I am sorry, I shared such a horrible video. But when we mock the pro- life people we forget the reality sometime.
I stopped in the middle, I have phobia of blood, but then in the Philippines, abortion is illegal and there are 400,000 unsafe abortions done every year, unsafe meaning no trained professional medical person is doing it,
there are lots of reason for induced abortions
not yet ready financially
not yet ready emotionally
due to incest
due to rape
too many children already
baby born has imprefections -- abnormal
mothers life is in danger
CONTRACEPTION and education for women is the best solutions, so that they will know how to protect for themselves and say NO or YES
Prettydarkhorse, I agree with you. Contraception!
Nature wants us to have babies
As many as possible.
We simply cannot do that.
So we try to trick our nature.
Contraception is not 100% safeproof unfortunately. Abortion is a necessary evil, and it should be legal everywhere. Sometimes it's not a woman's fault, and she needs a way out. And it's a horrible experience anyway - legal or illegal.
Don't be sorry.
Sometimes a reality shock is needful.
I watched the whole video. Shocking and sad. Looks like the footage was of late-term abortions after the 12 week mark. Eye opener for sure. But a reality.
"Do not start threads for the sole purpose of promotion or posting links."
Please review forum rules before creating threads.
Bumping this thread.
Upholding the right of the unborn to LIFE is a very valid thing, and a personal right of every American citizen, not to mention that abortion is just plain baby-killing. It's an American (and international) holocaust of major proportions, perpetuated BY Americans upon their own children.
I'm not talking about the instances when there really IS a dilemma where a choice MUST be made.
I'm talking about killing babies for none other reason than selfishness on the part of mothers-to-be and fathers-to-be.
The issue has already been decided; based on science and reason, not mythology.
No morality in the decision making? It is a moral or immoral choice to make. Many use the excuse that most babies will be abused. Out of all the babies born, how many are abused?
They use excuses like rape and incest. Babies don't know anything about those things. They just want to live.
Excuses like not knowing who the father is. Keep your clothes on and it won't matter.
Like I said, it all comes down to morals. Those who are in a position to decide whether to abort a baby or not are pretending to be God and that is the bottom line.
The issue was decided based on obsolete science.
Not to even mention the outrageous immoral leadership in The White House, which (and who; yes, Mr. Obama) promotes baby-killing and other immoralities.
Your statement is incorrect and potentially libelous.
So you say.
I say your post is harrassment, Ron.
Preaching again woman? This is against the Word and you will surely burn in hell for going against the Word.
Plus your irrational nonsense pretty much proves why women are not allowed to preach. It is one of the rare instances I actually agree with the bible.
Hate speech and a personal attack all rolled into one! Shocking, simply shocking!
Just quoting the bible sweetie pie. God said so - not me.
Wow, I don't know how you and Brenda managed to get him to quote the Bible, when he thinks it's really about nothing.
I don't think it is about nothing sweetie pie.
I am just constantly amazed at the followers who never follow the rules. Makes me think they don't actually believe.
And it might shock you to discover that I spent years studying the bible. Unlike most believers.
You wouldn't know what the Bible said if it bit you in the ass! You just can't handle the truth can you Mark? This isn't suppose to be a country where life has so little value but, hey it's only a baby. Oh yeah, I forgot you're a promme frit.
The danger is not that a particular class is unfit to govern. Every class is unfit to govern.
Do you have any idea of the consequences we'd have to deal with if abortion were made illegal? Now, I understand where your concerns come from when certain women go to clinics to get their fourth or fifth abortions and it does seem like blatant irresponsibility. However...
I know if it were illegal, many women would resort to doing it illegally in very unsafe ways.
How does killing many to save a few sound, morally speaking? Even now anyone can go and do anything they want legal or illegal. They can find drugs, get drunk or whatever if they just set their minds to it. I am talking of young teenage boys and girls.
Everybody should have reproductive choice specially for women---- and for the government to provide safe services for the woman who wants abortion because it happens that women resort to abortion for so many reasons. ABORTION simply happens, like infidelity etc..
we should focus on educating women and empower them to use contraception and assert themselves to avoid being pregnant if they are not yet ready etc...
If you are referring to rape then don't speak as if that is sex, it is violence, nothing more!
To some it's exactly that. And no, I don't hold that view. And it's not always about violence. Sometimes it's a silent giving in. Not exactly rape but you'd have to find yourself in such a situation in order to know exactly what that means.
in some societies yes, they cant say no to their husband like for example in the Philippines
No. Miscarriage simply "happens" sometimes. Not abortion.
I suppose you think the mother just "happens" to say hey I want this baby to not be born.
I suppose you think the doctors just "happen" to poke babies with an instrument that makes their brains dead and other such inhumane practices.
induced abortion is when a woman do something to abort the baby -- at times she is scared for her parents to know she is pregnant so she tries to do something else to abort it, other times the baby is an outcome of rape, incest or infidelity...hundreds of reasons
spontaneous abortion is miscarriage
maternal mortality rate due to induced abortion is very high, the government should provide abortion to women who wants to have induced abortion rather than women risking their lives if they do it on their own
is called reproductive choice
Pretty, the Government does not provide anything! We the taxpayers provide the funds that a tyrannical Government uses to enslave us, I do not want my money going to a woman who can't use proper birth control!
If the pregnancy is a result of a sexual assault then use my money to abort the child and then buy bullets for the late term abortion of the rapist!
Well said Maita.
I personally have never been faced with that choice to make but I do know people who have. I am Pro-Choice. I do not know if put in that situation that I would actually have an abortion but I believe that it is MY choice to make and that no one else should be able to decide for me - not the church, not the preident, etc...
There are many reasons and circumstances under which women consider and have abortions. Each circumstance is different and no one should judge someone else's decision unless they have lived their life or walked in their shoes. The reasoning might not seem valid to you but to someone else, it's a life altering decision that I don't believe is ever taken lightly - at least it shouldn't be.
If I ever had to make that choice and decided to have an abortion, I'm just thankful that I have a safe environment in which this can be done, by professional doctors and that I don't have to travel to some seedy town in Mexico, go through a back alley door, and have some make-shift doctor perform an abortion with a wire hanger (as has been done in the past before it was legal) and lose my life in the process on account of the non stop bleeding from the butcher job he just performed.
Women do need to be educated, made aware of ALL their options, not just abortion. That isn't always the answer. For some it may be but at least they have a choice.
I will say this...my egg donor had two choices to abort me or give me up for adoption. I'm alive today because she chose to put me up for adoption and I am grateful for that.
