Home - List All Discussions

What it means to be pro-life

Because apparently some are confused.

by: Jameberlin

I was taught that what it meant to be pro-life, was that you believe that every human being, every human being, has an inalienable right to life.
Meaning, you don't believe in killing a person, ever, regardless of the stage of life, supposed quality of life, or what sins they have committed (obviously there are some exceptions, war, self defense, when you're forced to kill, in other words).
It means you will never advocate or condone the willful and needless killing of another human being, ever.
Anyone who doesn't agree with this, shouldn't consider themselves pro-life. Period.
Pro-life, means pro-life, not just anti-abortion, but PRO-LIFE. It's not a negative, it's a positive. None of us have the right to take the life of another human being for no good reason.
It's my opinion, that this forum is willfully neglectful of other aspects of being pro-life. Abortion is not the only issue, it's the biggest, sure, but not the only one.

reply from: yoda

Lovely thought, but it has no academic support.
pro-life adjective against open access to abortion: in favor of bringing the human fetus to full term, especially by campaigning against open access to abortion and against experimentation on embryos http://encarta.msn.com/encnet/features/dictionary/DictionaryResults.aspx?refid=1861736610

pro-life adjective opposed to the belief that a pregnant woman should have the freedom to choose an abortion if she does not want to have a baby
http://dictionary.cambridge.org/define.asp?key=63328&dict=CALD

pro-life -adj.
opposed to legalized abortion; right-to-life http://www.infoplease.com/dictionary/pro-life

Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1) -
pro-life -adjective opposed to legalized abortion; right-to-life. http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=pro-life&r=66

pro-life adjective supporting the belief that it is immoral for a pregnant woman to have the freedom to choose to have an abortion (= an operation to end a pregnancy) if she does not want to have a baby http://dictionary.cambridge.org/define.asp?key=prolife*1+0&dict=A

reply from: Kero

So are you saying that a man who rapes and kills ten little children is as worthy of life as an innocent babby?

reply from: Jameberlin

I'm saying that life is God's to give and take away. I'm saying that man should be not be allowed to be on the streets, but it's not our place to kill him.

reply from: Jameberlin

Lovely thought, but it has no academic support.
pro-life adjective against open access to abortion: in favor of bringing the human fetus to full term, especially by campaigning against open access to abortion and against experimentation on embryos http://encarta.msn.com/encnet/features/dictionary/DictionaryResults.aspx?refid=1861736610
">http://encarta.msn.com/encnet/...efid=1861736610
pro-life adjective opposed to the belief that a pregnant woman should have the freedom to choose an abortion if she does not want to have a baby
http://dictionary.cambridge.org/define.asp?key=63328&dict=CALD
">http://dictionary.cambridge.or...63328&dict=CALD
pro-life -adj.
opposed to legalized abortion; right-to-life http://www.infoplease.com/dictionary/pro-life
">http://www.infoplease.com/dictionary/pro-life
Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1) -
pro-life -adjective opposed to legalized abortion; right-to-life. http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=pro-life&r=66
">http://dictionary.reference.co...q=pro-life&r=66
pro-life adjective supporting the belief that it is immoral for a pregnant woman to have the freedom to choose to have an abortion (= an operation to end a pregnancy) if she does not want to have a baby http://dictionary.cambridge.org/define.asp?key=prolife*1+0&dict=A
pro
- adverb
1. 1. in favor of a proposition, opinion, etc.
- noun
2. a proponent of an issue; a person who upholds the affirmative in a debate.
3. an argument, consideration, vote, etc., for something.
Life
- noun
1. the condition that distinguishes organisms from inorganic objects and dead organisms, being manifested by growth through metabolism, reproduction, and the power of adaptation to environment through changes originating internally.
2. the sum of the distinguishing phenomena of organisms, esp. metabolism, growth, reproduction, and adaptation to environment.
3. the animate existence or period of animate existence of an individual: to risk one's life; a short life and a merry one.
Those are the word's definitions, that is what it means to be pro-life.
Here's a little more academics for you:
"Pro-life is a term representing a variety of perspectives and activist movements in bioethics. It can be used to indicate opposition to practices such as euthanasia, human cloning, research involving human embryonic stem cells, and the death penalty, but most commonly (especially in the media and popular discourse) to abortion, and support for fetal rights. The term describes the political and ethical view which maintains that fetuses and embryos are human beings, and therefore have a right to live."
.... "The major stated goal of the pro-life movement is to "restore legal protection to innocent human life."[6] This protection would include fetuses and embryos, persons who cannot communicate their wishes due to physical or mental incapacitation, and those who are too weak to resist being euthanized.
Some pro-life advocates, such as those subscribing to the philosophy of a Consistent Life Ethic, oppose virtually all acts that end human life. They would argue that abortion, euthanasia, capital punishment, and unjust war are all wrong." (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pro-life)

reply from: lukesmom

yes, I have also understood prolife to be from conception to natural death for everyone. Abortion is the largest portion of the prolife movement but by no means the only part.

reply from: churchmouse

You have got a point. Being pro-life is far more then just being agaisnt abortion.
For a Christian especially it means that you allow God to take you according to His time. Doctor assisted suicide is a concern for all pro-lifers in every state. Legalizing this will open the floodgates for all sorts of abuses. Once again the vulnerable will be at risk.
It is hard for us to comprehend Gods love. The fact that He could forgive people, mass murderers is beyond our comprehension. We cant fathom that kind of love. We dont get it and we will never fully comprehend it.
But if you look at the people he hand picked in the Bible to write His Word.....he didnt pick perfect people. Paul for example persecuted and killed Christians wrote more books in the bible than anyone. David who wrotethe Psalms, was an adulterer and murderer. We cant presume to think like God. But He is the creator and He gave each of us life. He will take us when HE IS READY.
He decides because only He knows inside our hearts. He is the ultimate judge.

reply from: Jameberlin

I'm glad to see some others also believe that it's God's choice to give and take life, we are only stewards of life, we don't own it.
It's not just the innocent who deserve to live to a natural death, we all do. It's our inalienable right to life.

reply from: Banned Member

The pro-life advocate whether in the voting booth, abortion greif counseling, the clinic protestor, the blogger, writer or any other person that calls themselves pro-life or more is pro-life is and must be distingishable by their steadfast opposition to abortion in all its forms.
I believe that there are four basic truths about abortion and are as follows.
1 -Every abortion kills a human person.
If you can't past this basic truth, your future as a pro-life advocate is already over.
2 -Every abortion is wrong.
This must be understood. If there are exceptions for some abortions, than all abortions could essentially be justified in some abstract manner.
3 -There is and can be no no distinction between the born person and the unborn person.
The dignity and right to human life is never more perferrable to one group of persons over another. No one person born or unborn has more of a right to live than another. Every born person is a person. Every unborn person is a person.
4-If abortion is wrong and kills a human person, than it should be a criminal offense punishable by law.
Abortion should be a punishable crime for those that the seek them, those that provide them and those that pay for them.
There are no crimes that we agree are crimes that we choose universally not to prosecute.
The degree of guilt and the understading of the courts should always allow for extenuating circumstances (age, maturity, knowledge, coersion, etc...) and that they should be considered in the prosecuting of the crime and in the determination of what the punishment can and should be. Justice need not be uncompassionate. But there is no reasonable justification for granting legal and universal absolution to a group of people who commit the very crime that brutalizes the most innocent and defenseless in our society.
Many people feel bad about abortion. Many people think that there are too many abortions. Many still say that they personally feel that abortion is wrong but that either one, they feel thay can't tell others that it is wrong, or two, that it should be a womans right to choose.
Why do people feel bad about abortion? Because they know it is wrong. Feeling bad about abortion is not enough.
How many abortions are too many? However many that occur are too many.
How can you feel that something is wrong and not speak out against it? You can't. Does that mean that every person can be an avid pro-life advocate? Probably not. But there are things that every person can do. Vote for one, locally and nationally. Write something here and there, a blog, a forum and if they will publish it, a letter to the newspaper. The most important thing that people can do, is talk to other people about abortion. If it is mentioned in conversation, don't be afraid to express your views. There is no excuse for anyone to do nothing about abortion if you know and understand that abortion is wrong.
No one is unqualified to speak for the rights of the unborn. No one is excluded from speaking for the rights of the unborn. There are no special qualifications for speaking out and ther are no disqualifications for speaking out. Whether you are a celibate male or female, young, old, with children, without children, religious or irreligious, married or unmarried and even if you have had an abortion yourself. All should feel compelled to speak for the rights of the unborn. And we should exclude no one from our midst.
Why should one individual get to choose whether or not another human being lives or dies? They can't. And we should never pretend that someone has that choice, even for certain or special circumstances.
There is a difference between when one does what they can and goes above and beyond. When you become a more outspoken and visable pro-life advocate the disregarding of any one of the 4 basic truths about abortion completely compromises your credibility. Now how we express these truths may vary and which become the focus of our pro-life activity may also vary and no one can be discredited for focusing on one over another in their particular field of work. But when a person actively and openly denounces any one of the 4 truths you undermine the work of every other pro-life worker and advocate in the pro-life movement. That person enable abortion to continue and aids the rationale that allows abortion to continue.
Those that undermine the work of others should be called on their words and actions. Ones own personal experiences with abortion should never lesson what we know to be true about aborion and what we are able to express about abortion, even and especially if they have had an abortion themselves.
Our first and foremost responsibility is to the unborn person and regardless of what feelings of personal guilt may be incurred by expressing these truths about abortion, we should express them nevertheless, without apology and without exception.
That's my story and I'm stickin' to it!

reply from: AshMarie88

PRO-LIFE applies to ABORTION. PRO-LIFE means ANTI-ABORTION.
Just like PRO-CHOICE applies to ABORTION. PRO-ABORTION means PRO-ABORTION.
Pro-life may mean pro-ALL-life to some people, but it's not the correct definition in the abortion debate.

reply from: Jameberlin

the correct definition in the abortion debate? The abortion debate only exists because there are people out there who believe in the sanctity of ALL HUMAN LIFE.
Otherwise we wouldn't BE here in the first place!

reply from: AshMarie88

If we pro-lifers have to be pro-all-life in order to be called pro-life, then pro-choicers have to be pro-all-choice in order to be called pro-choice. ALL choices, even rape and murder, cause they're choices.
So there.

reply from: 4given

Yet you would not want to force those teachings.. oops morals on your children?!

reply from: Jameberlin

So there? lol.
If you truly believe that life is God's to give, and God's to take away, then it should follow, should it not, that it is never our right to take life?
I suppose perhaps we should amend the phrase to fit certain demographics?
We could say... for instance, pro-life for people who believe every human being has a right to live until their natural death (when God takes them)... Pro-early-life for people who believe only the unborn and young children have a right to life... Pro-God-Fearing-Christian-life, for those who believe you must have accepted Christ Jesus as your personal Lord and Savior in order to be worth your life... Pro-life-sometimes for people who believe that only babies that are wanted and without blemish should be allowed to live (a.k.a pro "choice")... We could have, Pro-anybody-but-the-Jews, pro-anybody-but-the-Muslims, Hindus, Bhuddists, Chinese, Koreans, Africans, Gays, Retards, Who Ever Doesn't Agree With Me.... The list goes on.
My point is, if people claim, as they often do, that they see no difference between the born, and the unborn, should it not follow that we see no difference between the born and the unborn?
If we claim that a baby has just as much right to live as it's mother, do we seriously sit there and say she has less right to live than her baby? I'm talking about life, life.
I think it's hypocritical, to sit there and say i believe every person should have a chance to live until their natural death, but.........
There should be no buts in the right to life, because it is simply the right to life.
Now if one were to say, for instance, i believe only those who live good decent lives should be allowed to live, and babies haven't done anything wrong so they should live... they could call themselves anti-abortion, but not pro-life. IMHO.

reply from: Jameberlin

Yet you would not want to force those teachings.. oops morals on your children?!
i couldn't force my morals on anyone, not you, not my children. I can only speak my mind, teach people what i think, and defend my position. I cannot FORCE anyone to do or think ANYTHING, if i did, i would take away their free will, and i can't take away anything God gives someone.
Again, with the quote crap. Did you even see what i wrote that in response to? I find it laughable, when parents say their children WILL think this, or that, WILL vote this way or that, WILL do this or that as adults. We're not GOD we don't KNOW what is in our children's hearts, we don't KNOW what His plan for them is. We can hope, and we can pray, but we do not KNOW.

reply from: 4given

Instead of the laughter you should focus on the parenting.
"Train up a child in the way he should go and when he is old, he will not depart from it" (Prov 22:6).
Are you not confident in your moral stance, that you feel your children will not adhere to your ideas and teachings about abortion? How old is (are) your child(ren)? When do you plan to educate them about abortion? How do you plan to do so?

reply from: 4given

Your quote.. therefore your "crap".

reply from: churchmouse

So are you saying that one can be pro-life abortion and be for embryonic stem cell or doctors assisted suicide?

reply from: Jameberlin

So because proverb 22 says so, children never rebel? What about Kero's sister who obviously rebelled against her parents teachings, while he remained steadfast? Did they raise her wrong?
My children will be taught to respect life, in all stages, because once they were without a voice, and i defended and protected them, they might find themselves without a voice again, and i will defend and protect them, others will fight to defend and protect them. Any decent human being will fight to protect all life, regardless of its "value". I will also teach my children to love others, as Christ did, i will lead by example, not coerce through bullying and fear mongering. Having to answer for your own sins is terrifying enough.
As far as my son, he's none of your business. It'd be prudent for you to leave him out of any opinions you may have on me and my values.
Oh, and my "crap", my opinions, my faith, they're just that. Mine. You can challenge them, agree with them if you like, you can bully and be abusive or whatever you want, if i couldn't take that i wouldn't be here.
I think it would be neat, wouldn't it, if people could just focus on the topic at hand and not bring other topics into it?
Forcing my values on another human being, by the way, has nothing to do with my opinion on what it means to be pro-life.

