Home - List All Discussions

is carolemarie prolife?

poll

by: ChristianLott2

I am pro life and I believe she is pro choice.

reply from: lycan

As a man I can understand the sense of powerlessness you must have felt when your child was aborted. However, unless there's something I'm not aware of it wasn't your child CM aborted. Stop acting like it was.

reply from: BossMomma

Carole made mistakes just like you did CL2, it's no more right to bash you for your mistakes than it is to bash her for hers. You need some help to deal with your pain.

reply from: lukesmom

This is, again, rediculous and you have become obsessive.

reply from: ChristianLott2

5 to 3 so far, cm is pro choice. I'm not bashing, I'm clarifying and accounting.
I don't attack cm for having had abortions, I attack her for lying and continuing to be pro abortion.
It's disgusting so many of you are using this to attack my character but then again, look who's doing the attacking - hypocrites, liars, murderers. You are all under investigation and none are above suspicion.
That most of you are already on the faux lifer list will show, this isn't just about cm, it's about those who defend pro aborts and call themselves pro life.
We've debated about life and abortion for years. It's time to have an accounting. The faux lifers and pro aborts together, the real pro lifers opposite.
We don't want liars and hypocrites destroying all our work, we don't want them screwing up our message. You believe what you believe. It's not what we pro lifers believe and we don't want you attempting to pervert and twist it to your mediocrity. You are scoundrels - murderers and liars and we don't want you around.

reply from: lukesmom

Just to clarify. I didn't vote and don't plan to. So if you are counting me in your "5" reduce it to "4".

reply from: ChristianLott2

I'm counting the polled votes. Just to clarify, I count you as a faux lifer pro abort and would never assume you side with real pro lifers.

reply from: BossMomma

Thankfully you aren't running squat around here. You aren't doing any work for the unborn, you sit here with your little pity-me sob story and use it to blame all women when you carry half the blame. Maybe next time you will look deep before you leap.

reply from: lukesmom

I'm counting the polled votes. Just to clarify, I count you as a faux lifer pro abort and would never assume you side with real pro lifers.
I really don't care what you think about me. I know the truth and that is good enough for me.

reply from: Banned Member

I wonder... am I pro-life enough?

reply from: ChristianLott2

do you think cm is pro life?

reply from: sheri

What good does it do to kick her out of the PL movement? She is doing a great deal of good at the abortion clinics, she will find truth in it's entirety someday, she is on the right path. To say she is not good enough for us implies we think were so much better and we are not, we can guide when the truth is on our side that is our only capacity to do good on this forum.
Please try to keep in mind also that no one is innocent, no matter how christian and pL we think we are we share the blood guilt, we need to end this as a nation, then we can afford to kick people out, untill then we need every good man.

reply from: ChristianLott2

People who do not believe in the pro life message should not be calling themselves pro life. Think of some other term or we'll coin one for you.
In this case, faux life was a great one. I got it from yv.
And poor Augustine...
I don't know what makes you feel pity for those faux lifers who were already on the list. They derided you at a feverish pace. That you now seek to protect them shows you may just be a sucker for punishment. That's not pro life, that's stupid. You've always been a bit self absorbed. Too bad it's lead you to hypocrisy.
I know I'm not saying the 'peaceful' thing, the 'let's all just get along' thing so many have been waiting for. I know the majority does not always favor the good and right.
We won't give up hope though, and we won't stoop to dirtying our message with the blood of innocent children just to appease an army of liars.

reply from: ChristianLott2

many on the faux lifer list believe you can hold pro choice views and still claim to be pro life. obama does too:
http://www.prolifeproobama.com/
it is a very real danger to allow wolves like this into the fold.
I urge everyone who has defended pro aborts in the past to stop now. It must stop somewhere. The legitimacy of the movement is at stake. With a liar and coward like Obama in the White House, we are under immediate threat. The pro life message must be delivered strong, clear, plain, simple, pure and unequivocal. To accept wrong as right is hypocrisy.
Also take a look at this:
http://prolifeobama.com/
It IS a conspiracy and it's got a HUGE cash flow. It's time to take more responsibility - for what we say and who we accept as friend.

reply from: Banned Member

Poor Augustine? I would be remiss in not pointing out, that it is compassion which separates the pro-life movement from the pro-abortion movement. Any attack here that is not directed against the pro-abortion industry is petty and pointless. Compassion is not about simply getting along but about serving a common purpose. Compassion is also the first command of Christ in the way of the two greatest commands; love God with all your heart and mind and love one another. Jesus does not give the command to correct the injustices of the world, only that we spread the truth of His Gospel. For someone to come to the this forum with the goal of singling out an individual for their personal actions as an act of personal vendetta is beyond reprehensible. It is at least stupid, certainly malicious and obviously counterproductive. ChristianLott2 should direct his anger towards the real enemies of the unborn; Barack Obama and Planned Parenthood. People should hunger to excercise the true spirit of the Gospel of Christ, not to play the role of the accuser.

reply from: SRUW4I5

Get over yourself.
I agree, he should. Do you really think he's capable of it?
I agree with the bolded part... I don't see what gets accomplished by telling someone that is pro-life that they aren't, and calling people bad things. It wastes time that could be spent helping someone choose not to have an abortion.
Off topic: What happend while I was gone? I don't remember Augustine being reasonable and easy enough to agree with.

reply from: ChristianLott2

See how easy that was Augustine? Now the pro aborts like you.

reply from: ChristianLott2

I'm singling out a group of people - faux lifers and their mascot - cm.
Just as you point to PP and their mascot, Obama.
Yet your accusations against PP and Obama are somehow more dignified than mine against FL and carole?

reply from: SRUW4I5

See how easy that was Augustine? Now the pro aborts like you.
Like him? Hardly. I just agree with some things he said.

reply from: Banned Member

Wow, Augie is on your little list now. You really do need to get a life. But keep doing what you're doing honey. I've never been worried about my freedom of choice being taken away anyway, but the way you & Nancy & your other few followers act, I KNOW that it will never happen. You're too busy judging the people who are on your side to ever bo a threat to us pro-choicers.

reply from: ChristianLott2

See how they all flock to you now, Augustine. You've made many pro aborts very happy.

reply from: ChristianLott2

For those who've already forgotten just what cm believes, we just had a five page long thread on it called Evidence:
http://www.prolifeamerica.com/fusetalk/forum/messageview.cfm?catid=7&threadid=5830&enterthread=y

reply from: RiverMoonLady

Well, Snottboy, now it's 10 to 5 that CM is prolife. And you put Augustine (of all people!) on your little hit list?
You are a sick, twisted, perverted, ridiculous individual.

reply from: ChristianLott2

"protect her mental health"
You upset my mental helath, cm. Do I have the right to kill you?
I wish.
We're all victims, even the baby. Why is the baby expendable?
Why can't others make the choice? If it's an okay choice for her, shouldn't the others be able to make the choice.
What's more, you already said she wouldn't make the choice, her parents would. Are you contradicting yourself again or did you just forget what you just said about allowing her parents to force her into an abortion?
You are pro choice, cm. Hate to break it to you but quite a few of us know you are. Maybe we should do a poll.
Carolemarie's comments are in bold. She outlines the usual pro abort position - force a child to have an abortion at her parent's choice.
Gosh, I'd rather we have no parental consent laws than something as vicious as she's outlined.
To clarify, we also have this earlier quote from cm:

reply from: ChristianLott2

Augustine, you've got NEW friends!!
Not as sick as this:

reply from: ChristianLott2

C
mon fear-a-smear,scopia,lukesmom,sheri,churchmouse,Teresa18,Augustine! Defend her statement!

reply from: joe

For 36 years our movement was corrupted. Infected by those that claim they love the unborn and the born but spit on the unborn child that was killed. They claim the "extremists" held back the protection of the unborn but in reality the "pro-life" movement is mainly composed of them...the traitors.
They run to defend a murderer (she shows no signs of repentance) and condemn the true hero's. They claim to show the love of Christ but it only applies to the killers not the innocent victims.
Expose the traitors with the truth. The unborn child is sacrificed by the individuals that claim they care.

reply from: ChristianLott2

As the poll shows, the majority who consider themselves pro life are actually faux lifers who indulge even the sickest of pro abortion rhetoric - the forced abortion of a young girl.

reply from: ChristianLott2

Looks like the real pro lifers are making a come back. Among those who consider themselves pro life, half of them consider cm pro choice.
Now carole, don't you think you should take this poll with a little seriousness and reconsider?
Admit you are pro abortion or change your views. You are doing more harm than good by perverting the pro life message, as are the other faux lifers. Err on the side of life or change your stated affiliation.

reply from: carolemarie

You are insane. The fact is that the parents make the choices right now for minor kids who were raped or incest victims, I didn't say that was good or bad, merely how it is. Nobody asks the kid what she wants, because she is underage, has no money and can't consent to surgery. Counseling would be a big improvement.
Counseling would help her say what she wants and let ther parents deal with their anger.
I never said I was for her getting an abortion. I did say her parents make the decision because that is how it comes down in real lifer. I never once said I wanted to force an abortion on her. But it happens because the grownups make the decision for her and she has no voice in the matter!

reply from: carolemarie

Like i said, I am fine with her keeping the baby, I hope she will choose life, but it isn't a choice others get to make...
Why can't others make the choice? If it's an okay choice for her, shouldn't the others be able to make the choice.
BY OTHERS I MEANT YOU!!!! THAT IS HER CHOICE TO MAKE< NOT YOURS NOT HER PARENTS
What's more, you already said she wouldn't make the choice, her parents would. Are you contradicting yourself again or did you just forget what you just said about allowing her parents to force her into an abortion?
I AM SAYING THAT SHE NEEDS TO MAKE THE CHOICE! NOT YOU NOT HER PARENTS< THAT IS WHY SHE NEED COUNSELING
You are pro choice, cm. Hate to break it to you but quite a few of us know you are. Maybe we should do a poll.

reply from: Teresa18

I voted pro-life. She is opposed to over 90% of abortions. Her actions with the CPC and outside the clinic are pro-life. We disagree that abortion is different from killing a born child, on rape and incest exceptions, and abortaficient birth control.

reply from: ChristianLott2

Then why did you say:
This would imply someone other than the 11 year old making the decision to 'protect her mental health'.
Are pregnant 11 year olds always victims of rape? Yes or no.

reply from: scopia19822

"Are pregnant 11 year olds always victims of rape? Yes or no."
Yes because an 11 yr cannot consent to sex. Statutory Rape.

reply from: ChristianLott2

See scopia, she's busted. She is pro forced abortion for little girls. That's the only way to interpret this.

reply from: BossMomma

Holy hell Augie, you joined the faux life list? I think it's official, CL2 is off his gord.

reply from: scopia19822

"Holy hell Augie, you joined the faux life list? I think it's official, CL2 is off his gord."
I guess hes ran out of women to persecute.. so now he moving on to be an equal opportunity persecutor. Welcome to the club Augustine.

reply from: BossMomma

Nah, if anyone here is faux life it's CL2. He is looking for pity and an outlet for his anger. He belongs on a psychiatrist's couch more than this forum.

reply from: scopia19822

"Nah, if anyone here is faux life it's CL2. He is looking for pity and an outlet for his anger. He belongs on a psychiatrist's couch more than this forum."
I agree, however if CL2 doesnt want the help then hes not going to get it. I have been told by a choicer that "its not all about me" with the last few posts I have made. I have been in a fit of depression this past week or so, its nothing major just seasonal from not being out in the sun and indoors because of the weather. When the weather warms up it will remit.

reply from: BossMomma

I hear ya, the winter typically gives me a small case of the blues too.

reply from: ChristianLott2

Well, it's not all about carolemarie but someone needs to be singled out as an example. BM is more pro choice than anyone else. She's the only person on the faux lifer list who claims she's pro life and wants to keep abortion completely legal. But no matter how much she whines, this is not about her either.
This is about people who are corrupting the true pro life message with all their excuses and exceptions.

reply from: scopia19822

"This is about people who are corrupting the true pro life message with all their excuses and exceptions."
I dont support abortion with any exceptions unless you count removing a tubal pregnancy as supporting abortion. I however dont think the treatment CM has recieved is fair, its nothing more than a high tech lynching. I think she is wrong and I will continue to tell her she is wrong, but I wont throw up her past in her face, as she has repented of that whether you want to believe that or not is up to you. I support the option of rape victims being offered the MAP, but I dont think it should be available to the general public. As far as other methods of BC go I am opposed to artificial BC as a Catholic however pregnancy prevention is between a woman, her partner, her doctor and God. Its a moral decision not a legal one. If a person hood bill is ever to get passed it would only have a chance if life is defined at implantation as that is when its clear that a new life is present and growing/forming. I would vote for such a bill so that makes me proabortion and I really dont care.

reply from: ChristianLott2

9/8 say cm is pro choice.

reply from: carolemarie

I think CL2 loves me and this is his way of reaching out.....constantly talking about me and thinking about me.....kinda of sweet if it wasn't so creepy...

reply from: Banned Member

http://usccb.org/prolife/issues/FOCA/postcard.shtml
http://www.usa.gov/Contact/Elected.shtml
http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm
https://writerep.house.gov/writerep/welcome.shtml
PLEASE AIM YOUR ANGER AT WASHINGTON DC!

reply from: churchmouse

I can not believe that anyone would be so board as to make a thread like this.
ChristianLott you are sad.
These people who make lists are pathetic.
Kindergarten certainly got out didnt it........

reply from: carolemarie

He can't help himself Churchmouse, he is in love with me....

reply from: lukesmom

Thank you Augustine. I couldn't believe it but in church Sunday the priest mentioned FOCA and abortion. Usually this is only talked about in Oct, Prolife month, at least in our little church. Anyway, the Catholic Churches here are having petitions signed and cards provided to send to government officials. About time the church caught up with the people! Although, to me it is too little too late. All of this should have been done BEFORE the election. Heck, the Catholic Church is constantly being accused of "brainwashing" its members and telling them how to vote. Since the church is accused, we may as well make the accusation actually true!

reply from: churchmouse

And you just had to be the one to do it right? And for what reason? What possible reason could you have as a Christian for trying to hurt someone?
What is in your heart? Your actions show it thats for sure. Why dont you say something, anything of substance that has to do with abortion instead of trying to cause trouble.
I single you out.....as a Christian whose actions are not done in a godly way.
I like scopia feel the abuse carole has recieved....most from the Christian-in name only group, is horrendous. It is absolutely horrible and you should be ashamed. I sat by long enough not saying a word, but not anymore.
There is not one person on this board that I agree with everything they say. We all dissagree on issues. But the way you people act is terrible.
Right or wrong carole has repented and she has put her sin out there to help people. You would realize that if you stopped hating long enough. God HAS FORGIVEN HER. I started a thread for people to share their sins. Not one of you stone throwers had the guts to share one thing. I think Liberal did and that is it.
You ought to take your Bibles out and read about how Christ talked to sinners. You ought to look at the sin in your own lives and quit worrying about everyone else.
Your abortion positions might be right but your supposedly Christian actions are wrong.

reply from: CharlesD

The real question is this:
Is it possible to be considered pro life if you accept any exceptions at all?
I have heard people say that any exceptions at all makes you pro choice, and I have heard pro choice people criticize some of their own who support any level of restriction on abortion.
What should we call someone who opposes over 98% of all abortions?
I would call that person pro life with exceptions. I might not agree with all the exceptions, but that's the way I see it. We don't need to be so darn hung up on everyone having the correct label.