Who would have thought this topic would stir up so many?
Who would've thought there are still adults who don't understand what murder is?
Yes, and they even let them sit on the Supreme Court!
We have murder-advocates in many seats of leadership where they should NOT be.
More people have been kiled in the name of christianity than any other group in history.
I never thought of that but its so true. Hello, Native Americans anyone?
....because it's a broad statement and (for instance) in the abortion issue alone millions of children are being killed by secularists every year worldwide, and I don't think you can blame abortion on Christians.... know any Christian abortionists?
The main killing done 'in the name of religion' was during the Crusades, which were a small blip in the terms of human killing.
Besides which, Crusaders by their actions proved they were not Christians, just as GWB did when he went into the Middle East fro profit.
Christ never advocated killing anybody, therefore anybody who does is by definition unable to be called a Christian.
"If you love me, you will obey my commands" means just that, and when we don't obey His commands, we show our lack of love and compassion.
I love it when people who believe in an invisible super being who tells them what to do into their head start asking for evidence.
Too funny sweetie pie. Too funny. You were joking right? We just pull facts out of thin air on the irrational beliefs threads.
"My god said XYZ, therefore I am right," is a favored religious approach. I have seen you do it.
Evidence forsooth. LOLOLOLO Yeah - I know - I am using smilies and laughter. Evidence? Deary me.
Another attempt to draw away from the topic of this thread. Why don't you tell us how you really feel about abortion? What about the video that was posted?
I think it is disgusting for you to use the death of a baby to further your political agenda. Typical underhanded behavior from so-called christians.
How many unwanted babies have you adopted? I know you are a big fan of using photos of dead babies to attempt to inflict your bronze age opinions of women on the rest of us, fortunately - the law disagrees with you and we will not be returning to dead women in back street abortionist's clinics any time soon.
I am in favor of women being allowed to choose what they do with their bodies. I also think that late term abortions are wrong.
But using video in this fashion to - basically lie about what abortion really is all about - is typical behavior from people with no moral standards.
And starting yet another " I want to stop women from doing what they please with their bodies because an invisible super being told me into my head it does not matter how much I lie as long as Jesus gets what he wants," thread is getting a little old.
How many unwanted babies have you adopted Dent?
Holier than thou? Yup...... Typical Kristian. No morals or ethics - that is the problem with you guys.
"Do as I say - not as I do."
Was that so hard to do? I knew you could speak your mind on the topic and still insult believers.
Just making an observation. No moral standards - that is the problem.
You are deciding who is and is not Christian based on what ???
They were the only Christians around in their day. You can't decide this like you decide what it is that god said - deciding what god said is ok, everyone does it, some obscure scraps even got put into a book.
It appears that the people most responsible for forcibly spreading christianity across the globe were not real christians and the only real christians are the few on here who support making abortion illegal in the hope that the mother will die using a back street abortionist, getting her just rewards.
Did you know that these also killed Christians and Jews in their conquest? I also wonder if you know who financed the crusades. They did it themselves and I mean those who marched and fought in it. The Catholic Church bought their farms aso they could finance their own wars.
It has absolutely nothing to do with the topic of this thread. It is meant to pull away from the real discussion and cause dissent.
OK on the non-christian Crusaders -
My thoughts on this are in line with what happens here. abortion is free on demand at any clinic - up to week 14. It is the business of those who choose to terminate a pregnancy not anyone else. Abortion in the early days up to week 14, (week 12 in other places) is not killing a human being it is killing a bunch of cells that in time could become a person.
"Abortion in the early days up to week 14, (week 12 in other places) is not killing a human being it is killing a bunch of cells"
It must be great to have the ability to determine exactly when life begins. What power.
" It is the business of those who choose to terminate a pregnancy not anyone else"
That slogan doesn't really work in China.
Unfortunately Chinas overpopulation has made things slightly different than overseas, maybe they could just do a lottery to kill people instead.
China's got a hug population but they are headed toward the same old/young imbalances as the developed world (the morally questionable population control measures having been all too effective).
Yes you are right, China has much more of a hug population - it is because they are so much more friendly LOL
The essential population control has not been 'too effective' - the rate of reproduction has resulted in the national average being around each person replaced, roughly stable or balanced if you like. There is nothing morally questionable about it - Chinese do not subscribe to our twisted moral values that are imposed by guilt trippers - they tend more to ethical values, reasoning.
Try to read things before comment on them -
14 weeks is not MY ability to determine when life begins - it is the practical statement of most of the world to determine the point life begins practically and more important, legally.
This is not a slogan - it is clearly my opinion. And that is exactly how it works in China, as you would know if you had ever actually been here, or, if you ever were in China, you stopped opening your preconceptions long enough to open your eyes.
Sorry if I offended, one of my best friends was a Chinese immigrant (he moved to London around a year back now). His (Deceased) sister was killed after birth by one of his grandparents, because they wanted a boy.
While I cannot speak from direct experince, I have had some pretty frank conversations on the subject, since he now has some very conflicted issues with his younger sister who was born outside of China.
I actually do fully agree with the statement "It is the business of those who choose to terminate a pregnancy not anyone else"
I have had this conversation many times. Immigrants by definition have rejected their home country and what they say has great importance - but of course their opinions can be one sided. I have very good Chinese friend in England who has issues, as many related to the racism she has encountered growing up in England, as from her family attitude. Another friend's grandparents constantly complain about the lands that were stolen from them when they had to run for it. This side of the bamboo fence they would say they were precisely the bad landlords that made the revolution so popular that it won out.
It is my experience that most stories of children being killed are just that - stories. Of course it happened as the rule applied to everyone including many very poor and uneducated people who already valued boys much higher than girls. But mostly these village people talk of leaving the unwanted baby outside of houses where they knew there were no children, or by the side of the road in the towns where people had more money. The Chinese also have a well developed gossip ability, and the older women can weave up tall tales to test credibility to the limit. This is not in any way to defend any of these issues - just offering up a pound or two of salt to go with western preconceptions
Actually it's killing a 'bunch of cells' that if they are not killed WILL produce a human being.
Life happens at the point when left alone it will proceed to a live birth, i.e. when the sperm meets the ovum.
We live in a secular society, so if people want to kill their offspring and society approves of this, so be it, it's their choice, and all we as believers can do is point out the errancy in this course of action.
We have had to deal with many women who have aborted and later come to faith, and realised what they had done.