reply from: carolemarie

Instead of the laughter you should focus on the parenting.
"Train up a child in the way he should go and when he is old, he will not depart from it" (Prov 22:6).
Are you not confident in your moral stance, that you feel your children will not adhere to your ideas and teachings about abortion? How old is (are) your child(ren)? When do you plan to educate them about abortion? How do you plan to do so?
Christian kids have abortions too.
I know people who had the abortion to "save the ministry".
To spare the pastor dad the embaressment.
Because they were in seminary school.
Because my parents would be so disappointed.
They have all repented, but they willfully chose abortion and were prolife as kids.

reply from: 4given

Originally posted by:
So because proverb 22 says so, children never rebel? What about Kero's sister who obviously rebelled against her parents teachings, while he remained steadfast? Did they raise her wrong?
I said nothing of rebellion. Neither did I address Kero or his situation. It isn't about whether or not she was reared with the "wrong" guidelines, but whether or not abortion was discussed and she understood, which children do naturally, that it is never okay to kill another innocent being.
I don't remember including him. In fact, I didn't know you had a son. It would be prudent for you to educate him about the abortion truths. How do you plan to do that?
What? You present them because they belong to you. All this nonsense about abusiveness and bullying. I will ask you to clarify if what you willfully post about your position, thoughts etc, is contrary to mine. Is that abuse or bullying? Please.
Fabulous! So you will do so.
How does one "force" another to value human life?

reply from: 4given

Right. I suppose we should cuddle and kiss them into repentance than? One does not have to be "Christian" to understand the truth about abortion. Ask a 5 year old. What have you said to your son? Your daughters? How have you explained abortion to them?

reply from: Jameberlin

4given, i do try and focus on the topic at hand, if the topic degenerates into abusive and bullying comments, as it often does, i usually offer my opinion on whatever is being discussed at the time.
You asked about my children, i assumed you meant for me to talk about them? Or was i wrong here? I could only assume that you asked me how many children i had and how old they were because you meant to use them in some argument about how i was wrong, and going to ruin my kids. I admit, took the defensive stance and thought it was necessary to inform you before hand, he's none of your business.
It would be prudent for me to educate him about abortion truths, and i will, when it is age appropriate. Until then, you can refer to my previous post where i stated how i will teach him the value of a human life, which i notice you forgot to quote and reply with your retort.
I am not insecure in my stance on life, i will not waiver, but i am not so deluded that i think everyone in my immediate circle will always hold my values, people often believe the lies of others, and are misguided and become complacent regardless of how steadfast their parent's convictions are.
As for the bullying, if you read it correctly, i said you were free to do what you wanted in regards to my opinions. I wasn't accusing you of bullying me.
As far as the "forcing" of one's opinions, here's the deal, you saw me post a comment in regards to a photo that i thought was outlandish, in that a pregnant woman had "MY BABY IS PRO CHOICE" written on her belly. Then in Yoda's post about "phony pro-lifers" you brought it up, and i made an attempt there to take responsibility for what i said and clear up any misunderstanding any other readers may have had about why i made that comment and what context it was in.
Now i make a post about what i believe it means to be pro life, and you come on here, with nothing relevant to the post's topic, but you ask me
To which i simply replied, i cannot force my values on anyone, and that the forcing of values is not relevant to my stance on what it means to be pro-life.
I explained why i said what i said. If you can't get it, that's not my problem. I will not waste any more time explaining something that is obviously lost on you.
Oh, a note about the proverb and rebellion... Say a child whose parents do teach him the right and good way in life, and he chooses to not follow, as it happens, is this not rebellion? Isn't the opposite of what Proverb 22 states, in fact, rebellion? This is what i meant, by my earlier post.

reply from: AshMarie88

So are you saying that one can be pro-life abortion and be for embryonic stem cell or doctors assisted suicide?
Embryonic stem cell research, no. Sadly, assisted suicide, yes. Because assisted suicide doesn't apply to abortion.
Now, I'm against assisted suicide, but that's just my opinion, and for the most part I AM pro-all-life except in the case of the death penalty for rapists and murderers. I don't believe tho, that I need to be pro-ALL-life in order to be pro-life.

reply from: nancyu

I'm saying that life is God's to give and take away. I'm saying that man should be not be allowed to be on the streets, but it's not our place to kill him.
Yours is a religious position. Not everyone believes in God. Does this mean they can't be pro life? If that is what you think then I disagree with you.
Capital punishment and abortion do not belong in the same category by any stretch. A person put to death for their crimes is given a little something called "due process" of law.
Where is the "due process" for the 3000+- children scheduled for slaughter today?

reply from: nancyu

So because proverb 22 says so, children never rebel? What about Kero's sister who obviously rebelled against her parents teachings, while he remained steadfast? Did they raise her wrong?
My children will be taught to respect life, in all stages, because once they were without a voice, and i defended and protected them, they might find themselves without a voice again, and i will defend and protect them, others will fight to defend and protect them. Any decent human being will fight to protect all life, regardless of its "value". I will also teach my children to love others, as Christ did, i will lead by example, not coerce through bullying and fear mongering. Having to answer for your own sins is terrifying enough.
As far as my son, he's none of your business. It'd be prudent for you to leave him out of any opinions you may have on me and my values.
Oh, and my "crap", my opinions, my faith, they're just that. Mine. You can challenge them, agree with them if you like, you can bully and be abusive or whatever you want, if i couldn't take that i wouldn't be here.
I think it would be neat, wouldn't it, if people could just focus on the topic at hand and not bring other topics into it?
Forcing my values on another human being, by the way, has nothing to do with my opinion on what it means to be pro-life.
Yup, looks like we've got another $prolifer$ here.
(Shame on you forgiven! What a big bully you are!)

reply from: yoda

I don't recall seeing your response to my question on this subject: Do you not understand that by supporting ANY criminal laws, you are "forcing your morality on others"?

reply from: yoda

Apparently, the term "bullying" is the new catch-phrase being used by $prolifer$ to refer to anyone who disagrees with them. Apparently, they think that some posters are able to reach through the monitor and physically strike their opponents...... and they still don't know we have a "iggy" function to block posters that offend us.
Strange, isn't it? It's like someone is whining "You must stop saying that, because what you are saying is preventing me from saying what I want to say".
IOW, take away one person's freedom of speech in order to make another person "brave enough" to say what they want to say.
It's all very macabre...... very Orwellian.......

reply from: LiberalChiRo

100% correct. But Yodacracker will disagree with you just to be a pig. He thinks he and only a few other people on the forum are the the only true pro-lifers.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

I'm saying that life is God's to give and take away. I'm saying that man should be not be allowed to be on the streets, but it's not our place to kill him.
I can understand the sentiment. A lot of people are against the death penalty, even some pro-choicers (which is REALLY weird!).

reply from: LiberalChiRo

Actually you're wrong. Go take a gander around the internet. You'll quickly realise, just by looking up the term "pro-life" that the term applies to much more than just abortion. Only an idiot thinks it applies only to abortion.

reply from: yoda

I really do appreciate your trying to be a devout Christian, and showing me all the love in your heart........
And I'm so flattered that you identify all dictionaries in my name, or rather in a facsimile of my name... "Yodacracker"........ what an honor!
To sum up, please continue to be a shinning beacon of Christian love and charity, okay?

reply from: yoda

Ah, more Christian love and charity...... ah, the warm glow!
Oh, btw, the "internet" is not a recognized dictionary, although there are online dictionaries, which say:
pro-life adjective against open access to abortion: in favor of bringing the human fetus to full term, especially by campaigning against open access to abortion and against experimentation on embryos http://encarta.msn.com/encnet/features/dictionary/DictionaryResults.aspx?refid=1861736610

pro-life adjective opposed to the belief that a pregnant woman should have the freedom to choose an abortion if she does not want to have a baby
http://dictionary.cambridge.org/define.asp?key=63328&dict=CALD

pro-life -adj.
opposed to legalized abortion; right-to-life http://www.infoplease.com/dictionary/pro-life

Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1) -
pro-life -adjective opposed to legalized abortion; right-to-life. http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=pro-life&r=66

pro-life adjective supporting the belief that it is immoral for a pregnant woman to have the freedom to choose to have an abortion (= an operation to end a pregnancy) if she does not want to have a baby http://dictionary.cambridge.org/define.asp?key=prolife*1+0&dict=A

reply from: LiberalChiRo

I don't have to be nice to you, you've already thrown several life-times of ASS on me. You're off the list.

reply from: yoda

Of course not! You don't have to be "nice" to anyone!
You're so perfect that you can justify using any type of abusive language against anyone you want to, right?
Please, keep right on being a shinning example of Christian love, patience, charity, and courtesy...... I'm enjoying it.

reply from: carolemarie

Right. I suppose we should cuddle and kiss them into repentance than? One does not have to be "Christian" to understand the truth about abortion. Ask a 5 year old. What have you said to your son? Your daughters? How have you explained abortion to them?
If your son or daughter had an abortion would you stop loving them?
Is your love conditional?
Neither would their heavenly Father. He would have us continue to love them and pray for them and help turn their hearts back to him.
You can understand the truth and still in your hour of crisis chose the easy way out. We see women all the time who did just that. They gave in to fear, pressure...and terminated knowing it was wrong. That is why if abortion becomes ilegal it will end most abortions.

reply from: churchmouse

ashmarie said,
nancy is right here many positions here are based on religious beliefs. If a poster is not a Christian then I can see why opinions would yoyo on the basic issues. But if you believe in God then it becomes about what God says and not what we think.
Embryonic stem cell is agaisnt God law. It is life there is no doubt about that.
http://www.orthodoxresearchinstitute.org/articles/ethics/hodges_stem_cell_research.htm

So if you are for this research then you go agaisnt Gods law, and your stance cant be pro-life.
The same with assisted suicide.......if you are a believer and you know what the Word says, you know what God commands, then suicide by your own hand or suicide with help from a doctor is wrong. You cant be pro-life in the truest sense and be for either of these things.
ashmarie said,
Well its a life taken by people other than God so they do relate in a way.
Now if someone is basing their position on their own morality and not Gods......then anything could go.
I believe Gods position is clear on all of these issues.
Agreed but that does not make capital punishment necessarily right. Mistakes can happen and there have been innocent people put to death. Both are deliberate.
This is what the organization I work for states on their website.
"Arizona Right to Life, Inc.is a non-sectarian, non-partisan, non-profit, 501(c)4 organization committed to articulating and protecting the right to life of all human beings, born and unborn. This is accomplished by educating people on the value of every human life and by promoting and supporting pro-life legislation, public policy and elected officials. Donations to Arizona Right to Life are NOT tax deductible. Arizona Right to Life is the oldest, largest and strongest pro-life organization in the State of Arizona."
http://arizonarighttolife.org/index.cfm/sections/About_Us-Contribute/4

Here are our positions.
Position Statements
The following are Arizona Right to Life's positions on various topics related to the pro-life movement as set forth by our Charter or the Board of Directors. For more information please contact our state office at 602-285-0063 or azrtl@azrtl.org
Abortion - Arizona Right to Life opposes abortion because it unjustly takes the life of a developing human being and does not support abortion as an adequate solution to pregnancies that are unplanned, unwanted, or the result of rape or incest. We believe that when pregnancy complications threaten a mother's health, it is the responsibility of doctors to treat the complication and to not kill an innocent child. If the pregnancy threatens the mother's life, doctors should do their best to save both mother and child.
Stem Cell Research - Arizona Right to Life supports adult stem cell and other forms of research that do not kill innocent human beings. We oppose embryonic stem cell research because it unjustly destroys a human being in the embryonic stage of development in order to further medical science.
Violence - Arizona Right to Life is opposed to the use of violence as a means to end the abortion conflict. We do not associate with groups who condone violence against abortion practitioners, nor do we publicize their events.
Euthanasia - Arizona Right to Life opposes "mercy killing," as a means to combat chronic pain or terminal illnesses. Examples of this include prescribing lethal doses of medicine or the withholding of food and water to intentionally end a patient's life prematurely. We affirm that patients are not obligated to undergo treatment that is considered "extraordinary" because of its financial, physical, or emotional toll on the patient.
Assisted Suicide - Arizona Right to Life denies the validity of the so-called "right-to-die" and joins the opinion of major medical associations, which condemn assisted suicide as, "directly incompatible with the role of physician as healer."
Contraception - Arizona Right to Life does not take a position on the morality of non-abortifacient contraception. We oppose the use of medications that cause abortions as either a primary or secondary effect. We also oppose the distribution of contraception to minors.
If you look at any other states positions......they are similar if not identical to ours.

