jump to last post 1-14 of 14 discussions (114 posts)

Why?

  1. lovemychris profile image80
    lovemychrisposted 5 years ago

    Can someone explain to me why abortion is under attack?

    Why Planned Parenthood?

    Are there no other issues that fall in the same catagory?

    And---if there is no separation of Church and State, as I have been told....why was Shariah Law outlawed in some state?

    Doesn't Sharia have the right, as much as Catholicism, to do what it wants?

    And why are only men making decisions on birth control, when they say over and over again that pregnancy is the womans' responsibility?

    Someone needs to 'splain to me how this is not rule by masogyny.

    1. WillStarr profile image89
      WillStarrposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      "Can someone explain to me why abortion is under attack?"

      If you don't have the basic humanity to understand why abortion is evil, then no amount of explaining would ever be sufficient.

      1. lovemychris profile image80
        lovemychrisposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        So--God is evil for mis-carriage: Got it.

        1. Evan G Rogers profile image83
          Evan G Rogersposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          LMC, that is such a flawed comparison.

          "Murdering is OK because God creates hurricanes that kill people".

          Really? You have to defend your beliefs with better arguments.

          The only sound defenses of Abortion are "It's my body, and I can choose to do with it as I wish", or "amazingly, legalized abortions lead to less violent crime".

          1. lovemychris profile image80
            lovemychrisposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            Mis-carriage: spontaneous abortion....

            Same thing. One is accepted as part of life, the other is demonized.

            Putting Moral Judgement onto it is the flawed reasoning!

            1. Josak profile image60
              Josakposted 5 years ago in reply to this

              This may not even be relevant, feel free to ignore.
              I am on the fence on the issue because I was an adopted out child that was allmost aborted... This puts me in a tough position because I love my life and the fact it would have been ended before it begun scares me.

              Having said that I do believe in legalisation because at the end of the day I believe you have sovereignty over your own body, it allways surprises me that the party which allways talks about the rights of the individual and about "small government" is the one which clamors to tell a woman what she can and can't do with her own body.
              Furthermore abortions occur whether it is legal or not they are just done unproffesionally and endanger the woman as well, that being the case I think its only logical to legalise it.

              1. Evan G Rogers profile image83
                Evan G Rogersposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                There are two questions you need to ask yourself to determine where you stand:

                1) Is murdering a human wrong?

                2) When does a new human come into existence?

                The answer to #1 is obvious... however, LMC seems to think that "if god kills something, then it's ok to kill that thing".

                The answer to #2 is difficult. The fetus' DNA IS different than the mother's, however it is still attached via an umbilical cord.

                In my own opinion: The fetus IS a new living being, and intentionally killing it is wrong. The mother knows that the child's life is 100% dependent on her, and thus must be very careful about choosing whether or not to have a child. Contraception is NOT hard to come by in this day and age, and there is always a sure-fire way to avoid pregnancy - abstinence. Men who don't want to have children should not have sex w/o protection, and neither should women. 

                In the case of rape, the woman has about a day or two after the rape before conception (conception does NOT happen immediately: those sperm don't swim very well). The woman should go to a doctor's office immediately, and file charges.

                If this fails, then I must admit that I am hypocritical: An abortion is justified in the case of a rape, but it should happen as soon as possible.

            2. Josak profile image60
              Josakposted 5 years ago in reply to this

              This may not even be relevant, feel free to ignore.
              I am on the fence on the issue because I was an adopted out child that was allmost aborted... This puts me in a tough position because I love my life and the fact it would have been ended before it begun scares me.

              Having said that I do believe in legalisation because at the end of the day I believe you have sovereignty over your own body, it allways surprises me that the party which allways talks about the rights of the individual and about "small government" is the one which clamors to tell a woman what she can and can't do with her own body.
              Furthermore abortions occur whether it is legal or not they are just done unproffesionally and endanger the woman as well, that being the case I think its only logical to legalise it.

              PS sorry I didn't mean to make this a response to your comment Chris

              1. lovemychris profile image80
                lovemychrisposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                Yeah, but if your life ended--you would not have known! You would fall back into the arms of Love, and come back another time.

                Don't worry about it Josak...

                I'm used to being attacked...and you didn't! I have armor of steel.

            3. Evan G Rogers profile image83
              Evan G Rogersposted 5 years ago in reply to this

              No, they're really not.

              Once again, your logic allows me to kill people because god allows lightning bolts to kill people.

              Your logic is flawed.

              1. lovemychris profile image80
                lovemychrisposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                Here's your logic:

                I am evil for having an abortion

                so

                God is evil for allowing mis-carriage

                1. Evan G Rogers profile image83
                  Evan G Rogersposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                  You're right. I do agree with that completely.

                  However, your argument is incorrect.

                  God Kills, thus I can kill : No.
                  Killing is wrong, thus God is wrong : Sure, why not (If a super-powerful deity is watching, please don't kill me!)

                  1. lovemychris profile image80
                    lovemychrisposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                    Because death is part of life....so who are you to judge when it is right or wrong? Who is anybody?

