• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

A new voice in the abortion battle

Jinglebob

Well-known member
Disagreeable said:
Jinglebob said:
I think that one of our first laws in this country is that you have the right to do with your body as you please as long as it's not hurting another person. When you decide to kill a child(person) that is inside of you, you no longer are just dealing with your body. Elementary Watson, there are now TWO people involved.

The cluster of cells that makes up a fetus can't live outside the woman's body. IMO, she should have the right to terminate a pregnancy until the fetus can live on it's own. Then it's a baby. Then it has rights.

I AM NOT SHOUTING, JUST MAKING IT POSSIBLE TO SEE WHO IS WRITING HERE, EASIER.

SOOOO, CAN A NEW BORN BABY LIVE OUTSIDE IT'S MOTHER? WITHOUT ANY HELP WHATSOEVER? I WOULD GUESS IN THE PROPER ENVIROMENT THEY WOULD HAVE TO BE AT LEAST 2 TO 3 YEARS OLD. SO IF THAT IS RIGHT, WHY NOT KILL CHILDREN UP TO THAT AGE, IF THEY ARE A BURDEN?

If you want to pierce your body, or put legal drugs into your body or even sell your body or I'd even go so far as to say, destroy your body, I ain't got a problem with that. The moment you become pregnant, then there is another person involved and socitey has the right to stop you from harming another persaon. We can even get you for drinking or taking the wrong drugs while pregnant, because THERE IS ANOTHER HUMAN BEING INSIDE YOUR BODY. Did you hear that this time? Don't be so obtuse.

My, aren't you being a bit liberal? It's ok with you to destroy the temple God has given you?

I DIDN'T SAY ANYTHING ABOUT MY BODY, I SAID YOUR BODY. THAT SEEMS TO BE THE ONE YOU WANT TO CONTROL, ISN'T IT?

If you want to control your body, DON'T GET PREGNANT! :mad:

Women get pregnant through no fault of their own, rape and incest come to mind. Is her fault, too?

NOPE, IT SURE ISN'T AND THIS LAW WOULD STILL ALLOW THE USE OF ABORTIFICANTS IN THOSE CASES, UP TO A CERTAIN LENGTH OF PREGNANCY.

Why do you think South Dakota didn't make the penalty for abortion a Class 1 or 2 felony? If abortion is murder, why is the penalty similar to having a bag of marijuana? Or repeated drunk driving? And why is the woman not charged with anything?

I'M NOT SURE. KINDNESS, COMPASSION?

I THINK THEY JUST WANT PEOPLE TO STOP USING ABORTION AS A FORM OF BIRTH CONTROL. WHY WOULD YOU WANT TO GET RID OF A CHILD , NOT CAUSED BY RAPE OR INCEST, OTHER THAN THINKING THAT THE CHILD WOULD BE PLACING A BURDEN ON THE MOTHER?

IF THAT IS THE CASE, THEY SHOULD HAVE TAKEN PRECAUTIONS NOT TO GET PREGNANT, IN THE FIRST PLACE.

IF YOU ARE TOO STUPID TO USE BIRTH CONTROL OF SOME FORM, YOU PROBABLY SHOULDN'T BE HAVING SEX.

AND IF YOU ARE THAT STUPID, YOU OUGHT TO AT LEAST GIVE THE CHILD UP FOR ADOPTION TO SOME LOVING PARENTS WHO WILL CHERISH AND NURTURE THE CHILD.

KIND OF LIKE WHAT WE DO WITH STUPID COWS WHO DON'T WANT THEIR CALVES. ONLY, WITH CATTLE, WE HAVE THE OPTION TO ELIMINATE THEM FROM THE GENE POOL WHEN THEY ACT THAT WAY.

By the way dis, you have a nice day. I'll pray for you. :)
 

Turkey Track Bar

Well-known member
The cluster of cells that makes up a fetus can't live outside the woman's body. IMO, she should have the right to terminate a pregnancy until the fetus can live on it's own. Then it's a baby. Then it has rights.

Dis:

You are wrong here...an embryo can live outside the womb--they do all the time--if you'll remember there is such a thing as test tube babies, and thus embryo transfer, I believe in human medicine it's called invitro fertilization. This technology is not only available in humans, but was pioneered in livestock species, namely cattle and horses.

Get your facts straight next time.

