[quote]skor wrote:
Plan B is not an effective method of birth control and still allows high chance of conception.
I still don’t understand how a question of legality/morality of abortion depends on a method of conception. Could ANYONE explain? It’s either “It’s a baby since the moment of conception and it shouldn’t be killed regardless of how it was concieved” OR “it’s not a baby until it can survive outside mother’s body”.
[/quote]
The studies I have read seemed to indicate that when given within the target time frame, the MAP is extremely effective.
As far as the legality/morality issue goes, according to what I have read, the MAP works in the same way that oral contraceptives do. Some people do want to get rid of those as well (I am not one). It is somewhat problematic, but it does solve the rape “loophole.”
[quote]miniross wrote:
steveo5801 wrote:
Professor X wrote:
steveo5801 wrote:
Prof. X, I think that YOUR logic is faulty here…
“Biological control” – is this what was once called “motherhood” had degenerated to? As much as the pro-abortion (or if you want to say the pro-choice)advocates wish to couch this debate in terms of a woman having control over “her own body,” in reality the debate is about a woman having the ability to kill her unborn baby.
I am not “PROabortion”. I am PROCHOICE. I have no intention of promoting the idea that abortions are great. However, I am completely against the idea that it is YOUR business what every woman chooses to do with her body.
Pro-choice = Pro-abortion because you allow for the choice to kill.
Ridiculous logic! A newborn baby is not its own viable entity either, but I am sure nobody would advocate that a woman has a right to kill it. Therefore, just because the baby needs the womb to incubate and grow, he or she is free game to kill? What sense is this?
Common sense along with the scientific knowledge that a ZYGOTE is not a baby or a newborn. It is a group of cells that each could potentially form the exact same genetic structure. It is a factory producing every gene that could POTENTIALLY form a baby. This is also the point at which the cells could split off and form twins and also the point at which clones have been made. That means for you to call this “a baby” is illinformed. It has the potential to be one, two, three or more different clones with the same genetic structure, but it is not a baby.
OK, it is not a baby. It is a “pre-formed” HUMAN BEING with as much right to live as you or I. Why can’t you see that? Calling it a ‘group of cells,’ might salve your conscience, but a human being is a human being – either before birth.
Also, 50 years ago, the “age of viability” was much much longer than it is today. Millions of premature children are living today due to increased medical ability to care and nuture these children. Who is to say that the age of viability will not continue to go down? Then what would be the excuse here?
There is a huge difference between aborting a fetus that can not survive on its own within the first trimester and aborting after that point. There would also be a huge ethical delimmma if babies could be regularly incubated artificially outside of the womb considering the potential for exploitation. I remind you again of the ability to clone individuals. These concepts are not science fiction any longer.
My point exactly – we are heading for an ever reduced “age of viability.” So if this is the criterion for and if a fetus is a “baby” then I am saying quite clearly that medical science is redrawing these lines right now!
Prof X – c’mon! Most abortions are not about aborting “zygotes.” Nice try to deflect the real argument, but the TRUTH of the matter is that by the time a woman (or girl) figures out she is pregnant, the baby really looks like a human being – because (I’ll let you in on a secret) – he or she is!. Nobody is aborting their zygotes, they are aborting (killing) their children, which is despicable.
It is not your choice to decide where that line should be cut off. It should be looked at scientifically to avoid the use of personal religious beliefs as the soul reason to control the choices of others.
Totally disagree! The people of the several states have every right to draw that line for the people of that state. This is what the Constitution says despite the ridiculous 1973 decision which decided that the Founders (who were for the most part either true Bible-believers or God fearers) actually intended for a woman to have this “right.” C’mon – “emanations from penumbras…” Need we say more???
So laws protecting people from looking at some naked nut job wandering on the streets are OK, but laws to prevent killing of one’s unborn children are not? Huh???
Prove that a fetus is a viable child that can survive on its own.
I already dealt with this and showed that this is a strawman argument. The age of viability is decreasing, so this cannot be the criterion that we should be looking at.
Until you do, your argument is strictly from your own personal morals or values and nothing more. That is not justification enough to control every other person who disagrees with you unless those who agree with you are the overwhelming majority.
Really? We do it all the time. A person has every “right” to take the position that killing a sick loved one is OK. The state says it is not. Guess what – Dr. Kevorkian is in prison right now (AS HE SHOULD BE). Moral decisions are made by the legislatures all the time and enacted into Law. This is nothing new – you only want to take away that right (which IS a right granted by the US Constitution) away from the people of the several states and say that all women have a right to terminate the lives of their unborn babies. How very very sad…
You know, I almost cannot believe men on a website dedicated to improving our health and strengthing our bodies would be so for abortion, which is the antithesis of what we are all about here at T-Nation.
