Bans 'do not cut abortion rate'

[rebeccajo 14]

Where did Joseph go?

He's indicated to us before that he MAY be a father.

I find it - inconsistent - for a man to wail on about bringing little children into the world and then not being around for their upbringing.

The story that I have a child and I am not there for its upbringing is a fantasy you cooked up in your own mind.

So why don't you clear it up for us?

No obligation to.

Tsk tsk. You lose your credibility when you refuse to clarify your personal behaviors then.

What credibility does truth have with the left anyway? It wouldn't matter.

Why are you running around in circles?

If you are a parent and you are still actively involved in your child's life, including financial support of that child, then fine.

If you are a parent and have absolved yourself of the care and raising of your child, then frankly you don't have any business having ANY opinion on the sanctity of the unborn.

[Peikko 1,575]

Why wouldn't I admit it is killing? It's a fact, it's reality. In an abortion a fetus is killed and guess what? Because of that the vast majority of people who have them are also emotionally affected by them which is why they are not something people just have like a hair cut, or fake nails. Because someone believes that the availability of abortion is a necessary it does not follow that that person believes that abortion isn't something that should be taken seriously, that people who seek them should be properly counseled and all the options available to them explored and only once it is determined that it truly is the best option available one performed.

I know you'll laugh at this, but out of all the libs here - I think you and I can find common ground. You and I both think reducing or eliminating abortions by eliminating the demand is also a good thing. Reducing demand is making birth-control safe and available. I read about a lot of those pills are dangerous long term. Can cause even sudden death. Who would want to take something with that risk?

Sorry, I didn't realise we were doing serious.

Yes, I am sure that's true. I don't think the pill is the cure all. Not the current one anyway. I do think that there are more positive options to be discovered given sufficient research funds and interest. I also believe that both parties are equally responsible in ensuring pregnancy doesn't take place, at least in countries where all sorts of birth control options are available and where for the most part it is not considered sinful or whatever.

[Joseph & Ana 0]

Yes, I've made equivalent remarks to eating babies at mcdonalds.

You don't strike me as the sensitive type.

Why wouldn't I admit it is killing? It's a fact, it's reality. In an abortion a fetus is killed ...

Kill em all and let God sort em out applies to fetuses as well

I think it's hilarious that I am expected to believe that you didn't think that comment was a joke. A rather black joke deliberately inserted to shock you, perhaps, but still a joke.

I'm sure you make jokes about killing arab terrorists on the sly, don't you Joe? Go on, you can admit it to us, we're all friends here you know

No, I don't live up to (at least all) of your stereotypes of Christians. I don't make jokes about killing people (i'm sure I have in the past and its wrong). We can all get caught up in a moment and blurt something out. And I don't have any problem with Arabs. There's an Arab family at my church that are wonderful people. I had Arab co-workers at my last employer who i enjoyed working with. You are the ones who labeled me as racist against them because I pointed out where the Quran took issue with their liberal beliefs. Thats all. I don't believe the Quran...... well anyway, i don't want to go off on a tangeant here, as i am prone to.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I know you'll laugh at this, but out of all the libs here - I think you and I can find common ground. You and I both think reducing or eliminating abortions by eliminating the demand is also a good thing. Reducing demand is making birth-control safe and available. I read about a lot of those pills are dangerous long term. Can cause even sudden death. Who would want to take something with that risk?

I'd say that a lot of people here think that. If you weren't so keen on going off on a big ideological rant as you always do - you'd have realised this.

As it is - we have to wade through pages of your fake sentiment and disingenuous moralising.

[Peikko 1,575]

Yes, I've made equivalent remarks to eating babies at mcdonalds.

You don't strike me as the sensitive type.

Why wouldn't I admit it is killing? It's a fact, it's reality. In an abortion a fetus is killed ...

Kill em all and let God sort em out applies to fetuses as well

I think it's hilarious that I am expected to believe that you didn't think that comment was a joke. A rather black joke deliberately inserted to shock you, perhaps, but still a joke.