reply from: faithman

Right. I suppose we should cuddle and kiss them into repentance than? One does not have to be "Christian" to understand the truth about abortion. Ask a 5 year old. What have you said to your son? Your daughters? How have you explained abortion to them?
If your son or daughter had an abortion would you stop loving them?
Is your love conditional?
Neither would their heavenly Father. He would have us continue to love them and pray for them and help turn their hearts back to him.
You can understand the truth and still in your hour of crisis chose the easy way out. We see women all the time who did just that. They gave in to fear, pressure...and terminated knowing it was wrong. That is why if abortion becomes ilegal it will end most abortions.
As well as the promise of prosicution of all involved in the killing. If we allow serial killers of the womb child determine what future punishment will be for future serial killers of the womb child, then justice is truely perverted. We make no such exceptions for those who pay for the death of the innocent born, we should make no such exceptions for those who cold bloodedly pay for the slaughter of the preborn. Particularly whores who kill just so the corner doesn't get cold, and they can get back in time for the next trick.

reply from: Banned Member

I am anti-abortion. I am anti-choice. I am pro-life in that I believe that each and every abortion is wrong and should be illegal.
Now in a broader sense some think that being pro-life means that you are also against euthanasia, medically assisted suicide and even against the death penalty. For my part I am against euthanasia, I am also against medically assisted suicide and I am for the judicious and most careful use of the death penalty. I am not against the death penalty, but I think that should be used only in extreme and extraordinary circumstances.
I also think that people should have the right to make their own end of life medical choices, including what treatment they will receive, refusing medical treatment or discontinuing medical treatment where it is deemed to neither improve the quantity or quality of life. Never should a person's life be ended because their continued treatment is simply deemed too burdensome or too inconvenient.

reply from: yoda

As as in the case of Terri Schaivo. Allowing her family to feed her, and pay for her hospitalization, was just too "inconvenient".

reply from: Agape

I agree on your consistency! Many prolifers are not consistent. On one point I would ask...you said that "never should a person's life be ended b/c their continued treament is deemed too burdensome or inconvenient". I wonder if you think that includes pregnant women that would die unless they receive treatment-like chemo or something that would effectively kill the fetus? Or even if that treatment means she shouldn't be pregnant anymore?
Just wondering if you could clarify, thank you!

reply from: carolemarie

I agree on your consistency! Many prolifers are not consistent. On one point I would ask...you said that "never should a person's life be ended b/c their continued treament is deemed too burdensome or inconvenient". I wonder if you think that includes pregnant women that would die unless they receive treatment-like chemo or something that would effectively kill the fetus? Or even if that treatment means she shouldn't be pregnant anymore?
Just wondering if you could clarify, thank you!
I agree I would love to hear the answer, and the same for you agape...

reply from: Jameberlin

CCC states if "non-lethal means are sufficient to defend and protect people's safety from the aggressor [i.e., the convicted murderer], authority [should] limit itself to such means, as these are more in keeping with the concrete conditions of the common good and more in conformity with the dignity of the human person" (2267).
This above almost never happens. I can think of only one example, Charlie Manson.
Also, your opinion on the "end of life" choices are valid, since these are decisions that would not terminate the life, so to speak, but let it end naturally.
The broader sense of pro-life, what you stated above, is the view of the Vatican thus it should be not the view of some, but of many.

reply from: Jameberlin

As as in the case of Terri Schaivo. Allowing her family to feed her, and pay for her hospitalization, was just too "inconvenient".
It was for her husband, who wanted to remarry.

reply from: churchmouse

He could have divorced her. But then you amrry for better for worse like it says in scripture......marriage is for life and God never intended for people to get divorce. He committed adultry, this good Christian man.

reply from: yoda

Apparently, he preferred her death to getting a divorce, for whatever reason.

reply from: Banned Member

So how do you choose between the mother and the unborn child? How does a mother choose between herself and her unborn child? If I were the father and husband to this mother and wife could I choose between the two? No I could not. I would try to save both. I would do everything that I possibly could do to save both woman and child. I would explore every possible treament that would save, or would prolong life for the mother that would not harm the unborn child, or do as little harm as possible until the child could be delivered with the best chance of survival for both, or as soon as was possible with the best possibility of saving both. But I would never choose simply choose an abortion.

reply from: Agape

So how do you choose between the mother and the unborn child? How does a mother choose between herself and her unborn child? If I were the father and husband to this mother and wife could I choose between the two? No I could not. I would try to save both. I would do everything that I possibly could do to save both woman and child. I would explore every possible treament that would save, or would prolong life for the mother that would not harm the unborn child, or do as little harm as possible until the child could be delivered with the best chance of survival for both, or as soon as was possible with the best possibility of saving both. But I would never choose simply choose an abortion.
I understand and your answer certainly is like mine! It would be a long journey and not a simple solution.
But to push further, if it were a clear cut case of 'abort or die' for your wife (if you are married I don't know) what are you going to say?
I have acquaintances who are Christian, love children, and quite opposed to abortion. Or, at least, were. Mother was naturally pregnant with triplets and had health issues and as she was older it was deemed a very dangerous pregnancy. It got to the point (long story) that either everyone was going to die, or she could abort one and give everyone a better change. They chose to abort. She had twins and everyone is fine.
Now they are prolife. But they weren't then. They were prochoice. I think that since nothing is certain in life, they couldn't have known the outcome of the pregnancy. I have never discussed this with them because it's a painful subject. I wondered if they lessened their adherence to prolife policies due to their situation but I don't want to bring up that can of worms.
What do you all think about this?

reply from: Banned Member

I think that first off you are talking about a rather rare instance. But rare instances do occur. The distinction for me in any choice of what choice to make regarding what treament to consider is the difference between "might die" or "will die". If one of the unborn could be delivered with some chance of survival for that unborn child and certain survival of the mother and the other children, than that is the course that I would probably take.
Circumstances beyond our control that force us to consider options that are not desirable and even tragic do occur. That does mean that we have compromised our morals or principles because these undesired circumstances are exactly opposed to our moral principles. Be certain; an early delivery that results in the undesired and tragic death of a child does not constitute an elective abortion.
There is a distinct difference however between "I will have an abortion" because of a risk, and "I will do what is necessary to preserve life" because of an imminent danger of death. I have known plenty of women that had risk factors and complications during pregnancies that did not rush out and have an abortion. In most instances they had the child without too much difficulty. No women should ever have an abortion and/or cause the death of an unborn child simply because of the mere "risk" of health complications. Every pregnancy has some risk of health complications, just as every day of life has some risk.

reply from: Jameberlin

It's kind of like an instance of conjoined twins, where you either separate so at least one can live, or you don't and they both die.
How do you choose in a situation like that?
I can't even offer any speculation as to how i would react given these choices.
I don't envy those who have had to deal with it.

reply from: Agape

I respect your opinion and I thank you for posting.

reply from: Agape

Of course, you said that earlier. I understand.
Yes, circumstances like these are unfortunate, and certainly do not mean we have to compromise our value systems. I am a little confused however because I detect a semantic issue-you are using the phrase "early delivery", when in fact, an early delivery that will unfortunately and inexplicticly lead to the death of the infant is in actuality, an abortion. It's technically true, isn't it? It's elective, the parents could take a 'wait and see' approach and trust in nature, but they make a decision otherwise. Could you please expound on this more for me as I am learning?

reply from: galen

an early delivery.. cesarean or vaginal... usually c-section in the case of an emergency, is done with precision and care, and NOT preformed to terminate a life. On the other hand an abortion in these circumastances , is preformed by brutal means, usually with suction, currette, or by prostaglandin administration, wich tears apart the child internally. There is no attempt by physician or staff in the case of abortion where the child is given any chance to live. In the case of an early delivery every effort is made to resuce the infant, and sometimes miracles can occure... we have had earlier deliveries and safe homecomings every 4-5 years or so...
I think Augustine's terminology in this case is right on and is the same sort i use in my classes.

reply from: Agape

Get used to that....
Crikey. I'm bloody smart 'nuff to read what others post and form my own ideas without editorials from posters on vendetta trips. Your last post on this thread was more about what "Fman" thinks of you than what you think yourself. Is that how you identify your values?

reply from: Banned Member

The difference between an early delivery and an abortion is 1) the nature of the precedure and 2) the moral intent of the decision. When one chooses an abortion, they are choosing to end the life of the unborn child without regard or respect for the rest of that unborn persons life. When one chooses a premature delivery they are risking the life of the unborn child but in consideration of the mother and as in the instance you mentioned, other children. The difference is not merely words, but intent. It is the intent of human actions that determines the moral content of an action, not the definition of words.

reply from: Agape

I see what you mean.
In the situation I described, an early delivery with hopes for life was not a possibility. The parents didn't have a choice of early delivery, they had a choice of abortion or not. Since they made this elective decision to end the life of one of the infants instead of losing all four lives, that is an abortion and not an 'early delivery'. I was wondering what posters would think, feel, or say in that situation.
Yeah, it's a big hypothetical. But it really happened to a couple I know and I wonder how others would approach this. Thanks for your insight.
Since the intent was to terminate a life, what do you think of that situation?

reply from: galen

in your friend's case it is considered an abortion... btw, medically speaking i know of no instance where selective reduction of triplets to twins did anything for the health of the mother that simple rest would not have done... methinks that there was probably more to that situation.

reply from: Banned Member

The intent was not merely to intentionally cause the death of an unborn person. The intent was the save the lives of three human beings.
For example; Sometimes people in rescue situations in real world environments, are forced to accept that they must must choose to save the greater amount of life, even though some people may die whom they cannot save. That does not mean that they chose to cause death.
The parents with the triplets chose to save the mother and the other two children, but the death of the other child was not the intent, and neither was it meaningless or arbitrary.
Without knowing the exact medical circumstances I cannot say whether or not the couple you describe choose to abort, or chose the only course of action they could choose because death was inevitable for all.

reply from: yoda

I would ask for a second and third opinion, because that sounds like a very, very rare occurrence. Not only that, for a mother with normal mothering instincts, it would be a agonizing decision to make. Beyond that, it's outside the scope of what I am here to debate about: the elective abortion of healthy babies by healthy mothers, which makes up about 95% of all abortions.

reply from: lukesmom

I very much agree. Many people can say what they think they will do in a "hard" situation but in truth, none of us actually knows until we face it. I found words are easy, actions are harder.

reply from: carolemarie

I agree, having to chose between the death of two people is not a good position to be in. Either way your decision results in the death of someone. A baby's death is sad, so is the death of the babies mother....there is no good choice to make.

reply from: nancyu

These are the questions we must ask ourselves ahead of time. Do you want abortion to remain a legal option because the situation may arise where the mother's life is in danger, and she decides then, well wait, NOW I want to choose?
By asking yourselves these questions now you can decide. Are you truly pro life? Or do you want that choice reserved for the mother. It sure would be swell to be pro life and switch back to pro choice when the need comes up. But the problem is if you want the choice in life or death situations then you will have to surrender choice to every woman in every situation. Which means you are pro choice.
Or if you are willing to give up choice, even in life and death situations we can actually get abortion outlawed. It is a tough call but you should figure out who you are and what your beliefs are before you give yourself the title pro life.
My opinion is the decision in Roe Vs Wade was based on the exception for the life of the mother. That is where the confusion came in. Article 1196 contradicted the rest of the law. It's true that you can not have it both ways! I'm sorry. Really and truly.
Either it is okay to kill a child or it isn't. A child's life is either placed in God's hands or it isn't. Pro choice means YOU get to CHOOSE when it is acceptable to kill a child. Pro life means you don't. Are you willing to pay the potential price to have abortion outlawed, or aren't you ? Are you pro life, or aren't you?
If you don't know what you would do in this situation then at least be truthful with yourself and instead of calling yourself pro life, call yourself undecided.
http://www.tourolaw.edu/patch/Roe/#rop
XII Our conclusion that Art. 1196 is unconstitutional means, of course, that the Texas abortion statutes, as a unit, must fall. The exception of Art. 1196 cannot be struck down separately, for then the State would be left with a statute proscribing all abortion procedures no matter how medically urgent the case.
Although the District Court granted appellant Roe declaratory relief, it stopped short of issuing an injunction against enforcement of the Texas statutes. The Court has recognized that different considerations enter into a federal court's decision as to declaratory relief, on the one hand, and injunctive relief, on the other. Zwickler v. Koota, 389 U.S. 241, 252-255 (1967); Dombrowski v. Pfister, 380 U.S. 479 (1965). We are not dealing with a statute that, on its face, appears to abridge free expression, an area of particular concern under Dombrowski and refined in Younger v. Harris, 401 U.S., at 50.
We find it unnecessary to decide whether the District Court erred in withholding injunctive relief, for we assume the Texas prosecutorial authorities will give full credence to this decision that the present criminal abortion statutes of that State are unconstitutional.
The judgment of the District Court as to intervenor Hallford is reversed, and Dr. Hallford's complaint in intervention is dismissed. In all other respects, the judgment of the District Court is affirmed. Costs are allowed to the appellee.
Here is Article 1196:
"Art. 1196. By medical advice
"Nothing in this chapter applies to an abortion procured or attempted by medical advice for the purpose of saving the life of the mother."
The foregoing Articles, together with Art. 1195, compose Chapter 9 of Title 15 of the Penal Code. Article 1195, not attacked here, reads:
"Art. 1195. Destroying unborn child
"Whoever shall during parturition of the mother destroy the vitality or life in a child in a state of being born and before actual birth, which child would otherwise have been born alive, shall be confined in the penitentiary for life or for not less than five years."