Quit the bullshit.
Ditto to you…with all due respect Prof. X…
Keeping government or the general public from controlling every aspect of human choice and decision is what I believe in. You live by your morals and uphold them. I live by mine. I am not PRO-abortion. I am pro-keeping you and everyone else out my personal business as much as humanly possible.
That signifies pro-CHOICE, which to me, means above all worry about yourself more than you worry about everyone else. Work on increasing sexual awareness in youth. Work on teaching birth control practices. Work on helping the millions of children already alive who are living in unbelievably bad conditions. Work on social programs designed to help these situations. How much volunteer work have you done in between fussing about what other people can or can’t do?
Quite a bit actually? Would you like an estimate of the hours over the past 10 years or so? I could give it to you if you wish…
How many kids have you mentored?
About 22 during the past 3 years or so…
I know what I have done on these issues, and I seriously doubt that the majority of the people making so much noise about controlling what all women do are doing the same.
Well, in my case, you are WRONG…but I really don’t like to toot my own horn, if you know what I mean Prof…
There are kids already on this planet not getting the attention they deserve. They should be getting priority over some half assed concern that apparently only encompasses the point up to which a baby is born and then it gets silenced into “fend for yourself” or “poor people are lazy”.
Nothing like playing the “poverty card” Prof. You pro-abortion (oh, excuse me) Pro-‘choice’ libs always take the argument back to how we should be giving more money from the rich and give it to the poor…nothing like a good 'ol government sponsored “Robin Hood.”
Hey, didn’t you just say that you were AGAINST government getting into our lives. Apparently, you and the rest of your liberal friends have no problem with government in other people’s wallets!
Think about it BEFORE you knee-jerk reply to this post, Prof. You are a very intelligent and well spoken person, but you are dead wrong on the issue at hand. Morally, ethically, and constitutionally…
Ok, one o=point i must make here.
when you say that a child can live at earlier and earlier stages of gestation, you are right, but not on its own. Through heroic intervention it is possible for a 23 weeker to survive, such has medical knowledge come along.
However, this should not be used as a justification for anti abortion, it is a non argument.
[/quote]
With all due respect, this is a ridiculous argument on your part ! The fact that a “neonate” cannot live without intervention is meaningless in this debate, because neither can a newborn child that has been carried to full term live without intervention – you know, it’s called feeding, diaper changing, etc.
Therefore, once again you make MY argument since there is no difference (except more intervention) when it comes to premature infants. The fact is that the number is GOING DOWN, so that it is not meaningful to excuse killing the baby due to this fact. See?
For that matter, there are very old people who cannot live on their own without extrodinary intervention. Should we “abort” their lives too? Do THEY not deserve to live?
Who give us the right to play God? I know some mentally impaired people that live great lives, albeit not what we would call completely “normal.” Who’s to say that it is better that these people should have been murdered before birth? Have you asked any?
[quote]
I work with neontologists, and they are duty bound to assist neonates at these stages, and do a wonderful job. But all that i speak to and ask, should we because we can(?) state that this is a moral question they often discuss (but will sureley never be answered) because of the ramifications to that child in the short, medium and long term, maybe a life in hispital or of crippling cerebral malformation.
Bottom line is that if you dont heat, ventilate, CPAP (respiratory support), humidify and generally go to great lengths no pre term baby of up to 30 or so weeks would survive at all.[/quote]
Again, so what? If you don’t feed, change, and nuture an infant it won’t survive either, but we call that murder. Some old people cannot live without heat, ventilation, etc. – so we kill them too?
Yes, this is a moral question – perhaps the most serious one of them all. How can anyone justify this?
The simple truth is that the “way out” feminist organizations simply want women to have the ability to screw around and then get rid of “the problem.” Yes, have all the recreational sex you want with no hastles and at the expense of a human life. How selfish is that !
[quote]orion wrote:
Do you admire us, just a little bit, for the strenght of our convictions and our will to to what is necessary?
Try to pull that off without trusting in a higher power…[/quote]
I admire anyone for the amount of thought that they have put into their beliefs and their willingness to reexamine them; I don’t think that obstinacy is a virtue. So while I may respect you for other things, strength of conviction doesn’t necessarily do it for me.
As far as a higher power goes, not all people opposed to abortion are religious. I am not.
[quote]skor wrote:
Plan B is not an effective method of birth control and still allows high chance of conception.