reply from: lukesmom

Finally! A voice of reason! Thank you Charles.

reply from: ChristianLott2

Is a pregnant 11 year old always a victim of rape? Yes or no.

reply from: ChristianLott2

No, I'm going to aim it at you. Nobody in DC gives a flying ***** about that *****. Not now, not ever.

reply from: BossMomma

Is a pregnant 11 year old always a victim of rape? Yes or no.
Yes, 11 year olds are not capable of giving concent, unless of course your a baby raper like noluno.

reply from: Faramir

And you just had to be the one to do it right? And for what reason? What possible reason could you have as a Christian for trying to hurt someone?
What is in your heart? Your actions show it thats for sure. Why dont you say something, anything of substance that has to do with abortion instead of trying to cause trouble.
I single you out.....as a Christian whose actions are not done in a godly way.
I like scopia feel the abuse carole has recieved....most from the Christian-in name only group, is horrendous. It is absolutely horrible and you should be ashamed. I sat by long enough not saying a word, but not anymore.
There is not one person on this board that I agree with everything they say. We all dissagree on issues. But the way you people act is terrible.
Right or wrong carole has repented and she has put her sin out there to help people. You would realize that if you stopped hating long enough. God HAS FORGIVEN HER. I started a thread for people to share their sins. Not one of you stone throwers had the guts to share one thing. I think Liberal did and that is it.
You ought to take your Bibles out and read about how Christ talked to sinners. You ought to look at the sin in your own lives and quit worrying about everyone else.
Your abortion positions might be right but your supposedly Christian actions are wrong.
This is one time I agree with you 100%.
Superb post.

reply from: Faramir

Here's a question for you.
What if person A is 100% pro-life on paper but does nothing at all about the abortion issue in real life?
What if person B is only 98% pro-life on paper and in theory, but goes out to clinics and talks women out of abortions and saves hundres of babies?
Which one, practically speaking, is more pro-life?

reply from: Faramir

Dude, you're getting to be a little too intense about this.
Anyway, I have asked her about her pro-life work, and from what she has told me about her her sidewalk counselling, I would estimate she has helped save over 700 babies from abortion. Note that I had to ask her several times to get details and that she does not herself boast, but gives all the credit to God. I decided to "boast" about it myself, since if Carole's persecutors want to keep saying "3" to her, then I think they should know about the "700," and maybe they could take that into consideration next time they are tempted to call her killermarie.
I believe that qualifies her to be pro-life, in spite of some of her exceptions, that I think are wrong to make, but at this stage of the game, it's just talk. Her ACTIONS prove that she is pro-life.
You have saved ZERO babies from abortion. (And I'm no better--I'm in the same boat).
She has saved HUNDREDS.
Though you and I do not believe in abortion under any circumstance, she is a thousand times more prolife than you and I put together, because her actions speak much louder than words on a message board.

reply from: Faramir

I'm curious about a name on "the list."
I understand I am "farismear" and I qualify to be on "the list" because I don't believe in brow-beating "pro-aborts" and because I sometimes am not politically correct, though I am 100% pro-life in my beliefs, but who is "manson"?

reply from: faithman

Do try to keep up. We realize that you are way to busy defending bortheads, and false pro-lifers to do anything else, but that is the name of CL2's dog. I am just currious whether it is named after charlie or marrilyn?

reply from: ChristianLott2

The punch line is this:
If an 11 year old is not capable of making the decision to have sex, how can she be capable of making the decision to abort?
Phrased differently:
If the only type of sex an 11 year old is capable of having is coerced, why does carolemarie not consider her 'decision' to abort coerced?
In the end, either she can make her own decisions or she cannot. Many of you say she's not able to decide to have sex but IS able to decide to have an abortion. That's hypocrisy.

reply from: ChristianLott2

Do try to keep up. We realize that you are way to busy defending bortheads, and false pro-lifers to do anything else, but that is the name of CL2's dog. I am just currious whether it is named after charlie or marrilyn?
http://www.prolifeamerica.com/fusetalk/forum/messageview.cfm?catid=7&threadid=5773&enterthread=y
I think I should have called Him Sam as in 'Son of Sam' but Manson as in Charles Manson fits as well.

reply from: yoda

Mark Crutcher says there is no such thing as prolife with exceptions. He says people who have "exceptions" are prochoice with exceptions. And he's got a point, because if you allow exceptions for things like rape and incest, you are in effect saying that people ought to be allowed the choice of abortion if they allege that they were raped, or had sex with a close relative.
We can't throw anyone out of the prolife "movement", because it's not a club, as much as some people seem to think it is. Anyone can claim to be prolife, and there's not much we can do about it, other than voice our opinions about their claim.
My concern about false prolifers is that they seem to try to mislead other prolifers and steer them toward proabort positions, like saying that born and unborn kids are "not the same", or that it's okay to kill a zygote before it implants. If we're going to embrace positions like that, we might as well give up now.
Being prolife (to me) means you embrace the principle that no one has the right to electively take an innocent human life. And that includes babies or rape and incest, and babies that haven't implanted yet. That means all innocent human life. Any deviation from that is a step towards being a proabort, IMO.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

Wow, firstly... Augustine kind of defended Carole, AND CL2's nonsense is clearly pissing off about 90% of this forum. Hell, I don't even need to take him off iggy for this... But I may as well.

reply from: BossMomma

The punch line is this:
If an 11 year old is not capable of making the decision to have sex, how can she be capable of making the decision to abort?
Phrased differently:
If the only type of sex an 11 year old is capable of having is coerced, why does carolemarie not consider her 'decision' to abort coerced?
In the end, either she can make her own decisions or she cannot. Many of you say she's not able to decide to have sex but IS able to decide to have an abortion. That's hypocrisy.
Because it is dangerous for an 11 year old to undergo pregnancy, much less a c-section which carries triple the danger of dying as opposed to vaginal birth. It would be considered medically indicated.

reply from: Teresa18

This is what is said by many pro-aborts about abortion.
As far as defining personhood at implantation, it would be a lie, and it still discriminates against a category of human beings. A person begins at conception and has grown by the time he/she implants.

reply from: Teresa18

True. I think he left because he was scared we were going to report him to the authorities.

reply from: ChristianLott2

Because it is dangerous for an 11 year old to undergo pregnancy, much less a c-section which carries triple the danger of dying as opposed to vaginal birth. It would be considered medically indicated.
So even if the 11 year old would like to keep her baby you'd force her to abort.
In some countries, pregnancy and birth well below age 16 is common. I wonder where you get all your facts from? I think you make it all up to justify your desire to control other people's lives, especially young pregnant girls and the pre born.
Now say something smart ass and post some false statistic from a pro abort site like webMD.

reply from: nancyu

Of course it's dangerous. That is not the point!
These are just the kinds of arguments which expose a faux lifer. They make it appear that WE are guilty of child rape. Another pro abort lie.
We're not advocating teen pregnancy and child rape here, you know.
We're saying what needs to be considered IF it happens. No, it's not good for the 11 year old person. There is STILL another person to consider, whether we like it or not!
We can't kill one innocent person, to make life better for another innocent person. It isn't choosing one over another, it is choosing one person's LIFE over another person's safety, and/or convenience. And we have to TRY to save the lives of BOTH.

reply from: carolemarie

And in my opinion, the reason the prolife movement is stuck in that water is because they spend their time hating each other and working against each other.
They would rather fall on the sword over exceptions and cause splits and factions then work with others to end 98 percent of abortions.

reply from: nancyu

Did anyone ask for the opinion of a pro abort liar?

reply from: lycan

If I understand this thread correctly CL2 asked for everyone's opinion.

reply from: scopia19822

"As far as defining personhood at implantation, it would be a lie, and it still discriminates against a category of human beings. A person begins at conception and has grown by the time he/she implants."
Catholic beliefs on BC are not binding to non Catholics. Birth Control is a relgious/moral matter not something the government should stick their noses in other than to make sure products on the market are safe. The only way personhood would pass is if it defined it at implantation. There is at that point a human being growing and the law is going to want tangible proof that a human life is present. That can only be established after implantation as that is when the child is growing and forming. Its not until implantation that the hormone that are used on pregnancy test are produced. In this case one has to be pragmatic, do we want to stop abortions of an established pregnancy or split hairs over whether or not BC is moral/ethical?

reply from: nancyu

Since when are you an expert on how "personhood would pass"?

reply from: Teresa18

Whether it would pass or not is beside the question because it is a lie. There is a human being growing from conception. The Catholic Church teaches life should be protected from conception.

reply from: scopia19822

"Since when are you an expert on how "personhood would pass"?"
The only reason the Colorodo Bill got defeated was because many feared that if life was defined at conception than it would ban certain methods of BC and most people who would have other wise have voted for it did not want that to happen.

reply from: nancyu

so he did, and I stand corrected.
CL what were you thinking? You shouldn't let pro aborts vote, they're not even people!
But since what's done is done, you should add a couple other options to the poll.

reply from: scopia19822

"Whether it would pass or not is beside the question because it is a lie. There is a human being growing from conception. The Catholic Church teaches life should be protected from conception."
I am well aware of what the Church teaches. However we promote that by promoting chastity until marriage and teaching NFP. Sadly if the Church is hestitant to chastise members who voted for Obama with his proabortion stance or too withhold communion from proabort politicans they are not going to be out protesting BC for non Catholics which is really what the personhood bill defeat in Colorado bulls down too.

reply from: nancyu

Since when are you an expert on how "personhood would pass"?
The reason the Colorado bill was defeated was because there were more dishonest voters than honest ones.

reply from: Teresa18

I'm just saying that defining personhood at implantation would be scientifically and morally inaccurate because life begins at conception. The opposition is to birth control that has a function that can end the life of a newly concieved person.

reply from: ChristianLott2

so he did, and I stand corrected.
CL what were you thinking? You shouldn't let pro aborts vote, they're not even people!
But since what's done is done, you should add a couple other options to the poll.
Sorry nancy. Sometimes I become too 'open minded' for my own good. However, there are some pro aborts who correctly identified cm as a pro abort. That was the only point I was trying to make, that sometimes liars tell the truth.
As for those bent on using dishonesty to make all their points (cm and bm), the poll isn't really for them. If we take all the faux lifers from the poll, it's 9 to 0, cm is pro abortion.
She still refuses to answer a direct yes/no question, preferring to let her pro abort henchmen bm do the talking (or rather, lying).

reply from: scopia19822

"The opposition is to birth control that has a function that can end the life of a newly concieved person."
Their are many people who are anti abortion who dont hold the Catholic Church's or the Fundamentalist Protestant stance on birth control. Hormonal birth control is also used to treat menstrual disorders as well, for some women its the only treatment they can afford or have access too. If you out law hormonal BC for people who use it for contraception than you have to outlaw it for all. So sadly you have two evils to choose from, outlaw abortions of an established pregnancy or ban birth control that may or may not cause a human egg to fail to implant, which we at this point have no way of knowing was there in the first place. We do however have ways of telling when a human life is pregnant post implantation. I would rather outlaw abortion of established pregnancies and keep hormonal bc legal than to fight over BC and never have a chance of seeing abortion outlawed.

reply from: ChristianLott2

Man, don't you get tired of repeating the same lie?
Every time you say this me or someone else points you to the fact that a drug does not have to be banned to make it illegal for illicit use.
Why do you keep acting like you don't know what prescription drugs are???

reply from: CharlesD

I'm just playing with semantics here, but a personhood bill would not define personhood as anything. Such a bill would simply be recognizing what already is the case, that all human beings are persons by virtue of being human. A law stating that grass is green and the sky is blue would not be defining them as such, but would be recognizing an already existing reality.

reply from: lycan

If we wish to discuss when life begins or whether bc methods are truly contraceptive, I think we should discuss it in another thread. http://www.prolifeamerica.com/fusetalk/forum/messageview.cfm?catid=7&threadid=5820&STARTPAGE=6&FTVAR_FORUMVIEWTMP=Linear and http://www.prolifeamerica.com/fusetalk/forum/messageview.cfm?catid=7&threadid=5856&enterthread=y might be a couple of places. This thread was created to attack a person, and while I'm glad people (including me) have come to that person's defense I think the thread needs to fade into oblivion.

reply from: ChristianLott2

I agree.
Now why aren't you on my faux lifers list?

reply from: faithman

I agree.
Now why aren't you on my faux lifers list?
....and the quickest way to establish personhood for the womb child, is the life at conception act. the problem with these "other tactics" is that they draw away attention from what needs to be done. I believe that these "other tactics" are specificly designed to do just that. I don't think pro-life is devided at all. It has merely been infiltrated by undercover bortheads to mis direct. The cure is "pro-life" cleaning it's own house first. We must declare where our loyalty lies. Pro-life is precieved to be an exstention of the rep. party. Even at our state rally, it looked more like a political pep rally for the govenor. We are not going to end this politically, as long as we accept faux-pro-lifers as "leaders". The issue has always been personhood. To be distracted from that fact means death to the womb child. We need to demand that our "leaders" promote personhood. We need to demand that our resources be put into materials that promote the image of the womb child. But what we get insted is ego driven personality cults, and "organizations" that are shills for a party that has sold us out in a major way. And the only materials they produce is glossy begger sheets, competing for our dime to rent fancy offices, and pay themselves a handsome wage while the babies die. "I AM A PERSON" has proven to be one of the most, if not the most effective source of abortion stopping material. The live imagry changes hearts and minds by the droves. These other so called tactics are a waist of time and money. Everyone who truely cares about the plight of the womb child, should put their time and resources into materials like IAAP. We have even been succesful in getting them into the schools. Quit being fooled by self interest punks. Simply get armed, and get busy. The real numbers back us up. Abortion minded women change their minds about killing their womb children, when they see the imagry. It is reported by mobile ultra sound ministries, that as high as 98% of the abortion bound, change their minds about murdering their children. IAAP makes every individual the same kind of powerful witness for the womb child. For the cost of one ultra sound rig, We could supply millions of cards and posters to activist all across the nation. God has not called us to blindly follow stupidity. He has called us to be good stewards over our resources. How can it be good stewardship to rent luxury offices to do nothing blow hards, while the children die by the millions? We can easily beat the bortheads, but we must first cast out the abortion trash in our own ranks. We must clear the decks of "old guard" leaders who care more about making a living than stopping the dieing. Anyone who wants to truely be effective, can contact me by PM, and I will send you an "IAAP" care package for free. It really is that simply. When you show the truth, the lies go away. Includding the lies told by faux-lifers.

reply from: ChristianLott2

Butcher-marie makes the rounds again, calling true pro lifers murderers in an attempt to draw the attention away from her own real life murder of three of her children..
Yet please, keep defending her pro aborts. She's the perfect mascot.

reply from: faithman

Verbal substance to what already is?

reply from: LiberalChiRo

I'm just saying that defining personhood at implantation would be scientifically and morally inaccurate because life begins at conception. The opposition is to birth control that has a function that can end the life of a newly concieved person.
AN individual human's existence begins at fertilization - not life itself.
Anyway, I feel implantation is too important a step to say that we can completely disregard it. Until it implants, all bets are off. It can't develop until it implants.