                    Live and let live.

    2. couturepopcafe profile image61
      couturepopcafeposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      There's no issue with Shariah as it pertains to governing Muslims only when it interferes with national security as seen by the feds. Church or Temple is like Queen but Feds are King and trump everything. You should know that. There's no getting around it. We'll never get deep into the imbed. We have to live with it, leave it, or hide it under the mattress.

      1. lovemychris profile image80
        lovemychrisposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        The feds are in bed with the "safety issue"....some of them. It's a farce to call judeo-christians "safe".

    3. profile image0
      Sooner28posted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Lovemychris,

      I think it's mostly because it's an election year, and the GOP is trying to excite the Republican base to show up, since Romney is evidently not doing it for them. 

      Recall that the Republican Congress under Bush did not defund Planned Parenthood, or push for any type of personhood amendment.  However, many of those were not Teapublicans, or if they were, they did a good job of hiding it.

      So I really don't know if they are truly sincere.  I'm going to say possibly, due to the fact that many republican governors have gone after abortion, and Teapublicans tend to be less open to compromise and facts when it goes against them.

      1. lovemychris profile image80
        lovemychrisposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        That makes a lot of sense.....or I could wonder, like friendlyword did the other day:

        What are they up to? Is this a distraction?

        Follow the money....

        1. profile image0
          Sooner28posted 5 years ago in reply to this

          With Rick Santorum now attacking prenatal care, and saying Obama is not a "true Christian" (which I'm not, so I don't give a crap) is going to severely hurt him if he makes it to the general election.  He reminds me of someone from the 50s, saying things like contraception is wrong.

          1. lovemychris profile image80
            lovemychrisposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            Yes...he's become quite demonic.

            BUT:
            "Rick Santorum devoutly ignores or opposes Church teachings on capital punishment, just war, immigration, health care, capitalism..."

            The Bible and the Constitution....use and change at will. Just like history.

  2. aguasilver profile image87
    aguasilverposted 5 years ago

    I guess the reason is because many people view abortion as the murder of the unborn, and that tends to raise issues with them.

    Forty million (mainly black) Americans have been sacrificed to abortion, that smacks of a slight racial genocide, but I guess those who support abortion would baulk at accepting that fact.

    As for misogyny, I cannot answer, perhaps American men are fed up of the 'feminist' movement and have lost respect and love for those who promote it?

    There you are, this should get the forum buzzing, but I am off to bed (past midnight where I live) so have fun!

    John

    1. lovemychris profile image80
      lovemychrisposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Not buzzing....sighing in sadness.

      Still? STILL?? that attitude in 2012??

      I'll say the same to you:

      How many fetuses has God "sacrificed" to mis-carriage?

      1. aguasilver profile image87
        aguasilverposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        No contest on the racial genocide bit then?

        Guess that's 'liberally' acceptable, maybe even part of the plan?

        1. lovemychris profile image80
          lovemychrisposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          Of course not. People are not forcing women to get abortions, and NO ONE contemplates going for one like it's a fun day at the beach.

          It's a life-saving decision. For 2.

          No contest on the god is evil for miscarriage?

      2. Eric Newland profile image60
        Eric Newlandposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        Hmm, sometimes people die in accidental falls. It must be morally permissible to push them off cliffs.

        1. lovemychris profile image80
          lovemychrisposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          The result is the same. YOU put the "morality" onto it.

    2. Hollie Thomas profile image59
      Hollie Thomasposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      As for misogyny, I cannot answer, perhaps American men are fed up of the 'feminist' movement and have lost respect and love for those who promote it?

      That is the the point completely. They never had respect for it not the women in it. Hence, the demonisation of the feminist movement. If you don't like it, tough. Just like so many women have been excluded from so much, you are excluded from the movement, get over it or start one of your own.

      There are plenty of intelligent men out there who see the point and the aims of the movement. Clearly you are not one of them.

      1. aguasilver profile image87
        aguasilverposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        Clearly, but that's because I have seen what the results are, and as I love women (and honour, cherish and protect them) a movement that causes so much harm to women, is something I cannot support.

        Listen 'sister' I just wanted to give the topic some spin for the OP, if I had not put in a nice juicy comment for folk to take a dig at, it may have died a death!

        1. Hollie Thomas profile image59
          Hollie Thomasposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          Who are you to say that the movement causes so much harm to women? Are you a woman? Do you have first hand experience of harm caused by the feminist movement? (and don't quote what happened to your sister or some imaginary aunt, if they were true feminists, they would never give you the opportunity to support or not, get over it, this not about men) I doubt there  are many women that would want your protection, or version of love and cherish-ment.  That's the whole point of the movement, yet you don't seem to get it. We neither need nor want your support. It's not important, you don't have a say here.

          Listen "brother" the feminist movement does not "need" you. Neither do they need your juicy comments.

          1. aguasilver profile image87
            aguasilverposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            Well you certainly cannot take a wind up can you! smile

            If your diatribe is resemblant of what a 'true' feminist thinks, you really cannot expect men to take you seriously, or pay you any respect, for you deny your femininity and seek to be like men, so why should any man treat you any differently?