I still don’t understand how a question of legality/morality of abortion depends on a method of conception. Could ANYONE explain? It’s either “It’s a baby since the moment of conception and it shouldn’t be killed regardless of how it was concieved” OR “it’s not a baby until it can survive outside mother’s body”.
nephorm wrote:
orion wrote:
How do you find out if a woman was really raped or just says so?
Morning.
After.
Pill.
If you get raped, you have what, 48-72 hours to get a morning after pill? If you are in a situation where you can’t get to a hospital within that period of time, you have more problems than just rape, which will probably be indicated by other evidence. This really isn’t as big of a problem as you think it is.
[/quote]
Here let’s make it easy.
Pro-life: The baby/fetus/cell mass benefits.
Pro-choice: The woman benefits.
Forcing a woman who didn’t choose to have a child to care and raise one even if she can’t, who benefits?
[quote]Professor X wrote:
steveo5801 wrote:
Unlike you, I don’t have time to sit here and pour over every word that might have been said. So what if this point was made before? I am making it now. Can you answer the question? Perhaps you are afraid to, because I have you in a bit of a quandry. You see, YOU CANNOT HAVE IT BOTH WAYS!
Honestly, this comment is your weakest one yet. I tell you I answered this exact scenario already in this thread and then you tell me you can’t be bothered to find it and read it? Screw you then. It is not my job to retype every stance I have when the exact same fucking thing was typed just 3 or 4 pages in front of this one, you arrogant piece of shit.
[/quote]
Yes, Prof. X, I don’t have time to find and read whatever you wrote before since I have a life to live in the real world. Quite frankly, I really don’t even care to read it or what you might have said, because unlike others on this site, I am not intimitated by you nor do I care that you seem to want to attack me and spew out four letter words instead of answering a simple question.
The fact is that I have you in a logical trap of your own making. You have no problem with government intervention in the lives of its citizens, as long as the intervention benefits you or your causes in certain ways – especially providing money. Yes, you and liberals like you have no problem with this type of government controls, but let those who wish to protect the lives of the unborn, and you scream unfair government intrusion. How ridiculous!
Your attitude here in attacking me with curse words only demeans whatever you post here and in other threads of this site. Perhaps if you studied the issues more and wrote less, you would be better off.
I have nothing more to say to you and I will continue to post whatever and wherever on this site I can. This is called “freedom of speech” which, if you don’t know, is guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution – the same document that guarantees Life, Liberty, and Property!
[quote]lucasa wrote:
skor wrote:
Plan B is not an effective method of birth control and still allows high chance of conception.
I still don’t understand how a question of legality/morality of abortion depends on a method of conception. Could ANYONE explain? It’s either “It’s a baby since the moment of conception and it shouldn’t be killed regardless of how it was concieved” OR “it’s not a baby until it can survive outside mother’s body”.
nephorm wrote:
orion wrote:
How do you find out if a woman was really raped or just says so?
Morning.
After.
Pill.
If you get raped, you have what, 48-72 hours to get a morning after pill? If you are in a situation where you can’t get to a hospital within that period of time, you have more problems than just rape, which will probably be indicated by other evidence. This really isn’t as big of a problem as you think it is.
Here let’s make it easy.
Pro-life: The baby/fetus/cell mass benefits.
Pro-choice: The woman benefits.
Forcing a woman who didn’t choose to have a child to care and raise one even if she can’t, who benefits?
[/quote]
The child benefits – he or she gets to live!
Also, there is such things as adoption. See, killing is not the only choice!
The fact is that I have you in a logical trap of your own making. You have no problem with government intervention in the lives of its citizens, as long as the intervention benefits you or your causes in certain ways – especially providing money. Yes, you and liberals like you have no problem with this type of government controls, but let those who wish to protect the lives of the unborn, and you scream unfair government intrusion. How ridiculous!
[/quote]
couldn’t one then make the similar assertion that the problem with you and conservatives like you is that you have no problem with government intervention in the lives of it’s citizens as long as the intervention benefits you and your causes in certain ways especially if you do not have to provide money in the form of taxes for the social programs that will be needed to clean up your mess. (I know how you guys feel about taxes… that whole “read my lips… no new taxes” thing got y’all fired up…)
Its going to take a lot of tax dollars to pay for the additional municipal workers to empty the extra dumpsters filled with unwanted babies. How bout the uninsured women filing into ERs with abscesses in their uteri because of not so sterile coat hangers? gonna flip the bill for that one? have any plans on how to handle the unadoptable kids with severe birth defects because their mother, who was drug addicted, couldn’t get a first trimester abortion? How bout the extra prisons we’ll need to house the throngs of unloved, unwanted, and unplanned who are virtually guaranteed to feel marginalized and disenfranchised. Is this not a recipe for a crime explosion…
But steve-o… the problem with you and conservatives like you is that you think you’re superior. You think you know what’s better for people than the people themselves. You think, ergo, that you should be entitled to make decisions for them for their own good…It is the very height of arrogance.