reply from: nancyu

I'm just saying that defining personhood at implantation would be scientifically and morally inaccurate because life begins at conception. The opposition is to birth control that has a function that can end the life of a newly concieved person.
AN individual human's existence begins at fertilization - not life itself.
Anyway, I feel implantation is too important a step to say that we can completely disregard it. Until it implants, all bets are off. It can't develop until it implants.
What are you talking about? An unborn child is a person. What does implantation have to do with anything? Go blow smoke someplace else.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

I'm just saying that defining personhood at implantation would be scientifically and morally inaccurate because life begins at conception. The opposition is to birth control that has a function that can end the life of a newly concieved person.
AN individual human's existence begins at fertilization - not life itself.
Anyway, I feel implantation is too important a step to say that we can completely disregard it. Until it implants, all bets are off. It can't develop until it implants.
What are you talking about? An unborn child is a person. What does implantation have to do with anything? Go blow smoke someplace else.
Lukesmom explained it much better than I can. Basically, yes. A new human being is complete at fertilization. But without implantation, it cannot develop into a human being, period. It will just die. So there's really two steps needed: fertilization AND implantation. I don't know if this was Lukesmom's intentions behind what she wrote, but for me it makes sense to help explain why I'm okay with birth control.

reply from: churchmouse

CharlesD said,
In that case yoda is not pro-life because he said if a womans life were in danger she had every right to kill. Whether you are saving her life or not you are still killing a human being.
But I agree with your statement.
What does our law say?
http://definitions.uslegal.com/r/rape/

Thank you Faramir, the abuse has been terrible. She deserves an apology.
I love Crutcher but dont agree with this position. If a womans life is in danger I believe it is moral to try to save it.
This is the only exception that I make.
Well it seems to be an exclusive club on this site doesnt it? You guys are the ones with juvenile lists, nameing who you thinks in it and who is not.
This is the internet and virtually everything people claim to do or not to do might all be lies. All we have to go on is what they say in posts.
As the Christians in name only do on this board.......They show Christianity in a bad light. Thats what I find appauling.
You said on another thread yoda that you believed any woman had the right to take a life to continue their own, if they were in a medical emergency.
So you took your name from the pro-life group and joined the pro-choice crowd.
Your real agenda is to hate....hate those that you dissagree with. You don't throw stones you throw bolders. And whose name do you do it in? You certainly defy the Scriptures and do not follow them.

reply from: faithman

In that case yoda is not pro-life because he said if a womans life were in danger she had every right to kill. Whether you are saving her life or not you are still killing a human being.
But I agree with your statement.
What does our law say?
http://definitions.uslegal.com/r/rape/

Thank you Faramir, the abuse has been terrible. She deserves an apology.
I love Crutcher but dont agree with this position. If a womans life is in danger I believe it is moral to try to save it.
This is the only exception that I make.
Well it seems to be an exclusive club on this site doesnt it? You guys are the ones with juvenile lists, nameing who you thinks in it and who is not.
This is the internet and virtually everything people claim to do or not to do might all be lies. All we have to go on is what they say in posts.
As the Christians in name only do on this board.......They show Christianity in a bad light. Thats what I find appauling.
You said on another thread yoda that you believed any woman had the right to take a life to continue their own, if they were in a medical emergency.
So you took your name from the pro-life group and joined the pro-choice crowd.
Your real agenda is to hate....hate those that you dissagree with. You don't throw stones you throw bolders. And whose name do you do it in? You certainly defy the Scriptures and do not follow them.
I don't apologize to baby killers. And you are now ignoring the ascripture to reprove evil. CM's post are full of it, and yet you defend a baby killer? Our real agenda is to defend womb children [remeber them?]. And that we will do no matter how much faux-lifers try to redefine it. It is not an act of hate to identify those who are the enemy of the womb child in word and deed. CM is the best bad example we have. Almost every post is anti womb child in favor of the killers. If you are too brain dead to realize that, then it is on you.

reply from: ChristianLott2

You said on another thread yoda that you believed any woman had the right to take a life to continue their own, if they were in a medical emergency.
So you took your name from the pro-life group and joined the pro-choice crowd.
yv can answer this better than me but I'd like to point out how happy I am you are on the faux life list. You are up there with cm and bm as one of the more devious pro aborts.
Your real agenda is to hate....hate those that you dissagree with. You don't throw stones you throw bolders. And whose name do you do it in? You certainly defy the Scriptures and do not follow them.
Oh, yes. My agenda is hate. Most definitely. I don't shy away from phony liars like yourself at all. To come on here and get angry and attack people like me, then say you DO NOT hate is a lesson in hypocrisy for us all.

reply from: ChristianLott2

And it is. I'm so glad you are here fman. We are surrounded by phony hypocrite 'christians' - liars and scoundrels willing to bend every rule to get along with pro aborts.

reply from: ChristianLott2

Abortion can be considered birth control, Lib.
Try to use precise terms. Tell us you are okay with abortifacients if that is what you mean, as it is what's being discussed. Not birth control, not contraceptives - abortifacients.

reply from: ChristianLott2

What does our law say?
http://definitions.uslegal.com/r/rape/
">http://definitions.uslegal.com/r/rape/
Yes or no, pro abort.

reply from: faithman

What does our law say?
http://definitions.uslegal.com/r/rape/
">http://definitions.uslegal.com/r/rape/
Yes or no, pro abort.
Yes, an 11 year old is always a victim of rape, as they do not have legal consent to sexual activity.

reply from: yoda

What are you talking about? An unborn child is a person. What does implantation have to do with anything? Go blow smoke someplace else.
That's really sick, isn't it? That's like saying that many born babies will die of SIDS, so we can't call them human beings until they become adults. Or that an adult will die if taken into outer space without any oxygen tanks, so we can't call astronauts human beings until they return to earth.
That's just plain sick.

reply from: yoda

Wow, you're still bitter over what I said about all women knowing what they are killing, aren't you? Go ahead, get it out of your system!!
A woman can defend her life anytime she chooses to, that's not negotiable. But she need not ask for an "abortion" to do that, a respectful and considerate "early delivery" is all that is required.
That's because you don't understand his position. He has never said a physician cannot try to save her life, just that the physician should try first to save BOTH lives. Try to keep up while you're attacking me, will you?
<Yawn>...... more bitterness, more personal attacks... more lies. Get your lies all lined up in a row, will you?

reply from: yoda

She is too busy trying to get "revenge" on me for suggesting that all women know what they are killing when they ask for an abortion. Seems like I must have touched a nerve, ya think?

reply from: ChristianLott2

What are you talking about? An unborn child is a person. What does implantation have to do with anything? Go blow smoke someplace else.
That's really sick, isn't it? That's like saying that many born babies will die of SIDS, so we can't call them human beings until they become adults. Or that an adult will die if taken into outer space without any oxygen tanks, so we can't call astronauts human beings until they return to earth.
That's just plain sick.
Well, she's almost there yv. All she needs to do is cut out that last bogus exception and she'll be pro life. Of those on the faux lifer list she's just about the only one left who hasn't attacked me for defending the pre born against killercarole (or at least not that I recall).

reply from: faithman

She is too busy trying to get "revenge" on me for suggesting that all women know what they are killing when they ask for an abortion. Seems like I must have touched a nerve, ya think?
Do haters and shamers think? ?MUST ASK THE PROFETII KILLER OF THREE ON THAT ONE!

reply from: yoda

Close only counts in horse shoes and hand grenades.

reply from: yoda

Nah..... they're too full of hate and too busy trying to shame someone.... why one of them (RML) even tried to "shame" me yesterday.... imagine!

reply from: carolemarie

According to Faithman, if we cosidered "womb children" the same as born children we would burn down clinics and hang abortion providers.
Apparently he doesn't consider then the same thing since he doesn't do that either!
Perhaps he is a faux prolifer....
He claims that calling a baby a fetus is a prochoice trick to dehumanize the baby, yet is so blind that he doesn't see his rhetoric is the same thing, doctors become abortionist so they can be hated, prochoicers are bortheads or skancs. He does the exact same thing he complains about.
It is all posturing and rhetoric

reply from: faithman

Blather on death scanc. You only prove our point with everyone of your illogical posts.

reply from: carolemarie

There you go again, the bible specifically says to put aside coarse and dirty talk...you claim to be a Christian, then live up to what the scripture says.
You use rhetoric to dehumanize those you disagree with, and complain when they do it....
You support killing abortion providers and will not say it is wrong. That makes you a murderer because as a man thinks in his heart, he is....
Scripturally, you have no grounds for your hating and derisive behavior. In fact the bible tells you to put it aside. To not slander your neighbor.
When are you going to live up to the standard you claim to follow?

reply from: faithman

I have slandered no one. Truth is not slander. Nor is the use of force to protect the innocent prohibated in scripture. Scanc is not a curse word. Is is a discrption of women with very loose morals. That fits you to a tee. You come here bragging about your whore boots and bling. What about...1Ti 2:9 In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array; 1Ti 2:10 But (which becometh women professing godliness) with good works. 1Ti 2:11 Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. 1Ti 2:12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.
But it would seem you ignore the scriptural abnomission for women not to have diria of the mouth. Your very post is out of order with scripture.

reply from: nancyu

I believe he said "if ours was a righteous nation..." that is what we would do (as a nation)
Are you suggesting we should stop calling abortionists "abortionists"? and start calling them "doctors"?

reply from: faithman

I believe he said "if ours was a righteous nation..." that is what we would do (as a nation)
Are you suggesting we should stop calling abortionists "abortionists"? and start calling them "doctors"?
WELL!!! the killer death scanc has to defend all killers in order to justify her brutal barbaric act against thre of her own children. OOOOOPPPPS sorry. That little mistake she made three times.

reply from: carolemarie

I don't try to justify my past....that would be a big waste of time for all of us. I take responsiblity for my past legal choices.
But I have change my position and views on abortion, because I am a Christian now and God changed my heart and life. I hope you can comprehend that fact, I am no longer prochoice!
FYI-God has no problem with bling and high heels, or boots either for that matter....there is nothing "whorish" about high heels! Grow up!!!! God is for us having fun! In fact he created us to party with Him.

reply from: faithman

1Ti 2:9 In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array; 1Ti 2:10 But (which becometh women professing godliness) with good works. 1Ti 2:11 Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. 1Ti 2:12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.

reply from: nancyu

I believe he said "if ours was a righteous nation..." that is what we would do (as a nation)
Are you suggesting we should stop calling abortionists "abortionists"? and start calling them "doctors"?
WELL!!! the killer death scanc has to defend all killers in order to justify her brutal barbaric act against thre of her own children. OOOOOPPPPS sorry. That little mistake she made three times.
Yet she keeps saying that she wants abortionists jailed? What about women who will perform their own abortions? Will they be jailed? Or will we just call them "doctors"?

reply from: carolemarie

1Ti 2:9 In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array; 1Ti 2:10 But (which becometh women professing godliness) with good works. Where does that say I can't wear high heels and dress fashionably?
1Ti 2:11 Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. 1Ti 2:12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.
I am not going to wear a burka, or be put into bondage because you don't understand scripture! God created us for relationship with him, and Jesus came to set the captives free. Women are not suppose to be silent slaves to men!

reply from: ChristianLott2

Classic cm doublespeak.
Let's ask a few questions:
How can you be pro life without considering womb children actual children?
Are they LESS THAN children? Maybe 'potential' children?
CM claims to be pro life yet does not consider the womb child a 'real' child nor does she believe abortion murder.
Now how can you repent for something like three abortions when according to CM, she didn't even have any children to murder?
Someone who fixes teeth is a dentist.
Someone who murders babies as a job is an abortionist.
Someone who runs around screaming for a woman's 'right' to murder a baby is ... a pro abort. Like you and your 'excuses'.

reply from: carolemarie

I never said that women were not pregnant with human babies.

reply from: nancyu

Yeah, but that "p" word isn't easy for you to say is it? PERSON. I think you are afraid of our US Constitution, and what it would mean for you pro death-to-the-fetus types if you were to admit to yourselves or to anyone else that an unborn child is a person.

reply from: carolemarie

human babies are persons nancy.
It is redundant to say a baby is a person.
that is why a cat babie isn't called a person

reply from: nancyu

Are unborn human babies persons, carolemarie?

reply from: carolemarie

can you not read? Women are pregnant with human babies! Not fish or stones or cute monkey babies

reply from: faithman

Then why would you vow to fight personhood be atributed to the womb child? Oh thats right, so future killer scancs will get the free walk you did.

reply from: carolemarie

Then why would you vow to fight personhood be atributed to the womb child? Oh thats right, so future killer scancs will get the free walk you did.
1. it would cause birth control to be banned
2. micarriages would require death certificates and investigations, because if a person dies, we investigate why.
3. Yes, I don't like the jailing of women, the 2nd victim in abortion.

reply from: faithman

Then why would you vow to fight personhood be atributed to the womb child? Oh thats right, so future killer scancs will get the free walk you did.
1. it would cause birth control to be banned
2. micarriages would require death certificates and investigations, because if a person dies, we investigate why.
3. Yes, I don't like the jailing of women, the 2nd victim in abortion.
All stupid and non sencical reasons to justify murder, and letting the killers walk free.

reply from: carolemarie

Then why would you vow to fight personhood be atributed to the womb child? Oh thats right, so future killer scancs will get the free walk you did.
1. it would cause birth control to be banned
2. micarriages would require death certificates and investigations, because if a person dies, we investigate why.
3. Yes, I don't like the jailing of women, the 2nd victim in abortion.
All stupid and non sencical reasons to justify murder, and letting the killers walk free.
In YOUR opinion. Which matters about as much as mine does to you.
The law you want is sloppy, raises more problems than it solves. And it goes down in flames where ever it is introduced.

reply from: faithman

Then why would you vow to fight personhood be atributed to the womb child? Oh thats right, so future killer scancs will get the free walk you did.
1. it would cause birth control to be banned
2. micarriages would require death certificates and investigations, because if a person dies, we investigate why.
3. Yes, I don't like the jailing of women, the 2nd victim in abortion.
All stupid and non sencical reasons to justify murder, and letting the killers walk free.
In YOUR opinion. Which matters about as much as mine does to you.
The law you want is sloppy, raises more problems than it solves. And it goes down in flames where ever it is introduced.
SSSSSOOOO we should continue to let the children die, because death scancs don't like them being called persons? And it does not go down in flames by the way. Folks become more aware and educated. It needs to be kept at the for front until it does go thru. The only "problems" it causes is for baby killers like you.

reply from: Faramir

Then why would you vow to fight personhood be atributed to the womb child? Oh thats right, so future killer scancs will get the free walk you did.
ATTENTION MARK CRUTCHER
ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!
A post-abortive woman, who regrets her abortion(s), and who is involved in the pro-life work of counseling and preventing babies from being destroyed by abortion, should be able to post on this board in peace and not be continually harassed and abused.
While it is appreciated that you offer a place for this topic to be discussed, your forum has become a free-for-all, and the most vulnerable, who have stories to tell about the lessons they learned, instead of being encouraged for sharing their stories, are condemned and persecuted.
There is nothing wrong with honest debate and disagreement, but name-calling like "scanc" and "killer," should not be permitted in a civil discussion, and this conduct repels others from joining in this important discussion. And it certainly discourages others who are post-abortive, who might otherwise share the lessons they've learned.
I implore you moderate this forum, at least minimally, and prevent the rampant abusiveness that has been allowed, and which reflects poorly on the pro-life cause.