I'm sure you make jokes about killing arab terrorists on the sly, don't you Joe? Go on, you can admit it to us, we're all friends here you know

No, I don't live up to (at least all) of your stereotypes of Christians. I don't make jokes about killing people (i'm sure I have in the past and its wrong). We can all get caught up in a moment and blurt something out. And I don't have any problem with Arabs. There's an Arab family at my church that are wonderful people. I had Arab co-workers at my last employer who i enjoyed working with. You are the ones who labeled me as racist against them because I pointed out where the Quran took issue with their liberal beliefs. Thats all. I don't believe the Quran...... well anyway, i don't want to go off on a tangeant here, as i am prone to.

I don't have stereotypes of christians. Fundamentalists are however fair game

[Joseph & Ana 0]

Why wouldn't I admit it is killing? It's a fact, it's reality. In an abortion a fetus is killed and guess what? Because of that the vast majority of people who have them are also emotionally affected by them which is why they are not something people just have like a hair cut, or fake nails. Because someone believes that the availability of abortion is a necessary it does not follow that that person believes that abortion isn't something that should be taken seriously, that people who seek them should be properly counseled and all the options available to them explored and only once it is determined that it truly is the best option available one performed.

I know you'll laugh at this, but out of all the libs here - I think you and I can find common ground. You and I both think reducing or eliminating abortions by eliminating the demand is also a good thing. Reducing demand is making birth-control safe and available. I read about a lot of those pills are dangerous long term. Can cause even sudden death. Who would want to take something with that risk?

Sorry, I didn't realise we were doing serious.

Yes, I am sure that's true. I don't think the pill is the cure all. Not the current one anyway. I do think that there are more positive options to be discovered given sufficient research funds and interest. I also believe that both parties are equally responsible in ensuring pregnancy doesn't take place, at least in countries where all sorts of birth control options are available and where for the most part it is not considered sinful or whatever.

I agree. It is both party's responsibility. I also agree with the safe male pill (or injection that wouldn't sterilize us) as well. Where Ana and I are concerned - I would always take the responsibility if it were me and it was possible. I would go out of my way so that she was never inconvenienced. The only problem is that she feels the same way (just the opposite)

I know you'll laugh at this, but out of all the libs here - I think you and I can find common ground. You and I both think reducing or eliminating abortions by eliminating the demand is also a good thing. Reducing demand is making birth-control safe and available. I read about a lot of those pills are dangerous long term. Can cause even sudden death. Who would want to take something with that risk?

I'd say that a lot of people here think that. If you weren't so keen on going off on a big ideological rant as you always do - you'd have realised this.

As it is - we have to wade through pages of your fake sentiment and disingenuous moralising.

You should know by now that I am not fake. I don't do fake. I don't even like implants.

[HAL 9000 96]

.

Imposing pregnancy? NO one is imposing pregnancy - She CHOSE to be pregnant when she spread her legs. In case anyone hasn't heard, that is how babies are made.

And in case you haven't heard, if HE would use a freaking condom that wouldn't happen.

Your misogyny is record setting, Bubba. Momma must be so proud of you.

Right on sister.

Who are exactly the ones pleading for girls to prove they love us?

Don't you find it truly hypocritical that the ones fighting for the guvamint to stay away from our health care can't wait to get the guvamint to control what a woman does with her body?

Wrong again. Killing the baby isn't her right.

On planet Joe,

No, the fact is that you've already redefined what life and murder is. We're trying to restore it back to where it should be. Back to reality, and truth.

Truth stands for redefining things as he sees them. Heaven have mercy on all of us if we ever crash land there.

Its already been redefined. I'm not redefining anything. Just trying to restore truth where a lie now stands.

You're just a real American hero huh?

So- since you seem to have the ole pole up the sheister... pray add what exactly that definition is to the list of things you need to define for us.

The list includes several questions on this topic:

1. Biological definition of

a. Murder

b. Baby

c. Fetus

d. Idiot

2. Legal definition of

a. Murder

b. Baby

c. Fetus

d. Idiot

3. Legal definition of

a. Morals

b. Abortion

c. Rights of fetus

d. Rights of pregnant females

All three (with subsets), before and after Roe v Wade.

Oh and good luck with that.

Joe is indeed creating new definitions.