What’s more is that your positions typically have their genesis in a complete and utter faith in the bible, the constitution, the bill of rights… etc etc… but as someone else in the thread wrote… “We’re still debating that which you are taking for granted” I may not be christian and I might not be willing to concede that our founding fathers were imbued with omniscience. I may think that your faith in these things is arbitrary and inane
You’ll go to sleep tonight feeling superior because you are christian, because you’re well read, because you feel your profession is a noble one ( I believe I read in your profile that you’re a teacher ). You’ll believe you fought the good fight today because you spoke for the unwashed masses who were too uninformed and too godless to speak for themselves competently.
You feel cozy in the knowledge that you’ve volunteered your time to “mentor” 22 kids. You feel that it gives you the juice to talk authoritatively on this matter. I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt and allow for the posibility that the hour a week you spend with any one of these kids is beneficial. But you are beyond narcissitic if you believe that you or anyone like you could possibly do anything to make up for the other 167 hours in an at best apathetic, at worse abusive environment.
You wrote earlier in the thread “Who give us the right to play God” [sic]
You are right everything I said about the law enforcement system can be said about it if it deals with other issues too.
I know that it is a very blunt instrument that never really solves anything which is why it should be one of the last resorts and not something you automatically call for whenever something bothers you.
OMG, you think all criminals are stupid!
The only time you ever hear about them is when they fuck up, that is as if you form your opinions of entrepreneurs by reading statistics concerning bankruptcy.
Plus, and I harp on this a little bit whenever I can, organized crime does play an important role in a society, otherwise it would not exist.
And to doogie, I could have been an abortion very easily. My mother was 19 when she had me, and things couldn’t have been much worse for them. It could have very easily been me.
The fact is, I would still fight for her right to abort then to have folks like the religious right choose it for her.
If she hadnt chosen to have me, but the state had forced her too…well then where is your small government republican paradise then? Real freedom that is.
What if she had chosen to abort you, because some feminist with an agenda who didn’t give a shit about your mother’s emotional health convinced her to kill you? What if your mother spent the rest of her life hating herself because she was tricked into believing you weren’t really a person?
Then you have:
You=dead
Mother=a mental case
Who would that have benefitted?
What world do you guys live in? All of a sudden now we think women care about abortions? I thought the talking point of the right was that women use them as frequently as aspirin?
And what feminist? Since when do feminists kill? They argue for the right to choose, but rarely have I seen them out with the signs that say “Let’s kill babies”. Although the extremists on your side have no problem bombing buildings apparently.
As far as the small government issue, you do understand that Roe v. Wade made it a federal issue, rather than a state issue, right? Republicans are for less federal control and more local control.
blah blah.
I don’t believe any government, anywhere, be it state or federal, has the right to say that one can’t do this.
Less local control just means that Texan women will come to places like NJ to have their abortions, while the rest of people like you keep your heads in the sand and pretend its not happening. Either way, it doesn’t help anyone anywhere. Hiding the problem does not mean it doesn’t exist.
A few clinics have been bombed, millions of unborns killed. Neither is right.
I’ll never be able to change your mind about abortion (obviously), and that’s fine.
However, all I aim for is that the right realizes that this shit will still go on, and it will be far more hazardous to the woman’s life. To say that she shouldn’t “spread her legs” (as someone mentioned) is not only bullshit, but also completely callous to the life of a woman (besides that, I’m sure that no one here had sex before they got married, and so you are all virtous and no accidents could possibly have happened).
This will not stop abortions. You won’t even be able to say if it went down or not, because there will be no numbers and no way to judge. It is very easy to damn every girl that gets one…until its your daughters trying to hide the fact that she got pregnant from a super religious father.
Like I said, things aren’t black and white. They shouldn’t be treated as such. [/quote]
I agree. And for the record, I’ll get around to damning these women as soon as I get thru making my own life free from sin.
Some of the debate on here is actually pretty thoughtful. If you can wade thru the emotion. Orion brings up some interesting points relating to rape cases and such.
Certainly far from black and white. That is for sure.