reply from: ChristianLott2

bwaaaaaa!!!
rofl

reply from: ChristianLott2

You admit the baby is a person. Yet you think applying the law to that baby as a person is.. 'sloppy'.
Here you go folks. The hypocrite killer in all her bloody glory..

reply from: Faramir

You admit the baby is a person. Yet you think applying the law to that baby as a person is.. 'sloppy'.
Here you go folks. The hypocrite killer in all her bloody glory..
ATTENTION MARK CRUTCHER
ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!
A post-abortive woman, who regrets her abortion(s), and who is involved in the pro-life work of counseling and preventing babies from being destroyed by abortion, should be able to post on this board in peace and not be continually harassed and abused.
While it is appreciated that you offer a place for this topic to be discussed, your forum has become a free-for-all, and the most vulnerable, who have stories to tell about the lessons they learned, instead of being encouraged for sharing their stories, are condemned and persecuted.
There is nothing wrong with honest debate and disagreement, but name-calling like "scanc" and "killer," should not be permitted in a civil discussion, and this conduct repels others from joining in this important discussion. And it certainly discourages others who are post-abortive, who might otherwise share the lessons they've learned.
I implore you moderate this forum, at least minimally, and prevent the rampant abusiveness that has been allowed, and which reflects poorly on the pro-life cause.

reply from: ChristianLott2

Attention fear-a-smear! Don't let the door hit you on the way out!

reply from: churchmouse

Carole the fact is that some birth control are abortifacients because they work by causing early term abortions. The IUD seems to prevent a fertilized egg a new human being from implanting in the uterine wall. The pill does not always stop ovulation, but sometimes prevents implantation of the growing embryo. And now we have the RU-486 pill that aborts a new fetus, a new baby.
So if you look at the scientific evidence and if you are a Christian, you cant seriously believe that birth control might not cause an abortion something God would find wrong.
Read what Randy Alcorn has to say about this.
http://www.jesus-passion.com/bcpill1.html#Medical_Journals_and_Textbooks_Medical_Journals_and_Textbooks_

As for jailing woman, abortionists etc.....how can we change our laws to protect the innocent and let the criminal go free? The doctor can do nothing unless he has a willing participant. Why should we make abortion illegal and not give some sort of punishment to the law breaker?
Or dont you think the unborn is a person? As a Christian you should, I think you know that. I dont think or consider those that abort actually victims unless they were forced.
Did someone force you to abort?

reply from: Faramir

That question is not relevant to this context concerning punishment, when and if abortion is illegal.
You can't assume she would have aborted if abortion had been illegal.
I've thought about the punishment issue, and it's above my paygrade, and yes I know who said that. I defer to the experts like Fr. Pavone of Priests for Life, who has my respect as a champion of the unborn, who does not want the women to be punished.

reply from: lycan

Carole the fact is that some birth control are abortifacients because they work by causing early term abortions. The IUD seems to prevent a fertilized egg a new human being from implanting in the uterine wall. The pill does not always stop ovulation, but sometimes prevents implantation of the growing embryo. And now we have the RU-486 pill that aborts a new fetus, a new baby.
So if you look at the scientific evidence and if you are a Christian, you cant seriously believe that birth control might not cause an abortion something God would find wrong.
Read what Randy Alcorn has to say about this.
http://www.jesus-passion.com/bcpill1.html#Medical_Journals_and_Textbooks_Medical_Journals_and_Textbooks_
">http://www.jesus-passion.com/b..._and_Textbooks_
This is a vicious thread that needs to be shut down. As I've said earlier, if you wish to discuss whether contraceptives are abortifacient there are other places on the board where this can be discussed.

reply from: nancyu

You admit the baby is a person. Yet you think applying the law to that baby as a person is.. 'sloppy'.
Here you go folks. The hypocrite killer in all her bloody glory..
I'm quite sure that she has NEVER used the word "person" to describe an unborn child.

This is how she makes herself appear to be pro life when she is anything but. She would twist herself in a knot before she would use the two terms ("unborn child" and "person") in the same sentence.

reply from: yoda

Ah, but YOU are going to assure us that they are NOT the "same as" born children, right?

reply from: yoda

Wait..... if both babies AND women are "victims" of abortion, then who is the perpetrator when a woman self-aborts?
The pharmacist? The mayor? Who?

reply from: yoda

Don't let the door hit you in the butt on the way out, weenie.

reply from: yoda

Wow... yet another moderator speaks!

reply from: faithman

That question is not relevant to this context concerning punishment, when and if abortion is illegal.
You can't assume she would have aborted if abortion had been illegal.
I've thought about the punishment issue, and it's above my paygrade, and yes I know who said that. I defer to the experts like Fr. Pavone of Priests for Life, who has my respect as a champion of the unborn, who does not want the women to be punished.
Pavone is a sell out punk, and a pro-life trator.

reply from: yoda

There's always room for another Barack, weenie......

reply from: faithman

There's always room for another Barack, weenie......
I would say we have a whole package of um here. The question is beef or chicken? Inwould say as foul as they are, chicken. [birds of a feather and all]

reply from: yoda

And don't forget.... it's above some "prolifers" paygrade to say if letting a baby live is "best"....

reply from: faithman

I guess they got caught in the latest lay offs at planned parenthood. Killing babies don't pay as good as it once did. But the criminal elect will bail them out.

reply from: yoda

Yeah, I wonder why Barack and Nancy dropped the abortion mill bailout in their new bailout bill?
Do you suppose they had a "soft moment"? Naaaaahhhhhhh.,.........

reply from: faithman

Because they got caught?

reply from: churchmouse

Well if he thinks no punishment is necessary for anyone then IMO he is wrong, I dont care if he is a priest or not. He is fallible and sinful as well.
And if you sin, you pay one way or another.
That is scriptural. Sin is sin and it separates us from God.
No one sins without some sort of punishment.
Should the priests and pastors that molested youngsters all over the world get away with it?
lycan get a grip.....I did not say anything hurtful. What I did was to state fact.
I answered anothers persons post.....caroles post.
nancy....do you think an unbeliever can lead people to Christ?

reply from: faithman

Well if he thinks no punishment is necessary for anyone then IMO he is wrong, I dont care if he is a priest or not. He is fallible and sinful as well.
And if you sin, you pay one way or another.
That is scriptural. Sin is sin and it separates us from God.
No one sins without some sort of punishment.
Should the priests and pastors that molested youngsters all over the world get away with it?
lycan get a grip.....I did not say anything hurtful. What I did was to state fact.
I answered anothers persons post.....caroles post.
nancy....do you think an unbeliever can lead people to Christ?
Yes, an unbeliever can lead someone to Christ. It is the word that does the work, not the one who uses it. Philippians 1:14-18

reply from: ChristianLott2

From day one fear-a-smear has been defending cm. He talks about nothing else. I guess that's why cm has become the pro abort mascot instead of the ignored.
fear-a-smear is more pro abortion than all the other faux lifers besides cm, his idol.

reply from: Faramir

The owner of this website does not want punishment either. Have you read what he said about it?
What do other pro-life leaders say?
Of course we all pay for our sins in one way or another. Are you saying the law should be employed to do that?

reply from: yoda

Of course not. We should just talk sternly to serial killers, rapists, child molesters, and armed robbers. None of them should be punished by the law, that would be cruel!! We must show them LOVE AND UNDERSTANDING!!
But of course, killing babies isn't even as bad as those things, to you, right?

reply from: ChristianLott2

No, that's why he spends all his time on here defending his favorite murderer, cm.
It surprises me how much time he spends on this forum and he doesn't even believe abortion is murder. Why waste your time talking about something multiple times a day, every day when it's just 'no big deal'?

reply from: faithman

The owner of this website does not want punishment either. Have you read what he said about it?
What do other pro-life leaders say?
Of course we all pay for our sins in one way or another. Are you saying the law should be employed to do that?
If you had actually talked to him personally, which I have, he has said that from a pragmatic point of view, not what is just. Men have a natural soft spot for the weaker sex. It is natural for men to want to protect women. But the law should be just. And in order for the law to be just, it must be blind to gender as well. If a womb child is a person, then the same laws that govern the killers of born persons should also govern the killers of pre-born persons, without special consideration as to gender. That is only just.

reply from: ChristianLott2

If you had actually talked to him personally, which I have, he has said that from a pragmatic point of view, not what is just. Men have a natural soft spot for the weaker sex. It is natural for men to want to protect women. But the law should be just. And in order for the law to be just, it must be blind to gender as well. If a womb child is a person, then the same laws that govern the killers of born persons should also govern the killers of pre-born persons, without special consideration as to gender. That is only just.
I find it very hard to believe MC would be against Personhood. Is fearasmear lying AGAIN?

reply from: faithman

If you had actually talked to him personally, which I have, he has said that from a pragmatic point of view, not what is just. Men have a natural soft spot for the weaker sex. It is natural for men to want to protect women. But the law should be just. And in order for the law to be just, it must be blind to gender as well. If a womb child is a person, then the same laws that govern the killers of born persons should also govern the killers of pre-born persons, without special consideration as to gender. That is only just.
I find it very hard to believe MC would be against Personhood. Is fearasmear lying AGAIN?
MC is actually one of the biggest supporters of IAAP. He actually started this forum for efforts such as this. IAAP owes much to MC for making our effort what it is.

reply from: faithman

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3uMjpHnxswk

reply from: Faramir

If you had actually talked to him personally, which I have, he has said that from a pragmatic point of view, not what is just. Men have a natural soft spot for the weaker sex. It is natural for men to want to protect women. But the law should be just. And in order for the law to be just, it must be blind to gender as well. If a womb child is a person, then the same laws that govern the killers of born persons should also govern the killers of pre-born persons, without special consideration as to gender. That is only just.
I find it very hard to believe MC would be against Personhood. Is fearasmear lying AGAIN?
I said he opposes punishment of women who abort.
Do you deny he said that?

reply from: faithman

Attention Mark Crutcher. The phonies on this forum are a bunch of cry baby wooses that want you to join their ranks and censor real pro-life speach. It would be a tragedy to supress the truth as other casper milk toast "pro-life" forums have done. Please do not give in to the faux-lifers and bortheads. We have let them smear their fecal matter over this issue for 36 years. ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!!!!!

reply from: ChristianLott2

Why don't you give us a quote and a link.

reply from: Faramir

Why don't you give us a quote and a link.
Nevermind.
I have no respect for him as an authority.
He apparently is in the "killermarie" and "scanc" club.

reply from: scopia19822

"Nevermind.
I have no respect for him as an authority.
He apparently is in the "killermarie" and "scanc" club."
His reaction to your concearns is sad. Now some of us are going to have to think about whether or not we belong here or not. However I think for us to leave will give the heman woman haters club the upper hand and Im not about to do that.

reply from: Faramir

I think you should stay.
Don't let the bullies dominate.
But as far as Life Dynamics is concerned, this forum reflects badly on it, and since he refuses to stop the abuse and degradation of the post-abortive, he is showing tacit approval it.
A credible pro-life oganization would not stand for that nonsense.

reply from: ChristianLott2

Like your faux lifers club?
you should go make a site. and quit all your 'whining'.

reply from: churchmouse

And you are right.....so could someone who you say is a faux lifer influence someone else from getting an abortion?
Faramir what has Crutcher said about punishment? Could you give me a link please.
ChristianLott you are the most pathetic person on here? You are mean- spirited, conniving and hateful. You are so immature its not funny.
You say NOTHING OF SUBSTANCE.....because all you like to do is attack people and hate.
A Christian YOU ARE NOT. I pray anyone who sees your name does not assume that you stand on the Word. You stand for the opposite, and you do NOT STAND ALONE. I have been praying for you daily that some how your heart would soften......but some hearts are dead.
Are you referring to scripture here?.......What about the ones where we are commanded by Christ Himself to love and to talk with kindness even towards our enemies. What about those? Do you follow them or just toss them out with the bathwater?
What you say might be true.......but the way you do it is ungodly. For the life of me I can't understand why you dont see this. you are intelligent, you have knowledge about this topic and you stoop to the levels of ChristianLott. Your better than that.
You know......what grade are you in, seriously? Are you in junior high or high school? You talk about clubs........YOU HAVE A LIST and you bully people. How juvenile is that? Do you also keep a diary? LMAO

reply from: Faramir

I tried to search for it, but couldn't find it.
It was a few months ago and I remember clearly he was in agreement with Fr. Pavone about not wanting punishment for the women.
I don't think anyone here would dispute that.
But so long as he allows and excuses post-abortive women to be horribly degraded on his forum, I don't care to use him as an authority, and his opinions are not worthy of my respect.

reply from: ChristianLott2

I do hate and I do attack.
You hate me and are attacking me, but you're a hypocrite and a liar and refuse to admit it.
dead for the pro aborts you defend.
You know......what grade are you in, seriously? Are you in junior high or high school? You talk about clubs........YOU HAVE A LIST and you bully people. How juvenile is that? Do you also keep a diary? LMAO
Yes, I'm keeping an account. Since when is keeping track of things immature? Should we all be slobs like you?

reply from: yoda

Are you speaking to him out of love? Are you showing him your gentle side?

reply from: churchmouse

Oh no on the contrary you are in my prayers every night. I feel sorry for you that one could be so lost. I pray God changes your heart because I think you are in a lot of pain. Your anger proves that.
Of course you do......its your mentality to do so. You have nothing to add to anything.
I am being brutally honest. I do not think that I have said anything that bad. I feel bad for spinwiddy.
Pathetic............
"Arousing or capable of arousing sympathetic sadness and compassion: Arousing or capable of arousing scornful pity."
The words describe her actions. She acts hateful, she is mean-spirited and I will admit that.

reply from: ChristianLott2

Oh no on the contrary you are in my prayers every night. I feel sorry for you that one could be so lost. I pray God changes your heart because I think you are in a lot of pain. Your anger proves that.
You need to stop praying to your devil about me. You will not like the results, I assure you.
Of course you do......its your mentality to do so. You have nothing to add to anything.
You can't read or keep up with the stuff happenening on this board, you just feel like singling me out for an attack. You will remain on the faux lifer list.
Just about as bad as anything I've ever said and it's all been brutally honest assessments. You need to get off your high horse and stop defending pro aborts like cm and being a liar hypocrite by attacking me.

reply from: yoda

And yet, when others say what they consider to be "brutal honesty", they get attacked, and told they are supposed to speak from "Christian love" and never say anything derogatory.
Why is it okay for YOU to be "brutally honest" but not for others?

reply from: faithman

And yet, when others say what they consider to be "brutal honesty", they get attacked, and told they are supposed to speak from "Christian love" and never say anything derogatory.
Why is it okay for YOU to be "brutally honest" but not for others?
Kettles and pots anyone?

reply from: yoda

Strange, isn' it? After being told how wrong it is to call anyone a "scanc" for months now, we see the cheif "big girl panty wadder" using that word in a thread title.....
And others who constantly whine about how mean we are to a particular poster making strong personal attacks on others. I mean, why is it okay for them but not for us? Is it because we don't have a "big girl panty wadder" on our side?

reply from: micah

Don't you just love how nice and lovingly Christians treat each other?

reply from: sk1bianca

i don't think this debate is going anywhere.