reply from: faithman

This is what I keep trying to tell people. The hard cases were never an issue. Texas law already allowed for them. Hard case abortion will not keep the abortion industry in business. Every effort should be made to save both. With modern medacine, that is just about all the time. It is the 90 plus % of purely elective abortions that we should focus on. But it all goes away with the passage of the life at conception act. Politically, that should be the focus. As far as in the field, Nothing works better than the 4d ultra sound. But not everyone can afford the machine, nor have the tech cert. to run one. Soooo the IAAP cards and posters are the next best thing. The message is they are persons. And the image makes the individual activist as close to an ultra sound machine as they can get for just a few cents a piece, as apposed to 10's of thousands of dollars. We have 50,000 in production, and headed to Colorado as we speak. Thanks to all IAAP folks who have made it posible. And major thanks to Life Dynamics for makeing this major distribution tool [the forum] available to the personhood community.

reply from: nancyu

Right. So it is always preferable to murder to avoid a nasty divorce right. What a good Christian, indeed.

reply from: Agape

I'm sorry I wasn't more specific; there was an issue with the three infants surviving; they had no chance as a threesome but with twins their chance were higher.
Another ass-backwards internet forum attempt to "one up" somebody. You are in the wrong, suck it up, quit doing it, and get over what "Fman" thinks of you. It's boring, it's petty, it's not getting anyone anywhere.

reply from: Agape

The intent was not merely to intentionally cause the death of an unborn person. The intent was the save the lives of three human beings.
For example; Sometimes people in rescue situations in real world environments, are forced to accept that they must must choose to save the greater amount of life, even though some people may die whom they cannot save. That does not mean that they chose to cause death.
The parents with the triplets chose to save the mother and the other two children, but the death of the other child was not the intent, and neither was it meaningless or arbitrary.
Without knowing the exact medical circumstances I cannot say whether or not the couple you describe choose to abort, or chose the only course of action they could choose because death was inevitable for all.
It sounds like you condone their "selective reduction"? Do I have that right?
Since nothing is certain in life and the doctors are not psychic it's hard not to wonder why the parents didn't let God's will determine their fate.
I would ask for a second and third opinion, because that sounds like a very, very rare occurrence. Not only that, for a mother with normal mothering instincts, it would be a agonizing decision to make. Beyond that, it's outside the scope of what I am here to debate about: the elective abortion of healthy babies by healthy mothers, which makes up about 95% of all abortions.
I would get additional opinions as well, absolutely!
Sure, it's not many, but if it's one it's enough to talk about. I think these discussions are good and help to define our positions. I find a lot of prolifers are uncomfortable with these situations and don't want to discuss them with friends, and if they work it out on the boards it can be better for all.
But the 'hard cases' are abortions, too.

reply from: nancyu

The intent was not merely to intentionally cause the death of an unborn person. The intent was the save the lives of three human beings.
For example; Sometimes people in rescue situations in real world environments, are forced to accept that they must must choose to save the greater amount of life, even though some people may die whom they cannot save. That does not mean that they chose to cause death.
The parents with the triplets chose to save the mother and the other two children, but the death of the other child was not the intent, and neither was it meaningless or arbitrary.
Without knowing the exact medical circumstances I cannot say whether or not the couple you describe choose to abort, or chose the only course of action they could choose because death was inevitable for all.
It sounds like you condone their "selective reduction"? Do I have that right?
Since nothing is certain in life and the doctors are not psychic it's hard not to wonder why the parents didn't let God's will determine their fate.
I would ask for a second and third opinion, because that sounds like a very, very rare occurrence. Not only that, for a mother with normal mothering instincts, it would be a agonizing decision to make. Beyond that, it's outside the scope of what I am here to debate about: the elective abortion of healthy babies by healthy mothers, which makes up about 95% of all abortions.
I would get additional opinions as well, absolutely!
Sure, it's not many, but if it's one it's enough to talk about. I think these discussions are good and help to define our positions. I find a lot of prolifers are uncomfortable with these situations and don't want to discuss them with friends, and if they work it out on the boards it can be better for all.
But the 'hard cases' are abortions, too.
I agree Agape.
Faithman, the hard cases ARE an issue. These are the cases that prevent abortion from being completely outlawed. These are the cases that leave the door open for the rest of the cases. And in my opinion, the laws supporting abortion in cases of life of mother are what caused all laws against abortion to be found unconstitutional and vague.
If an unborn child is a person, then ALL abortion is illegal. Even those done to defend the life of the mother. They are not necessarily ALL murder, those done to save the mother would be considered self defense perhaps, but they would need to be decided case by case, just like any case of murder or manslaughter.

reply from: Agape

Yes, yes, Nancy! If one abortion is okay, then all abortions are okay because the end result is always, always, always the same.

reply from: churchmouse

In Gods eyes yes. But we are not a Christian nation and our governmment does not give the unborn personhood. The judges on the SC that passed Roe.....stamped a bullseye on every unborn child conceived in this country. They made it possible for women to kill.
Our government kicks them to the curb and pretends to be righteous. This is not the case. We are anything but a nation of faith in God.

reply from: nancyu

In Gods eyes yes. But we are not a Christian nation and our governmment does not give the unborn personhood. The judges on the SC that passed Roe.....stamped a bullseye on every unborn child conceived in this country. They made it possible for women to kill.
Our government kicks them to the curb and pretends to be righteous. This is not the case. We are anything but a nation of faith in God.
It's always been "possible" for women to kill. Roe VS Wade gave everyone a little extra protection and incentive.
The last time I checked we are a nation of, for, and by the people. I am one of the people, and in my eyes the unborn are persons, and there are no exceptions to that.
To concernedparent, I have thought it through and through. I know I am not the only decision maker, but in my view there is no way for abortion to be entirely outlawed unless the unborn are fully recognized as persons. If and when they are, there can be no exceptions. Either they are persons or they are not. That's the facts jack. If you're pro choice, they are not persons, If you are pro life then they are persons. If you can't make up your mind then I guess you're undecided.

reply from: nancyu

In Gods eyes yes. But we are not a Christian nation and our governmment does not give the unborn personhood. The judges on the SC that passed Roe.....stamped a bullseye on every unborn child conceived in this country. They made it possible for women to kill.
Our government kicks them to the curb and pretends to be righteous. This is not the case. We are anything but a nation of faith in God.
It's always been "possible" for women to kill. Roe VS Wade gave everyone a little extra protection and incentive.
The last time I checked we are a nation of, for, and by the people. I am one of the people, and in my eyes the unborn are persons, and there are no exceptions to that.
To concernedparent, I have thought it through and through. I know I am not the only decision maker, but in my view there is no way for abortion to be entirely outlawed unless the unborn are fully recognized as persons. If and when they are, there can be no exceptions. Either they are persons or they are not. That's the facts jack. If you're pro choice, they are not persons, If you are pro life then they are persons. If you can't make up your mind then I guess you're undecided.
I know the unborn are persons, but just for the sake of argument, suppose I did not believe they were, but still opposed legal abortion on demand with no exceptions. I would then not be "prolife?" You wouldn't let me in the club? You would insist you were morally superior, and that I was not dedicated to the prolife cause?
What if I acknowledged that the unborn are "persons," yet still fully supported the legal right to abort? I would then be "prolife" in your view? You do realize such people exist, don't you? Anybody who opposes legal abortion on demand, supporting the prohibition of elective abortion, is "prolife," regardless of their beliefs regarding personhood, and anybody who believes elective abortion on demand should be legal, and supports such laws, is "prochoice." It's as simple as that.
And just so you know, I'll clarify once more that the SCOTUS never ruled that the unborn were not "persons," they merely stated that the unborn had never been "recognized in the law as persons in the whole sense." The issue was never whether or not the unborn were "persons," but whether or not the 14th Amendment was intended to include the unborn in the mention of "persons" pertaining to "the right to life."
Are you unwilling to clarify whether your "purist" stance would require mothers to die rather than allow them to terminate their pregnancies? If the umbilical cord is wrapped around the child's neck and strangling it, would you refuse to allow the pregnancy to be terminated in order to save the child, simply because it might not survive anyway, and the procedure would then technically be an "abortion?" Must nature take it's course, even if that means mother, child, or both will die?
I'm not really in the mood for a drawn out debate. I'm going to pick some blueberries. I think you know enough about my position to argue both my side and yours, so if it's not too much trouble could you argue it out amongst yourself, and let me know if I change my mind. Thanks!

reply from: yoda

I like that response!

reply from: lukesmom

Nancy, Have you actually been in a no win situation that you had to make a choice, a choice you didn't want to be faced with, a choice you have to make under great emotional strain and grief and sorrow? You really have NO IDEA what you are talking about. I don't care what you THINK you will do. You REALLY have no idea until you are faced with the unthinkable. Beleive me in this, I have lived it. No one was more staunchly prolife than I was but the shock and pain and grief of being told of medical problems is worse than you could ever imagine and the very human instict to get away from the pain in any way possible was also overwhelming.
Now, I have said before and I will say again, words are easy, actions are much more difficult and you will never REALLY know what action you will take until you face it. Please God you never have to.

reply from: nancyu

Nancy, Have you actually been in a no win situation that you had to make a choice, a choice you didn't want to be faced with, a choice you have to make under great emotional strain and grief and sorrow? You really have NO IDEA what you are talking about. I don't care what you THINK you will do. You REALLY have no idea until you are faced with the unthinkable. Beleive me in this, I have lived it. No one was more staunchly prolife than I was but the shock and pain and grief of being told of medical problems is worse than you could ever imagine and the very human instict to get away from the pain in any way possible was also overwhelming.
Now, I have said before and I will say again, words are easy, actions are much more difficult and you will never REALLY know what action you will take until you face it. Please God you never have to.
Thank you for the prayer. I, too hope I will never be faced with such a choice. And Sue, you have my deepest sympathy for what you have gone through. I pray that no one will be faced with such situations.
I'm not sure you are getting what I'm trying to say, though. I'm talking about laws. I don't want laws to tell me that I can choose to kill my child in any circumstance. Why do they need to?
Are there laws saying you can kill your born child in certain circumstances? Are there laws saying you can kill anyone under certain circumstances?
Such laws are unnecessary because certain things go without saying. Of course you can kill in self defense; are there specific laws stating you can?
Abortion law exceptions were put there to confuse, and scare people into keeping abortion legal. The exceptions are unnecessary to write into any law, and they are what keep the abortion business booming.
I still say abortion laws themselves are unnecessary. The laws against murder and manslaughter should apply to unborn persons in the exact same way they apply to any other person. We need to ask for enforcement with regard to abortion.

reply from: Agape

Nancy, Have you actually been in a no win situation that you had to make a choice, a choice you didn't want to be faced with, a choice you have to make under great emotional strain and grief and sorrow? You really have NO IDEA what you are talking about. I don't care what you THINK you will do. You REALLY have no idea until you are faced with the unthinkable. Beleive me in this, I have lived it. No one was more staunchly prolife than I was but the shock and pain and grief of being told of medical problems is worse than you could ever imagine and the very human instict to get away from the pain in any way possible was also overwhelming.
Now, I have said before and I will say again, words are easy, actions are much more difficult and you will never REALLY know what action you will take until you face it. Please God you never have to.
Alot of women say this about abortion. Does that help you to sympathize with their plight or are you steadfast in your prolife convictions?
I am sorry for what you went through.

reply from: Agape

That's your opinion, and you're certainly entitled to it. In my opinion, you are "wrong" in attempting to form an opinion on an issue you obviously do not understand, and my suggestion to you is to "get over" what I think of Fboy, "such it up," and try to understand that you don't have the authority to dictate what I post. You have the right to express your opinion, but it is quite hypocritical for you to criticize me and tell me to "quit doing" what you are yourself doing by criticizing me.
I'm trying to "one up" somebody? What do you consider yourself to be doing? Hypocrites are funny...
I'm commenting about your posts that don't reflect your own opinion but what others think of you. That's clearly not something I'm doing.
I could hold this against you as dishonesty, but I don't think you understood your own post so I'll forgive you.

reply from: Jameberlin

The fact that she went through what she went through should prove to you EXACTLY what her convictions are. If you don't know what happened, or didn't bother to read her story, you have no real right to address her convictions AT ALL.
A lot of women say that about abortion, because a lot of women who HAVE been faced with that option know that when a person is under great stress, there's no telling what they might be driven to do. Anyone remember Andrea Yates? She was under incredible stress because of her illness, and she drowned her five children, who can say, that they would or wouldn't do the same if they were in that EXACT position?
It's not meant as sympathy toward abortion, it's just statement of fact. IF YOU HAVE NOT BEEN THERE, YOU DO NOT KNOW WHAT YOU WOULD DO.
It's my opinion that statement of fact, shouldn't even be debatable.

reply from: Agape

The fact that she went through what she went through should prove to you EXACTLY what her convictions are. If you don't know what happened, or didn't bother to read her story, you have no real right to address her convictions AT ALL.
A lot of women say that about abortion, because a lot of women who HAVE been faced with that option know that when a person is under great stress, there's no telling what they might be driven to do. Anyone remember Andrea Yates? She was under incredible stress because of her illness, and she drowned her five children, who can say, that they would or wouldn't do the same if they were in that EXACT position?
It's not meant as sympathy toward abortion, it's just statement of fact. IF YOU HAVE NOT BEEN THERE, YOU DO NOT KNOW WHAT YOU WOULD DO.
It's my opinion that statement of fact, shouldn't even be debatable.
I just asked a question! You don't have to be so bloody touchy. I read her story. I never doubted her statements. I just wondered if her situation helped her to sympathize with others when they ask for abortion. No harm in asking that.
GEESH!