[quote]steveo5801 wrote:
Yes, Prof. X, I don’t have time to find and read whatever you wrote before since I have a life to live in the real world. Quite frankly, I really don’t even care to read it or what you might have said, because unlike others on this site, I am not intimitated by you nor do I care that you seem to want to attack me and spew out four letter words instead of answering a simple question.
[/quote]
If that is the case, why would you waste the time to write a 3 paragraph response to me not saying anything at all? That sure doesn’t sound like the actions of someone who doesn’t care.
Mrdav2u wrote a good response to the rest of what you wrote. I really have nothing to add to what he already did.
The fact is that I have you in a logical trap of your own making. You have no problem with government intervention in the lives of its citizens, as long as the intervention benefits you or your causes in certain ways – especially providing money. Yes, you and liberals like you have no problem with this type of government controls, but let those who wish to protect the lives of the unborn, and you scream unfair government intrusion. How ridiculous!
couldn’t one then make the similar assertion that the problem with you and conservatives like you is that you have no problem with government intervention in the lives of it’s citizens as long as the intervention benefits you and your causes in certain ways especially if you do not have to provide money in the form of taxes for the social programs that will be needed to clean up your mess. (I know how you guys feel about taxes… that whole “read my lips… no new taxes” thing got y’all fired up…)
Its going to take a lot of tax dollars to pay for the additional municipal workers to empty the extra dumpsters filled with unwanted babies. How bout the uninsured women filing into ERs with abscesses in their uteri because of not so sterile coat hangers? gonna flip the bill for that one? have any plans on how to handle the unadoptable kids with severe birth defects because their mother, who was drug addicted, couldn’t get a first trimester abortion? How bout the extra prisons we’ll need to house the throngs of unloved, unwanted, and unplanned who are virtually guaranteed to feel marginalized and disenfranchised. Is this not a recipe for a crime explosion…
But steve-o… the problem with you and conservatives like you is that you think you’re superior. You think you know what’s better for people than the people themselves. You think, ergo, that you should be entitled to make decisions for them for their own good…It is the very height of arrogance.
What’s more is that your positions typically have their genesis in a complete and utter faith in the bible, the constitution, the bill of rights… etc etc… but as someone else in the thread wrote… “We’re still debating that which you are taking for granted” I may not be christian and I might not be willing to concede that our founding fathers were imbued with omniscience. I may think that your faith in these things is arbitrary and inane
You’ll go to sleep tonight feeling superior because you are christian, because you’re well read, because you feel your profession is a noble one ( I believe I read in your profile that you’re a teacher ). You’ll believe you fought the good fight today because you spoke for the unwashed masses who were too uninformed and too godless to speak for themselves competently.
You feel cozy in the knowledge that you’ve volunteered your time to “mentor” 22 kids. You feel that it gives you the juice to talk authoritatively on this matter. I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt and allow for the posibility that the hour a week you spend with any one of these kids is beneficial. But you are beyond narcissitic if you believe that you or anyone like you could possibly do anything to make up for the other 167 hours in an at best apathetic, at worse abusive environment.
You wrote earlier in the thread “Who give us the right to play God” [sic]
EXACTLY[/quote]
According to you I am “arrogant” and feel “superior” and a whole host of other assertions that you made. You have one big problem buddy – you don’t know what you are talking about!. You don’t know me and I don’t know you, so quit the personal BS and stick to the issue at hand.
It is amazing to me that you liberals never cease to attack the person when you have absolutely nothing to say that is factual.
The gist of what you accuse me of with respect to government intervention is not my position , but why should you stick to the facts, when you can make me sound like some arrogant, “Jesus -freak?” Right?
Well, for your information, I have no problem with government acting Constitutionally – you know according to the actual founding document. You know the piece of paper that spells out what government can AND CANNOT DO!
Again, what you liberals seek is to expand government intervention into areas never intended for government – i.e. welfare programs, insurance programs, housing programs, food programs, programs, programs, programs…
When you cannot get your way in the Congress, you look to unelected judges who invent rights that are not only not there, but cannot be there!
So, stop the attacks because they only make you look like an idiot and respond to the facts.
Abortion = Murder – because a life is being destroyed.
You wish to cloud the issue with babies in dumpsters (which would be a felony) and poor girls flooding the ER’s, to justify murder? How insane is that?
Boy, I am proud to be an American. It is good to know that in this country, other people try to legislate their system of morality on other people. It is good to know that the founding fathers fought and died so that people could tell women what they can and can’t do to their bodies. Sometimes I agree with conservative viewpoints, but I am the most liberal person alive. Why? Becuase, a republican would just as soon kill me as be my neighbor if I don’t agree with his point of view. I have never met a homosexual that tried to force his way of life on me, but I have heard conservatives/republicans say things like “God hates fags”.