No one has ever prosecuted any woman for not bringing a fetus to live birth in the USA. I will go out on a limb here and say I don't believe it has ever been a stutute on the books of any country that I can think of. Simply put, killing a fetus has never been considered murder and I don't think that definition is ever going to end up on any statute book.

It isn't murder more than what he wants it to be according to HIS definition of what HE wants the law to be. Hardly realistic at all. Therefore, that makes him a nutter for claiming that which is not.

I know that what someone has written for you to feel better about killing a baby is all you care about. You redefine something, and then say "Whats the definition?".

A baby is a baby, and killing it is murder. Period. I know you've brainwashed yourself into thinking that it isn't, but it is. Truth can't be changed based on the weather or what we "feel". A baby will always be a baby, no matter what law gets written. Someone will have to answer for the 45 million deaths. I hope we don't get to 100 million.

Yeah... have some more feces with that too. You really do seem to know more about me than I do about myself. In some circles, that's a sign of just being demented.

You still haven't defined jack-squat. No surprise there, and you want to talk about substance.

[Peikko 1,575]

I don't see how that's a problem. That's a mutually beneficial arrangement, you both should be very content with that. Would that all couples were able to communicate so effectively.

[HAL 9000 96]

W/out sperm there is no fertilization. Put on a darn condom. Slip it on, slip it off. Why should a female have to change her body's hormonal balance for our pleasure?

This Post Rules!!!!!!!!

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Why wouldn't I admit it is killing? It's a fact, it's reality. In an abortion a fetus is killed and guess what? Because of that the vast majority of people who have them are also emotionally affected by them which is why they are not something people just have like a hair cut, or fake nails. Because someone believes that the availability of abortion is a necessary it does not follow that that person believes that abortion isn't something that should be taken seriously, that people who seek them should be properly counseled and all the options available to them explored and only once it is determined that it truly is the best option available one performed.

I know you'll laugh at this, but out of all the libs here - I think you and I can find common ground. You and I both think reducing or eliminating abortions by eliminating the demand is also a good thing. Reducing demand is making birth-control safe and available. I read about a lot of those pills are dangerous long term. Can cause even sudden death. Who would want to take something with that risk?

Sorry, I didn't realise we were doing serious.

Yes, I am sure that's true. I don't think the pill is the cure all. Not the current one anyway. I do think that there are more positive options to be discovered given sufficient research funds and interest. I also believe that both parties are equally responsible in ensuring pregnancy doesn't take place, at least in countries where all sorts of birth control options are available and where for the most part it is not considered sinful or whatever.

I agree. It is both party's responsibility. I also agree with the safe male pill (or injection that wouldn't sterilize us) as well. Where Ana and I are concerned - I would always take the responsibility if it were me and it was possible. I would go out of my way so that she was never inconvenienced. The only problem is that she feels the same way (just the opposite)

I know you'll laugh at this, but out of all the libs here - I think you and I can find common ground. You and I both think reducing or eliminating abortions by eliminating the demand is also a good thing. Reducing demand is making birth-control safe and available. I read about a lot of those pills are dangerous long term. Can cause even sudden death. Who would want to take something with that risk?

I'd say that a lot of people here think that. If you weren't so keen on going off on a big ideological rant as you always do - you'd have realised this.

As it is - we have to wade through pages of your fake sentiment and disingenuous moralising.

You should know by now that I am not fake. I don't do fake. I don't even like implants.

So the guy who insists on seeing individuals in terms of stereotypes is actually serious about it?

That's not very complementary of you.

[Peikko 1,575]

Oh dear,

Oh well, that was in ref to Joe saying they don't want to inconvenience each other with their birth control arrangements.

[HAL 9000 96]

Where did Joseph go?

He's indicated to us before that he MAY be a father.

I find it - inconsistent - for a man to wail on about bringing little children into the world and then not being around for their upbringing.

The story that I have a child and I am not there for its upbringing is a fantasy you cooked up in your own mind.

So why don't you clear it up for us?

No obligation to.

You can't reason with someone whose logic is rooted in biblical morality. There world is one of absolutes and there is no interpretation, you either adhere to their belief system, or you are simply wrong, no deviation whatsoever.