Thankfully Christ forgives, the problem is that often they cannot forgive themselves, especially if they then have other babies, or worse cannot have further children.
TANSTAFL.... There ain't no such thing as a free lunch....
We all pay for our errors.
Yes we do. Sadly, the people laying on the guilt absolve themselves of all responsibility, and often a christian priest ends up sexually abusing the unwanted child. Sad really. But that is what christianity is is all about really. "Do as I say, not as I do."
Many of these unwanted children end up on the streets, but that is not what is important. What is important is the laying on of guilt.
Thank you for reminding me why I do not subscribe to your religion. Your hate mongering is getting louder John. Did Jesus tell you you were slacking off or something?
Best to ignore the spontaneous abortions that God performs Himself though - right?
No best not to ignore the spontaneous abortions that God performs Himself, that is His prerogative, and in Romans 28 style we can know that it is for the best for the situation.
We suffered three miscarriages before we became pregnant, and one ectopic pregnancy, so I guess we are able to live with Gods wisdom in our lives.
You have many deep resentments towards 'Christians' and have obviously been hurt by some, I cannot apologise for them.
I can only reiterate my stance that where someone deliberately sets out to abuse the name of Christ, by using the title 'Christian' but disobeying the tenets of Christ, they in reality are not Christians, I don't know what they are, they may be the 'tares'we see mentioned in scripture, they may be plants by the enemy, they may just be 'hirelings' who hide behind the mask, whatever they are they are as despicable to me as they seem to be to you.
If you met someone who said they were an atheist, yet you saw that they obviously worshipped a god, would you still accept that they were and atheist.
Forrest said "simple is as simple does"
I don't care if someone's been to seminary, wears all the garb and swings incense whilst being a master theologian, if they are in rebellion to what Christ teaches, they do not belong to Him, and will be told to depart from Him when they finally meet.
You say many unwanted children end up on the streets, I know, my son works with them in the city of New York, and Metro Ministries works with them in America, Haiti and India, plus we have been working with street kids in Haiti for fourteen years, not just this last month.... we collect and assist a ministry that has built 54 schools for these street kids in Haiti, and has been feeding 20,000+ per day for years.... don't attempt to claim the high ground over Christ, He hold it all and just because you see bad Christians, don't think for one moment that Christ is not still helping the poor all over the world.
Our little church will have collected over €20,000 for Haiti in the last month or so, and we are passing that 100% untouched to ministries in Haiti, who have guaranteed that no administrative fees will be deducted and 100% of that collected will go directly into feeding street children.
Christ told us that the poor will always be with us, and maybe that's because the secular man is mostly interested in their own selves, they maybe only use the poor and homeless as a counter to attack believers with.... any atheist,rationalist, scientist or humanitarian who has been an is involved with saving children from their plights, please step up to the plate, let us know what you do to ease their plight.
Make my day and show us believers up with your generosity and consideration.
Mark you have effectively said that it is better to abort a child than let it live on the street, you have made yourself the arbiter of life and death.
What right does anybody have to decide whether someone lives or dies for convenience?
Bill Wilson, who started Metro Ministries, was left to fend for himself on the street, that's why he now helps others, and has done for the last 30 years, living in Brooklyn where those folk live, he's been beaten,stabbed and shot, and told that with the size of the ministry he should be living in comfort in a safer area, but he lives right in with the people he and his workers care for.
Every life that God considers viable IS viable, who are you or anybody else to decide who can live and who will die?
This is right - who are you to tell others that what they do with their lives, including reproducing themselves if they choose or not reproducing if they choose.
Laying on the whole we are doing such good works trip has no bearing on this argument, you do these things because you choose and you can. Even this argument is open to criticism as you bring up the whole thieving pile of hypocrisy that swills around as charity, the stink of which obscures the occasional good stuff.
Religion attracts good people who see the good messages in it and ignore the bad messages and out of date morals. It also attracts bad people because any message can be twisted to personal use in translation. Unfortunately, while you may be one of the good guys, the bad guys seem to be in charge of the show, as usual.
Agreed, the bad guy is always trying to run the show, we fight a common enemy.
I would never tell someone what to do with heir life, I may tell them how I have found peace and contentment and security, but how they run their life is their business, like I said in my hub on abortion (one of my first hubs; 'Why don't women say.....') it's up to the individual.
But lets just stop trying to whitewash the issue, abortion is legalised killing, the 'thing' one is terminating is a human life, no cop out about what stage it's in, pregnancy is like all other absolutes, nobody is 'slightly pregnant' or 'a little bit dead'... you are either alive or dead, and a child in the womb is alive unless God or man kills it.
I'm off to sleep now...3am here.
God does not need any assistant abortionists, He can do the whole thing Himself if life is not viable.
The Lord giveth, and the Lord taketh away. Who has the right to question Him, really? No one.
The lord is just one of many made up gods. A woman's own body is real, and her own domain.
That you support the idea of legislating what people may or may not do with their own bodies according to YOUR beliefs expresses an extreme lack of respect for the beliefs of others. Not to mention a complete disregard for science.
I admit to both accusations in that last paragraph, quite freely and happily.
Are you saying that you're an intolerant, rather ignorant bigot? Understand that I am not saying this about you, but it seems to me that when you say you freely admit that you have no respect for the beliefs of others and no regard for science, this is how you will be viewed.
In certain circumstances, I don't care how I'm viewed. This issue is one of those.
However, you should maybe look up the definitions of "bigot" and "prejudice" (both have about the same meaning.) And both mean an intolerance based on lack of facts or reason.
Yep, I'm intolerant.
Nope, I'm not a bigot.
Yes, I'm ignorant about many things, as are all people.
This issue is not one of them.
With all due respect, Brenda, it seems you are one of them. Obviously the law considers that there is a difference between abortion and murder, perhaps you should give consideration to why that is the case while keeping in mind the separation of church and state.
That having been said, even the Bible makes a distinction between "murder" and "killing." The commandment forbids "murder," but it's pretty obvious-Biblically speaking-that God seems to think there might be instances in which it's justified to kill.
You are welcome to your religion, and you are welcome to allow it to dictate *your* life choices--in fact, for those who are capable of actually living what they believe, it is a good thing--however, we are not allowed to force our religions on other people, to allow those religions to make laws that affect the entire country, to use religion to make choices for others, or to presume that we know what is the right for another person--with very good reason.
Well, I'm not surpised, but still shocked at the poor reasoning behind the actions of a moderator.
They closed my questioning thread to replies.