My point is this- A woman has supreme rights to her body. If she wants an abortion, she should have a right to one.
If a person wants to be gay, and wants to marry their partner, they should be allowed too.
If a person wants to smoke dope in the confines of their own home, as long as they do not endanger anybody else, they should be allowed to.
It always amazes me, none of the pro-life people seem to want to take babies from people that don’t want them if they go ahead and have them.
Shit like this is why I am really thinking about getting a vasectomy. at 18, it may not be a wise choice, but I know accidents can happen, and I have known a lot of people that have had their lives ruined, and their childrens lives ruined through unplanned pregnancies.
Another thing, last time I knew, little babies went to heaven. So an aborted fetus would probably end up pretty well off in the end of things.
Is judging other not an equal sin to everything else?
Who gave other people the right to impose there system of beliefs on me?
This ol’boy is going to try to find a couple of pro-choice bumper stickers.
The fact is that I have you in a logical trap of your own making. You have no problem with government intervention in the lives of its citizens, as long as the intervention benefits you or your causes in certain ways – especially providing money. Yes, you and liberals like you have no problem with this type of government controls, but let those who wish to protect the lives of the unborn, and you scream unfair government intrusion. How ridiculous!
couldn’t one then make the similar assertion that the problem with you and conservatives like you is that you have no problem with government intervention in the lives of it’s citizens as long as the intervention benefits you and your causes in certain ways especially if you do not have to provide money in the form of taxes for the social programs that will be needed to clean up your mess. (I know how you guys feel about taxes… that whole “read my lips… no new taxes” thing got y’all fired up…)
Its going to take a lot of tax dollars to pay for the additional municipal workers to empty the extra dumpsters filled with unwanted babies. How bout the uninsured women filing into ERs with abscesses in their uteri because of not so sterile coat hangers? gonna flip the bill for that one? have any plans on how to handle the unadoptable kids with severe birth defects because their mother, who was drug addicted, couldn’t get a first trimester abortion? How bout the extra prisons we’ll need to house the throngs of unloved, unwanted, and unplanned who are virtually guaranteed to feel marginalized and disenfranchised. Is this not a recipe for a crime explosion…
But steve-o… the problem with you and conservatives like you is that you think you’re superior. You think you know what’s better for people than the people themselves. You think, ergo, that you should be entitled to make decisions for them for their own good…It is the very height of arrogance.
What’s more is that your positions typically have their genesis in a complete and utter faith in the bible, the constitution, the bill of rights… etc etc… but as someone else in the thread wrote… “We’re still debating that which you are taking for granted” I may not be christian and I might not be willing to concede that our founding fathers were imbued with omniscience. I may think that your faith in these things is arbitrary and inane
You’ll go to sleep tonight feeling superior because you are christian, because you’re well read, because you feel your profession is a noble one ( I believe I read in your profile that you’re a teacher ). You’ll believe you fought the good fight today because you spoke for the unwashed masses who were too uninformed and too godless to speak for themselves competently.
You feel cozy in the knowledge that you’ve volunteered your time to “mentor” 22 kids. You feel that it gives you the juice to talk authoritatively on this matter. I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt and allow for the posibility that the hour a week you spend with any one of these kids is beneficial. But you are beyond narcissitic if you believe that you or anyone like you could possibly do anything to make up for the other 167 hours in an at best apathetic, at worse abusive environment.
You wrote earlier in the thread “Who give us the right to play God” [sic]
EXACTLY
According to you I am “arrogant” and feel “superior” and a whole host of other assertions that you made. You have one big problem buddy – you don’t know what you are talking about!. You don’t know me and I don’t know you, so quit the personal BS and stick to the issue at hand.
It is amazing to me that you liberals never cease to attack the person when you have absolutely nothing to say that is factual.
The gist of what you accuse me of with respect to government intervention is not my position , but why should you stick to the facts, when you can make me sound like some arrogant, “Jesus -freak?” Right?
Well, for your information, I have no problem with government acting Constitutionally – you know according to the actual founding document. You know the piece of paper that spells out what government can AND CANNOT DO!
Again, what you liberals seek is to expand government intervention into areas never intended for government – i.e. welfare programs, insurance programs, housing programs, food programs, programs, programs, programs…
When you cannot get your way in the Congress, you look to unelected judges who invent rights that are not only not there, but cannot be there!
So, stop the attacks because they only make you look like an idiot and respond to the facts.