            OK I get it, you don't want to be treated any differently from a man, so I will grant you your wish "get stuffed you're boring" there, now you can feel all righteous and self justified.

            Does feminism kill the sense of humour also, sure looks like it does!

  3. knolyourself profile image60
    knolyourselfposted 5 years ago

    It is election year. Aggravate the voters with phony issues to get them to the polls to vote for psychopaths.

    1. Hollie Thomas profile image59
      Hollie Thomasposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      I only have to visit a thread to see that your statement is valid.

    2. lovemychris profile image80
      lovemychrisposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Yes, and it works every time.

  4. Eric Newland profile image60
    Eric Newlandposted 5 years ago

    Oh, and speaking of the feminist movement, it's probably worth noting that...

    Brace yourself..

    Not all feminists are pro-choice.

    http://feministsforlife.com/

    1. Hollie Thomas profile image59
      Hollie Thomasposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Oh, revelation.

    2. aguasilver profile image87
      aguasilverposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      This one is pretty good also.... (just saying!)

      http://www.savethemales.ca/001904.html

      1. Castlepaloma profile image25
        Castlepalomaposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        10 reasons for pro choice

        1, The concept of personhood is different from the concept of human life. Human life occurs at conception, a 24 week time limit for abortion was examined and endorsed ...
        1. three month is the limit time for abortion.
        2. Adoption is not an alternative to abortion, because it remains the woman's choice whether or not to give her child up for adoption. And very few women who give birth choose to give up their babies
        3 Abortion is a safe medical procedure
        4, In the case of rape or incest, forcing a woman made pregnant by this violent act would cause further psychological harm to the victim.
        5. Abortion is not used as a form of contraception. Pregnancy can occur even with responsible contraceptive use.
        6. The ability of a woman to have control of her body is critical to civil and human rights.
        7. One the worst problem is over population on earth
        8. Teenagers who become mothers have grim prospects for the future.
        9. I child can die if gone unlove, the child will most often want to know their orginal mother
        10 Personally I prefer no adoption, if I had my life to be lived all over again.

        1. gregas profile image75
          gregasposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          I agree on pro-choice. Besides, which is murder, abortion before the 24 week time period or throwing a newborn in a dumpster? Greg

          1. lovemychris profile image80
            lovemychrisposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            I keep asking them: What are you going to do with these unwanted babies, when you are cutting funds for the babies that are already here?? What is the agenda here?

            A whole underclass of women on the streets with little children?? As if that wasn't big enough!


            What?

            1. aguasilver profile image87
              aguasilverposted 5 years ago in reply to this

              The following would perhaps suggest that easing of the adoptive process may actually empower women who were unable to get pregnant?

              Infertility
              (Data are for the U.S.)
              Number of women ages 15-44 with impaired fecundity (impaired ability to have children): 7.3 million

              Percent of women ages 15-44 with impaired fecundity: 11.8%

              Number of married women ages 15-44 that are infertile (unable to get pregnant for at least 12 consecutive months): 2.1 million

              Percent of married women ages 15-44 that are infertile: 7.4%

              Number of women ages 15-44 who have ever used infertility services: 7.3 million

              Source: Fertility, Family Planning, and Reprodu … 67, 69, 97  [PDF - 4.6 MB]

              Of course those 11.8% of women who cannot get pregnant may not want to adopt, yeah, really, like that's not a possibility and any man who has experienced an 'infertile' wife who wants to have children knows that adoption is a real option, made more difficult by high cost adoptions.

              So lets look at some adoption figures that PROVE there are waiting parents out there:

              http://www.legallanguage.com/legal-arti … tics-2010/

              Why Are International Adoptions in Decline?
              The decrease in international adoptions can attributed in large part to the clamp down on Guatemalan adoptions. Due to political tension in the South American country, the US State Department has put a notice on adopting children from Guatemala, making it all but impossible to complete the adoption process.

              While it seems strange that just one county can have such an effect on international adoption statistics, keep in mind that just two years ago, Guatemala was the most popular country for international adoption. US families brought 4,122 children from Guatemala to America in 2008.

              Russia also saw a decrease, most likely due to some negative press and a temporary hold on US adoptions when a 7-year-old Russian boy’s American adoptive family put him on a trans-Atlantic flight back to Moscow by himself.

              Adoption Statistics Over the Last Decade
              From 2000 to 2008, the average number of international adoptions by US families was much closer to 20,000 a year.

              Year
              Number of Adoptions to the US
              2000    18,857
              2001    19,647
              2002    21,378
              2003    21,654
              2004    22,990
              2005    22,734
              2006    20,680
              2007    19,609
              2008    17,475
              2009    12,753


              At this current rate of decline, 2011 international adoption statistics will show a number closer to 10,000 than 20,000.

              There are thousands of children around the world who could become a part of US families. Hopefully international adoption statistics for the next few years will reflect a generous increase in numbers.