I reported back and told 'em all my questions were not answered.
Wonder if I can ever expect fairness from hub pages staff?...
I have it on good authority that they are going to start closing any and all religious threads by people who love Jesus and try to bring Truth an Honesty into the Open and Show Late Term Abortion Videos. Plus - I hear the owners have all become Satanists.
And it is your fault for going against the Word. I warned you.
Hallelujah, lord have mercy, Mark is preaching the word, glory be his name,Amen!!!!!!!!!
No, Tex, the Book of Mark! Of course, it wasn't nearly as factual as Forrest Gump, though!
I have decided to worship Mark instead of football, praise him!
I don't blame you after the Longhorns year!
There are some things worse than finishing second, like finishing where Georgia did, thats gotta suck!
Yeah, it was pretty bad, but our quarterback took hits from SEC players all season. Colt didn't last a whole quarter. Touche!
He didn't last two series! But still the winning-est quarterback of all time, so, touche!
But he wasn't playing SEC teams,Tex! If you can't beat the best, forget the rest! en garde!
You've already been given an answer. We are not being unfair, simply upholding the rules. Threads should not be created for the sole purpose of promoting links, and posting graphic visual content is not the same as simply discussing a touchy subject. Talking about the fact that you think abortion is disgusting would be perfectly acceptable. Posting a video with graphic images is not. Just as (to use your own example from the other thread) talking about the possibility of Jesus being homosexual is perfectly acceptable, but posting a video of Jesus having gay sex would not be.
Please note that both sides of every debate complain to us about discrimination... the "liberals" say the "conservatives" are given too much leeway, and vice versa. You may feel like you are the victim, but you're not unique in that. Nobody is ever going to be happy with what I do, or what Norah does. That's just the nature of the job. But please, try to have a little perspective.
Sorry Maddie, but that's the problem with society today----it promotes the idea that there ARE two valid "perspectives" about baby-killing and homosexuality, when in fact there aren't.
But I'll shut up for now as far as asking about the abortion video, if you'll please tell me why it was okay for Ron Montgomery to insinuate that Christians are into beastiality without his post being deleted.
And if you're gonna say he had a right to say that, then tell me where you and other moderators draw the line at personal (and I did take it personal) attacks?
I did not see that post. Feel free to flag it for me.
I reported it yesterday.
Do you mean I should do so again?
The post says nothing about Christians. It uses the term "homo-abortionists" which is a completely made up term, and just a bunch of silliness if you ask me.
And you didn't take the context of the whole thread into account either, including the people (one of them myself) at whom the insult was directed.
I give up.
Next time I'll just be secure in the knowledge that, by hub pages rules, I can pretty much tell Ron what a perverted sense of right and wrong he has, and that he's a pervert himself, just as long as I lump it into an indirectly-defined category and don't actually mention his name.
So - there is only ONE valid perspective?
Preacher woman - you dun be goin agin tha word a god.
Okay. I gotta reply to this, or wanna anyway, real quick.
With a question.
For those who don't believe a woman should be so vocal, tell me WHERE are the men "preachers" who should be so forthright and vocal about the moral issues?
The day I see a man on here who's as outspoken as I am, and who takes a strong enough stance about right and wrong, is the day I'll sit back and AMEN him time after time.
I'm not saying there aren't some good Bible-believing men on here. There are many I respect.
But where's the ones who will stand up like John the Baptist and warn sinners to repent and label right right and wrong wrong without conceding to liberalism, without fear of being labeled intolerant, without holding back?! It might be said that they're in the churches, but I personally think they need to be here too.
And I gotta go.
That day I'll look forward to.
I believe a woman has a right to speak her piece and do with her body what she wishes.
It be the biybel wot sez woman b'aint be preechin'.
You dun be goin agin the Word a tha lord woman.
Makes me realize you do not actually have any moral standards.
I was actually making fun of the Lord Mark Knowles, but you go girl!
Any time that a man speaks out against abortion, nearly everyone starts picking on him. They say that's just typical of a man to say something like that.
I must also add this. Those who are responsible for the killing of the unborn babies will be judged at the White Throne Judgment. It is all in the hands of God.
It might be good if "GOD" really existed.
A mystical entity handing down mythic judgment. another good laugh. Thank you SirDent.
I am glad you find all of this funny. It is good to laugh. Where is the morality of your laughter?
Laughter is part of cause and effect. I laugh because something was funny. Hence, doesn't qualify for morality, just to let you know.
Laughing comes from an emotion. Emotions are amoral. Hence, they are not right or wrong.
So, before you question my morality, you should first learn what it is in the first place.
You talk a lot about moralty, but you do not show morlaity in this thread. But to get to an othet topic than the one in this post, "What is the moral obligation, according to Cagsil, of the mother of an unborn child?"
I can see you make no sense. Glad you're getting your money's worth from your religion.
Have a great day!
Why does it seem impossible for you to answer a simple question?
It's not impossible to answer you're question, for the simple fact that you don't deserve an answer, because you're mocking me, before I post it.
So, what acknowledge your train of thought. It's religious based and since that's the case. You're not worth any further communication.
Or did you not get that by me saying Have a good day?
Here's one possibility.......
Cause I never did that!
YAY MADDIE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Great reply and so true!!
I think it's important to educate all women to act responsibly when it comes to sexual behavor. I also think contraception is a good idea and wouldn't mind that my tax goes to helping educate women to act responsibly with contraception, it's part of helping women to become good citizens.
Why only educate women about contraception? Men need to be educated as well and encouraged to use protection. Men are part of the baby-making process and need to take their share of responsibility.
I agree with you Hypno, don't want to leave the guys out of it. It just happened that we were talking about women. Seriously, I wish both young men and women were educated more about the responsibilities and consequences of sex, contraception, protection, and acting responsibly when there are unintended outcomes. Families are not able to have this kind of conversation and schools really are not equipped to have this conversation which is why we're in such a terrible spot.
thats why the family is still the most important part of the society to instill values among children -- to use contraception and for school curriculum to provide venues for children to know when it is safe or not safe to engage in sex and the negative consequences it can bring to their lives and their future will be ruined if they are irresponsibe pertaining to their sexualities
Sex is such an uncomfortable topic among families. My mother was uncomfortable discussing sex when I started having my period. She actually wished for just a little bit that I would learn about it from the gutter Although she didn't admit it at the time.
my parents as well, it is taboo to ask about it--- that is why until I was 19 I was not allowed to have a bf hehehe, never know anyhting about sexuality, contraception etc, and so when I had my first bf, I got preggers and was forced to get married at 21, Now I divorced the ex and I try to educate my children about sexuality but at times it is very difficult to do it,
I just try to tell them about options--contraceptions and what early pregnancy can do to their lives, instead of learning it from their peers or friends the wrong way i try to explain to them and try to be cool MOM<
I find it interesting and sad that many people prefer the non-challenge of engaging in discussion about licking toads and other hogwash to actually entertaining the notion of moral right and wrong.