Abortion = Murder – because a life is being destroyed.
You wish to cloud the issue with babies in dumpsters (which would be a felony) and poor girls flooding the ER’s, to justify murder? How insane is that?
[/quote]
Liberals want programs to help others. Sweet Jesus! how sad.
Love thy neighbor.
So I suppose, helping others is not the governments business, but making laws that limit freedoms and fuck lifes up is there business. Police and firefighters help people, but I suppose they need to be removed
Actually, Fuck you. I haven’t seen in a newspaper EVER where a pastor did something for someone. I hear about off duty policemen, soldiers, firefighters, emt’s and stuff. I see families that are being fed only through government help. I see old people dependent on social security that can afford to live, but couldn’t without government savings programs.
Big John the Disciple said “Love each other, that is enough” How true. If people practiced that, then no one would go hungry, becuase if your neighbor didn’t have enough to eat, neither would you, because you would be giving them half of what you had. You cant legislate morality. Jesus helped others, he didn’t judge them. God judges, not us. Sometimes I wonder how conservatives can do so little for others, and judge others so harshly, and still be so popular.
If someone has an abortion, and that is “murder” then I suppose it isn’t our place to stop em, God will take care of them in the end.
I also hope you NEVER EVER have an unwanted pregnancy (I have not, but I have too many friends that have) I hope you never need help from the government, and I hope you are without sin when you judge others.
[quote]BarneyFife wrote:
Boy, I am proud to be an American. It is good to know that in this country, other people try to legislate their system of morality on other people.
[/quote]
Morality has always been a part of the excercise of human government. Have you not read the Mayflower Compact or The Declaration of Independence? These are rife with moral and religious truths that guided those who founded our great nation. The only problem is that today our youth have been sold a bill of goods that says that there is no moral absolute truths – in short “anything goes.” This, my friend, is a new phenomenon – and it is not good.
Well, women (and men for that matter) may do with their bodies that which they wish – as long as by doing whatever, they are not endangering others. For example, if a woman wants to throw herself out of a 2nd story window onto a crowd of people, you would have to say that she should be legally prevented from “doing with her body what she wishes.” Even though I am using an hyperbolic example, you should get the point – the “right is not and has never been unlimited.”
Besides, I am not concerned for the sacrosanct “women’s body.” I am, however, concerned that you believe her unborn infant child is a part of her body – sort of like a fingernail, where she has unlimited rights to cut it off. The rights of everyone end at the begining of someone else – in this case a tiny helpless human fetus.
Huh? Are you OK?
That is very unfortunate, because God loves all people – including homosexual people. God hates sin – all sin, of which homosexuality is one. However, nobody who would speak the truth of God’s Word could ever make a statement like that. I am sorry that you feel that represents all Christians. It does not.
I already dealt with this. It is not her body – it is the baby’s and therefore should not have rights to kill it. She should have thought before getting into the bed with Mr. Unresponsible.
No problem with that – just don’t ask the rest of us to sanction that legally. It has always throughout millenia been aberrant behavior and therefore not recognized by society.
Some society you are trying to create! Anything goes – just do it in your “own home.”
What are you talking about? Killing a baby is not the answer – adoption is out there if a person wants to give their baby up. Plenty of families would take them.
Believers in Jesus Christ also go to heaven. Want to advocate killing Christians as well?
The Biblical teaching on this is hypocritical judging. Look it up and read carefully in context. The Bible says that we should judge all things and weigh all things, etc. The portion you are talking about is about judging hypocritically.
If you don’t vote, don’t complain!
You are very young and have been fed a diet of “moral relatavism” which says that everyone’s morals are equal to every one else’s and there is no such thing as a final moral authority.
The fact is that I have you in a logical trap of your own making. You have no problem with government intervention in the lives of its citizens, as long as the intervention benefits you or your causes in certain ways – especially providing money. Yes, you and liberals like you have no problem with this type of government controls, but let those who wish to protect the lives of the unborn, and you scream unfair government intrusion. How ridiculous!
couldn’t one then make the similar assertion that the problem with you and conservatives like you is that you have no problem with government intervention in the lives of it’s citizens as long as the intervention benefits you and your causes in certain ways especially if you do not have to provide money in the form of taxes for the social programs that will be needed to clean up your mess. (I know how you guys feel about taxes… that whole “read my lips… no new taxes” thing got y’all fired up…)
Its going to take a lot of tax dollars to pay for the additional municipal workers to empty the extra dumpsters filled with unwanted babies. How bout the uninsured women filing into ERs with abscesses in their uteri because of not so sterile coat hangers? gonna flip the bill for that one? have any plans on how to handle the unadoptable kids with severe birth defects because their mother, who was drug addicted, couldn’t get a first trimester abortion? How bout the extra prisons we’ll need to house the throngs of unloved, unwanted, and unplanned who are virtually guaranteed to feel marginalized and disenfranchised. Is this not a recipe for a crime explosion…
But steve-o… the problem with you and conservatives like you is that you think you’re superior. You think you know what’s better for people than the people themselves. You think, ergo, that you should be entitled to make decisions for them for their own good…It is the very height of arrogance.