Cheers--

TTB :wink:
 

Disagreeable

Well-known member
Turkey Track Bar said:
The cluster of cells that makes up a fetus can't live outside the woman's body. IMO, she should have the right to terminate a pregnancy until the fetus can live on it's own. Then it's a baby. Then it has rights.

Dis:

You are wrong here...an embryo can live outside the womb--they do all the time--if you'll remember there is such a thing as test tube babies, and thus embryo transfer, I believe in human medicine it's called invitro fertilization. This technology is not only available in humans, but was pioneered in livestock species, namely cattle and horses.

Get your facts straight next time.

My facts are straight. The embryo cannot come to term and be a human being without the body of a female. A woman must agree to devote her body to those cells for them to become a human being. The key word there being "agree." If she doesn't want to, you have no right to force her.

Hundreds of frozen human embryos are destroyed every year in fertility clinics. Yet you never see the Bush Bunch trying to stop that.
 

Disagreeable

Well-known member
Jinglebob said:

SOOOO, CAN A NEW BORN BABY LIVE OUTSIDE IT'S MOTHER? WITHOUT ANY HELP WHATSOEVER? I WOULD GUESS IN THE PROPER ENVIROMENT THEY WOULD HAVE TO BE AT LEAST 2 TO 3 YEARS OLD. SO IF THAT IS RIGHT, WHY NOT KILL CHILDREN UP TO THAT AGE, IF THEY ARE A BURDEN?

Nice try, but we're not talking about babies. It’s illegal to kill a child. We're talking about a woman's right to choose whether to carry those few cells to term or not.

I DIDN'T SAY ANYTHING ABOUT MY BODY, I SAID YOUR BODY. THAT SEEMS TO BE THE ONE YOU WANT TO CONTROL, ISN'T IT?

You apparently have a problem with women managing their own body in some ways, but you don’t care if they destroy it in others. Some might call that hypocritical.

NOPE, IT SURE ISN'T AND THIS LAW WOULD STILL ALLOW THE USE OF ABORTIFICANTS IN THOSE CASES (rape, incest), UP TO A CERTAIN LENGTH OF PREGNANCY.

If you truly believe a fertilized egg is a human being, how can you support any abortion? The baby is not at fault for being the product of rape or incest. I know I can say hypocrite here.

I THINK THEY JUST WANT PEOPLE TO STOP USING ABORTION AS A FORM OF BIRTH CONTROL. WHY WOULD YOU WANT TO GET RID OF A CHILD , NOT CAUSED BY RAPE OR INCEST, OTHER THAN THINKING THAT THE CHILD WOULD BE PLACING A BURDEN ON THE MOTHER?

So you don’t believe SD is serious about this anti abortion law? They are only trying to get the public’s attention? Hmmm. Who’d have thought the legislature of SD would be so hypocritical as to pass a law, not expecting it to be followed?

IF THAT IS THE CASE, THEY SHOULD HAVE TAKEN PRECAUTIONS NOT TO GET PREGNANT, IN THE FIRST PLACE.

Right. They’re not allowed to change their minds. Only men who can and do walk away. They can change their minds with no penalty at all.

IF YOU ARE TOO STUPID TO USE BIRTH CONTROL OF SOME FORM, YOU PROBABLY SHOULDN'T BE HAVING SEX.

There you go being judgmental again. Ever hear of birth control not working? Broken rubbers, bad birth control pills? You know the rhythm method isn’t very reliable.

AND IF YOU ARE THAT STUPID, YOU OUGHT TO AT LEAST GIVE THE CHILD UP FOR ADOPTION TO SOME LOVING PARENTS WHO WILL CHERISH AND NURTURE THE CHILD.

And if your job is riding horses and you can’t perform it because you’re eight months pregnant, who’s going to support your other kid while you carry a rapist’s child to term?

KIND OF LIKE WHAT WE DO WITH STUPID COWS WHO DON'T WANT THEIR CALVES. ONLY, WITH CATTLE, WE HAVE THE OPTION TO ELIMINATE THEM FROM THE GENE POOL WHEN THEY ACT THAT WAY

Are you being judgmental again?.
 