Common sense? Yep...intact...Conscience? Check...Feelin' pretty good for a flawed human...I did get into a fight with my roommate the other day and said some things I shouldn't have. You're right; I should apologize to him.
Perhaps you ought to remember what the Good Book says about judgment, my friend.
Tell that to the women who later grieve for the unborn children they were coaxed into killing or allowed to kill.
You forgot to check your seared head. Is it okay?
Again, I stumbled upon a HOT issue. My 2 cents: abortion is wrong.
I'm not offended. I'm just trying to say that your comment about women saying 'no' to sex isn't always as cut and dried as it means rape - or not rape. There is a grey area.
However - regarding a normal healthy relationship, however fleeting, then yes, of course you are right. A woman can always say no.
You do? Good good. I didn't I know was in the 'e' team, 'twas sufidreamer that pointed it out. I believe it caused quite the controversy
You should be on the e team froggy, you're very helpful and a lot of people would agree that you belong there. Ignore the whiners.
Why controversy? If I was in it it would cause controversy, now thats a fact!
Pretty, I think for many people here, you are a VCM - VERY COOL MOM.
Thank you flight and Atexan, I will eat now, if only you are near here, I have some spring rolls,
Talk to you again
I'd rather have some Lumpia, can you hook me up?
ok thats an easy cook, Ill send it to you via snow
it is almost the same as spring roll
do you also eat beef pho noodles?
Enjoy your snack! Hook me up too in the future!
Anyway, I did.
I don't mind some heated debate, even false accusations sometimes if I'm allowed to "fight back", but that post of Ron's was total perverted hogwash. It was an assault against pro-Lifers and conservatives and Christians in general concerning two subjects.
Brenda, truth be told (and I'm going to be really frank here) the amount of people that piss and moan about bugger all is probably a big reason why genuine stuff will be missed. I've lost count of the times I've seen someone shouting 'harrasment', 'personal attack!!' when there's been nothing of the sort.
Equally, some folks have genuine issues and don't always get heard. Perhaps it's because the flagged threads inbox is weighed down with absurdity?
*shrugs* I don´t know Texan, I'm not admin and have no idea how it works, behind the scenes.
They use their perspective, which is subjective!
Been banned for things that happen here everyday where nothing is said or done, maybe I'm a little jaded, and I am without a doubt rebellious by nature!
You have? Oh. Well, seems you're not banned now
I have been threatened with a 90 day ban next time. And I have only been banned 3 times. Twice it was atomswifey though - so I figure I should get a pass for those.
90 days is also my next ban, wonder when it will happen?
I agree with you Mark, that lady was almost worth a ban!
Worth it - and funny too.
I did indeed laugh and often wondered if she were serious or just trying to appear ignorant. I never decided which, though!
Is that your subjective view?
How do you know their actions are not objective?
Since you only have a one-sided argument, it shows you are using your subjective views, in order, to degrade HubPages Staff, who try to be objective in doing their job.
They look at all sides before they make a decision and MUST do what's in the best interest of the company.
If anti-choice people put as much effort into assisting women and families who are in trouble as they put into condemning a basic human right, we would not have so many tragic situations in the first place.
There are no human rights more basic than life, wyanjen.
And how do you know pro-lifers don't put even more effort into assisting women and families in trouble?
Last I checked, nearly every organization that provides the best support, food assistance, shelter, education, legal advice, education and medical references for women who don't want abortions are pro-life.
You neatly qualify your response by narrowing it down to 'your' women - how Christian is that - you help with all your self centred 'love' those who agree with your narrow point of view. The real world and the real problems are out there and the mess that you see is mostly in the name of religion at the moment.
In the 1970s, I was privileged to attend a workshop with Ken Feit. Ex-Jesuit priest, clown, mime artist and storyteller, Ken devoted his life to living as an "itinerant fool", seeking to understand the life of Christ, a life of no permanent commitment, no permanency, proclaiming universal love. He carried one suitcase with him containing his costume and the books he could not live without. He spent no more than 2 weeks in any place. He travelled the world, listening and learning from different cultures. Often, he would improvise on the street, challenging people to respond to his "foolishness".
We worked through many themes for street theatre and other, often spontaneous performances. He touched me deeply and I have never forgotten him (he died in 1981 in a car crash in Utah).
At the end of one presentation, we were invited to present topics to Ken and he would act out his response. Someone gave him the topic of abortion.
Ken stood in the middle of the stage and screamed, and screamed, and screamed.
We then discussed his response with him. To put it briefly, the scream was the scream of the child never to be born, and, at the same time, the scream of the mother who is forced do this to her child because of pressures she is unable to bear.
It is easy to judge and condemn, but unless you have walked the same path as the person you despise, you have no right to make moral pronouncements on their actions.
Did he also do the unwed mother with several kids, not knowing how she would ever raise them properly? I'm sure there was plenty of anguish for him to act out in those scenarios too!
Maybe should have done the legspread and not caring what the consequences were until later scenario! Must be some angst to show there huh?
Ken screamed to signify all the pain of children, born and unborn, and the pain of parents and non-parents, for whatever reason.
He had no pat answer, there is no pat answer.
Relating to pat, his clown name was Pathetique and it amused him that many children would hear this as Pattycake.
He was an amazing man, there is a book about him called "Foolish Wisdom", which I hope to obtain soon.
Outside of the kilings, Washington has one of the lowest crime rates in the country.
sorry for misspelling. Comp. has filter.
Haven't had time for baking since I was appointed Obama's Porn Czar.
That's because of your latest mischief. I post plenty but hubpages moderators intercept it before you can view it.
It's a good thing you have a helmut to keep you from hurting yourself!
Technically, "buns" are still considered pastry.
That was extrememely sad and disturbing. I myself could never do it. The guilt afterwards would kill me inside.
wow, just need to add, judgements are strong, maybe from many not knowing there are many situation. Who are we to judge what is acceptable or not.
Ugly as it is, abortion is a booming business and won't be stopping anytime soon.