              --------

              There are solutions, and those solutions could make it easier to adopt, especially as those adopting from overseas face heavy bills to do so, precluding no doubt many willing adoptive parents in the USA who simply cannot afford the high costs of overseas adoptions.

              Even if we could not place EVERY child (before they were aborted, they could be placed) we could save thousands of lives by taking a moral viewpoint regarding abortion.

              Personal convenience loses it's validity when you have created a life irresponsibly, and want to have that human being killed just because you do not wish to be inconvenienced.

              There are options, apart from mass genocide of your future hope.

          2. profile image0
            Sooner28posted 5 years ago in reply to this

            Or refusing to fund welfare programs that will feed the 15 million children currently in poverty in the Untied States!  The options are really almost endless.

        2. aguasilver profile image87
          aguasilverposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          10 answers....



          "Human life occurs at conception" so we agree on that point, however here are a few of those who were spared abortion and adopted:

          How many of the following do you wish had never been born?

          Andy Berlin
          Anthony Williams
          Aristotle
          Art Linkletter
          Bo Diddley
          Buffy Sainte-Marie
          Carl-Theodor Dreyer
          Charlotte Anne Lopez
          Christina Crawford
          Clarissa Pinkola Estes
          Crazy Horse
          Dan O'Brien
          Daunte Culpepper
          Dave Thomas
          Debbie Harry
          D.M.C.
          Edgar Allan Poe
          Edward Albee
          Eleanor Roosevelt
          Eric Dickerson
          Faith Daniels
          Faith Hill
          Freddie Bartholomew
          George Washington Carver
          Greg Louganis
          James MacArthur
          James Michener
          Jean Jacques Rousseau
          Jesse Jackson
          Jett Williams
          Jim Palmer
          John J. Audubon
          John Hancock
          John Lennon
          Langston Hughes
          Larry Ellison
          Lee Majors
          Leo Tolstoy
          Les Brown
          Lynnette Cole
          Malcolm X
          Mark Acre
          Matthew Laborteaux
          Melissa Gilbert
          Michael Reagan
          Moses
          Nancy Reagan
          Nat King Cole
          Nelson Mandela
          Patrick Labyorteaux
          Peter and Kitty Carruthers
          President Gerald Ford
          President William Clinton
          Priscilla Presley
          Ray Liotta
          Reno
          Sarah McLachlan
          Scott Hamilton
          Sen. Paull H. Shin
          Sen. Robert Byrd
          Steve Jobs
          Surya Bonaly
          Tim Green
          Tim McGraw
          Tom Monaghan
          Tommy Davidson
          Victoria Rowell
          Wilson Riles

          Quite a list of 'personalities' we would be missing huh.

          Nelson Mandela should strike some chords with Liberals...? and you would have missed President Gerald Ford and President William Clinton, though I guess some Conservatives may lament on the last one, and Monica Lewinski would probably been less famous.

          Nat King Cole would have been a great loss, and Malcolm X (IMO)

          'Imagine' a world where John Lennon had never being born?

          Steve Jobs would definitely have cause our world to be less innovative, and Edgar Allan Poe would have lefta big hole in American literature.

          I wonder how many genius's, Presidents, inventors and great statesmen we are missing because of those 40 million abortions carried out since Wade versus Roe was 'won'?



          Statement, not requiring any answer.



          May I suggest that the mere fact that "very few women who give birth choose to give up their babies" is an argument against press-ganged abortion by Planned Parenthood.

          As for "Adoption is not an alternative to abortion" I would proffer that those listed above (and myself, for I was also recommended for abortion) may wish to differ on that issue.



          http://health.nytimes.com/health/guides … rview.html

          Risks of surgical abortion include:
          Damage to the womb or cervix
          Emotional or psychological distress
          Excessive bleeding
          infection of the uterus or fallopian tubes
          The risks of surgical abortion increase as a woman gets further along in her pregnancy. That's why it's important to make a decision about abortion as early as possible, when the procedure is safest.
          The risks for any anesthesia are:
          Reactions to medications
          Problems breathing
          Bleeding
          Infection
          Call your health care provider if you have had a surgical abortion and you have:
          Excessive vaginal bleeding (may lead to shock)
          Continued pain or pregnancy symptoms (possible sign of ectopic pregnancy)
          Signs of infection, including persistent fever, vaginal drainage with a foul odor, vaginal drainage that looks like pus, or abdominal pain or tenderness

          Yep, that sounds very safe and secure, and speaking as someone who has counselled post abortion women, I can tell you that the 'Emotional or psychological distress' is very real and will surface for most women at some point, especially if the abortion then causes 'Damage to the womb or cervix' and they cannot have children when they do decide to do so.



          Agreed, that is ONE area where abortion is a valid cause for most people, doesn't make it more palatable, just recognised as a valid objection to carrying a child to term.



          http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/artic … ntrol.html

          Teenagers are using repeat abortions as a form of birth control, with some girls having four or more terminations by the age of 18, it has been claimed.
          Nearly 1,500 of the 19,000 girls under 18 who had a termination last year had previously undergone one earlier abortion for an unwanted pregnancy – and in at least one case a teenage girl had her eighth abortion.
          Department of Health data for 2008 reveals 74 teenagers had their third abortion and a further 15 girls under the age of 18 had previously had between three and six earlier abortions.