reply from: faithman

I am glad we don't. Bunched bloomers are mighty uncomfortable. [unless you are into that sort of thing like faramir seems to be]

reply from: churchmouse

You have no control over that unfortunatly for you. Sorry.
I pray God softens your heart. It must be hard living like you do with so much hate bottled up inside.
You can not compare the things I say to make a point with the hate words and terms shown on here by the stone throwing group. I have never called anyone such a name as scanc. That word is simply uncalled for and you know it.
You can be brutally honest without namecalling or cant you yoda? Or are you afraid to stand up to those that do it because you are afraid of caving in?
The sad thing is that the majority of people here attempting to debate the issue of abortion believe that there should be two sides. They have lists and if you arent on one you are on the other. And the two groups are at war totally losing site of why they should be here.
No one should take the abuse carole has had to take. I dont care what her position is.....no one should treat her that way. I have been in arguments, I have dissagreed with her, I still do on some issues.....but never did I call her a name. What gets me are the ones treating her the poorest.....believe they are acting in a Godly way. Their actions are nothing like what Christ would condone. I question their faith.
I am gonna call you on it yoda.......where have I ever used a word that even compares to "scanc".
You know honestly if I were carole I would be afraid of your group yoda. Because you guys are borderline violent with her. You are way over the line of decency.
I can only imagine what you might do if you came face to face with her. I pray that never happens.

reply from: scopia19822

"I can only imagine what you might do if you came face to face with her. I pray that never happens."
I cringe at that very thought... I hate to see what they would do to her or any one else who speaks out against the treatment she has recieved.

reply from: faithman

Scanc is not a cuss word. It is a discription of women with low morales. What should we call a woman who flaunts her evil deeds as a position to give her voice more wieght? what should we call a woman who tells other women that provocative clothing is wonderful, even when the scripture speaks specificly against it? What do you call a woman that has promised to fight the foundation of pro-life [personhood] simply because it would mean criminal killer scancs would meet the justice nessisary to protect the innocent? I would say scanc is pretty tame. Simply show us where this word comes anywhere near the cuss word you are trying to make it. It is simply the discription of a low moral degenerate, of which CM is a perfect example.

reply from: ChristianLott2

You have no control over that unfortunatly for you. Sorry.
ok, well I'll go pray to my devil about you. you have no control over that either.
I pray God softens your heart. It must be hard living like you do with so much hate bottled up inside.
You must be the most pathetic person I've ever seen. I say that with all honesty and no amount of hate whatsoever.
You can not compare the things I say to make a point with the hate words and terms shown on here by the stone throwing group. I have never called anyone such a name as scanc. That word is simply uncalled for and you know it.
I've never used the word scac, but it seems you fear this word more than the title of murderer. Wow, I'd much rather be a scanc than a murderer, but I guess you have your priorities..
because yoda is so weak, right? and you say this with such honesty and no amount of malice at all.. uh hu..
There absolutely NEEDS to be two sides. It's amazing you refuse to separate the good from evil and wish to be called a christian.
No one should abuse the womb child as killer has done. They're just words, it's not like we're attacking her with forceps and a canula as she advocates doing to young women's babies and has done to three of her own!
Oh, now it's just one word. You use plenty of derogatory terms and you brow beat anyone who disagrees with you, miss high and mighty.
oh, it's yoda's group now. let me ask you something - when have you ever heard any one except fman use the word scanc? why don't you stop attacking people for no reason? go attack fman if you've got a problem with what he says. attack me for exactly what I say - and attack yv for something he has said, or nancy.
then to insinuate we'd actually do some physical harm to the killer is inciteful and scandalous. you should be booted for such veiled threats and innuendo!
How pathetic you are.

reply from: scopia19822

"You must be the most pathetic person I've ever seen. I say that with all honesty and no amount of hate whatsoever. "
Actually its the other way around.
"then to insinuate we'd actually do some physical harm to the killer is inciteful and scandalous. you should be booted for such veiled threats and innuendo!"
I dont know about Yoda or even Fman, but you IMHO are most certainly capable of violence if your posts are a good indication of what you are like in real life. If your ex had chosen to carry your twins to term if your state of mind is like it is now, the only visitation a judge would grant you is supervised if that. You are a danger to yourself and others.

reply from: faithman

AAAAAAAAAH there's that broad brush again........ Warning: phony wet paint zone.

reply from: ChristianLott2

It doesn't bother me. She's the one who thinks all sins are equal. A murder is equal to a lie or saying a cuss word or talking back to your parents. They do this to mask their own guilt and place it on everyone else who refuses to walk the insanely fine line they've set out for others to trip over.
It takes a lot of gall but that's what happens when you refuse to repent and still defend evil in your heart.

reply from: faithman

2Cr 7:10 For godly sorrow worketh repentance to salvation not to be repented of: but the sorrow of the world worketh death.
2Cr 7:11 For behold this selfsame thing, that ye sorrowed after a godly sort, what carefulness it wrought in you, yea, [what] clearing of yourselves, yea, [what] indignation, yea, [what] fear, yea, [what] vehement desire, yea, [what] zeal, yea, [what] revenge! In all [things] ye have approved yourselves to be clear in this matter.

reply from: scopia19822

"It doesn't bother me. She's the one who thinks all sins are equal. A murder is equal to a lie or saying a cuss word or talking back to your parents. They do this to mask their own guilt and place it on everyone else who refuses to walk the insanely fine line they've set out for others to trip over. "
You have no comprehension of what sin is or the consequneces of them are in Gods eyes CL2. A person who murders, commits adultery, slanders, steals and covets unless they confess and repent of their sins are all in danger of the same fate in Gods eyes and thats hellfire. A cuss word can be a venial sin, unless its profaning Gods name or taking it in vain where it becomes a mortal sin. If I say to a lady that a dress looks good on her when it really doenst to spare her feelings is a venial sin, not one of endangering my immortal soul, but not a good thing to do. However if I do what you and your cowardly buddies have been doing to carole, than thats slander, bearing false witness and that is a mortal sin and unless you repent you are in danger of hellfire. You have spread lies and falsehoods about a person, that in Gods eyes is equal to murder. It may not be the same gravity in the secular courts, but in the eyes of God its just as henious and the penalty is exactly the same.

reply from: faithman

You not only side with moral degenerates [scancs in short hand], but you show just how ignorant you are of God's word. We have slandered no one. We have not born false witness against the moral degenerate [scanc in short hand]. She has said what she has said. And the scripture says to come out from among them. So why do you insist upon defending the killer scanc camp [moral degenerate in long hand]?

reply from: faithman

May haps birds of a feather? quack quack woddle woddle......

reply from: yoda

Irrelevant. You said some pretty nasty things, things that could hurt someone's feelings just as bad as "scanc"... which is kind of a joke by now. Even Weenie uses that word, don't you know?
I fear no man OR woman. And I despise hypocrisy.
You can thank Lib for that, she started the whole list thing.
I have no opinion on how a committed Christian should "treat" someone whom s/he thinks is a phony Christian and a fake prolifer. People who are passionate about their religion tend to have very strong opinions, and I find no fault with that. You'll have to take that up with them, and if you continue to insult them, you're simply being a hypocrite.
In the post I replied to. "scanc" is just a word, it's no worse than what you said.
What the hell is "borderline violent"? Is that like when scopia threatens to trash my camera and me with it, and threatens to sue me, and then implies that she's going to shut down this forum? Is that what you're talking about? You really ought to consider your words more carefully, you're sounding like farismear now, whining about things that don't exist.
Of course you can..... you're making up plenty of stuff as you go here, why not fabricate some more crap to throw at me?
You make me sick.

reply from: yoda

Yeah, I'm still cringing at the thought of you attacking me and my camera, suing me, and shutting down this forum. Cringe my ass......

reply from: yoda

It must be okay, would Weenie use a word that wasn't okay?

reply from: yoda

No, that would be too logical and fair, CL. She's still bitter at me for saying that all women know what they abort...

reply from: Banned Member

I believe that Spinwiddy is pro-abortion.

reply from: yoda

Careful, someone will start calling you a "hater" and demand that you be censored.....

reply from: faithman

NNNNNNNNNNOOOOOOOOOO!!!! REALLY? What would make anyone think that? what a judgmental hatful statment.

reply from: ChristianLott2

Of course you can..... you're making up plenty of stuff as you go here, why not fabricate some more crap to throw at me?
You make me sick.
I think you should add her to your faux lifer list. Just a thought.

reply from: yoda

I thought about that, but I haven't seen any statements of a true proabort nature in her name. Stupid maybe, but not pure proabort.

reply from: churchmouse

I agree scopia.......could you please private message me, I have something to share.
Thanks.
Only people who have no class whose heart is hardened would use a word like that to descibe anyone. Would you call her that if Christ was standing there?
Say, what did Christ call the adultress who was about to be stoned to death?
Ifs funny faithman that you never defend yourself with the Word.
You have never addressed the scriptures I have given. Are you a Christian?
You act ungodly there is no other way to put it.
Your not worth answering.
I will say this.....I stand by my statement.....that who knows what you guys would do. I believe you hate post abortive women so much that if push came to shove, who knows what would happen.
And I do NOT include Yoda in the dangerous group.
scopia I just luv ya for this one sister......
Show me in the bible where it lists sins in order of severity. I suppose your sins are at the bottom of that list. LOL
And what do you know about the Word, you are not a Christian.
Why dont you comment on the scriptures that I give for once. Take the one on loving your enemy. Do you do that? The only thing that should come out......is false prophets.
And if the shoe fits wear it proudly.
You pick and choose what you think is important in the Bible. You love the hate, fire and brimstone parts and you dont grasp the gospel message at all. Christ made a few commandments you are NOT DOING.
"As I have loved you, so you must love one another' (John 13:34).
"But I tell you who hear me: Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you" (Luke 6:27-28).
"Do not repay evil with evil or insult with insult, but with blessing, because to this you were called so that you may inherit a blessing"(1 Peter 3:9).
Using the scanc word is insulting and evil on your part. No blessings will come your way by using it. You are not one of Gods disciples if you hate.
"Anyone who claims to be in the light but hates his brother is still in the darkness. Whoever loves his brother lives in the light, and there is nothing in him to make him stumble (1 John 2:9-10)."
Do you love Carole? Do you love me?
I think your actions are terribly wrong but I love you and I pray that God softens your heart towards those you see as unforgiveable.
God can transform your heart Faithman its never to late. Give all the hostile feelings you have to Him.....He will set you free. Then the work you do will be blessed.
I Pray for your needs and I pray that God will help you forgive those you hate.

reply from: ChristianLott2

What a miserable person you are, mouse.

reply from: scopia19822

"seek help"
You are the one that needs to seek help, dont you have any family that cares about you and your welfare?

reply from: carolemarie

I am not a "moral degenerate"! That is one of the more silly statements I have heard from you! I am a born-again, bible believing, conservative evangelical Christian! I am a born again, spirit filled daughter of God. And I dress like any fashion conscience woman....I like all the girl stuff, shoes, makeup, bling....sounds like a normal woman to me....and there is nothing in scripture that says i can't enjoy clothes and shoes!

reply from: churchmouse

I am not a moral degenerate either. I am a Christian who stands on the bible as the authoritive word of God. It is Godbreathed and perfect without error. It is from the Bible that I make all my life decisions.
I too like to dress fashionable and wear pretty clothes. I dress my age but dont wear dresses down to my ankles....ABOVE THE KNEES CAN YOU IMAGINE. I am a dancer so I love to dance. I ballet, I tap and I jazz, love latin, ballroom. I wear makeup and I get my hair done once a month. I love girly things......BUT I ALWAYS GIVE GOD GLORY, whether I am talking to the girl who does my hair, the checkout guy at the grocery store.....my kids friends, my husbands associates. GOD COMES FIRST and everyone knows it.
Hey carole I love shoes too. I live in Arizona and I own over 30 pairs of flip flops. LOL My family just signs when I come home with another pair. LOL
I love Old Navy ones, they are only 2.99 a pair.

reply from: carolemarie

I am not a moral degenerate either. I am a Christian who stands on the bible as the authoritive word of God. It is Godbreathed and perfect without error. It is from the Bible that I make all my life decisions.
I too like to dress fashionable and wear pretty clothes. I dress my age but dont wear dresses down to my ankles....ABOVE THE KNEES CAN YOU IMAGINE. I am a dancer so I love to dance. I ballet, I tap and I jazz, love latin, ballroom. I wear makeup and I get my hair done once a month. I love girly things......BUT I ALWAYS GIVE GOD GLORY, whether I am talking to the girl who does my hair, the checkout guy at the grocery store.....my kids friends, my husbands associates. GOD COMES FIRST and everyone knows it.
Hey carole I love shoes too. I live in Arizona and I own over 30 pairs of flip flops. LOL My family just signs when I come home with another pair. LOL
I love Old Navy ones, they are only 2.99 a pair.
Sounds perfectly normal to me! I bet most the women who post here have more than 20 pairs of shoes.....
Above the knees????? In 2009???? What are you thinking!!!! LOL

reply from: Faramir

I don't know.
How about "Madonna"?
Did I guess right?

reply from: faithman

I am not a "moral degenerate"! That is one of the more silly statements I have heard from you! I am a born-again, bible believing, conservative evangelical Christian! I am a born again, spirit filled daughter of God. And I dress like any fashion conscience woman....I like all the girl stuff, shoes, makeup, bling....sounds like a normal woman to me....and there is nothing in scripture that says i can't enjoy clothes and shoes!
Can't read? Or did you tear those pages out? And if you are all those things you claim, when are you going to start acting like it? But NNNNNOOOOO. You exalt your child killing and future child killers. So your not suposed to dress modestly? You are the poster child for moral degeneracy on this forum. I don't care how much "christian wool" you try to hide under, you are a womb child killer in both word and deed. You are the deadly enemy of the Pre-born, and no pro-life voice at all.

reply from: churchmouse

No carole way above the knee.
I even wear a swimsuit to the beach can you imagine that?
If these people saw what I wear when I go latin dancing. LOL
I DRESS MODESTLY.

reply from: yoda

What, no leather micro-skirt, fish net blouse or knee high patent leather boots?

reply from: churchmouse

Dont like leather, except on sofas.....wore fishnets stockings in the seventies ......never heard of a fishnet blouse?
And believe it or not I hate boots, unless of course I am snow skiing.
I wear my skirts no more than three fingers above my knee.

reply from: scopia19822

"I am not a "moral degenerate"! That is one of the more silly statements I have heard from you! I am a born-again, bible believing, conservative evangelical Christian! I am a born again, spirit filled daughter of God. And I dress like any fashion conscience woman....I like all the girl stuff, shoes, makeup, bling....sounds like a normal woman to me....and there is nothing in scripture that says i can't enjoy clothes and shoes!"
Well I dont wear shorts, low cut tops, or low rise tight jeans/pants. I mostly wear nice jeans and modest tops, yet they are trendy for the most part, some not so but practical. If I wear skirts/dresses which is mostly in the summer because its keeps me from over heating then they are ankle length, I love my denim skirts but its a matter of personal comfort/preferance. I also sometimes will cover my head with a scarf when I go out of the house, as I want to be in obediance to 1 Corinthians 11:4-7 where a woman is advised to cover her hair. I do wear some make up, just eyeliner/mascara and will wear a pair of earrings and my wedding set. I just dont like alot of jewelry or make up. A little goes along way. One can be trendy/fashionable and yet modest. But we must also remember that we are not to be ostentacious with our attire.