Another business. What makes a business successful? Demand, and abortion clinics have waiting lists. Bottom line.
Just my 2 cents, irrelevant where I stand on the issue, it is, and will continue to be.
Actually you are spot on there!
Most big businesses including baby food manufacturers help sponsor abortion clinics.
What? But why would baby food companies sponsor abortion clinics? Don't they want people to have babies so more parents will have to buy food?
I used to have big list of all the companies that sponsor these clinics.
This is called business.
Business people (the top ones) are completely amoral. Everything is money.
There is no business in a company producing food for babies reducing the number of babies. They must do so at a moral standpoint. Remember people can have a moral standpoint which is in direct opposition to your own moral standpoint, since moral views are entirely based on personal perspective.
But a babyfood manufacturer can only sponsor an abortion clinic on moral grounds.
There is no profit in a baby food manufacturer killing off future business.
Not everyone has a choice. I have heard many horror stories about teenage girls who were forced to have abortions by their parents. And, sometimes an abortion is necessary to keep the mother alive.
For the most part, I am against abortion. But there are certain circumstances, I think, that make abortion necessary. Rape and illness are the two circumstances that come into my mind. Did you know that 80% of women have been raped at some point in their lives? 50% of women have been raped multiple times by different people.
We must also remember that, unless we ARE the mother, we don't know the exact circumstances and we have no right to judge. Often, women are feeling ashamed and scared when they get an abortion. They are probably not in their right minds and are unable to tell you the real reason for which they are getting an abortion until much later.
I think that when people address the issue of abortion, they are often trapped inside their "perfect world" minds, where every baby that forms is made in the perfect scenario. What people must remember is that there are many rapists out there, there are many parents out there who would not help a pregnant teenage girl, and there are many other situations we are not aware of.
Furthermore, even if abortion was made illegal, people would just set up black market abortion clinics with dirty knives and doctors who really don't know what they're doing, resulting in even more deaths, infections, and infertility. Although some of us may have a moral compass that says no no no to abortion, does your moral compass say yes yes yes to teenage girl's deaths and severe illnesses? You must think of both sides of an issue before you condemn something.
I was a member of the Life organisation when I was young, about 22 or 23. I was vehemently anti-abortion. At that time, even rape would not have been a good reason to have one, simply because it was not the baby's fault his or her mum got raped.
I'm a lot older now, and my views have relaxed. Abortion is still wrong to me.
The video at the start of this topic showed what happens in abrotions later than 12-13 weeks, before that, a woman can opt for a simple D & C abortion. Later than that she must go through labour and the baby must be killed either during or after. They used to inject a salt solution into the uterus to kill the baby.
Later abortions are more upsetting to everyone concerned. It would be far better to relax the Law to allow all abortions for whatever reason up to 12 weeks, and NONE after that, except when the mother's life is in danger.
I know the tests for Downs Syndrome and spina bifida can't be carried out until 17 or 18 weeks, but I don't think these conditions are a reason for abortion. That's a bit like Hitler's Germany - kill the imperfect in society.
Women have a damned good idea they are pregnant from early on, and you can buy testing kits that can show a positive from as early as a week before the next period is even due.
Everyone knows when they have had unprotected sex.
Even if it was an accidental pregnancy through a contraceptive failure, most women still know by 6 weeks at the latest that they are pregnant or think they might be.
This is not a good forum topic because everyone has their belief and it is very difficult to get that person to change beliefs.
Better to accept what is happening out there in the big wide world and look for a solution that will keep everyone (or most folk) happy.
This does not seem right to me - can you clarify ??
Not the kind of thing I would usually mention in a public forum, but the discussion here has forced me to it.
I had an abortion yes. Because I have a medical condition (liver related) which gets worse with the passing months of pregnancy, causing the child to die within the mother's wound. It can be dangerous for the mother too. My first child barely survived and even the doctor's advised me not to get pregnant again. Despite being on pills, I still got pregnant (that %). I went for the abortion within the first 6 weeks. The doctors told me it was the best thing to do. Given a choice, I would do it again.
I don't care about any moral/religious judgement. It was my personal choice. And I'm glad I had it. Period.
I am pro abortion, that does not mean I am anti-life.
My first reason for being so is simply that I think it is the parents right to decide whether or not to keep a baby, lets face it, a condom could be classed as murder by most of the pro life arguments, it just isn't used because is it less 'personal'. I would not preach to a family to abort a baby, but nor would I preach for them to keep a baby, it is definately up to them.
Legalization of abortion keeps abortion safe, it does happen anyway, backstreet abortionists are common in all countries which have made it illegal, and actually allowing abortion statistically reduces future crime.
Contraception is only a small part of the abortion argument in my opinion. Protection doesn't always work, and sometimes people have no choice in the matter (Rape is both sex and violence, to an earlier commentor, and can result in pregnancy) While I would advocate the use of contraception, I do not see much difference between that and an abortion, since both are preventing a future life.
There is adoption as an alternative, and a lot of the time it works out well, which is why Crazdwriter is around today. By the same argument however there are people writing on this forum today because people did not use contraception, and yet the pro-lifers are advocating the use of contraception itself?
I am thankful my parents got it on without a rubber, but I do not think that gives me the right to tell other parents that they should have unprotected sex simply for that reason.
Condoms are murder, abortion is murder, hell, deciding to watch a movie instead of doing it is murder.
But it is a kind of murder that I think prevents a lot of unhappiness in this world, and allows parents to be parents when they are both prepared and stable enough for a family.
P.S the crusades were very christian, a lot more christian infact than the watered down version of the religion we have today. Christianity requires you to kill those of other religions, put God before your family, etc, etc. If however this is going to be discussed further it should however be in a new topic, I don't see it having anything to do with current day abortion.
Why there is opposition for abortion ?
In some cases there is no alternative to abortion, for example there are many rape cases and in those cases that women needs to abort and that is acceptable. If that woman is having problem (health/financial) to keep baby then why not abort ?
If any woman is having problem with health then her choice of abortion is not wrong at all. If people ask me choose baby or mother in extreme cases, I'll prefer to choose side of mother. There is nothing anti-life about it, it's about choice. Just because you choose name of Jesus to label your personal decisions and call any of your unanimous decisions as from Jesus then it is utter crap of faith.
I see Christians preaching against abortion just for one good reason, increase the count of religious followers. Muslims did the same earlier and now Christians want to do the same. In India, kerala church ordered women to have more than 2 kids just for the sake of increasing count of followers. So this type of faith-business allowed ? Or it is adjusted in prayers with god ?