On this there is no deviation. Your world is one of relativism, and that must be applied across the board, or you have a double standard (which you do in this case)

Anyway - Pike or Gene - You saying "it isn't" doesn't change reality. Its a baby. If i call a newborn not a baby, it doesn't change what it is, and it doesn't change what it was 1 month ago or 6 months ago. A baby. The fact is, that the terminology was changed so that people can justify the death.

Joe, unless you just fell out of a tree - it can hardly have escaped your notice that its a central part of the human experience to contextualise things.

If a woman chooses (for reasons of her own) not to go through with a pregnancy, then there is no baby.

i guess you can argue that a dead baby is not a live baby.

We don't contextualize this type of killing. At least those with some grasp of morality.

More substance from the winner. Or was it whiner? I can't tell.

If you want to play baseball, bring your glove.

[Joseph & Ana 0]

I don't see how that's a problem. That's a mutually beneficial arrangement, you both should be very content with that. Would that all couples were able to communicate so effectively.

Yeah i should have said "problem" because it really isn't. Unless we argue who gets to be the more inconvenienced one.

Why wouldn't I admit it is killing? It's a fact, it's reality. In an abortion a fetus is killed and guess what? Because of that the vast majority of people who have them are also emotionally affected by them which is why they are not something people just have like a hair cut, or fake nails. Because someone believes that the availability of abortion is a necessary it does not follow that that person believes that abortion isn't something that should be taken seriously, that people who seek them should be properly counseled and all the options available to them explored and only once it is determined that it truly is the best option available one performed.

I know you'll laugh at this, but out of all the libs here - I think you and I can find common ground. You and I both think reducing or eliminating abortions by eliminating the demand is also a good thing. Reducing demand is making birth-control safe and available. I read about a lot of those pills are dangerous long term. Can cause even sudden death. Who would want to take something with that risk?

Sorry, I didn't realise we were doing serious.

Yes, I am sure that's true. I don't think the pill is the cure all. Not the current one anyway. I do think that there are more positive options to be discovered given sufficient research funds and interest. I also believe that both parties are equally responsible in ensuring pregnancy doesn't take place, at least in countries where all sorts of birth control options are available and where for the most part it is not considered sinful or whatever.

I agree. It is both party's responsibility. I also agree with the safe male pill (or injection that wouldn't sterilize us) as well. Where Ana and I are concerned - I would always take the responsibility if it were me and it was possible. I would go out of my way so that she was never inconvenienced. The only problem is that she feels the same way (just the opposite)

I know you'll laugh at this, but out of all the libs here - I think you and I can find common ground. You and I both think reducing or eliminating abortions by eliminating the demand is also a good thing. Reducing demand is making birth-control safe and available. I read about a lot of those pills are dangerous long term. Can cause even sudden death. Who would want to take something with that risk?

I'd say that a lot of people here think that. If you weren't so keen on going off on a big ideological rant as you always do - you'd have realised this.

As it is - we have to wade through pages of your fake sentiment and disingenuous moralising.

You should know by now that I am not fake. I don't do fake. I don't even like implants.

So the guy who insists on seeing individuals in terms of stereotypes is actually serious about it?

That's not very complementary of you.

Calling you a lib isn't a stereotype. I thought you'd be honored.

[HAL 9000 96]

i guess you can argue that a dead baby is not a live baby.

We don't contextualize this type of killing. At least those with some grasp of morality.

Yes we do Joe, hence as has been pointed out to you (also inumerable times) - if you choose to have an abortion you are not charged with having committed a murder.

Murder is a human construction that is defined by the law.

The difference surely is the willingness to respect the decisions of women to manage their own lives and bodies, and not try to force them into having a child against their will based on dishonest sentiment masquerading as morality.

It isn't dishonest to call a baby exactly what it is. Whats dishonest is calling it something that it isn't so as to allow its destruction if one wishes to do so.

The point being - that whatever you think about it, it isn't your decision to make and therefore the process of reasoning that goes into it isn't yours either.

Quite simply, you need to learn to mind your own business.

Then it isn't your business if someone kills their 2 year old.

Because 2 year olds reside inside their mums. Get a grip and learn to argue with congruity.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

HAL is so goddamn mean