reply from: Agape

That's your opinion, and you're certainly entitled to it. In my opinion, you are "wrong" in attempting to form an opinion on an issue you obviously do not understand, and my suggestion to you is to "get over" what I think of Fboy, "such it up," and try to understand that you don't have the authority to dictate what I post. You have the right to express your opinion, but it is quite hypocritical for you to criticize me and tell me to "quit doing" what you are yourself doing by criticizing me.
I'm trying to "one up" somebody? What do you consider yourself to be doing? Hypocrites are funny...
I'm commenting about your posts that don't reflect your own opinion but what others think of you. That's clearly not something I'm doing.
I could hold this against you as dishonesty, but I don't think you understood your own post so I'll forgive you.
How about addressing the points raised, regardless of your speculations regarding my motivations, Socrates? You certainly seem to be easily distracted...
I pointed out that you called me a hypocrite and that is false. That was your 'point' and it was sharply addressed, with tact. I just don't get how calling me Socrates is doing much for your reputation. That's an honor.
Are we going to continue the "my penis is bigger than your penis" posting or are you going to grab up a carton of Humility and drink it down?

reply from: Jameberlin

Does not exactly imply "do you find it easier to sympathize others who ask for abortions." It implies that if you sympathize with their "plight" you may not be steadfast in your convictions. Hence the "OR are you steadfast in your convictions"
Had you meant it the other way, perhaps you could have worded it "Do you find your experience helps you to understand another woman who is considering abortion?" Without bringing up her convictions, because those are clear and in no way relevant to what you say you were asking. Which leads me to believe your response to me was an attempt to back track on your first question.

reply from: Agape

Does not exactly imply "do you find it easier to sympathize others who ask for abortions." It implies that if you sympathize with their "plight" you may not be steadfast in your convictions. Hence the "OR are you steadfast in your convictions"
Had you meant it the other way, perhaps you could have worded it "Do you find your experience helps you to understand another woman who is considering abortion?" Without bringing up her convictions, because those are clear and in no way relevant to what you say you were asking. Which leads me to believe your response to me was an attempt to back track on your first question.
You read into it. Honestly. I didn't mean anything other than the black and white words put on the page. I can see what you are saying, though.
I will be careful to word things more diligently in the future. I would hope that others in turn would not make assumptions about my motivations and ask first.

reply from: carolemarie

The fact that she went through what she went through should prove to you EXACTLY what her convictions are. If you don't know what happened, or didn't bother to read her story, you have no real right to address her convictions AT ALL.
A lot of women say that about abortion, because a lot of women who HAVE been faced with that option know that when a person is under great stress, there's no telling what they might be driven to do. Anyone remember Andrea Yates? She was under incredible stress because of her illness, and she drowned her five children, who can say, that they would or wouldn't do the same if they were in that EXACT position?
It's not meant as sympathy toward abortion, it's just statement of fact. IF YOU HAVE NOT BEEN THERE, YOU DO NOT KNOW WHAT YOU WOULD DO.
It's my opinion that statement of fact, shouldn't even be debatable.
I just asked a question! You don't have to be so bloody touchy. I read her story. I never doubted her statements. I just wondered if her situation helped her to sympathize with others when they ask for abortion. No harm in asking that.
GEESH!
Lukes' mom has always been kind to women who have had abortions and regret them. I have found people who have suffered greatly tend to have more compassion.

reply from: lukesmom

Nancy- What I am saying is to please not be so sure what you would or would not do. There are some situations you have no idea of what you will do until you actually face them. It is very easy to state convictions about situations you have no concept of. I should say I am using the word you as in general not you specifically. I am and always have been prolife but now I can say I am prolife in more than words. But I also understand and empathize with other women who have faced this "choice" and aborted. I also feel extreme sympathy for them because they only felt sorrow and grief at the loss of thier child and never allowed themselves to know the peace and joy, yes, joy of feeling thier child grow underneath their heart, of bonding with that child of holding that child and sharing a total love that encompasses all. A love and peace beyond understanding, a joy that surpasses the sorrow.
Agape- Of course our journey with Luke helps me to sympathize with their plight. I LIVED their plight. I KNOW the pain, the loneliness, the shock they feel at first which makes them consider termination. I know the "pressure" from doctors and others who have no understanding, who think abortion will make the pain go away. What a joke! I am steadfast in my convictions but I did not carry Luke because I am prolife or because of some political statement. In fact, for a numb, sorrowing, grieving parent, those are the LAST things you think of. No, I carried Luke to his natual birth and death because I am his mother and I love him. Nothing more, nothing less and that doesn't make me heroic or saintly or anything other than a plain and ordinary mother. Period. Please do not be sorry for what we went through, it was beautiful and the most spiritual time of my life. If I wouldn't have gone through this, I wouldn't have had Luke and I wouldn't be the person I am today. You can be sorry my son isn't here with us, starting kindergarten this fall.
Thank you and God bless, Sue, Luke's mom

reply from: churchmouse

Are we really? Maybe we used to be, but today it seems to be more about what our liberal judges and politicians want us to be.
I agree they are people there is no doubt. But our secular government does not think so. What you said here is the truth.
"If you're pro choice, they are not persons, If you are pro life then they are persons."
You cant sit the fence, there is no compromise, no wavering back and forth....on this issue.
The minute our laws recognize the unborn as people........in law, abortion will be outlawed. Some states have a law that forbids a woman on death row to be executed because she carried a person. Figure that one out.
This is why the pro-aborts are so afraid of ultrasounds being a requirement to show woman. They are afraid that if women saw the humanity inside them it will be over.
Well it only makes sense that if someone is agaisnt abortion they believe that which is in the womb is a human being. If it were not why would they care?
carolemarie said,
Absolutely. Its like trying to comprehend what a soldier on the battlefield goes through. You cant. You live it.......it is real.
God can use pain and suffering for HIS GOOD. We might not understand it, but He does and His plan is perfect. Thats when faith comes into the equation.
I talk with broken women all the time that cant get passed the abortion they had.
lukesmom said, "I also feel extreme sympathy for them because they only felt sorrow and grief at the loss of thier child and never allowed themselves to know the peace and joy, yes, joy of feeling thier child grow underneath their heart, of bonding with that child of holding that child and sharing a total love that encompasses all. A love and peace beyond understanding, a joy that surpasses the sorrow."
Its more than a loss. Most women when they come to grips with the abortion......realize that they killed. Loss is a more comforting term. Yes the child was lost......but it was brutally killed. That is what is hard to deal with.
I was giving a talk to a group of teenagers and my pastor was listening. I am an emotional person so many times when I get moved I cry. He told me after the talk......stop feeling sorry for yourself by crying. God has forgiven you and you need to show them that you are in control that you have accepted Gods forgiveness. You killed, you are forgiven. I now find joy in the fruits that God has given me. He takes our deepest sorrows and can use them for our own good, for His good.
I cant ever say that I never cry......... I cry for joy that God loves and has forgiven me. My child is with Him. I rejoice because of that.

reply from: BossMomma

Ok, so you look into the eyes of a woman violently raped and pregnant by her assailent that she must give birth and raise this child that was forced into and upon her. You go tell the teenage girl who made the mistake of having sex that she must give up her childhood, her education and, her life to raise a child regardless of how ill equipped she is to do so. You go tell the woman who must choose between her life and her unborn child's life that she is less important than her fetus. You throw around a heap of judgements without even knowing the circumstances behind a decision. Christian rhetoric doesn't matter to everyone, I for one am happily Wiccan and could care less about what jesus says, your god is not providing for my children, nor is he providing for the children of impoverished countries where children dig through trash heaps in search of some meager scrap of food. Facts show that your god doesn't care one wit for the children of the world, so stop using the bible to back up a judgemental and utterly factless arguement.

reply from: BossMomma

Instead of the laughter you should focus on the parenting.
"Train up a child in the way he should go and when he is old, he will not depart from it" (Prov 22:6).
Are you not confident in your moral stance, that you feel your children will not adhere to your ideas and teachings about abortion? How old is (are) your child(ren)? When do you plan to educate them about abortion? How do you plan to do so?
Kids turn out different than their parents all the time, my folks are republicans, I'm a Liberal. My folks are Lutherans, I'm a Wiccan. My 6 year old is a Southern Baptist, I have no problem with that because I understand that people are prone to make their own decisions.

reply from: Agape

Thanks so much for your message, Sue, it is a rare thing you have gone through.

reply from: churchmouse

Ok Momma. If you value life all life, the child of rape is still an innocent life right?
Now, if you walked into a nursery full of newborns and I told you ones mother was raped.......could you pick that child out? Could you look at it and tell it, that you could have condoned his mother killing him?
Do you think it matters to the life in the womb if you are pro-life or pro-choice?
Rape is a violent act. But the child is still innocent and two wrongs do not make a right.
You are a pro-abort. Already you condone abortion for school, age, rape, poverty.....
the only circumstance that makes a difference is that the unborn is slaughtered, disembered alive. You condone this act for various reasons. YOU ARE NOT PRO-LIFE.
IMO your so called life oriented religion is false. So it doesnt surprise me you dont stand up for all life. Dont you beleive that whatever you dish out you get back? If you condone that innocent children in the womb are slaughtered.......I can only imagine what will come back to you.
Let me ask you this. Where do your beliefs come from? You say mine as a Christian are false......so give me the History.......sources.......the proof that your religion is the truth? Show me.
You believe because of what facts?
And what has your god, goddesss, bag of magic tricks done for humanity?

reply from: Jameberlin

First of all, have you read any of my other posts? You probably should before you start attacking me or my God.
I never said a woman violently raped should have to raise the child of her assailant (although, it is HER child too, many women who choose life in that situation do feel that way). I have tremendous sympathy and support for women who are victims of their abuse. I've also stated quite clearly that i have never, and will never condemn any woman who has had an abortion. I know full well that you can't say what you would or wouldn't do in any situation until you've lived it. All i say is that in my opinion, it's not the child's fault, and it shouldn't be punished for the crime inflicted on it's mother. I do NOT hold a fetus' right to live above that of a womans, I HOLD IT EQUAL.
It is a gross misconception people have of pro-lifers, that we care more about babies than women, when we simply care just as much about the babies as the woman.
I respect that my God has no value in your religion, that's fine by me. My sister was also wiccan for a while, and has had three abortions, and i love her dearly. It's not true though, that there are FACTS to show that God doesn't take care of people. There are no FACTS that prove God doesn't exist, if you don't believe he does, that's fine by me. I can pretty much assure you though, that if God inspires a group of people to go to say... Guatemala and administer medical treatment, schooling and other aids, that He IS providing for those children through the people who believe in Him.
I didn't quote the bible on this one, there are atheists who believe that every human has a right to life as well... Your accusations of my being judgmental and bible quoting in this thread are unfounded and uncalled for.
I would suggest that you maybe read some more of my posts before you go judging me and slandering me, because i don't appreciate it.
If you're going to post your views on this forum, you're going to have to grow a thicker skin, because if you're this pissed at me.... it won't get any better with those on here who ARE judgmental and who DO condemn.

reply from: yoda

Sometimes that is true, other times not.
Choosing the defend your own life does not automatically mean that you are no longer prolife. I don't know why you would think it would.
The difference, IMO, is that a prolifer would ask the doctor to try to save both patients, while the proabort would tell the doctor to "get rid of that parasite".

reply from: BossMomma

Ok Momma. If you value life all life, the child of rape is still an innocent life right?
Now, if you walked into a nursery full of newborns and I told you ones mother was raped.......could you pick that child out? Could you look at it and tell it, that you could have condoned his mother killing him?
Do you think it matters to the life in the womb if you are pro-life or pro-choice?
Rape is a violent act. But the child is still innocent and two wrongs do not make a right.
You are a pro-abort. Already you condone abortion for school, age, rape, poverty.....
the only circumstance that makes a difference is that the unborn is slaughtered, disembered alive. You condone this act for various reasons. YOU ARE NOT PRO-LIFE.
IMO your so called life oriented religion is false. So it doesnt surprise me you dont stand up for all life. Dont you beleive that whatever you dish out you get back? If you condone that innocent children in the womb are slaughtered.......I can only imagine what will come back to you.
That's just it, we are not punished for our beliefs and I love how you managed to twist my post. I've never killed a child born or unborn so why should I expect anything? I neither condone nor oppose, rather I keep my nose out of the reproductive choices of other women. I refuse to be a dictator, forcing parenthood on women who don't want that responsibility.
Let me ask you this. Where do your beliefs come from? You say mine as a Christian are false......so give me the History.......sources.......the proof that your religion is the truth? Show me.
You believe because of what facts?
And what has your god, goddesss, bag of magic tricks done for humanity?
Well they dang sure didn't organize hunts for christians as they did in the Salem witch craft trials, where was the pro-life views of god there? My Goddess says harm ye none, do as ye will. I am harming no one, thus I am well within the guidelines of my religion. Your religion states " Judge not lest ye be judged for by those judgements shalt ye be judged." Where in your raving are you obeying your god's teaching? Abortions will happen everyday because it is a woman's legal right, your screaming for the lives of the unborn isn't stopping them. What are YOU doing to save unborn lives?

reply from: yoda

The child of rape is already there, it is too late to wish it away. Such a victim is faced with the choice of killing that child, or allowing that child to live, even if it means adoption.
Your way simply adds to her burdens by making her an accessory to the killing of her own baby.