How ignorant a statement can anyone make? Do you actually believe what you wrote?
What is the moral obligation of a woman who is pregnant to her unborn child?
I understand ectopic pregnancies will not come to full term and endanger the life ot he mother and baby both. That is different than having sex and becoming pregnant and deciding that abortion is the way to go.
Whose moral standards did those who made it legal to have abortions use?
As I stated in another comment, there is also guilt associated with having an abortion.
You think I preach against abortion to increase followers? This is the most ignorant thing you said.
There are almost no morals at all anymore in this world. Nothing is off-limits and everything is legal. Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law. Let chaos reign and man do anything he wants.
abortion clinics are a business. lucrative multi million dollar businesses. bottom line. They're not going anywhere. All other elements and beliefs are irrelevant. Business is business.
Skyfire, I think Lyrics meant "mean", not "bean".
Donald Trump known for his TV show, the one where he fired people, because they weren't good enough for a job.
I don't preach morality on the basis of some religion. I believe morality is subjective and shouldn't be dictated by some random wanna-be god's word religion.
Morality is subjective.
Duh, Whether to abort or not is the decision to be made by that woman. Brainwashing women religiously to keep the child with so-called religiously moral arguments make sense ?
Guilt or no-guilt, it's their decision to keep it.
Nowhere in my post I said Sirdent preaches to increase followers. I made this statement anywhere about YOU ?
You talked about ignorance earlier, right ?
Don't get worked up, we have saviour who died for our sins right ?
abortion happens and it kills the mother, specially if it is performed not by a licensed one, and women usually resort to abortion in a clandestine manner , at times it is illegal so they do it in their own as well, until they are bleeding profusely and rushed to the hospital and some died because of it, hundred of thousands women are dying because of this
are we blind, for the meantime what are we doing, condemning abortion and the woman???
why not help facilitate the safe way to abort until a certain age of the baby because it happens and it happens always,,,
When it comes to religion they preach charity and low crime, but the statistics show that where religion is highest, crime is highest, and charity is at it's least abundant. Where things are more liberal and religion is less prevailant crime tends to be lower and free will donations are considerably higher.
I am not saying that the Christians are commiting the crimes, since most Christians are law abiding, but I would one day like to research this topic to find out exactly where these metrics form!
This is a huge generalization. Where did you get this information?
Doesn't everyone just kinda know this ? Religion is about trying to dictate how others live - by doing this it is both the cause and the effect in the cycle of death and resurrection.
Really? Saudi Arabia is high in religion would you say that there is a lot of crime there? Russia is low in religion would you say there is low crime there?
Oli, I still want to know your source regarding your statement.
Good point about Saudi, maybe though this is more about the comparative qualities of religions.
meaning that at least they operate their religion successfully according to their idea of their own rules. We may not like it but maybe a big part of the hate Christians have for it is that they at least do it so much better.
So if I understand you correctly china man, you are saying that you agree with oli that Christians are hypocrites and that Muslims are successful because they maintain a strict adherence to a narrow interpretation of Islam. Yet your tone when it comes to Christians tring to adhere to their religious teachings has been disapproving because you see them as being narrowminded. How is it that you admire one for being narrowminded but not the other?
You are putting Oli's words in my mouth. I have no time for either religion - I was pointing out, in response to your Saudi comment, that they do what they set out to do better than you. I don't have to see anything right in either side.
Well then let's keep oli out of this because he's not here. You did however agree with oli's assessment that Christians don't do a good job of adhering to their teachings because of the high crime rate. You assessed that a strict muslim state such as Saudi is more successful because they do maintain a strict interpretation of islam. So one would think that you would applaud Christians trying to be successful by making people adhere to a strict construction of Christianity yet you are judgmental of those who do. So the question is still why do you approve of one and not the other?
I replied to this above - maybe you missed it ?
I do not have to agree with any religion to point out that they do what they set out to do better than you.
Their religion doesn't tolerate any disobediance. Punishment is severe. Unless you're advocating the same in western religions, it's not a good comparison.
It is interesting (sad) what religion does to the psyche of not just the religious, but also to nonbelievers living in a religious society.
When someone kills a pregnant woman, the perp can be charged with two counts of murder, but if the woman chooses to have an abortion, it's not murder. I don't get it.
I'm against abortion in general, but I don't think Roe v Wade should be overturned. Why? Because women are going to have abortions whether or not they're legal, even if it means having them performed by a quack. Better to provide safe means for terminating a pregnancy.
HOWEVER, there is no excuse for a late term abortion, unless the mother's life is in danger!! This isn't a "mass of cells." This is a tiny human being who can react to his surroundings and experience pain. WHY would any woman wait so long to make such a critical decision?
I think everyone on both sides of this debate agrees with this.
But it is being used to cloud the issue over what most rational people see as a mass of cells, and societies everywhere have set the difference where this change to becoming a human being occurring after 12 or 14 weeks. To talk of early term abortion as murder is as ridicluous as banning spermicide that 'murders' millions of healthy half persons every day.
When I hear the arguments from pro-lifers I am reminded of a quote from a movie I watched recently
"You mean you were the fastest sperm in your race?"
To ensure that there is no mistake - this is not directed at you Habee who talks more sense than most on here
I personally don't believe it's the same.
Someone correct me if I'm wrong about this, but I think spermicides prevent the egg from being fertilized in the first place. And a man's sperm only has the potential to be a child when coupled directly with the woman's egg. So it's not a "half child"....
Conception is the beginning of a child.
So, to compare the use of spermicides to abortion is a bit erroneous, I think.
This is the point - I was not making the comparison, I was making comment on how the pro-life thinking 'decides' when a thought becomes a person, and how their reasoning is emotive and ridiculous.
At least most pro-lifers have a much clearer-cut and scientifically supportable idea of when a "mass of cells" becomes a person- at the very beginning of the human organism's existence.
Pro-choicers can't agree if it's 8 weeks, 14 weeks, "viability," crowning, or when the umbilical cord is cut.
Your arguement failed when you mentioned 'half humans' that's a whole different ball game.
Fertilised Ovum are no linger 'half humans'.
" most rational people see as a mass of cells"
"most rational people" = people who agree with you? Yeah ~
See if you agree with me?
There are 4 difference of a child inside its mother and a child outside of its mother.
1) Size - one is smaller than the other. Does a small person have less rights than a basketball or football player who are very much larger than them?