Silver

Well-known member
Well Jinglebob, it's unfortunate that someone who is so normally rational in thought as yourself has been so soundly beaten at every point by someone such as ole Dis here.
You are quite clear in that you think a zygot is a human being and accorded all the rights of a human being. That it's never ok to kill a baby. That it's a baby from conception. So, when does it stop being a baby? When does it become ok to kill this child? Something tells me (I might be wrong here) that you think the death penalty is ok. (So it's ok to kill this child when it's a little older....). Perhaps you back the war in Iraq (put a little age on the child, slap him in a uniform, point him east and send him off to die), or possibly kill someone else's baby (of indeterminate age).
Obviously there must be a line somewhere where it becomes ok to kill these children then?
 

kolanuraven

Well-known member
Why does no one get upset about those embryos that are frozen then later destroyed by the clinics?

How do you see that?

And who gets the murder 'rap' on that deal? The parents....the clinic....whom????

I'd venture to guess that more embryos are destroyed via clinics ,by parents permission who have decided they have enough children, than are aborted by suction, RU486 ,etc.

This is the bigger point you all are missing???? What about it?
 

theHiredMansWife

Well-known member
And I don't think being bound for the priesthood should suddenly nullify his opinion on the subject, either. That's like the people who always say men's opinions shouldn't count as much as women's. I don't really see that.
It's often easier for them to make sanctimonious pronouncements, but a truly well thought out opinion should be respected from everyone.
 

Silver

Well-known member
theHiredMansWife said:
And I don't think being bound for the priesthood should suddenly nullify his opinion on the subject, either. That's like the people who always say men's opinions shouldn't count as much as women's. I don't really see that.
It's often easier for them to make sanctimonious pronouncements, but a truly well thought out opinion should be respected from everyone.

Well said.
 

Jinglebob

Well-known member
Silver said:
Well Jinglebob, it's unfortunate that someone who is so normally rational in thought as yourself has been so soundly beaten at every point by someone such as ole Dis here.
SORRY, I BEG TO DISAGREE.
You are quite clear in that you think a zygot is a human being and accorded all the rights of a human being. That it's never ok to kill a baby. That it's a baby from conception. So, when does it stop being a baby?
OUR LAW CONSIDERS NOT BEING A BABY AS TEEnAGE, AND AS ADULT AT 18 TO 21 CONSIDERING THE LAW.
When does it become ok to kill this child?
NEVER. AND WHEN DID IT BECOME A CHILD INSTEAD OF A BABY?
Something tells me (I might be wrong here) that you think the death penalty is ok.
FOR ONCE YOU GOT SOMETHING RIGHT. I DON'T BELIEVE IN THE DEATH PENALTY
(So it's ok to kill this child when it's a little older....). Perhaps you back the war in Iraq (put a little age on the child, slap him in a uniform, point him east and send him off to die), or possibly kill someone else's baby (of indeterminate age).
I GUESS I SHOULD CLEAR UP THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN KILLING AND MURDERING. KILLING TO PROTECT OR PROVENT SOMEONE ELSES DEATH IS FINE. MURDER (WHAT YOU DO WHEN YOU ABORT A CHILD) IS NEVER FINE. IF THE PRESIDENT AND CONGRESS FEEL THAT WE NEED TO GO TO WAR TO PREVENT MURDER TO OUR CITIZENS, THEN YES, I AM FOR THIS WAR. I HAD A SON WHO PROUDLY SERVED AND SEVERAL NEPHEWS AND A NIECE ALSO IN THE LINE OF FIRE. THEY SERVED SO WE MAY HAVE OUR RIGHTS.IF YOU'VE GOT A PROBLEM WITH THIS WAR, TELL THE POLITICIONS AND THE TERRORISTS. DON'T WHINE AT ME.
Obviously there must be a line somewhere where it becomes ok to kill these children then?
IT'S NEVER OK MURDER A CHILD. I GUESS IF A CHILD (UNDER THE AGE OF 18 OR 21)COMES AT YOU WITH A LOADED GUN AND FIRES, WITH INTENT TO MURDER YOU OR YOUR FAMILY OR EVEN ANY OTHER INNOCENT PERSON, THEN IT WOULD BE PERMITTED TO KILL THAT CHILD. BUT IT WOULDN'T BE MURDER ON YOUR PART. IT WOULD BE DEFENSE.

The problem with so many people like dis and you is that you seem to either just skim over what others write, or you don't understand the content. Dis likes to change others words and won't answer any questions as to what she/he/it believes. I believe that I've made my case ubundentley clear and there is not the slightest chance in hell to get anyone with a different mindset to change their mind or ideas. So therefore I am done with this thread and any future ones. If you feel that you and the rest of those who believe in murdering pre born children, want to believe that this means you win, so be it. We all have to attone to our maker someday. I hope you all have good luck with that. I will pray for all of you.
 