          Would tend to disagree, but they are only quoting Department of Health data for 2008, so it may have changed since then, anyone want to guess whether that % will have increased or decreased?... no though not.



          Agreed, but maybe she needs to exercise that self control before she recklessly created a human being that is now an inconvenience, or am I being too logical, I mean surely the point to decide about having a baby is before you have sex?

          After that your decision becomes one that affects others, so your 'rights' get equally less significant, because the decision taken is 'critical to the civil and human rights' of all those folk listed above, who would have left the world a worse place had their mothers exercised their 'civil and human rights' to have them killed, before their lives had been fulfilled.... but after they had reached the 'concept of human life' point that you stated commences at conception.



          One of the worse answers to that is eugenics and genocide of the innocents, perhaps you will step forward when they decide that anybody who is considered unfit for labour should be terminated as well?

          That is also a logical argument to make if you support mass killing to deplete the population.

          Also rather racist, especially as MOST of the developed world is now in negative birth rate, i.e. the civilised societies are no longer replacing themselves.

          All population growth is in the under developed world, and the largest breeders are Islamic women in the 10/40 window, are you suggesting that we force abortion onto Muslim women, or are you content to simply wipe out the so called 'WASP' element of our world?



          Of course we could spend more time pointing that out to them, instead of educating them how to put on a condom with their boyfriend, or whoever they are shagging at the time?

          Or even dare suggest that sex is something which is better when kept to the marriage bed, but then the liberals have long screamed those arguments down, in favor of sex education at the youngest age possible, and certainly before the child is legal to have sex, in favor of mass genocide of our possibly brightest hopes for the future.

          Yeah, that makes sense.... if you are seeking a NWO solution to controlling the world.



          Again, all those listed above seemed to survive in their adoptive homes, and indeed those who adopt normally have real and genuine love for the children they adopt, so point one is moot.

          Point two merely proves that children have more sense than some mothers who choose abortion, they actually CARE about the parent who gave birth to them, how strange!



          Do I take that to mean that you were adopted, and wish you had never been born? or that you have given a child up for adoption and regretted it?

          Massive subject, and yes I have hubs on about all the points I have raised, but not one which I wish to play table tennis with for the sake of pleasing bleeding heart liberals.

          1. gregas profile image75
            gregasposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            You have your list of adoptees that were lucky enough to turn out good. I'm not like you and I'm not going to use this forum to make a hub, or long winded thread, and I'm not saying either way, pro or anti. I am simply giving you, and others, a web site to check out. Not that it will make any differebce to you, because your mind is set one way. But go see this site.
            http://www.amfor.net/killers/
            Greg

            1. lovemychris profile image80
              lovemychrisposted 5 years ago in reply to this

              Yup...you could make a long list of people we'd be better off without.

              Bottom line is this: God/Nature/Creative Force gave it onto the female of the species to bring life or not. That's just the way it is.

            2. aguasilver profile image87
              aguasilverposted 5 years ago in reply to this

              Yep, an impressive list of adopted killers, I can see what you mean, killing 46 million babies a year makes total sense now.

              1. gregas profile image75
                gregasposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                Those are just ehe ones that are adopted. How many live in abusive homes and orphanages that turn out bad because because they weren't, or felt they weren't, wanted all their lives. I agree with the not getting pregnant in the first place, but we are living in a "real" world, not a fantasy land.

                1. aguasilver profile image87
                  aguasilverposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                  But we could change the 'real world' to one that worked better?

                  It's not an impossibility, just need to start teaching a moral code again, and giving the lost generations some hope that we, who rule currently, really do wish to improve our world.

                  To quote a famous adopted guy who did not murder anyone, "You may say I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one, hope someday you will join us..."

                  Starting with not killing 46 million children a year would be a start maybe?

                  1. Castlepaloma profile image25
                    Castlepalomaposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                    Did not John Lennon imagine no Religion too?

          2. Evan G Rogers profile image83
            Evan G Rogersposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            A utilitarian approach to abortion is hopeless.

    3. lovemychris profile image80
      lovemychrisposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Yes--women have minds of their own....SHOCK!

      1. Evan G Rogers profile image83
        Evan G Rogersposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        No one here is arguing otherwise.

        1. lovemychris profile image80
          lovemychrisposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          Yes, I know...it's just their bodies and lives that are not their own.

          1. Evan G Rogers profile image83
            Evan G Rogersposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            The baby has a different set of DNA than the mother. She is just feeding it and giving it a place to live.

            Sorry that nature f**ked you over on that one, but facts are facts.

            1. lovemychris profile image80
              lovemychrisposted 5 years ago in reply to this

              Yes, and it's up to her to choose if she wants to be that place to live or not.

              If she is given that responsibility, it is hers.

              1. Evan G Rogers profile image83
                Evan G Rogersposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                Well, I was about to say "there ya go", but then you just got done saying that you support murdering people because there's no right or wrong.