reply from: faithman

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

reply from: carolemarie

I am for a ban on performing abortions. Ends the problem. Punishes the right person, (those who profit of exploiting women)

reply from: ChristianLott2

except in the case of rape and incest, where rape includes all girls under the age of 18 who can't consent to sex legally and are therefore always 'raped' and who's parents will make the decision for her, hence FORCED.
RIGHT?
you just left all that out didn't you liar?

reply from: carolemarie

???Your spin on my post doesn't make it true.
I support an exceptions for rape incest and life of the mother. That would end 98 percent of abortions....holding out for a total ban just means babies die...
And I advocate counseling for the girl and her family, I think that would avoid abortion, but I recognize that the girl counts too. Forcing her to abort or forcing her to have a baby are both horrendous situtations for a child.
I never said that all minors are raped. I never said that the parents got to make her have a baby or get an abortion, but realistically, they will make that choice. An 11 year old can't move out and support a baby, you can't force the parents to raise that child and you can't force the girl to give away her baby! I can't help it that you refuse to think the situtation through....if the parents are in counseling as well, they will be required to listen to her
I am prolife, and I care about the mother AND the child, not just the child.

reply from: nancyu

Ain't if funny how cm almost says what she means.
What she says:
What she means:

reply from: churchmouse

Scopia you do dress modestly.
I do not wear low cut tops that show clevage. I wear low rise jeans but my tops cover my stomach. They just feel better to wear. Mine are not tight either but they are not baggy. I love dresses especially in the summer and of course I wear flip flops all year long.....I cant stand to have my feet all covered up. I only wear tennis shoes when I work out and they drive me nuts.
But I do have some dresses that I dance in that you would probably think were not modest enough. They are not as skimpy as the ones that they wear on Dancing with the Stars but they are more revealing than my summer sun dresses lets put it that way. They still are tasteful. I cant dance in a tent.
I wear makeup but not much....love necklaces and rings but hate ear rings and dont wear them at all. Occasionally I wear a watch.
I live in Gap body black stretch pants and t-shirts with flip flops......thats what i love to wear.
I LOVE THESE PANTS.........THEY DONT WRINKLE OR SHRINK AND THEY ARE SO COMFORTABLE !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! The stretch cotton capri is my favorite I have at least a dozen pairs. They are cheap and they last forever.
And no I dont work for Gap. LOL
http://www.gap.com/browse/category.do?cid=17045

Girls we need a thread to share fashion tips and secrets. LOL
AND NANCY YOU ARE NOT BEING FAIR.

reply from: scopia19822

"But I do have some dresses that I dance in that you would probably think were not modest enough. They are not as skimpy as the ones that they wear on Dancing with the Stars but they are more revealing than my summer sun dresses lets put it that way. They still are tasteful. I cant dance in a tent."
Its not like your only wearing 2 hankercheifs and a loincloth that these kids love to strut around the mall in. Its not up to be to judge anybodys attire. Although I have been guilty of it when I see very immodest almost naked people walking around.

reply from: 4given

*tip* Do not bring your son into Abercrombie Kids.. Several years ago I went with a friend to the A&F Kids store. She pointed out the "brazillian cut bikinis".. Thongs for kids? I have several garments from A&F.. as do my sons. *Internet shopping*

reply from: scopia19822

"Do not bring your son into Abercrombie Kids.. Several years ago I went with a friend to the A&F Kids store. She pointed out the "brazillian cut bikinis".. Thongs for kids? I have several garments from A&F.. as do my sons. *Internet shopping*"
Just about all of my sons cloths are handme down or from 2nd hand stores. I buy things like Gap, Tommy hilfiger, and other name brands for next to nothing. Some are new with the tag still on them. Its just he grows so fast that to spend all of that money on brandnew stuff is senseless IMO.

reply from: faithman

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

reply from: ChristianLott2

liar. you want a dead baby and it's dead babies you get.

reply from: faithman

http://i81.photobucket.com/albums/j214/yodavater/IamaPerson2.jpg
liar. you want a dead baby and it's dead babies you get.

reply from: yoda

Really?
Not allowing your child to kill your grandchild is a "horrendous situation"?
REALLY????
I think I'll start a poll and see how many agree with you on that.

reply from: SRUW4I5

Really?
Not allowing your child to kill your grandchild is a "horrendous situation"?
The sickos that think no child should have the right to be born would probably agree that it's a "horrendous situation" if someone tries to let someone be born.

reply from: yoda

Yes, and at least one poster who claims to be prolife says so too.
We haven't heard from Weenie yet, I think s/he's ashamed to speak up on this issue.

reply from: SRUW4I5

Yes, and at least one poster who claims to be prolife says so too.
We haven't heard from Weenie yet, I think s/he's ashamed to speak up on this issue.
How can you be Pro-Life and want to stop someone from letting someone be born?
Those two things sound like they'd be opposites.

reply from: yoda

NOW, you're starting to ask the right questions.
Now if only the right posters will step up to the plate and answer them.......

reply from: churchmouse

WEll I agree. What I hate are tatoos and piercings. I do not get it.

reply from: SRUW4I5

WEll I agree. What I hate are tatoos and piercings. I do not get it.
Mind if I ask why you hate them or don't get about them? My boyfriend has his sons name and birthday tattoed on his arm. It's kinda cool.

reply from: faithman

NOW, you're starting to ask the right questions.
Now if only the right posters will step up to the plate and answer them.......
http://i81.photobucket.com/albums/j214/yodavater/IamaPerson2.jpg

reply from: yoda

WHERE ARE YOU NOW, WEENIE??????
WHERE ARE YOU NOW, WEENIE??????
WHERE ARE YOU NOW, WEENIE??????
WHERE ARE YOU NOW, WEENIE??????

reply from: micah

How old are you?

reply from: yoda

Old enough to know posts from a proabort like you when I read them.

reply from: ChristianLott2

NOW, you're starting to ask the right questions.
Now if only the right posters will step up to the plate and answer them.......
It's blatantly obvious cm is a pro abort.
Why do so many 'pro lifers' defend her?
Why do you defend the pro aborts faramir?

reply from: nancyu

No.
carolemarie is not prolife.

reply from: churchmouse

Well maybe its my age......I just dont know.
My daughter is in her friends wedding so we had to go to this bridal salon to try on the dress. This beautiful girl came out in a gorgeous gown. The beading was beautiful, long train very traditional. Then she turned around. It plunged down the back to her waist. She was tattoed from the neck to the waist. Skulls and flying birds and lightening bolts........all over her back. I couldnt believe my eyes.
This gorgeous girl in a white gown.......with skulls down her back.
I do not get it. I heard her tell her grandmother that she loved it because it showed off her back.
I don't know its personal taste.....I just do not like tatoos and that goes for pretty little butterflies as well. I mean I don't look at someone differently.....because they have one, I just dont like them.
But I dont like neon colored hair either. This kid at work came in with a rod that was pierced from the top of his ear down and thru the lobe. I told him......take it out and keep his job.....or leave it in and lose his job.
He took it out.
You talk about us like we are aliens. LOL
I do not agree with many positions that CArole believes in. I believe however that she has asked Gods forgiveness and that she has been forgiven. I believe she is a Christian because she displays it here on this board.
I do not agree with the name in only Christians that are treating her like they are. They are ungodly.
nancy,
And you are not a Christian, so there.

reply from: ChristianLott2

And you are not a Christian, so there.
I'd rather be truly pro life than a pro abort defender like you, however 'un-christian' it makes me appear in your eyes.

reply from: faithman

And you are not a Christian, so there.
I'd rather be truly pro life than a pro abort defender like you, however 'un-christian' it makes me appear in your eyes.
http://www.armyofgod.com/Baby12.html

reply from: churchmouse

What is truly pro-life in your opinion?
That you spew hatred to other brothers and sisters in Christ?
That you are violent both in word and action?
That you dump your faith in order to be a true pro-lifer?
What is a true pro-life postion?
Is yoda truly a pro-life person. He thinks abortion is ok, if the mothers life is in danger.

reply from: yoda

Not wanting any babies to die.
You really enjoy lying, don't you? Still bitter that I don't believe your little "I didn't know it was a baby" routine, eh? Abortion is NEVER OK!
And an early delivery to save a life is NOT an abortion!

reply from: ChristianLott2

and she calls herself a 'christian'. what a liar.

reply from: faithman

And you are not a Christian, so there.
I'd rather be truly pro life than a pro abort defender like you, however 'un-christian' it makes me appear in your eyes.
http://www.armyofgod.com/Baby12.html

reply from: yoda

I'm like the little boy who was in Sunday School when the teacher asked "How many here want to go to Heaven?" All the kids except little Johnnie raised their hands. The teacher asked little Johnny why he didn't raise his hand, and he said "If all these people are going I don't want to go!"

reply from: ChristianLott2

I'm like the little boy who was in Sunday School when the teacher asked "How many here want to go to Heaven?" All the kids except little Johnnie raised their hands. The teacher asked little Johnny why he didn't raise his hand, and he said "If all these people are going I don't want to go!"
Yeah. Why would I want to spend the rest of eternity with murderers and people who defend murderers?
Do I really think a loving God would allow ass holes into heaven? No.

reply from: micah

Would a loving god allow even one abortion?

reply from: ChristianLott2

God gives us free will. You will pay for your sins, I will pay for mine.

reply from: springhilljack

PRAY HARD THAT HE WOULD...

reply from: ChristianLott2

PRAY HARD THAT HE WOULD...
cute

reply from: scopia19822

"God gives us free will. You will pay for your sins, I will pay for mine."
Remember that next time you persecute CM or anyone else.

reply from: ChristianLott2

Oh, I do. EVERY SINGLE TIME.
You are the one defending her deceptions.

reply from: faithman

Oh, I do. EVERY SINGLE TIME.
You are the one defending her deceptions.
There is a difference in percecution and confronting.. Cm is a baby killer pure and simple.

reply from: carolemarie

I am not a baby killer....you just hate me because I will not kiss your behind on this personhood bill. If I decided to love it, then I would be Miss prolife poster girl.
That is your sole problem. You need to grow up if you are going to deal in politics

reply from: faithman

Like you are the big grown up because you killed three ? By the by, you kill three babies, yepper, you are a baby killer.

reply from: carolemarie

No, I am no longer someone who deserves that title.

reply from: faithman

You deserve a lot more than the title. But the title will have to do.

reply from: carolemarie

I deserve to be treated fairly.

reply from: faithman

In that case you would be behind bars for murder.

reply from: carolemarie

No --abortion is legal and I chose to opt for a legal procedure. If it had been against the law I wouldn't have done it.

reply from: ChristianLott2

the pre born deserve to be treated fairly but can't seem to get a fair shake from a pro abort politico like you.
baby killer. compromiser.

reply from: SPRINGHEELJACK

In that case you would be behind bars for murder.
EXCEPT THAT ABORTION IS LEGAL YOU PONDSCUM SUCKING BLITHERING IDIOT WITH A SICKO NEED TO DEGRADE OTHERS BY EXPLOITING DECEASED BABIES.

reply from: churchmouse

Yoda you said that to save a mothers life you were for abortion. I did not lie.
What if it was in the first trimester and they had to induce......that is not killing?
It does not matter if its in the first or the last trimester........inducing early when you know there is NO CHANCE THAT THE BABY SURVIVES is still killing.
What dont you get? You said to save the mothers life was ok.
Lott I call you Lott because I can not bring myself to type Christian next to your name. No way.
Well you wouldnt but you just might. Are you born again? If you are not, then you will spend life in hell with the unsaved. Your mouth is filthy. Do you also talk like that when you go to church? Or do you live two different lives? LOL
He gives us free will. We are the ones that kill, He does not.
OH I WILL SECOND THAT ONE ALRIGHT. LOL
And there is a big difference in loving and hating. To bad you dont know the difference.

Should I?
Remember a few short weeks ago, we got along. You were so nice to me....etc etc etc. You never told me you thought I should go to prison or die for the abortion I had.
Are you now changing your tune? LOL

reply from: faithman

In that case you would be behind bars for murder.
EXCEPT THAT ABORTION IS LEGAL YOU PONDSCUM SUCKING BLITHERING IDIOT WITH A SICKO NEED TO DEGRADE OTHERS BY EXPLOITING DECEASED BABIES.
Once again twit, it is about trying to save the ones who haven't been killed. One way to protect the future, is restraining those who have a history of destroying it. Particularly those who have not truely repented from their evil ways, and pretend to be something they are not.

reply from: faithman

Yoda you said that to save a mothers life you were for abortion. I did not lie.
What if it was in the first trimester and they had to induce......that is not killing?
It does not matter if its in the first or the last trimester........inducing early when you know there is NO CHANCE THAT THE BABY SURVIVES is still killing.
What dont you get? You said to save the mothers life was ok.
Lott I call you Lott because I can not bring myself to type Christian next to your name. No way.
Well you wouldnt but you just might. Are you born again? If you are not, then you will spend life in hell with the unsaved. Your mouth is filthy. Do you also talk like that when you go to church? Or do you live two different lives? LOL
He gives us free will. We are the ones that kill, He does not.
OH I WILL SECOND THAT ONE ALRIGHT. LOL
And there is a big difference in loving and hating. To bad you dont know the difference.