2) Dependency - One is dependant on the mother one is not?
Do people who depend on medicines like diabetecs or heart patients have less rights as a human because they are dependent on medicines?
3) Development - One is more developed than the other. Does a 5 year old girl or a 11 year old boy have less rights as a human because they have not gone through puberty and are not fully developed? NO!!!
4) Placement - One is inside its mother, one is outside. If you leave your home you are now outside, do you have less rights as a human because you are outside? What about if you were in another country, would you have less rights as a human for being in Asia? What about being in an airplane? Your not even on the earth, would you have less rights as a human because you were not on the earth?
I believe "Fetus" is a french word that means baby?
This moronic argument is anyway full of holes inconsistencies and downright funny stuff.
We all have more or less rights than others. Living in China I have less rights than a Chinese national – and other rights they do not have. Poor people have less rights than rich people, we may not like it but this is the human condition. And this is the condition promoted by your godless religions.
Does a child have less rights than an adult – of course they do !! you can smack a child with impunity – smack me and you will not only get a broken nose you will get arrested!
Nobody forces you to go to school whether you want to or not, orders you to stop doing whatever it is you happen to be doing, at random!
If you leave your home you DO have less rights than when you are inside !! I guess you are in the US, I understand your godless gun laws to mean that you can shoot me in your home but not in the street.
And the Enslish language word for foetus is the French word foetus and the French word is the latin word - still foetus. And none of them mean baby they all mean foetus.
If you are against abortion, I would like to ask you if you are also against war? Do you find it wrong that we are fighting -killing people- in Iraq and Afghanistan?
There is a difference between abortion and fighting in a war. A bbaby has done no harm to anyone nor had intentions of harming anyone. Wars are fought because of offense or some similar circumstance.
That being said, I am against starting wars. I am not against protecting my family or my country from anyone who means to do them harm.
Wow - big issue here - to take one tiny element I read recently that a supposed 'Taliban' leader was not thought to be dead - along with his wife and children that WERE blown to pieces on the road in another country by some plastic US drone thing filled with murder! You appear to be saying that abortion is wrong but killing others who don't agree with your particular view is ok.
You stated that killing for abortion is wrong but killing for war is ok. quite clearly - and you are wrong.
You are attempting to change what I wrote to make it what you want me to write. Grow up and look at what I wrote. Read it slowly.
I imagine maybe you would let harm come to your family if they are attacked, but I will do everything I can to keep harm away from mine.
Don't tell me to grow up to try to disguise the conflicting and spurious nonsense you write - You are clearly saying that abortion is NOT ok but it IS ok to kill in a war because of some offense - what offense did Iraqi babies do to you, or your country !!
BTW. I quite admire your spirited debate on these forums even though you are defending the indefensible.
But surely you're not naive enough to believe that all the people harmed -or killed- by war are out to get you?
Or are you?
Either way, so it's okay to kill someone to keep your own life from harm?
It's not okay. But killing in defense of the innocent is only tolerable if it cannot be avoided. Killing innocents who are accidentally in the crossfire is also to be avoided as much as possible.
But again the killing that takes place in a war is different than the preemptive taking of innocent human life that occurs with elective abortion.
Some cross-fire halfway across the world from you !!
Are you really trying to defend what your blood thirsty administration calls 'collateral damage' when referring to the kids it kills? And this was coined in the sixties when they were trying to inflict their self centred views on yet another population by killilng them.
Whose preemptive is it? Who gets to decide if it can or cannot be avoided? What gives them that right? Did anyone ask the victims? Perhaps they would have liked to live..
This is what is called, "turning the other cheek."
It is an admirable christian moral quality that sets them above all others and ensures them a place at the party with Jesus.
Really? You're saying christians possess this quality? And that it's a saving grace for them, part of their doctrine and teachings?
Amazing.. I never would have guessed that based on the christians here who constantly cry that they're being persecuted.
Oh yes - this is turning the other cheek. I thought that meant something else, but it now means something about fighting to show that your religion should be respected because their morals come from a higher power and are therfore more valid, and complaining bitterly when people laugh at your ridiculous beliefs and saying this is "unwarranted persecution."
You will have to ask Valerie to explain it to you - she explained it to me. I still didn't get it - but she was adamant that turning the other cheek means something new now. Nothing to do with what I always thought.
But - this may go some way to explaining why I thought Christians are total hypocrites. Jesus never would have killed anyone - except in defense of an innocent child - unless that innocent child is in an American war zone or the result of rape. Then killing it is OK with Jesus, and this is what is known as "turning the other cheek."
As I say - I am not really getting it but Valerie has it down pat.
Ah yeah okay. See I was starting to think "turning the other cheek" meant something like "speaking out of both sides of the mouth". That one seemed to fit.
Or possibly it was related to praying loudly on street corners. Like "turn the other cheek, but be sure to loudly let everyone know that you're doing so."
by Chris Mills 8 years ago
I am pro-life. I am so adamant about seeing the number of abortions decrease that I am in favor of providing contraception to minors without parental consent. I could actually work side by side with a pro-choice person on this point. I may not agree with this person on anything...
by Asa Schneidermann 5 years ago
Before, it was all kind of fuzzy. We knew that abortions took place in Planned Parenthood facilities and fought against it, but other activities were unclear. Now, we have clear, undeniable evidence of the evil - and I mean evil - practices taking place using our own tax dollars. It is not an...
by Thinkaboutit77 12 years ago
People who are pro-life are really pro-choice because it is the pro-lifers who wish to give the unborn child a CHOICE rather than have the choice made for them.The pro-choice movement is really a pro-abortion movement because abortion is a big business, there's a LOT of money involved in this side...
by Leslie McCowen 10 years ago
"On a conference call with reporters and bloggers this afternoon, Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) characterized the GOP’s recent legislative effort to restrict access to abortion and contraception as “the most comprehensive and radical assault on women’s health in our life time,” promising to wage a...
by Judith Hayes 18 months ago
The state of Maine has just passed a law that requires children to be vaccinated. All exemptions have been removed. Is this not an act of the state that controls a person's body and demands they introduce a chemical element into it? We have abortion laws that say women does not have to have a baby...
by Phocas Vincent 21 months ago
Do you believe in your opinion that in the topic of abortion, the US Government should regulate the procedure or should it be a left to the discretion of the individuals involved? (Please keep it civil and clean guys.)
Copyright © 2021 HubPages Inc. and respective owners. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc. HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.
HubPages Inc, a part of Maven Inc.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|