                1. lovemychris profile image80
                  lovemychrisposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                  No I didn't say that. Stop using Limbaugh Logic.

                  I'm saying YOU don't have the right to tell me what's right for me. Do you?

                  1. Evan G Rogers profile image83
                    Evan G Rogersposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                    This was your exact quote: "Because death is part of life....so who are you to judge when it is right or wrong?"

                    You just said that humanity is not able to judge whether death is right or wrong because it is a part of nature.

                    You also, previously, said that "buying things with money earned from a job" is NOT capitalism "because profits are involved".

                    If you don't want to obey logic, then you will forever be its slave.

                    Pcunix admitted that he'll kill me for leaving the union; Deeds argued similarly; and you just said that humanity isn't able to judge right or wrong deaths.

                    I think that this has been the most gratifying week on HubPages ever. I've seen with absolute clarity, and have been able to bring to the bright light, the obvious flaws in liberal logic.

  5. lovemychris profile image80
    lovemychrisposted 5 years ago

    "The best judge of whether or not a country is going to develop is how it treats its women" -- Obama

    1. lovemychris profile image80
      lovemychrisposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      These religious people support Affordable Care Act....can I say the gender is not surprising:

      "Benedictine Sisters, Boerne, Texas; Congregation of the Sisters of Charity of the Incarnate Word, Texas; Dominican Congregation of Our Lady of the Rosary, New York; Dominican Sisters of Hope; Justice and Peace Committee of the Sisters of St. Joseph of Springfield, Massachusetts; Marianist Province of the United States; Sisters of Charity of St. Elizabeth Leadership Team, New Jersey; Sisters of Charity of St. Vincent De Paul of New York; Sisters of the Holy Cross Congregation Justice Committee; Sisters of the Incarnate Word and Blessed Sacrament, Corpus Christi, Texas; Sisters of Mercy West Midwest Justice Team, Nebraska; Sisters of the Most Precious Blood, Missouri; Sisters of the Presentation of the Blessed Virgin Mary, New York; Sisters of St. Dominic Congregation of the Most Holy Name; Society of the Holy Child Jesus, American Province Leadership Team; Ursuline Sisters of Tildonk, US Province; JOLT, Catholic Coalition for Responsible Investing; Region VI Coalition for Responsible Investment, Ohio, Kentucky, Tennessee; School Sisters of Notre Dame Cooperative Investment Fund"

      This truly is the Return of the Cosmic Goddess. Only sane and Godly people are women.

  6. lovemychris profile image80
    lovemychrisposted 5 years ago

    How many of the following do you wish had never been born?

    Hitler
    Stalin
    Zodiac Killer
    Dick Cheney
    Donald Rumsfeld
    Marquis de Sade

    .....get the drift? It can go either way.

    1. aguasilver profile image87
      aguasilverposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      But the list is infinitely smaller Chris, and instead of trying to turn the point, answer whether you think ANY of those people on my list deserved to die before they had a chance to show their possibilities?

      Hitler and Stalin were monsters, but they did help with the eugenics problem that those who support abortion consent to, and besides, between then they cause less people to die than the abortionists have managed since 1960.

      Abortionists kill over 46 million children EVERY year, so who are the mass murderers?

      1. lovemychris profile image80
        lovemychrisposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        There is no way to come to an agreement here.

        I do not believe that a fertilized egg is a person. You apparently believe that egg is more important than the woman carrying it...has more rights, deserves more consideration.

        We will have to see what kind of country we end up with. Because there is no way of meeting half-way here.

        Unless we could agree to teach birth control, and make it freely available, so that abortions don't happen as much as possible.

        1. aguasilver profile image87
          aguasilverposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          Obviously there is no way pro life and pro choice can ever agree, they have different perspectives.

          The relevant thing you stated was:

          "We will have to see what kind of country we end up with"

          Well let's just hope that we don't miss the next Steve Jobs, or John Lennon, or Nelson Mandela those folk would be bad to miss, and the list of notable adopted folk is very extensive.

          Frankly I would not dice with eugenics and chance missing those people, but then I had a vested interest anyway, because had my mother listened to the doctors, I would not be here trying to defend those 'eggs' who became marvellous additions to the human race and moved us forward in cultural, technical and social development in all areas they touched.

          The 'hidden' agenda of those BEHIND the pro choice argument, the eugenicists who believe that we should reduce the world population to 500 million, is "slowly slowly catchee monkey", i.e. today they have made killing unwanted children (sorry 'eggs') acceptable.

          By stealth they have brainwashed the liberal left and wishy washy middle American into defending the right to kill on demand, and succeeded in dehumanising the human form, thereby clouding the issue of who defends the unborn citizens rights and civil liberties?

          The Nazi's persuaded millions of decent Germans to accept that attempted genocide of the Jews, Homosexuals, Gypsies and mentally retarded (by Nazi standards) was to be condoned, or at least not interfered with, by DEHUMANISING those people in the public perception, and making it impossible to speaj out against.