reply from: Jameberlin

CP, i agree with you. I'm not very good at saying what i want most of the time... But i have said almost this exact thing, and i wonder how it never gets through?
Both of my sisters, my mother, and my grandmother were raped. Both of my sisters have had abortions, and i can tell you right now, their abortions hurt them more than the rapes emotionally, and continue to do so.
I don't speak on this out of ignorance, i know what rape and abortion do to families. I know how it affects people.
I sit here, and see my sister's kids, and my kid, and i think about the other four that aren't here. I have wept for those kids, just like i would for any born baby that had died.
I would have a 14 year old niece or nephew now... Instead my sister got a pittbull puppy from her boyfriends parents if she just agreed to the abortion...

reply from: yoda

So then "your religion" claims that unborn babies do not exist, or what?

reply from: BossMomma

If you're going to post your views on this forum, you're going to have to grow a thicker skin, because if you're this pissed at me.... it won't get any better with those on here who ARE judgmental and who DO condemn.
I wasn't pissed, your the one who needs to grow a thicker skin. No random screen name on a message forum has the power to anger me. Furthermore I wasn't responding to all your posts, I was responding to your post What it means to be pro-life. Pro-life seems to only encompass the unborn, I get sick of hearing how sacred the unborn life is while the quality of life for the born child and mother is significantly less important.

reply from: BossMomma

The child of rape is already there, it is too late to wish it away. Such a victim is faced with the choice of killing that child, or allowing that child to live, even if it means adoption.
Your way simply adds to her burdens by making her an accessory to the killing of her own baby.
Sorry but, a dear friend of mine was raped, got pregnant, and aborted. It was no burden on her. All she felt afterward was relief that she could get on with healing and in time return to her normal life style.

reply from: Jameberlin

Actually, yes, they did. That's the whole reason the puritans came here in the first place, to escape religious persecution.
Let us not forget Queen Elizabeth I slaughter of Catholics. Pagan Rome burning Christians, tearing them limb from limb and slaughtering their children in front of them.
Christianity has had it's fair share of injustices too. Also, most of the "witches" burned in New England were not actually witches at all just people who had a different way of seeing things, or who were falsely accused by the "righteous". We're not all puritans though, not all Muslims are extremists, not all wiccans respect life.
By the way, Churchmouse does a lot to save the unborn.

reply from: galen

And since some women do not appear to regret having their offspring killed, they should be allowed to choose to do so? What if the father of your child rapes you after your child is born? If you think it would make you feel better to kill your child, should you be allowed that choice?
_____________________________________________________
i have to wonder how long it took her to come to terms with her rape?

reply from: Jameberlin

Did you not see the part where i said that pro-life encompasses ALL HUMAN LIFE? And how i lamented that this board only focuses on abortion and not OTHER aspects of what it means to be pro life?
If you're claiming that my stance on being pro-life only applies to the unborn, i have to seriously question your reading comprehension, as that is not at all what my post said, and i got a lot of flack for thinking that every human person has a right to life.
I'm sorry i thought you were angry, it just seemed that way to me when you started accusing me of throwing my religion or the bible into it, when i clearly didn't. I didn't even mention God at all. I also didn't condemn, or judge anyone in my post. In fact, i didn't even focus on abortion, nor did i bring rape into it, nor did i state what i thought of people who partake in abortion....
It simply stated that i was taught to respect all human life, all of it. I am pro-life, not just anti-abortion, not just anti-euthanasia, but pro-life.
I think you'll also find i'm the only person on this board who actually posts things i find relevant to the pro-life movement including human rights atrocities in China, and our own governments human rights violations past abortion.

reply from: BossMomma

Originally posted by: BossMomma
My Goddess says harm ye none, do as ye will. I am harming no one, thus I am well within the guidelines of my religion.
So then "your religion" claims that unborn babies do not exist, or what?
Where did you get that? I love how you add things to my posts, creative writing can be fun. I am within the guidelines of my religion, I've harmed no one. I've never aborted, have given birth unless natural miscarriage ended the pregnancies. Thus, how have I violated my religion? How have I claimed that the unborn don't exist or that I want the unborn to die? I simply realize and accept that which I cannot change.

reply from: BossMomma

Actually, yes, they did. That's the whole reason the puritans came here in the first place, to escape religious persecution.
Let us not forget Queen Elizabeth I slaughter of Catholics. Pagan Rome burning Christians, tearing them limb from limb and slaughtering their children in front of them.
Christianity has had it's fair share of injustices too. Also, most of the "witches" burned in New England were not actually witches at all just people who had a different way of seeing things, or who were falsely accused by the "righteous". We're not all puritans though, not all Muslims are extremists, not all wiccans respect life.
By the way, Churchmouse does a lot to save the unborn.
Rome also butchered Druids and anyone outside their religion, Rome is where Catholisism stemmed. Wicca is nothing more than modern day druidism, a love of nature and nature is not always warm and cuddly. And what does church mouse do to prevent even one abortion?

reply from: yoda

I don't deny that there are women who could kill their whole family and not feel bad about it. But for most women, they will eventually have to face the fact that they are the murderers of their own children, for the rest of their lives.

reply from: BossMomma

Boss, you seem very selective in what you choose to respond to...You stated on another thread that you would not respond to trolls. Is that your brand of "get out of debate free card?" Will you simply ignore posters who's questions and comments you are reluctant to respond to, declaring them to be "trolls?'
It's not that, I just get sidetracked with home responsibilities and kids and don't get to all the responses towards my posts. I am an avid debater and I haven't labled anyone a troll.

reply from: yoda

Regardless of your personal feelings on all those subjects, "prolife" does mean "antiabortion":
pro-life adjective opposed to the belief that a pregnant woman should have the freedom to choose an abortion if she does not want to have a baby
http://dictionary.cambridge.org/define.asp?key=63328&dict=CALD

Main Entry: an·ti·abor·tion
Pronunciation: "an-tE-&-'bor-sh&n, "an-"tI-
Function: adjective
: opposed to abortion and especially to the legalization of abortion <antiabortion lobbyists>
- an·ti·abor·tion·ist /-sh(&-)nist/ noun
http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=antiabortion

reply from: yoda

Anyone who advocates for the legality of elective abortion has a part in the responsibility for elective abortions that happen in this country. That includes you.
You are the "facilitator" of those who actually do the killing.

reply from: BossMomma

_____________________________________________________
i have to wonder how long it took her to come to terms with her rape?
It took about 6 months of rape counseling before she put it behind her. The abortion didn't cause her one ounce of guilt and it shouldn't.

reply from: BossMomma

Regardless of your personal feelings on all those subjects, "prolife" does mean "antiabortion":
That's great toots but I'm pro-choice, I choose to birth and raise my children. What the next woman does is her choice.

reply from: BossMomma

Ah, very good then. I look forward to giving you the opportunity to logically defend your position. I have a challenge that might interest you. I'm afraid I have parental responsibilities as well, so I'm out for now, but I'll bump the thread for you when I next log on.
Look foreward to it, Ciao.

reply from: Jameberlin

Rome butchered a lot of people, but Rome doesn't exist anymore.
Rome is not the only place where Catholicism stemmed either, it was Rome, Alexandria and Antioch that was the base for Catholicism for a long time. Later it was Jerusalem and Constantinople, which was when the great schism took place and you had two factions of Christianity, Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox.
Wicca is not modern day Druidism, as those who try to worship in the way the Druids did are referred to as Neo-Druids. It's also relevant that there is no historical evidence that the Druids were anything but male, all references to Druidesses come from Irish Lore after the Druids disappear from historic texts. Wicca is a completely separate religion that originally was founded in England in 1954. We don't know what the druids believed, really, only that they were polytheists, practiced human sacrifice and supposedly taught harmony with the earth, as most "earth" religions do. Wicca is a form of neopaganism, but it doesn't adhere to one school of thought, it has many different factions that believe many different things, but mostly adhere the core fundamentals of religious principles, ethics and ritual structure. Not all wiccans are witches, and not all witches are wiccan either.
It's true Wicca is becoming more like old world paganism in that many people are now choosing to include other separate deities in their beliefs along with the core god and goddess, i believe wicca to be more akin to the ancient Persian religions, Native American religions or Greco-Roman paganism than to Druidism though, as the Druids dropped off the face of the planet according to history and we have no idea what their true belief system was, or even that Druidism was a religion, and not just a name for the priestly class of the Celts.
Churchmouse works at Right to Life, attends conventions and counsels women, she does a lot and you shouldn't judge her.
Please don't call me toots, it's condescending and i don't appreciate it.

reply from: Jameberlin

Yoda, we've been here before... Prolife is a made up word to mean against abortion now. The words Pro (being for something) and life (any organic animal that grows and adapts to it's environment and is not dead) mean PRO LIFE, as the way I any many others like me believe.
You can say to be prolife means you're strictly anti-abortion, but if we weren't PRO LIFE to begin with, there would be NO argument about abortion at all.
I believe it's semantics. You should say, imo, that you're anti-abortion, because if you believe an unborn child has more right to life than the woman who has an abortion, you are in fact dictating the value of another human life. Being anti-abortion is not necessarily pro-life in my mind. You can throw as many dictionary definitions of "prolife" or "pro-life" in my face that you want, but it will not change the fact that if some of us weren't FOR LIFE to begin with, no one would have a problem with abortion now. Abortion, eugenics, forced sterilization, euthanasia and capital punishment are all things you get from the mentality that SOME LIVES are WORTH MORE than OTHERS. If you want people to respect unborn lives, you have to teach them to respect all lives.

reply from: Agape

You must have met my family *joke joke*

reply from: Agape

Yoda, we've been here before... Prolife is a made up word to mean against abortion now. The words Pro (being for something) and life (any organic animal that grows and adapts to it's environment and is not dead) mean PRO LIFE, as the way I any many others like me believe.
You can say to be prolife means you're strictly anti-abortion, but if we weren't PRO LIFE to begin with, there would be NO argument about abortion at all.
I believe it's semantics. You should say, imo, that you're anti-abortion, because if you believe an unborn child has more right to life than the woman who has an abortion, you are in fact dictating the value of another human life. Being anti-abortion is not necessarily pro-life in my mind. You can throw as many dictionary definitions of "prolife" or "pro-life" in my face that you want, but it will not change the fact that if some of us weren't FOR LIFE to begin with, no one would have a problem with abortion now. Abortion, eugenics, forced sterilization, euthanasia and capital punishment are all things you get from the mentality that SOME LIVES are WORTH MORE than OTHERS. If you want people to respect unborn lives, you have to teach them to respect all lives.
Nice post. You could also literally include "all" lives, such as dogs, flowers, and green peppers.
I see no reason not to, either. I try very hard to not discriminate.

reply from: Jameberlin

Agape, i know it sounds weird to a lot of people, but i try not to discriminate either. I am for life, i love living things, my life would be really boring and not very tasty if living things weren't around.
I try buy cruelty free organic meat, cage free chicken and eggs, save just about every baby bird that falls in my back yard, take in strays, preserve plant life (i found wild strawberries in my yard, IN ARIZONA, and now don't mow that corner for fear i'll kill them) to the best of my ability... as a kid i moved snails and slugs out of my way when i'd rode my bike because i couldn't stand the thought of squishing them when they were doing nothing wrong..
I'm weird, i know, but this is me... and apparently i'm not the only one in the "slightly touched in the head" boat.

reply from: Agape

I would rather be "slightly touched in the head" than live any other way!

reply from: galen

________________________________________________________
no guilt...? and you are sure she put it behinde her by 6 months? ... that must be the fastest recovery i've ever heard of...
most of us in the buisness call it denial if a woman says she's over it that quickly..

reply from: yoda

Yes, that's one way to put it. Another way would be to say that you are "proabortion". Both are correct.

reply from: yoda

If compound words and terms were defined by breaking them down into their parts and defining each part individually, I would agree with you. But that is not the case, such words and terms are defined as a whole word or term, not by individual parts. Take "hot dog" for example, does that mean an overheated cannine?
It isn't me that says that, it's dictionaries. And I acknowledge the academic authority of dictionaries, whether anyone else does or not.
Everything we say and write is "semantics". And words do mean things, so how we use them does matter. You may approach being prolife any way you wish, but you cannot change society's accepted definition of that term by mere force of will.
And you may have as many private definitions as you like, but they do not change the perceptions of society in general about the term, which is what is reflected by dictionaries. We simply cannot go about changing the meaning of words to suit our particular slant on things.
And I would point out that trying to broaden the definition of the term prolife opens the door for proaborts to distract us in all sorts of ways, which they do quite often enough as it is.

reply from: yoda

Yes, in fact you would be obliged to do so, if that was what "prolife" meant. But it is not. In fact, you'd have to include bacteria, slime mold, etc., etc.....

reply from: carolemarie

________________________________________________________
no guilt...? and you are sure she put it behinde her by 6 months? ... that must be the fastest recovery i've ever heard of...
most of us in the buisness call it denial if a woman says she's over it that quickly..
I tend to agree with Galen on this, it generally takes longer to recover from rape, and when you add a pregnancy to that it makes it harder. There are more issues to work through.

reply from: Jameberlin

I'm not easily distracted.
Okay, so society views the term pro-life to mean anti-abortion... Society also says the words pro-choice mean every person has a choice in their own "reproductive freedom", yet you call them all "pro-abortion", when this is clearly not the definition of the term "pro-choice". How do you justify that?
Yoda, this made me lol... Good job. Although perfectly true, this sentence in no way reflects any of the posts you've made on the legality of abortion, "phony prolifers", or "pro-life butts".
I do believe in the academic authority of dictionaries, but it doesn't change the fact that there would be no definition for the term prolife if some people didn't stand up for respect for all life in the first place.