Should I?
Remember a few short weeks ago, we got along. You were so nice to me....etc etc etc. You never told me you thought I should go to prison or die for the abortion I had.
Are you now changing your tune? LOL
Are you now trying to say that you did not deserve to be punished for doing the deed? You came here as a humble contrite voice. Not a blatant arrogant voice that flaunted past evil as a position that gives your voice more wieght. Mercy is not getting what we deserve, but it doesn't change the fact that we deserve to be punished. The first part of justice is conviction. You came convicted that abortion, and your part in it was evil. No excuses, not one justification. That is true repentance. Mercy then has a place to land. Mercy only over rides justice, when the guilty yields under the conviction of justice, broken and contrite. You either fall on the rock broken, or the rock falls on you and crushes to a powder. It is not an act of compassion to let the unrepentant continue in evil at the expence of the innocent. I truely hate my job of justice. But I must do it or mercy has no place to land. You came here as a truely contrite, and broken evil doer, under the conviction of justice. That is what gave you access to mercy, and that is what gave me the great joy of being able to extend kind words. But I must also do my duty. My loyalty in this issue belongs to those who bear the image of the pre-born Christ. It is an ugly and misunderstood business. But if you tag along behind long enough, you will see the peacable fruit of righteousness. Don't despize the work of justice, nor stand in the way of it, and be plowed asunder. Simply rejoice that mercy has given you safe harbor from it. It is the brutality of the law that drives us to the safty and mercy, of the grace and truth of the Lord Jesus Christ. The Lord resists the proud, and draws close to those who have yieded to the work of the law. The most compassionate thing I can do is my job. Even if that job is misunderstood.

reply from: carolemarie

Your so full of it! You don't know the first thing about mercy, and you want your pound of flesh....it matters nothing to you that I have said over and over that I regret my abortions and work to help other women make better choices, your issue is that I don't like your pet legislation.
My Savior has forgiven me and you , a so-called Christian is being hateful because you don't like grace. It offends you that there is no punishment for me...
that is why Jesus is called the rock of offense. You want your sins forgiven, but resent other people getting off the hook. Read the unmerciful servant parable..

reply from: faithman

If I were a killer, I would be more conserned about my own reading habits, insted of instructing others what theirs should be. You are an arrogant, boastful, and selfjustified murderer. It is you who makes a mockery of grace. "shall we continue in sin [baby killing excuses] that grace may abound? GOD FORBID!!! How can those who claim to be freed and forgiven continue there in?

reply from: carolemarie

You refuse to extend the same mercy to others that Christ showed to you.
My sins have been forgiven, there is no reason to throw them in my face!
You are certainly the poster boy for being arrogent.

reply from: faithman

If I were a killer, I would be more conserned about my own reading habits, insted of instructing others what theirs should be. You are an arrogant, boastful, and selfjustified murderer. It is you who makes a mockery of grace. "shall we continue in sin [baby killing excuses] that grace may abound? GOD FORBID!!! How can those who claim to be freed and forgiven continue there in?

reply from: yoda

No, I did not say that, and yes, you did lie.
An early delivery to save a life is NOT an abortion!

reply from: yoda

How many pounds did you get?

reply from: faithman

If I were a killer, I would be more conserned about my own reading habits, insted of instructing others what theirs should be. You are an arrogant, boastful, and selfjustified murderer. It is you who makes a mockery of grace. "shall we continue in sin [baby killing excuses] that grace may abound? GOD FORBID!!! How can those who claim to be freed and forgiven continue there in?

reply from: faithman

Yoda you said that to save a mothers life you were for abortion. I did not lie.
What if it was in the first trimester and they had to induce......that is not killing?
It does not matter if its in the first or the last trimester........inducing early when you know there is NO CHANCE THAT THE BABY SURVIVES is still killing.
What dont you get? You said to save the mothers life was ok.
Lott I call you Lott because I can not bring myself to type Christian next to your name. No way.
Well you wouldnt but you just might. Are you born again? If you are not, then you will spend life in hell with the unsaved. Your mouth is filthy. Do you also talk like that when you go to church? Or do you live two different lives? LOL
He gives us free will. We are the ones that kill, He does not.
OH I WILL SECOND THAT ONE ALRIGHT. LOL
And there is a big difference in loving and hating. To bad you dont know the difference.

Should I?
Remember a few short weeks ago, we got along. You were so nice to me....etc etc etc. You never told me you thought I should go to prison or die for the abortion I had.
Are you now changing your tune? LOL
Are you now trying to say that you did not deserve to be punished for doing the deed? You came here as a humble contrite voice. Not a blatant arrogant voice that flaunted past evil as a position that gives your voice more wieght. Mercy is not getting what we deserve, but it doesn't change the fact that we deserve to be punished. The first part of justice is conviction. You came convicted that abortion, and your part in it was evil. No excuses, not one justification. That is true repentance. Mercy then has a place to land. Mercy only over rides justice, when the guilty yields under the conviction of justice, broken and contrite. You either fall on the rock broken, or the rock falls on you and crushes to a powder. It is not an act of compassion to let the unrepentant continue in evil at the expence of the innocent. I truely hate my job of justice. But I must do it or mercy has no place to land. You came here as a truely contrite, and broken evil doer, under the conviction of justice. That is what gave you access to mercy, and that is what gave me the great joy of being able to extend kind words. But I must also do my duty. My loyalty in this issue belongs to those who bear the image of the pre-born Christ. It is an ugly and misunderstood business. But if you tag along behind long enough, you will see the peacable fruit of righteousness. Don't despize the work of justice, nor stand in the way of it, and be plowed asunder. Simply rejoice that mercy has given you safe harbor from it. It is the brutality of the law that drives us to the safty and mercy, of the grace and truth of the Lord Jesus Christ. The Lord resists the proud, and draws close to those who have yieded to the work of the law. The most compassionate thing I can do is my job. Even if that job is misunderstood.

reply from: faithman

Yoda you said that to save a mothers life you were for abortion. I did not lie.
What if it was in the first trimester and they had to induce......that is not killing?
It does not matter if its in the first or the last trimester........inducing early when you know there is NO CHANCE THAT THE BABY SURVIVES is still killing.
What dont you get? You said to save the mothers life was ok.
Lott I call you Lott because I can not bring myself to type Christian next to your name. No way.
Well you wouldnt but you just might. Are you born again? If you are not, then you will spend life in hell with the unsaved. Your mouth is filthy. Do you also talk like that when you go to church? Or do you live two different lives? LOL
He gives us free will. We are the ones that kill, He does not.
OH I WILL SECOND THAT ONE ALRIGHT. LOL
And there is a big difference in loving and hating. To bad you dont know the difference.

Should I?
Remember a few short weeks ago, we got along. You were so nice to me....etc etc etc. You never told me you thought I should go to prison or die for the abortion I had.
Are you now changing your tune? LOL
Are you now trying to say that you did not deserve to be punished for doing the deed? You came here as a humble contrite voice. Not a blatant arrogant voice that flaunted past evil as a position that gives your voice more wieght. Mercy is not getting what we deserve, but it doesn't change the fact that we deserve to be punished. The first part of justice is conviction. You came convicted that abortion, and your part in it was evil. No excuses, not one justification. That is true repentance. Mercy then has a place to land. Mercy only over rides justice, when the guilty yields under the conviction of justice, broken and contrite. You either fall on the rock broken, or the rock falls on you and crushes to a powder. It is not an act of compassion to let the unrepentant continue in evil at the expence of the innocent. I truely hate my job of justice. But I must do it or mercy has no place to land. You came here as a truely contrite, and broken evil doer, under the conviction of justice. That is what gave you access to mercy, and that is what gave me the great joy of being able to extend kind words. But I must also do my duty. My loyalty in this issue belongs to those who bear the image of the pre-born Christ. It is an ugly and misunderstood business. But if you tag along behind long enough, you will see the peacable fruit of righteousness. Don't despize the work of justice, nor stand in the way of it, and be plowed asunder. Simply rejoice that mercy has given you safe harbor from it. It is the brutality of the law that drives us to the safty and mercy, of the grace and truth of the Lord Jesus Christ. The Lord resists the proud, and draws close to those who have yieded to the work of the law. The most compassionate thing I can do is my job. Even if that job is misunderstood.

reply from: churchmouse

Christ said, "But I say to you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which spitefully use you, and persecute you".
Matthew 5:16 says, "Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven."
James 1:19: "Wherefore, my beloved brethren, let every man be swift to hear, slow to speak, slow to wrath:
20: For the wrath of man worketh not the righteousness of God.
21: Wherefore lay apart all filthiness and superfluity of naughtiness, and receive with meekness the engrafted word, which is able to save your souls.
22: But be ye doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving your own selves.
23: For if any be a hearer of the word, and not a doer, he is like unto a man beholding his natural face in a glass:
24: For he beholdeth himself, and goeth his way, and straightway forgetteth what manner
25: But whoso looketh into the perfect law of liberty, and continueth therein, he being not a forgetful hearer, but a doer of the work, this man shall be blessed in his deed."

reply from: Yuuki

No, I did not say that, and yes, you did lie.
An early delivery to save a life is NOT an abortion!
Okay, so here's where I'm meeting a wall of logic. Both of the cases below are to save the mother's life.
1. It is not okay to "abort" the pregnancy by tearing the child apart/partial birth/saline/etc through any process that kills it before delivery.
2. It's totally okay to "abort" the pregnancy by delivering the child alive, even if it is going to die anyway.
Remember the definition of abortion, and that miscarriage falls under it. Any premature delivery is technically aborting the pregnancy.
Why is #2 okay? I thought this was all about NOT killing babies? It's okay for them to die through lack of proper care but not okay for them to be torn apart? If you deliver a child that cannot survive outside of the womb, you are doing the equivalent of taking a terminally ill person off of the life support machines that are sustaining them. Would you ever consider that "okay"? Is this only okay because it's being done to save the mother's life?
Next, something that came to mind as I was typing this... an early term delivery (1st or early 2nd trimester) such as this would be induced via medicines, and the resulting birth would be a bloody mess, with the child almost too small to see in many cases. That is the definition of a Medical abortion, except it is done in the woman's own home with medications given to her at the clinic. Is a Medical abortion "better" than a surgical one because the child isn't torn apart in the process? It's technically an "early delivery"; it even uses the same exact hormones.
This post is not facetious, I'm really truly wondering.

reply from: churchmouse

BEcause you cant see it does not mean anything. Its still a life. The heart starts beating at around 20 days. So in that bloddy mess is a tiny tiny heart. An abortion is an abortion whether you can see it or not. So what you are saying is that abortion is ok if the baby is killed and comes out whole.
If you induce a pregnancy and the child has no hope of survival, you still are killing it. You are changing its enviroment from a safe one to a hostile one.

reply from: ChristianLott2

We're talking about saving the mother's life only. In this case you'd deliver the child in an attempt to save the child's life too, not dismember it in the womb thereby giving it NO chance to live.

reply from: yoda

It is about not killing babies. But it's also about not telling anyone that they cannot defend their lives. So a woman who is likely to die because of her pregnancy has the right of self defense. You can't forbid someone from preserving their own life, period.
"Lack of proper care"? What are you talking about? What kind of care would the baby get if it's mother dies before it's viable? Your question makes no sense.
It's not permissible to forbid anyone from defending their life. Taking a life is never "okay", but that's still not a justification to forbid a woman from defending her life.
And it is not the equivalent of taking a person off life supports, because that person is not a threat to someone else's life.
Provided that it is not done for the specific purpose of killing the baby, it is definitely better than tearing the child to pieces.

reply from: yoda

Exactly. I wonder why that's so hard for some to see?

reply from: carolemarie

sometimes that unfortunatly happens when a woman is engaged in defending her life. She is allowed to get medical treatment. We have the same right to life, if not more of a right than a fetus/baby

reply from: yoda

Why not just say that BOTH have an equal right to medical treatment?
Would that be so hard for you to say?

reply from: faithman

"If not more" ? So much for equality!!!

reply from: yoda

Yeah, she thinks they're "equal", it's just that she thinks the woman is "more equal" than her baby.

reply from: Yuuki

Nope, not what I'm saying at all. I'm actually asking a question.
So you disagree with Yoda that premature delivery to save the woman's life is okay?

reply from: Yuuki

We're talking about saving the mother's life only. In this case you'd deliver the child in an attempt to save the child's life too, not dismember it in the womb thereby giving it NO chance to live.
I know we're only talking about that, which is why I mentioned that in my post.
Okay, so you're "giving it a chance" even if you know it's too young to survive? Throwing a baby into a lake is "giving it a chance" to swim, but we know it's not going to happen. Churchmouse just said that this type of delivery was immoral no matter what. Do you agree or disagree?

reply from: CharlesD

Where I fall on this is that it is never acceptable to intentionally take the life of an innocent human being. If you need to remove the baby to save the mother's life, then by all means remove it, but you should remove it alive and then take every possible measure to save the baby and the mother. If your life saving efforts fall short and the baby dies anyway, then at least it wasn't murdered and everyone can rest with a clean conscience.

reply from: Yuuki

It is about not killing babies. But it's also about not telling anyone that they cannot defend their lives. So a woman who is likely to die because of her pregnancy has the right of self defense. You can't forbid someone from preserving their own life, period.
Heh, Augustine would disagree with you... but I disagree with him so that means I agree with you! I'm glad we are on the same wavelength in regards to that.
"Lack of proper care"? What are you talking about? What kind of care would the baby get if it's mother dies before it's viable? Your question makes no sense.
The mother's womb is the ideal and proper location for the child. Taking it outside of that place is basically taking it off of life support systems and plunging it into freezing cold water, as far as it's concerned. The best way for it to be cared for is to leave it inside. That's what I meant. And obviously it wouldn't be getting any care at all if its mother died, but other people in this debate don't seem to understand that!
But I still think I have a point... it's okay for it to gasp for air and die in an incubator but not okay for it to be torn apart? Why? Is it just dignity? Is it respect for life? Some (not me) could argue that it's not very dignified to gasp for air and die slowly like that, but I personally think it's much less dignified to be torn apart or have your brains sucked out, whether you're alive at the time or not. Like, we don't allow corpse desecration so why do we allow it to unborn children?
I hope I'm not confusing you too much.
It's not permissible to forbid anyone from defending their life. Taking a life is never "okay", but that's still not a justification to forbid a woman from defending her life.
Okay, thank you. Really, you need to go talk to Augustine and Scopia.
I was only describing it from the unborn child's point of view, but thank you for bringing that up. You're defending the woman.
Provided that it is not done for the specific purpose of killing the baby, it is definitely better than tearing the child to pieces.
Alrighty. And obviously, only if it's done to save the mother's life. Not electively. I think that relates to what someone mentioned about a medication to end ectopic pregnancies without surgery needed on the woman.

reply from: carolemarie

an early delievry is the same thing as abortion if the baby can't survive.
It is the ending of the pregnancy. The intent is wasn't to kill, but the result is. But in this case it is moral.
Why all the hair splitting? You can defend your own life, even if it means killing the fetus. No requirement to make it be delivered intact so it can still die! That is just more stress on the mothers body for no reason.

reply from: Yuuki

What about the moral quandry of knowing its going to die, though?

reply from: faithman

What about the moral quandry of knowing its going to die, though?
The "chances are good" is different than the "assured distruction".

reply from: scopia19822

"an early delievry is the same thing as abortion if the baby can't survive.
It is the ending of the pregnancy. The intent is wasn't to kill, but the result is. But in this case it is moral. "
The idea is to get the baby to viablity which IMHO would be around 24 weeks where the baby may survive if placed on life support. Ideally they should get her as close to term as possible, she may have to be on strict bedrest until then, but theres no reason to not try and save the lives of both.

reply from: carolemarie

But how her medical care is managed is her right to decide, not ours. She has the right to accept treatment even if the treatment will end the life of the baby.

reply from: scopia19822

"But how her medical care is managed is her right to decide, not ours. She has the right to accept treatment even if the treatment will end the life of the baby."
We are talking about late term pregnancies. Do we need to discuss those horrible methods that are used?

reply from: yoda

I have to agree with Augustine that it is not a moral thing to do, but I still cannot agree that a woman ought to be legally required to sacrifice her life for the sake of her baby's survival. The survival instinct is so strong in many people that the cannot even contemplate sacrificing themselves for their child, while others cannot think of anything else. So I greatly admire and respect a woman who would sacrifice herself, but I can't see how it would be moral to force her to.
I don't believe in "mercy killing" for unborn babies, or born ones for that matter. That's fine for pets, but not for human babies, IMHO. At that very young age, we ought not place ourselves between them and nature, or "God" if you are religious, just to achieve peace of mind about their suffering.
No, not really. If their feelings are different on that issue, I can respect that. And I can understand how religion might be a factor there.

reply from: yoda

No, it isn't. An abortion is done for the specific purpose of killng the baby. An early delivery is done with all possible consideration being given to the baby AND the mother.
Until you can see the difference, I have to wonder how you can call yourself prolife.

reply from: yoda

The proaborts all say that abortion IS a "medical treatment".
So is having an abortion only for her to decide?