          I see the current Zeitgeist moving that way, drip by drip we slip down the slope of eugenics

          Now there are moves to FORCE terminations; where certain birth defects are shown when scans are conducted, and bit by bit we will move to the slippery slope of the eugenics program.

          Think that is impossible?

          The second point you made:

          "Unless we could agree to teach birth control, and make it freely available, so that abortions don't happen as much as possible."

          Could equally be writen:

          "Unless we could agree to teach SELF control, and make it SOCIALLY ACCEPTABLE to be chaste, so that abortions don't happen as much as possible."

          Yes we need to teach birth control, right alongside the moral and social reasons why ill considered sexual activities are wrong.

          THAT may reduce the need to kill those 46 million 'eggs' each year, and may allow the next generation of 'future hope' citizens to be born, before we run out of inventors, poets, writers and statesmen.

        2. profile image0
          Sooner28posted 5 years ago in reply to this

          That's the crux!  Somehow, someway a fertilized egg is equivalent to YOU in rights!  Should we count a fertilized egg in a consensus?  What if a mugger pushes a woman down that is two weeks along and and she miscarries?  That would need to be charged as murder...

          1. lovemychris profile image80
            lovemychrisposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            Fertilized egg and Sooner....I now pronounce you man and wife.

    2. Evan G Rogers profile image83
      Evan G Rogersposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      A utilitarian approach to abortion is hopeless.

  7. lovemychris profile image80
    lovemychrisposted 5 years ago

    Uhhuh...and how's that working so far?

    Geuss we don't have a problem of unwanted people in this world do we?
    My solution is help those already here, and stop bringing more in.
    When you want to have a child, and are ready to GIVE UP YOUR OWN LIFE....because that child becomes more important than you, then by all means do it. Until then, please don't bring any more people here to suffer.

    "Personal convenience loses it's validity when you have created a life irresponsibly, and want to have that human being killed just because you do not wish to be inconvenienced."

    Like I said in a previous post:
    Republican party has become neo-phyte woman haters.

  8. lovemychris profile image80
    lovemychrisposted 5 years ago

    Or we can snip all male babies until they are ready to be parents.

  9. lovemychris profile image80
    lovemychrisposted 5 years ago

    It has been my experience that the ones most wanting sex without committment are the males of the species....

    So..teach your sons about sex.

    And have them snipped. That will help reduce abortion.

    1. aguasilver profile image87
      aguasilverposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Agreed, however feminism seems to have encouraged women to engage in wanton sexual behaviour as well in today's iniquitous world.



      Did that, he is a missionary in NYC tending to the unwanted children of drug dealers, gang members and prostitutes....well someone has to teach them better ways of life!


      ...and also fit nicely into the eugenics program, where the European stock dwindle due to lack of replacement, whilst the less developed countries breed us into oblivion.

      Once we reach that point the argument for 'removing' the less productive members of planet earth will be compelling to the small number of white Anglo Saxon protestants left alive.

      Of course they will keep some 'peasantry' alive to ensure uncontested service of their needs, but only whilst they are productive and obsequious, after which, they would also be terminated, after all, they are only slaves.

      1. lovemychris profile image80
        lovemychrisposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        Sorry...but this has nothing to do with a kid who ends up pregnant, broke and terrified.

        1. aguasilver profile image87
          aguasilverposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          Actually it does, but I can understand that seeing the bigger picture makes it difficult to argue your case.

          I agree with you that the girl who ends up pregnant, broke and terrified, needs good balanced counselling, proper advice and financial support and education concerning how to stop that happening countless times.

          She needs to be taught a moral code, and cared for whilst she bears the child she is carrying, then supported whilst she rears that child.

          Now if you are pushing for that to replace the sick system of genocide we currently have, you have my total support.

          1. lovemychris profile image80
            lovemychrisposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            Who's going to pay for it?

            Certainly not your Godly types. Or I should say Faux Godly...Christian in name only...the CINO's.

            1. aguasilver profile image87
              aguasilverposted 5 years ago in reply to this
              1. lovemychris profile image80
                lovemychrisposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                Well, ok but Obama wants to use that money to "rebuild America"...
                But I'm sure he's more than willing to spend on poor families....as long as it's not tied to forced birth.

                1. aguasilver profile image87
                  aguasilverposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                  Then we can agree, as long as it's not tied to forced death as well? smile

                  Now I really must get some sleep....

                  1. lovemychris profile image80
                    lovemychrisposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                    No one forces abortion here...it's a life-saving choice.

                    And it's going to stay that way. Mothers will prevail.

        2. Castlepaloma profile image25
          Castlepalomaposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          Maybe its god’s plan to over populate the humans of our world, kill off the large animals. Allow insects to grow larger and take over the planet, much like how the first mammal rats did when the dinosaurs ruled the earth much longer than man did.

          The sea and sky will be cleaner and be true blue again, the other million species will have a much better chance to thrive on earth. I’m warming up to this God’s Plan, Go ahead be over fruitful and multiply, and don’t give those gay guys a chance to love each other

          1. aguasilver profile image87
            aguasilverposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            Nah, God has a better plan than that, just wait and see!

