to stay on point here. If you want to ask me something, ask with out all the rhetoric and name calling and I will answer you. Deal honestly and I will answer. If you are going to just snipe, let me know and I will put you back on ignore. Your choice.

reply from: faithman

I can understand how it seemed that way at the time. Except that there were two people who's lives were affected that day. Either way, yours would go on. Perhaps less pleasant and much more difficult, but you would continue to live. Your baby however had to die, just to make your life easier. There is something fundamentally wrong about children dying to make their mother's life easier....
There is nothing good about that and nothing can make it okay. And when you do have children, you will remember. Abortion is never a healthy or a good decision for anyone.
I mean, If it was so okay, why would you feel a need to ask the "Gods and Godesss to take her back" what difference would it make what happen to that person as long as your life was not made difficult? IMHO the fact you tack that on, is because on some level you recognize that it was basically a selfish and self-centered decision and feel a need to pretty it up.
You "pretty" your youthful mistakes up all the time. You play done your act of murder quite often. How nice of you to be SSSSOOOO condisending of others when you have done three times worse, then use God as a patsy to excuse yourself. Then you would have others believe that you are pro-life when you agree with the abortion loby that womb children are on a lower level than born children? That you would fight efforts for personhood because it would mean killers of womb children like you would have to go to jail, even though you think killers of born children should not? How does a hipocrit dare talk to anyone about being selfish?
I never said I wasn't selfish and that I wasn't wrong. I only said I was very young.
And I don't think I am being condesending to her. I am just pointing out her own words show that she has some doubts about her decision. Try to stay on point here. If you want to ask me something, ask with out all the rhetoric and name calling and I will answer you. Deal honestly and I will answer. If you are going to just snipe, let me know and I will put you back on ignore. Your choice.
You have never delt honestly on this forum. You have agreed with the abortion loby that the womb child is at a lower level than the born child, so why ask the questions you are when you don't put much value on the womb child your self? How dare you harras and bully people with the same kinds of questions you refuse to answer yourself. Go ahead and ignore me. It will only prove you to be a baby killing coward. That would not suprise me at all.

reply from: carolemarie

I can understand how it seemed that way at the time. Except that there were two people who's lives were affected that day. Either way, yours would go on. Perhaps less pleasant and much more difficult, but you would continue to live. Your baby however had to die, just to make your life easier. There is something fundamentally wrong about children dying to make their mother's life easier....
There is nothing good about that and nothing can make it okay. And when you do have children, you will remember. Abortion is never a healthy or a good decision for anyone.
I mean, If it was so okay, why would you feel a need to ask the "Gods and Godesss to take her back" what difference would it make what happen to that person as long as your life was not made difficult? IMHO the fact you tack that on, is because on some level you recognize that it was basically a selfish and self-centered decision and feel a need to pretty it up.
You "pretty" your youthful mistakes up all the time. You play done your act of murder quite often. How nice of you to be SSSSOOOO condisending of others when you have done three times worse, then use God as a patsy to excuse yourself. Then you would have others believe that you are pro-life when you agree with the abortion loby that womb children are on a lower level than born children? That you would fight efforts for personhood because it would mean killers of womb children like you would have to go to jail, even though you think killers of born children should not? How does a hipocrit dare talk to anyone about being selfish?
I never said I wasn't selfish and that I wasn't wrong. I only said I was very young.
And I don't think I am being condesending to her. I am just pointing out her own words show that she has some doubts about her decision. Try to stay on point here. If you want to ask me something, ask with out all the rhetoric and name calling and I will answer you. Deal honestly and I will answer. If you are going to just snipe, let me know and I will put you back on ignore. Your choice.
You have never delt honestly on this forum. You have agreed with the abortion loby that the womb child is at a lower level than the born child, so why ask the questions you are when you don't put much value on the womb child your self? How dare you harras and bully people with the same kinds of questions you refuse to answer yourself. Go ahead and ignore me. It will only prove you to be a baby killing coward. That would not suprise me at all.
Do you have a question? This seemed more like a statement or a diatribe than a direct question. Please rephrase.

reply from: nancyu

I can understand how it seemed that way at the time. Except that there were two people who's lives were affected that day. Either way, yours would go on. Perhaps less pleasant and much more difficult, but you would continue to live. Your baby however had to die, just to make your life easier. There is something fundamentally wrong about children dying to make their mother's life easier....
There is nothing good about that and nothing can make it okay. And when you do have children, you will remember. Abortion is never a healthy or a good decision for anyone.
I mean, If it was so okay, why would you feel a need to ask the "Gods and Godesss to take her back" what difference would it make what happen to that person as long as your life was not made difficult? IMHO the fact you tack that on, is because on some level you recognize that it was basically a selfish and self-centered decision and feel a need to pretty it up.
You "pretty" your youthful mistakes up all the time. You play done your act of murder quite often. How nice of you to be SSSSOOOO condisending of others when you have done three times worse, then use God as a patsy to excuse yourself. Then you would have others believe that you are pro-life when you agree with the abortion loby that womb children are on a lower level than born children? That you would fight efforts for personhood because it would mean killers of womb children like you would have to go to jail, even though you think killers of born children should not? How does a hipocrit dare talk to anyone about being selfish?
I never said I wasn't selfish and that I wasn't wrong. I only said I was very young.
And I don't think I am being condesending to her. I am just pointing out her own words show that she has some doubts about her decision. Try to stay on point here. If you want to ask me something, ask with out all the rhetoric and name calling and I will answer you. Deal honestly and I will answer. If you are going to just snipe, let me know and I will put you back on ignore. Your choice.
You have never delt honestly on this forum. You have agreed with the abortion loby that the womb child is at a lower level than the born child, so why ask the questions you are when you don't put much value on the womb child your self? How dare you harras and bully people with the same kinds of questions you refuse to answer yourself. Go ahead and ignore me. It will only prove you to be a baby killing coward. That would not suprise me at all.
Do you have a question? This seemed more like a statement or a diatribe than a direct question. Please rephrase.
I believe that was a statement.


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