Silver

Well-known member
Jinglebob, lumping into the same category as Dis is an insult I take quite personally. I haven't stated where I actually stand on these issues personally because I feel that doing so diminishes the philisophical side of the debate. If you seem to think it's pertinent, then here it is:
1: against abortion unless absolutely necessary and early (I don't know enough to make an informed opinion on what it early enough to be humane)
2: for the war in Afganistan, I support our troops all the way.
3: for the war in Iraq, now that you are there, although I don't support the original reasons for going
4: havn't formed a solid opinion on the death penalty..... I struggle with the ethics

So don't go off giving me your holier than thou attitude, I don't deserve it. If you want to discuss something using some logic I would be happy to accomadate, if I can. In the mean time I will pray for you also.
 

Soapweed

Well-known member
Disagreeable said:
Not just a man...who can walk away from a pregnancy and never invest a cent or a moment of his time into it.

But a priest...who will never (or almost never) produce or raise a child, pay the rent, worry about where the next pair of shoes will come from.

Oh, that's someone whose opinion I would certainly respect in the abortion debate. (Sarcasam intended) :roll:

You seem to think it is a "man thing" to be against abortion. Nearly all the ladies I know are against abortion. Of course, they mostly are Republican Christian ranch ladies, with common sense. They are the kind that take personal responsibility for their own actions.

Democrats have the opinion that the government owes them a living, and that the government should pay for their abortions of convenience. They are more apt to get high on mind altering substances, and plumb lose track of their personal actions. Alas, gee, golly, all of a sudden, through no fault of their own, they turn up pregnant. It is a basic "entitlement" to be able to eradicate the little fetus, go on with life, and no questions should be asked.

It would be interesting to see the breakdown of pregnancies that end in abortion. I am betting a fairly small percentage are caused by rape or incest. The vast majority of abortions are just a convenient way to avoid an unwanted pregnancy.

Killing little unborn babies is just plain murder because those babies don't have a chance. Capital punishment is acceptable, because the perpetrators of heinous crimes deserve to lose their lives for what they have done.
 

Jinglebob

Well-known member
Silver said:
Jinglebob, lumping into the same category as Dis is an insult I take quite personally. I haven't stated where I actually stand on these issues personally because I feel that doing so diminishes the philisophical side of the debate. If you seem to think it's pertinent, then here it is:
1: against abortion unless absolutely necessary and early (I don't know enough to make an informed opinion on what it early enough to be humane)
2: for the war in Afganistan, I support our troops all the way.
3: for the war in Iraq, now that you are there, although I don't support the original reasons for going
4: havn't formed a solid opinion on the death penalty..... I struggle with the ethics

So don't go off giving me your holier than thou attitude, I don't deserve it. If you want to discuss something using some logic I would be happy to
accomadate, if I can. In the mean time I will pray for you also.

Thank you for having the courtesy of summing up where you stand. Didn't mean to come off holier than thou. I imagine there are a large bunch of people in this world who are better people than me.

As for lumping you with dis, from what you wrote earlier, it sounded like you were on her side of the argument, so your either for or against or your crotch is gettin' sore! :wink:

Sorry if I offended you. And I dang sure can use all the prayers I can get. So if you weren't being sarcastic, thanks! :)
 

Silver

Well-known member
My grandfather, God rest his soul, allways claimed you could learn something from anyone. Well, he didn't word it quite that nicely, but I try to live by that. I would never discount something out of hand just because someone I don't like said it. If it's a good point, it's a good point based on it's merits, and I'll listen to it. Even if its from the other side of the argument.
Free thinking is what this great country is built on and I intend to carry it on.
 

Jinglebob

Well-known member
Silver said:
My grandfather, God rest his soul, allways claimed you could learn something from anyone. Well, he didn't word it quite that nicely, but I try to live by that. I would never discount something out of hand just because someone I don't like said it. If it's a good point, it's a good point based on it's merits, and I'll listen to it. Even if its from the other side of the argument.
Free thinking is what this great country is built on and I intend to carry it on.

Good advice and a good attitude. Can we still be friends? :oops:

:D :lol: :lol: :lol:
 

Latest posts

Top