            1. Castlepaloma profile image25
              Castlepalomaposted 5 years ago in reply to this

              You wait, I'm going out and going to kill something!!! lol The story of Gays Guns and God....lool haa haaa

              1. aguasilver profile image87
                aguasilverposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                Unfortunately, not being American, I sometimes have no idea what you are trying to say.

                This is one of those times, apologies, but I have no idea what you mean.

                Anyway guys, it's nearly 2am where I live, so adios until tomorrow (your evening time today)

                John smile

                The good news is, the world made it into Wednesday morning at least.

                1. Castlepaloma profile image25
                  Castlepalomaposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                  I lived in the USA before, If you have no Idea what Gay, Guns and God means. Then most America should give up Hollywood as BIG part of the culture.

    2. Evan G Rogers profile image83
      Evan G Rogersposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      If "ending abortion" is the goal, let's just kill everyone

      1. lovemychris profile image80
        lovemychrisposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        You said it, not me!

        1. Evan G Rogers profile image83
          Evan G Rogersposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          it's called a reductio absurdum.

          1. lovemychris profile image80
            lovemychrisposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            Yes..that's right.

            You don't like abortion, the only way to REALLY end it for good is to never have unprotected sex again ever. That is YOUR party's absurdo re-dumdum.

            1. Evan G Rogers profile image83
              Evan G Rogersposted 5 years ago in reply to this

              I'm actually member to a political party which doesn't discuss abortions.

              Thanks for trying.

              Either way, it doesn't matter, "Because death is part of life....so who are you to judge when it is right or wrong? "

              1. lovemychris profile image80
                lovemychrisposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                Well--you're candidiate for prez is anti-abortion, anti-birth control...so yeah...neither him nor you are true Libertarians.

    3. Evan G Rogers profile image83
      Evan G Rogersposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      This entire "in order to end abortion, cut men's junk" stuff is just a flawed argument.

      The woman carries and feeds the child in the womb. After a rape, the woman has a good 2 days to "evict" the deed before conception occurs.

      Rape is an act of violence that is separate from abortion.

      1. lovemychris profile image80
        lovemychrisposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        Look--I don't have a problem with abortion...you do.

        YOU do something about it on your end...I'm good.

        1. Evan G Rogers profile image83
          Evan G Rogersposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          You're right: I do have a problem with killing people

          You don't seem to:

          "Because death is part of life....so who are you to judge when it is right or wrong? Who is anybody?

          Live and let live."

          (In the past week, I have gotten 3 liberals to admit that murdering people is justified)

          1. lovemychris profile image80
            lovemychrisposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            If you have a problem with death...take it up with the Creator. You have no right placing your judgements on me. YOU are not God.

            1. Evan G Rogers profile image83
              Evan G Rogersposted 5 years ago in reply to this

              I can't believe that you're using this argument. It's hilarious.

              You think you're winning by saying such things, but you're really just admitting that you don't believe in the rule of society.

              You're actually admitting that murder is acceptable because only god can judge.

              This is hilarious.

              1. lovemychris profile image80
                lovemychrisposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                Yes I am. We all will pay for our actions. And I hope a soldier who kills people while following orders gets some compassion, as well as women who don't follow through on a pregnancy.

                Life is not a game where you pick and choose what you want...sometimes you get what you get.

                This is my feeling about God, and to me, it sure beats the heck out of the heck and dangnation they subjugate us with constantly.

                Bad
                Bad
                Bad
                You are Bad

                pfffffffft: save your judgements for your own deeds! We will pay for our own.

  10. suzettenaples profile image89
    suzettenaplesposted 5 years ago

    The answer to each of your questions is:  because our country is paternalistic.

  11. profile image0
    Sooner28posted 5 years ago

    Pick and choose huh?  If the Catholic church would just drop their opposition to homosexuality, abortion, and contraception, I may become Catholic myself!

  12. lovemychris profile image80
    lovemychrisposted 5 years ago

    BTW---an egg has MORE rights than me!

    Apparently, it has the right to be housed in me without my consent....oh...it can't decide anything. Some men in dresses will.

    1. profile image0
      Sooner28posted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Haha.  Isn't it amazing at the Darrell Issa hearing on contraception that there were no women there?  The irony is beyond insane.

      1. lovemychris profile image80
        lovemychrisposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        Especially since the moral arbiters have been known to rape little boys and cover it up.

  13. lovemychris profile image80
    lovemychrisposted 5 years ago

    And yes--they want docotors charged with murder and sent to prison for life....another way to scare off my Constitutional rights to a medical procedure cause the freedom-lovers have to have a strangle hold on lives they care nothing about.

  14. leenamartha profile image59
    leenamarthaposted 5 years ago

    I really don't know if they are truly sincere.  I'm going to say possibly, due to the fact that many republican governors have gone after abortion, and Teapublicans tend to be less open to compromise and facts

    1. lovemychris profile image80
      lovemychrisposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Yes, but you notice they leave child rape alone?

 
working