reply from: yoda

No, society does not define prochoice and proabortion that way. Why did you assume it did? Society defines both those terms as the opposite of prolife and antichoice..... someone who supports the legality of elective abortion.
In what way?
I'm not disputing that. I'm arguing for the accurate use of terms, period.

reply from: Jameberlin

Wouldn't supporting the legality of abortion imply that, as a pro-choicer you support women's choice to abort or not? I see nothing in the definition that states all women have to abort... could it be that dictionary definitions on this topic are sometimes incomplete? Could it also be true that there are many people out there who hold the belief that pro-life applies to abortion, euthanasia and capital punishment regardless of what the dictionary says? There are pro-choicers who believe that abortion should be legal so a woman has a choice... the dictionary doesn't state that, but clearly the majority of the choicers believe this to be their fundamental belief.
Okay, so you're arguing proper use of the terms. That's fine. My opinion still stands, and i won't waiver.
By the way, i refer to hot dogs as franks.

reply from: BossMomma

Churchmouse works at Right to Life, attends conventions and counsels women, she does a lot and you shouldn't judge her.
Please don't call me toots, it's condescending and i don't appreciate it.
I'm sorry but you and your ilk have been condescending toward me since the moment I got here. I'm guilty of nothing yet I've practically been accused of infanticide, you will excuse me if I don't give a rat's patoot.

reply from: churchmouse

So true. I never judged mommas heart only what she said on here. God can judge hearts....but I have every right as anyone else does on here to judge words.
Anyone that denys Christ.......well thats between them and God. No one can condemn but God.
Who told you what? Where is the source, the information? Who told you this? Why do you think this source is credible?
Abortions happen becuase the people involve are sinners. They are disobeying God and they are not living according to the Word.
Goddess? What Goddess?
I have worked in this field for almost ten years. I work with Right To Life and Silent No More.
Sick of hearing about the unborn children? Well of course you are, you are pro-choice.......your goddess said its ok.
No one here said that.......all LIFE IS VALUABLE. That is a concept you dont get.
Well for some its like getting teeth clean......for others its much much more. Took me twenty plus years to come to terms with mine. your friends life isnt over.......she has a lot of years where regret can creep in.
I am not going to puff myself up here let me tell you that. I do my best to try to convince people that all Life is sacred. I stand with signs......talk to people......but I certainly am not keeping a tally board. I work to save the unborn....but I even work harder trying to lead people to Christ. I cant save anyone, but I can be a voice for the unborn and Christ. HE DOES THE REST.
momma said,
You are pro-abortion......you advocate the slaughter of unborn human innocent children. You are not pro-life. Your confused.

I'm putting my money on you Concerned. LOL
yoda I just love your posts.......

reply from: BossMomma

Originally posted by: BossMomma
That's great toots but I'm pro-choice, I choose to birth and raise my children. What the next woman does is her choice.
Yes, that's one way to put it. Another way would be to say that you are "proabortion". Both are correct.
Whatever you say. I could just as matter-of-factly state that you are an imbecile and be just as wrong.

reply from: carolemarie

Prolife should be about all life. The unborn child isn't more important than the other born children or the woman. All life is sacred and valuable. That is why abortion is wrong.
Women shouldn't have to choose between their dreams and future and a child. We need to find win-win situtations in crisis pregnancies.
Real pro-lifers are pro-women as well...

reply from: Jameberlin

Here you go Yoda:
As i'm sure you already know, there is nothing in the dictionary about "phony pro-lifers".. So i suppose this one could be up in the air... but what you and other people like you fail to realize is that there are those of us who have suffered through loved-one's abortions. There are those of us who will never withhold love or understanding from anyone who has had an abortion... there are those who know that as humans are emotional creatures who feel the need to belong to a group, the only way to reach some people is through caring and understanding. How does this in any way constitute a phony pro lifer? Isn't the dictionary definition of pro-life that you oppose the legalization of abortion? If that is your soul definition of the phrase, then maybe your accusations of "phonies" is completely unfounded, or is the dictionary actually wrong on this particular aspect of being pro-life?
I've also never personally met anyone who advocated lying about the abortion process in order to win over pro-choicers. In fact, i've never met anyone willing to lie about being pro life at all... which makes me wonder why they would suddenly start trying to lie to you.

reply from: Faramir

Jameberlin...remember he accused you of being carolemarie?
That should tell you something.
And he's being totally misleading because the issue was simply being civil and not "making friends."

reply from: Jameberlin

I believe, not only was i accused of being Carole, but i was accused of being so in love with you that i followed you here to fawn upon you and drink up all that you say.
No one has apologized for any of it, by the way (not that i expect them to).
You're right, the issue isn't "making friends", because honestly there are plenty of "choicers" out there whom i'd rather not have anything to do with, but i do try my very best to be civil, or at least, somewhat restrained.

reply from: Jameberlin

BTW Faramir,
anyone for the legalization of hatreed and outlaw of income tax is okay in my book.

reply from: Faramir

The real purpose of this thread is to slam those who have the nerve to disagree with yodavater.
I have never made a prochoice statement, but have made it clear I am 100% prolife, but was kicked out of his private thread for prolifers because he "suspects" I am prochoice. I think he also thought I was Churchmouse for awile. And I think there is now a rumor that Planned Parenthood is paying me to infiltrate this forum, hence why I am being called a $prolifer$. And he has alluded to me as one of the "phonies."
Unfortunately, this forum has attracted what I think is an unfair share of black helictopter types who see a conspiracy behind every tree, and are suspicious of anyone who doesn't think just like they do. They take the cheap and easy way out by instead of discussing the issue or disagreement, simply hang the "pro abort" label on you...
And then they wonder why some of us get a little testy with them at tiimes.
But if you have a sense of humor, this place can be kind of fun.

reply from: 4given

Foolish, petty and wasted space...

reply from: Faramir

Then stop posting.
Hey, aren't you about due to cast another spell?

reply from: Faramir

Oops, I thought we were in the "phony prolifer" thread.

reply from: 4given

Then stop posting.
Hey, aren't you about due to cast another spell? What are you talking about? Rather what aren't you? This is an abortion forum- not a casual chatroom.

reply from: Faramir

Then stop posting.
Hey, aren't you about due to cast another spell? What are you talking about? Rather what aren't you? This is an abortion forum- not a casual chatroom.
Go pick on the nasty people that make prolifers look like ignorant turds.
Leave me alone for awhile.

reply from: 4given

Likewise. With pleasure. Return the favor.

reply from: 4given

Sure. Everyone stop with the references to God and how He has changed your lives and provides hope and peace that surpasses understanding. No more chat about how deeply He loves every one of us and how devastated He is by even one of His children being aborted. Nothing about repentance, forgiveness, and healing that can only come from Him kids! Don't mention His love or His sacrifice of His only perfect child to redeem us. A death paid for so brutally.
Truth is Vexing, many don't need God or a Church to tell them abortion is wrong. It is a (what I would prefer to understand as) common understanding when innocent. Who supports abortion? The ignorant, selfish or wicked. Did I leave the desperate out? Yeah.. the selfish category I suppose. I don't understand how readily one would sacrifice their child. Despite the justifications..

reply from: churchmouse

Oh if you think I am going to stop talking about Christ.......LOL
You are sadly mistaken. My faith is who I am. It comes before anything else.

reply from: 4given

Who me? I was trying to relay a message. JESUS CHRIST and HIS sacrifice comes before all.. should anyway.

reply from: churchmouse

Oh heavens I was not addressing that to you but to vexing.
4given......what you said I agree with.

reply from: yoda

Yes, that's implied in the wording of the definition. By supporting the legal right to abort, you ARE supporting the right to choose either death or life for your baby. Why is that so complicated?
No, only your understanding is incomplete.
IF there were a significant number, then their definition would be included as an alternate definition. Most words have more than one definition, you know? But a few online posters probably is not considered a "significant number".
You may consider yourself smarter than the dictionaries, but you're probably alone in that opinion.

reply from: yoda

Yes, that is obvious.

reply from: yoda

Thanks, you're doing pretty well too.

reply from: yoda

Just quoting the dictionary... why does that make people so angry?
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

pro-choice adjective advocating access to legal abortion: advocating open legal access to voluntary abortion http://encarta.msn.com/dictionary_/pro-choice.html

reply from: yoda

Why should there be? Those are two separate words, both of which are in the dictionary, and they do not constitute a multi-word term. So why did you expect to find them defined as a term?
My goal is to reduce abortions in every way I can think of. But becoming a part of a proabortion "group" is not one of the ways that I think will reduce abortion.
The word "phony" implies that one claims to support something that they actually do not. Look it up.
As I asked in the sub topic of the thread you are talking about, "is it really possible?" How would you know if you met one? Do you think they would just tell you upfront that they were phony?

reply from: yoda

Sure. Everyone stop with the references to God and how He has changed your lives and provides hope and peace that surpasses understanding. No more chat about how deeply He loves every one of us and how devastated He is by even one of His children being aborted. .
Everyone who is willing to let vexing define this forum and what is allowed on it, please go away.

reply from: Agape

Sure. Everyone stop with the references to God and how He has changed your lives and provides hope and peace that surpasses understanding. No more chat about how deeply He loves every one of us and how devastated He is by even one of His children being aborted. .
Everyone who is willing to let vexing define this forum and what is allowed on it, please go away.
Are you admin here, yodavater? I'm new so I don't know.

reply from: yoda

Nope. That would be "Terry".
And then we have our "pseudo-moderator", called Fartnomore/Faramir.....

reply from: Faramir

Sure. Everyone stop with the references to God and how He has changed your lives and provides hope and peace that surpasses understanding. No more chat about how deeply He loves every one of us and how devastated He is by even one of His children being aborted. .
Everyone who is willing to let vexing define this forum and what is allowed on it, please go away.
Are you admin here, yodavater? I'm new so I don't know.
lol

reply from: Jameberlin

Lol.
You're a dolt, i never said anything about becoming part of any group. I only said that people who hold other beliefs and values should be shown a certain amount respect. If you don't understand that, you're a lost cause.
See, unfortunately for people like me, those "borties" which you so affectionately refer to them as make up at least half of my family... Unlike you, i'm not in the business of bullying or intimidation, and i will not withhold love or respect for those in my family. This does not mean i deny the facts, or that i coddle them to try to win them over, it simply means they are my family,i love them, and i treat them like i love them.
Perhaps i worded some of my response wrong, i didn't mean to imply that "phony pro-lifer" would be a phrase found in a dictionary, i meant that within the dictionary term of "pro-life" it says nothing about "does not desire to associate with any pro-choicer", in other words, your accusation of people who happen to have friends who are pro-choice or who don't believe in beating people down in order to attempt to force them to buckle, is unfounded. As i see nothing within the dictionary definition for pro-life that implies that one who associates with or loves pro-choicers would not be able to consider themselves truly pro-life, or would be considered by society as a whole as a "phony".

reply from: churchmouse

yoda said, "
I dont know if he tries to define it......but his agenda does not seem to include discussion of the unborn child thats for sure.

And every chance that comes......vexing attacks the Christian. He defends anyone that goes up against a pro-lifer.

reply from: Faramir

I dont know if he tries to define it......but his agenda does not seem to include discussion of the unborn child thats for sure.

And every chance that comes......vexing attacks the Christian. He defends anyone that goes up against a pro-lifer.
I just want to say my two cents about the use of "he" for vexing.
She and I are not exactly pals, but I find it irritating that you cannot give the benefit of the doubt and at least be respectful of her wishes as to how to be addressed. I will use "she" and "her" because that's what she asks, because I don't know all there is to know about this condition and should give the benefit of the doubt, and because she didn't have to share anything about the condition.
I haven't seen all your exchanges, and I'm not excusing any rudeness that might have come from vexing in your direction, but I see your use of "he" as goading, and it justs adds fuel to the feud you've been having which I think you ought to just walk away from.
If what vexing is doing is wrong in the eyes of God, then He will deal with it, but He will also take into account vexing's knowledge and the sufferings this condition causes and how it might affect her decisions, etc. If we're going to err in dealing with vexing, why not err on the side of being considerate? That doesn't mean you have to show any approval whatsoever for a lifestyle that you see as sinful.

reply from: churchmouse

If you are a Christian you can't separate that from anything else, because that is who you are. Your faith affects all the decisions that you make.
Hey I have challenged people on here....to show me my error using the scriptures. I have asked people that claim they are Christian, to back up what they say by scripture and they cant, or they make excuses why they wont.
And vexing......it is my opinion that God created you the way you are... both mentally and physically. I gave you the scriptures why I beleive this way. If you think its bull......fine. You have your opinion, I have mine.
You have the right to say whatever you feel and to challenge anyone. I will say this to you.
I stand on what I believe to be true and I base it on scriptures. You want me to compromise what I believe. I believe that those that are pro-choice are really pro-abortion. If someone asked me not to use this term to describe them, should I comply? Like hell I will.
Now I can sympathize with vexings situation, but I still feel that God has a plan for everyones life, even Vexings. VExing was created in the image of God and was born with what God wanted to give.
VExing has called me all sorts of names and has not held back whatsoever, even telling me to go find a rusty pipe and injure myself. So who am i dealing with REALLY?
COMPROMISE
Vexing loves to attack Christians that is obvious, as vexing makes pot shots every chance he gets.