reply from: Yuuki

an early delievry is the same thing as abortion if the baby can't survive. That is why it is a strange prolife position.
Well yes, that's why I'm a little confused. But I can understand the distinction on how they are not the same. In one instance, you are directly and purposely killing the child, in a way that destroys its body inhumanely. In the other case, you are delivering it alive and whole, even if you know it's going to die. But at least you're not ripping it apart. And you're also not purposely killing it.

reply from: Yuuki

What about the moral quandry of knowing its going to die, though?
The "chances are good" is different than the "assured distruction".
A 12 week fetus is assuredly going to die out of the womb. There isn't a chance.

reply from: Yuuki

Well I think we're discussing situations where that just isn't possible.

reply from: Yuuki

I have to agree with Augustine that it is not a moral thing to do, but I still cannot agree that a woman ought to be legally required to sacrifice her life for the sake of her baby's survival. The survival instinct is so strong in many people that the cannot even contemplate sacrificing themselves for their child, while others cannot think of anything else. So I greatly admire and respect a woman who would sacrifice herself, but I can't see how it would be moral to force her to.
I think it's morally ambiguous. There are strong arguments for both sides and in the end, it depends entirely on the specific woman and her particular situation. Thank you for explaining more. I too could see myself respecting a woman who sacrificed herself, but it would depend on her situation. I could also think of situations where I would not find her sacrifice heroic at all.
I don't believe in "mercy killing" for unborn babies, or born ones for that matter. That's fine for pets, but not for human babies, IMHO. At that very young age, we ought not place ourselves between them and nature, or "God" if you are religious, just to achieve peace of mind about their suffering.
So when is it okay to end suffering, and/or what methods are acceptable? Does not medicine end suffering by taking away pain? Psychologists help reduce suffering by helping someone move past it... Is it just bad when it involves the death of someone?
No, not really. If their feelings are different on that issue, I can respect that. And I can understand how religion might be a factor there.
I could respect them if they were not personally insulting me and other women on this board. In fact I did respect them until then.

reply from: Yuuki

Well said.
Thank you!

reply from: carolemarie

What difference does it make at all? The inhumanity is when it is done for elective purposes, not a medical reason

reply from: yoda

To me, euthanasia has no legitimate moral place except in rare cases where a person is in unremitting, extreme, fatal and incurable agony, and has expressed a wish for relief at the cost of their life.

reply from: yoda

The fact that you ask that question is why you will never be prolife, IMO.

reply from: Yuuki

No, I think it's more than that Carole. It's not inhumane because it's elective. It's inhumane because it is inhumane to tear someone apart. The elective part just makes it worse.

reply from: Yuuki

To me, euthanasia has no legitimate moral place except in rare cases where a person is in unremitting, extreme, fatal and incurable agony, and has expressed a wish for relief at the cost of their life.
I can agree with that. How do you feel about vegetative states?

reply from: yoda

If a person has a living will, follow it. If not, keep them alive.

reply from: Yuuki

If a person has a living will, follow it. If not, keep them alive.
Most young people don't have living wills, but have expressed to their family members that they would/would not like to be kept in such a state. Would that type of consent be acceptable?

reply from: carolemarie

No, I think it's more than that Carole. It's not inhumane because it's elective. It's inhumane because it is inhumane to tear someone apart. The elective part just makes it worse.
so being delivered intact so you can die gasping for air is somehow better? Even if there is no way to live? And it is the simplest way to remove the fetus. Forcing a birth that the fetus can't survive is the same thing...and harder on the woman's body.

reply from: Yuuki

No, I think it's more than that Carole. It's not inhumane because it's elective. It's inhumane because it is inhumane to tear someone apart. The elective part just makes it worse.
so being delivered intact so you can die gasping for air is somehow better? Even if there is no way to live? And it is the simplest way to remove the fetus. Forcing a birth that the fetus can't survive is the same thing...and harder on the woman's body.
Better than being torn apart? yes. More dignified? Yes. More respectful? Yes. As for how tough it is on the woman's body, I can't imagine her actually worrying about that knowing a doctor wanted to tear the limbs off of her child as opposed to delivering it whole so she could say goodbye. Most complications that are going to be lethal for a woman occur later in pregnancy, which means by then the child is wanted. Most late-term abortions are basically labor and delivery anyway, with the exception of sucking out the child's brains.
"Let's see... we can dismember your child which, if I actually use an ultrasound to guide me will probably be safer for you, or we can deliver your child whole and dignified."

reply from: CharlesD

When people who have already been born are terminal and there is nothing we can do to save their lives, we give them pain killers and make them as comfortable as we can to make their passing as bearable as possible. We don't just off them. The same courtesy should at least be given to a pre born child.

reply from: scopia19822

"To me, euthanasia has no legitimate moral place except in rare cases where a person is in unremitting, extreme, fatal and incurable agony, and has expressed a wish for relief at the cost of their life."
I dont support just outright killing someone, thats just not right to me. However if one is terminally ill and doesnt wish to prolong their life its one thing to go into the hospice or have hospice care at home and discontinue treatment, hence letting nature takes it course. Its ok to give them heavy doses of pain meds even if it might hasten death as long as the intent is too keep the patient comfortable, not to directly kill them.

reply from: yoda

That would be a very difficult decision to make. Unless I had personal knowledge of such a desire, I couldn't take anyone else's word for it.

reply from: yoda

Exactly. And casually tearing them limb from limb is not "courtesy".

reply from: Yuuki

That would be a very difficult decision to make. Unless I had personal knowledge of such a desire, I couldn't take anyone else's word for it.
Well I think in that case you'd be the parent of the child, who had talked to you about it. But then again, how would you feel as the doctor? Obviously you're going to have to depend on the family's wishes in that case, unless you think there is a medically good chance of the teen coming out of it.

reply from: yoda

As a doctor, I would not take anyone's word for it. Family members have been know to lie.

reply from: Yuuki

As a doctor, I would not take anyone's word for it. Family members have been know to lie.
So basically this teen would stay on life support, sucking the family's purses, even if they never wanted to "live" that way.

reply from: scopia19822

"So basically this teen would stay on life support, sucking the family's purses, even if they never wanted to "live" that way."
Sucking the families purses? How long would they have to be on life support before you would want the plug pulled. My husband as a child was in a coma for 3 months after an auto accident, if they urged people to pull the plug back then like they do today he wouldnt be here alive today. The local hospital here urges and pushes the poor and uninsured people to sign a living will giving the hospital discretion, not the family to discontinue life support if they fall into a coma or need to be on life support.

reply from: Yuuki

Life support costs a lot of money, and Yoda just said that if he was the teen's doctor, he would not take the family's words that the teen would have wanted to be let go. He'd leave the teen on life support, which the family is obligated to pay. I'm not talking about reality right now. And what if the teen was wheeled into the hospital while unconscious and never had a chance to sign a living will?
For me personally the limit is a year. Your chances truly start becoming dismal after about 6 months, but I'd give myself a year.

reply from: scopia19822

"Life support costs a lot of money, and Yoda just said that if he was the teen's doctor, he would not take the family's words that the teen would have wanted to be let go. He'd leave the teen on life support, which the family is obligated to pay. I'm not talking about reality right now. And what if the teen was wheeled into the hospital while unconscious and never had a chance to sign a living will?"

Well the law says the next of kin is the one who gets to make the choice in these circumstances. My husband knows my wishes and I know his.

reply from: kd78

so what exactly does carolemarie have to do to not be hated so much? go back in time and change the past? perhaps back in high school during her first abortion she got the "choice" to abort or be homeless by her mother. unfortunately not every mother wants to help her teen daughter raise a baby. my mother wouldve made me get one had i been pregnant in high school no arguments allowed. or did she ever tell what happened then?
just wondering. i'm too lazy to find every single posts she made on here, and i'm not defending her past abortions. she can't take those back. i'm referring to now.

reply from: 4given

Carolemarie is not "hated". The issues as I understand them have to do with "exceptions".. amongst other statements. Her past has less to do with the issues in general..and more to do with her guiding the lukewarm to her "understanding". I could be wrong though. I don't know..

reply from: lukesmom

Just to clarify: Every hospital, nursing home, CBRF and Home care agency has the ethical obligation to offer every pt a chance to write a living will or power of atterny for health care. This is NOT so the dr or hospital can make life or death decisions for a pt but instead so the pt can make informed decisions for themselves while they are medically and mentally capable. No hospital or dr wants to make this decision for anyone or "force" anyone to discontinue life support OR be kept alive against their wishes.

reply from: scopia19822

"ust to clarify: Every hospital, nursing home, CBRF and Home care agency has the ethical obligation to offer every pt a chance to write a living will or power of atterny for health care. This is NOT so the dr or hospital can make life or death decisions for a pt but instead so the pt can make informed decisions for themselves while they are medically and mentally capable. No hospital or dr wants to make this decision for anyone or "force" anyone to discontinue life support OR be kept alive against their wishes."
Down here its about cutting cost, the local hospital down here doenst honor the Hill Burton Obligation as they are a Private for profit hospital. They will not let uninsured patients into the door, will divert ambulances if they can if the person doesnt have insuruance and patient dumping isnt uncommon.

reply from: yoda

I will not put a price on innocent human life, even if you will.

reply from: faithman

Just to clarify: Every hospital, nursing home, CBRF and Home care agency has the ethical obligation to offer every pt a chance to write a living will or power of atterny for health care. This is NOT so the dr or hospital can make life or death decisions for a pt but instead so the pt can make informed decisions for themselves while they are medically and mentally capable. No hospital or dr wants to make this decision for anyone or "force" anyone to discontinue life support OR be kept alive against their wishes.
That is a totally different issue than assisted suicide. A living will puts the out come in the hands of God. It merely states that if a condition is terminal with no hope of recovery, no heroric measures will be taken to prolong life. I have that with my mom. She did so because she knows my respect for life, and that I would not "put her down" like an ole plow horse, nor would I put her thru the undignified position of tubes and gizmoes in a vegitative state. It is a very thin line, and one I do not look forward to. I have also worked as a chaplin in hospice, and know how tramatic these situations can be. Best thing is to work all this out way ahead of time, so family won't have to make very difficult discissions when under so much stress. The greatest gift you can leave your loved ones before your passing, is a proclaimed faith in the Lord Jesus Christ. It is the only thing I have seen that brings comfort to those who have suffered the loss of a loved one. Some of the worst situations I have ever been in is trying to console unbelievers.

reply from: Yuuki

I will not put a price on innocent human life, even if you will.
It's not a price, it's listening to the family, who hopefully knew the teen best.

reply from: yoda

Of course it's a price, you specifically mentioned their "purse".
But what if it's not an unemancipated minor? What if it's an adult?

reply from: nancyu

If a person has a living will, follow it. If not, keep them alive.
Most young people don't have living wills, but have expressed to their family members that they would/would not like to be kept in such a state. Would that type of consent be acceptable?
A young person can not make this kind of decision for himself. Of course he is going to say that he doesn't want to put his family through hardship. But...
No one has the right to kill an innocent human being. Even if it is expensive, even if it is difficult, even if it is heartwrenching, even if the person is going to die anyway. We are all going to "die anyway".

reply from: nancyu

As a doctor, I would not take anyone's word for it. Family members have been know to lie.
So basically this teen would stay on life support, sucking the family's purses, even if they never wanted to "live" that way.
Wow. Sensitive...real sensitive.

reply from: nancyu

Just to clarify: Every hospital, nursing home, CBRF and Home care agency has the ethical obligation to offer every pt a chance to write a living will or power of atterny for health care. This is NOT so the dr or hospital can make life or death decisions for a pt but instead so the pt can make informed decisions for themselves while they are medically and mentally capable. No hospital or dr wants to make this decision for anyone or "force" anyone to discontinue life support OR be kept alive against their wishes.
That is a totally different issue than assisted suicide. A living will puts the out come in the hands of God. It merely states that if a condition is terminal with no hope of recovery, no heroric measures will be taken to prolong life. I have that with my mom. She did so because she knows my respect for life, and that I would not "put her down" like an ole plow horse, nor would I put her thru the undignified position of tubes and gizmoes in a vegitative state. It is a very thin line, and one I do not look forward to. I have also worked as a chaplin in hospice, and know how tramatic these situations can be. Best thing is to work all this out way ahead of time, so family won't have to make very difficult discissions when under so much stress. The greatest gift you can leave your loved ones before your passing, is a proclaimed faith in the Lord Jesus Christ. It is the only thing I have seen that brings comfort to those who have suffered the loss of a loved one. Some of the worst situations I have ever been in is trying to console unbelievers.

reply from: Yuuki

Of course it's a price, you specifically mentioned their "purse".
But what if it's not an unemancipated minor? What if it's an adult?
I mentioned that only because what if they are poor, KNOW they child wouldn't have wanted this, can barely afford to eat, and yet you (the doctor) refuse to let their child go so they lose their home trying to pay life support bills...
As for an adult, I don't think it makes any difference. If you told your family you didn't want to live like that, they have the right to carryout your wishes. Thank God that's the current law.

reply from: Yuuki

If a person has a living will, follow it. If not, keep them alive.
Most young people don't have living wills, but have expressed to their family members that they would/would not like to be kept in such a state. Would that type of consent be acceptable?
A young person can not make this kind of decision for himself. Of course he is going to say that he doesn't want to put his family through hardship. But...
No one has the right to kill an innocent human being. Even if it is expensive, even if it is difficult, even if it is heartwrenching, even if the person is going to die anyway. We are all going to "die anyway".
The young person has been unconscious since the accident, so whether or not you think they are capable of knowing how they would/would not want to "live" is irrelevant.
So, my grandmother, the nurses, the doctors and my parents (by extension) are all murderers for letting my grandfather off of life support after he lapsed into a coma following an operation? No, they are not.

reply from: Yuuki

As a doctor, I would not take anyone's word for it. Family members have been know to lie.
So basically this teen would stay on life support, sucking the family's purses, even if they never wanted to "live" that way.
Wow. Sensitive...real sensitive.
I feel it is VERY insensitive to ignore the teen's and the family's wishes, yes.

reply from: nancyu

As a doctor, I would not take anyone's word for it. Family members have been know to lie.
So basically this teen would stay on life support, sucking the family's purses, even if they never wanted to "live" that way.
Wow. Sensitive...real sensitive.
I feel it is VERY insensitive to ignore the teen's and the family's wishes, yes.
You like to try to guilt people into choosing death for themselves by saying something so cold as, "...sucking the family's purses"??? You're sick.
I would think most people would have more affection for their own children, but who knows what goes on in the mind of pro death slime.

reply from: Yuuki

As a doctor, I would not take anyone's word for it. Family members have been know to lie.
So basically this teen would stay on life support, sucking the family's purses, even if they never wanted to "live" that way.
Wow. Sensitive...real sensitive.
I feel it is VERY insensitive to ignore the teen's and the family's wishes, yes.
You like to try to guilt people into choosing death for themselves by saying something so cold as, "...sucking the family's purses"??? You're sick.
I would think most people would have more affection for their own children, but who knows what goes on in the mind of pro death slime.
No, I am trying to get people to think about the teen's wishes; the money part was from what the teen - or ANY family member - would think about if they were to be sustained on life support alone. Basically I mention it because that's how /I/ feel about the issue; I'd never want to be a burden. Technically I could out "live" my entire family being sustained on life support... but I don't consider that to be a LIFE. Because it's not. The brain is dead, and it's not coming back. Why waste your money keeping my body alive? My soul wouldn't be there anymore.


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