Now if vexing agrees never to call or make fun of a Christian by calling them a name or making fun of the faith.....I will not use He, Him but will use vexing for ALL my addresses. If vexing wants respect, vexing must respect others he dissagrees with as well.
I have tried to walk away from this many times. But once vexing finds out that you will not believe hook, line and sinker that what vexing is doing is ok......then the war begins. When I first came vexing said.......I DO NOT CARE WHAT ANYONE ELSE THINKS, I AM GOING TO DO WHAT I WANT EVEN IF THEY DONT LIKE IT. I am referring to our first discussions concerning his entrance into a womans bathroom. VExing also said, he was more of a woman than I or anyone else on here was. LOL You think vexing really cares what anyone thinks?
You say vexing is hurt.......what about all those vexing has hurt by rude and vicious comments?
You are right.....but I still have to answer to my God as well and be judged on my actions, words and conduct.
And if vexing is also loving and compassionate, vexing will clean up the attitude against Christians and those that stand on scripture and stop attacking them the first chance vexing gets.
Vexing wont compromise........because bashing Christ, Christianity and Christians are a part of VEXING.
others should change......vexing wont.
So no more "he, him"......if vexing stops throwing insults towards most of us on here that are Christian. If vexing wants me to change and care.......so can "vexing".

reply from: speck

So you are willing to be respectful, and not go out of your way to purposely hurt another, for blackmail/barter/compromise.
Do you think God will like your compromise? Or perhaps, you as a Christian, who claim to have a strong relationship with God and Christ, should know better than to only be respectful and kind when in return.
You question Vexing in her being pro-life, I question your Christianity.......

reply from: Agape

People do this crud all the time; 's/he was this or that to me, so that gives me the go ahead to be a total whack to them'!
Ridiculous justification.
Churchmouse, in the end, you have to stand for your actions and no one else's.

reply from: churchmouse

You can question all you want, that is fine. You with 44 posts have no clue what vexing has said and done on this forum to me and to others. Why dont you spend some time looking at the violent things vexing has said to others. VEXING DOES NOT CARE WHO VEXING HURTS VEXING HAS MADE THAT VERY CLEAR. I have been kind in comparison to what vexings has said.
I have never not been respectful to anyone here by calling names or swearing at them. I have never called vexing names, or said anything demeaning personhood except to call vexings actions wrong. I simply believe and I have given the scriptures why I feel as I do that sex change is wrong. There have been no attempts on vexings part to reach out to anyone in kindness that dissagrees with vexing, because if you dissagree........the war is on. You have no idea the threats that have been made.
I do not have to roll over and play dead just because I am a Christian. In this compromise I am asking vexing to also look at the way vexing has treated others.
Do you also think I should refrain from calling someone pro-abortion? Do I stop because they ask me? Do I call someone a Christian that IMO is not simply because its the polite thing to do?
Do I stop standing up for what I beleive to be the truth?
Vexing thinks because I do not agree with everything vexing says....I am a hateful intolerant person.
Vexing has attacked who I am as a person and has done it with hateful, violent words......I cant judge anyones heart, but I have every right to judge their actions.
Do you think vexings hurtful words agaisnt my God, Christ.....hurt?
I do not need to take that. I can stand up for what I beleive is the truth, even if it hurts others.

reply from: speck

You can question all you want, that is fine. You with 44 posts have no clue what vexing has said and done on this forum to me and to others. Why dont you spend some time looking at the violent things vexing has said to others. VEXING DOES NOT CARE WHO VEXING HURTS VEXING HAS MADE THAT VERY CLEAR. I have been kind in comparison to what vexings has said.
I have never not been respectful to anyone here by calling names or swearing at them. I have never called vexing names, or said anything demeaning personhood except to call vexings actions wrong. I simply believe and I have given the scriptures why I feel as I do that sex change is wrong. There have been no attempts on vexings part to reach out to anyone in kindness that dissagrees with vexing, because if you dissagree........the war is on. You have no idea the threats that have been made.
I do not have to roll over and play dead just because I am a Christian. In this compromise I am asking vexing to also look at the way vexing has treated others.
Do you also think I should refrain from calling someone pro-abortion? Do I stop because they ask me? Do I call someone a Christian that IMO is not simply because its the polite thing to do?
Do I stop standing up for what I beleive to be the truth?
Vexing thinks because I do not agree with everything vexing says....I am a hateful intolerant person.
Vexing has attacked who I am as a person and has done it with hateful, violent words......I cant judge anyones heart, but I have every right to judge their actions.
Do you think vexings hurtful words agaisnt my God, Christ.....hurt?
I do not need to take that. I can stand up for what I beleive is the truth, even if it hurts others.
CM, I have been on this forum longer than you have, and have been reading posts daily, for I believe to be about a year now. Just because I, unlike others, do not preach and flap my gums every 5 seconds, does not mean I do not know what is going on.
"I have never called vexing names, or said anything demeaning"
You know this is bull*****, as you have already used this as leverage and or attempt at blackmail. You are fully aware that when you refer to Vexing as a he, it does just that, demeans, and is name calling for her. You yourself see and admit to this, otherwise you would not try to use this to your advantage to get what you want. Very Christian like, truly.
There is a big difference between asking Vexing to look at the way she has treated others, and blackmailing/bartering morals and conduct.
What you are portraying to me, and possibly others is, it is ok for a child to keep hitting someone if the other child is also hitting.
There is no need for anyone to not stand up and speak out for what they believe in. You have been told by a few here now, that this is not the problem. The problem is, you are utilizing a term towards Vexing that you KNOW is hurting her, and you continue to do so, and try to USE it to your advantage. Again, truly, very Christian like of you.
I am aware that Vexing has said many hurtful things to you and others, as seems to be the pace for almost everyone here. However, again, when teaching children how to deal with those who hurt, do you tell them to fight back or walk away? Do you tell them to taunt back?
Vexing, at this time, may not be able to control herself, as it is a sensitive subject for her. Can you control yourself? As a Christian who KNOWS BETTER? Can you turn the other cheek? Can you stand up for what you believe in, without going out of your way to something you know hurts another?
Or will you continue to be the child who says it's ok because someone else is doing it?

reply from: Agape

Which part is that?
The "never calling her names" part, the "not being demeaning" part, or the "calling her actions wrong" part?
Ha ha ha!!
You also said this:

reply from: yoda

Yes, I think you did word some of your response "wrong". And I'm well aware of what the dictionary definition of prolife is, thank you.
Nor do I (see anything in the dictionary about that). Perhaps that's why I didn't say that? Yeah, could be........ but since you bring it up, I do have my own personal reasons to think that those who constantly "takes sides with" prochoicers are unlikely to be prolife. Just my opinion, you understand?

reply from: yoda

My, that's a rather inelegant defense, if I ever read one.....

reply from: Jameberlin

Yes, I think you did word some of your response "wrong". And I'm well aware of what the dictionary definition of prolife is, thank you.
Nor do I (see anything in the dictionary about that). Perhaps that's why I didn't say that? Yeah, could be........ but since you bring it up, I do have my own personal reasons to think that those who constantly "takes sides with" prochoicers are unlikely to be prolife. Just my opinion, you understand?
Sure, i can understand that. Opinions are like ***holes, everybody's got one and no one need two.

reply from: Jameberlin

I'd like to point out i've never accused you of anything of the sort. My ilk? These people aren't my ilk. I don't even know any of them.
You came to this board and i welcomed you and congratulated you on your newest baby, then you come here citing my post on my opinion of what it means to be pro-life and accuse me of bringing God and the bible into it when i didn't even mention them.
Don't lump me in with everyone who is nasty to you, as i have been nothing but courteous. You are guilty of judging me, not by my views or what i've said or how i've treated you, but by how others have treated you. That's a gross oversight on your part and it's not appropriate.
I have been courteous toward you, i'd appreciate the same.

reply from: yoda

So you agree that you are incapable of "controlling yourself"?

reply from: Jameberlin

Yeah, everybody has one, and they all stink except mine...
EDIT:
And possibly Christina Aguillera's. (She doesn't shyte, she candies...)
ROFL!

reply from: faithman

http://i81.photobucket.com/albums/j214/yodavater/IamaPerson2.jpg

reply from: nancyu

This is what it means to be pro life.
An unborn child is a person. Once conceived that child exists, and has as much right to exist as any other person.
Do not murder.

reply from: yoda

Then why didn't you take exception to that statement from the poster who originally said it?

reply from: churchmouse

And here we go again...............

reply from: galen

How is dressing as the gender I feel the most mentally comfortable hurting anyone?
I 'don't care who I hurt' because I know it's not hurting anyone.
Churchmouse keeps belabouring the 'insults' and 'attacks against God' even though I ceased them quite some time ago. Of course, Churchmouse never noticed, because she is so fixated on hating me for what I am and continually insulting me with the use of male pronouns.
If you feel that me having a physical sex change is wrong, then good for you. You've stated it and I read it. I don't need you thrusting it in my face whenever you get the opportunity to do so.
Leave it be.
This is MY life, not yours. I think a sex change is the right thing for ME. Your opinion on the matter is irrelevant, because it has absolutely nothing to do with you.
I don't care if you disagree with what I'm doing. Continue to do so. But I don't need to see you bringing it up all the damn time. We are quite aware of the fact you hate me and what I'm doing and that your pride won't let you back down when I carefully explain how you are wrong.
Anyway...what exactly have I said that is 'hurtful' towards your God? I use a capital letter when referring to your deity. That shows more respect for your religion than you show for my gender orientation.
I think its time that you realised, Churchmouse, that you are far more at fault here than I am - and that your sin of pride is preventing you from admitting that.
As I stated earlier in this post - I toned down my behaviour towards you, but you insist on continuing to be an antagonist towards me.

reply from: yoda

So if you don't agree with their statement, the "may" is meaningless, is it not?
Do you have issues with self control or not?

reply from: churchmouse

speck said,
Please. You are making excuses for bad behavior. There is no need for violent language speck.
I do not believe I am the one out of control. You might not like what i say, but thats ok.
How am I out of control? I can't turn my cheek to what i believe is the truth.
Why dont you ask the same of vexing?
I do not hate vexing and I do not believe other than saying that sex change is scripturally wrong I have been that cruel.
Vexing is the one that attacks........religon, Christians and anyone that dissagrees with vexing.
You travel around this forum and before long if vexing is there......vexing brings or relates the topic to vexing.
You know vexing, when I first came here I think one of the the first discussions I engaged in was the Colorado discussion about boys in the girls bathroom.
You made some harsh statements. You said.......you did not care about anyone elses feelings that it didnt matter, you would do what you wanted regardless.
It was all about you and what you wanted to do, EVEN IF IT HURT SOMEONE ELSE.
What a way to get people on your bandwagon eh? You said and threw in front of my face that you were even more woman than I was, that other women here were. What a way to make friends. You came across as arrogant and you certainly did not care for those that dissagreed with you. Then you went on the attack.
Other than using he, him.....I have said nothing that bad. And I have stopped using those pronouns and use your name to address you.
That is way more than you have ever done.
If you really really believe this......." This is MY life, not yours. I think a sex change is the right thing for ME. Your opinion on the matter is irrelevant, because it has absolutely nothing to do with you."
Then why the violent outbursts? If it is right for you then go for it. I shouldnt and I wouldnt ever try to stop someone from doing this. It is your life. But I have a life too. And I may just dissagree with what you are doing. Are you tolerant of my position as well?
Vexing you bring it up all the time, not with just me but with others. You always somehow bring it into a conversation.
I will stop addressing this issue. Lets see how long you can go without bringing it up.

reply from: yoda

.
How interesting that both vexing and Liberal are now saying that their lack of self control excuses their behavior on the forum.... and they both say they are Christians, don't they? Or is it just that both say they are "prolife"?

reply from: churchmouse

Self control my foot.
However I don't think vexing claims to be a Christian.......??????????

reply from: Agape

Which part is that?
The "never calling her names" part, the "not being demeaning" part, or the "calling her actions wrong" part?
Ha ha ha!!
You also said this:
Churchmouse is a true role model.
Ha ha ha!!!

reply from: churchmouse

agape........what does your name mean?
Hmmmmmmm

reply from: Agape

It means I don't like lies, Churchmouse.

reply from: churchmouse

As i said.......vexing I wont mention your sexuality again.......lets see how long you can go, not making every thread all about you that is.
Betcha cant do it........LOL

reply from: nancyu

Is this what it means to be pro life?

reply from: nancyu

http://www.americanrtl.org/news/black-eye-unborn is what it means to be pro life.

reply from: yoda

Nah. THIS is what it means:
pro-life adjective against open access to abortion: in favor of bringing the human fetus to full term, especially by campaigning against open access to abortion and against experimentation on embryos http://encarta.msn.com/encnet/features/dictionary/DictionaryResults.aspx?refid=1861736610

pro-life adjective opposed to the belief that a pregnant woman should have the freedom to choose an abortion if she does not want to have a baby
http://dictionary.cambridge.org/define.asp?key=63328&dict=CALD

pro-life -adj.
opposed to legalized abortion; right-to-life http://www.infoplease.com/dictionary/pro-life

Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1) -
pro-life -adjective opposed to legalized abortion; right-to-life. http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=pro-life&r=66

pro-life adjective supporting the belief that it is immoral for a pregnant woman to have the freedom to choose to have an abortion (= an operation to end a pregnancy) if she does not want to have a baby http://dictionary.cambridge.org/define.asp?key=prolife*1+0&dict=A

reply from: nancyu

Is this what it means to be pro life?
Yes.
If I'm not strong enough to stand up for myself, how do you expect me to stand up for the unborn?
I won't roll over and show my belly when someone LIES about me so blatantly.
Would you?
I think you should try getting over yourself. Ignore the insults like the rest of us try to do. You're not so special, you know.


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