What’s more is that your positions typically have their genesis in a complete and utter faith in the bible, the constitution, the bill of rights… etc etc… but as someone else in the thread wrote… “We’re still debating that which you are taking for granted” I may not be christian and I might not be willing to concede that our founding fathers were imbued with omniscience. I may think that your faith in these things is arbitrary and inane
You’ll go to sleep tonight feeling superior because you are christian, because you’re well read, because you feel your profession is a noble one ( I believe I read in your profile that you’re a teacher ). You’ll believe you fought the good fight today because you spoke for the unwashed masses who were too uninformed and too godless to speak for themselves competently.
You feel cozy in the knowledge that you’ve volunteered your time to “mentor” 22 kids. You feel that it gives you the juice to talk authoritatively on this matter. I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt and allow for the posibility that the hour a week you spend with any one of these kids is beneficial. But you are beyond narcissitic if you believe that you or anyone like you could possibly do anything to make up for the other 167 hours in an at best apathetic, at worse abusive environment.
You wrote earlier in the thread “Who give us the right to play God” [sic]
EXACTLY
According to you I am “arrogant” and feel “superior” and a whole host of other assertions that you made. You have one big problem buddy – you don’t know what you are talking about!. You don’t know me and I don’t know you, so quit the personal BS and stick to the issue at hand.
It is amazing to me that you liberals never cease to attack the person when you have absolutely nothing to say that is factual.
The gist of what you accuse me of with respect to government intervention is not my position , but why should you stick to the facts, when you can make me sound like some arrogant, “Jesus -freak?” Right?
Well, for your information, I have no problem with government acting Constitutionally – you know according to the actual founding document. You know the piece of paper that spells out what government can AND CANNOT DO!
Again, what you liberals seek is to expand government intervention into areas never intended for government – i.e. welfare programs, insurance programs, housing programs, food programs, programs, programs, programs…
When you cannot get your way in the Congress, you look to unelected judges who invent rights that are not only not there, but cannot be there!
So, stop the attacks because they only make you look like an idiot and respond to the facts.
Abortion = Murder – because a life is being destroyed.
You wish to cloud the issue with babies in dumpsters (which would be a felony) and poor girls flooding the ER’s, to justify murder? How insane is that?
Liberals want programs to help others. Sweet Jesus! how sad.
Love thy neighbor.
So I suppose, helping others is not the governments business, but making laws that limit freedoms and fuck lifes up is there business. Police and firefighters help people, but I suppose they need to be removed
[/quote]
Why, this is a legitamate use of local government. I never said this – you did.
Sorry kid, but you are not my type!
Really intelligent, do you know any other nice words?
Well, usually, we Christians like to help people without all of the fanfare. I know of many pastors and other Christians who help each other ever day. So the fact that YOU have never heard of any, doesn’t make it so.
Perhaps if they got a job, they could buy food. Oh, but why bother when you are on the government dole?
You are completely wrong. Before all of this – FAMILIES had to help their loved ones! Get it? It is the FAMILIES RESPONSIBILITY, not the taxpayers!
Big John the Disciple said “Love each other, that is enough” How true. If people practiced that, then no one would go hungry, becuase if your neighbor didn’t have enough to eat, neither would you, because you would be giving them half of what you had.
[/quote]
My point exactly! See John the Apostle wasn’t advocating government welfare. He was advocating people of faith helping others – the way Jesus would. Jesus never said that the government would solve the problems of poverty, etc. He said that we Christians need to be out there. And some of us are!
Yes, but we have a responsiblity while we are here. God will hold us accountable for how WE acted.
I am a lot (lot lot) older than you. You are just a kid – a bright one, but a kid nonetheless.
I never was part of an unwanted pregnancy because although it was very difficult to do so, I controlled myself when it came to sex before marriage. I know that is not preached anymore, but if you don’t place yourself in a situation where this could happen and you commit to wait until you’re married, this will solve the problem.
The problem is that young people want their “fun” and we just kill the kid afterwards. This is sick behavior and wicked thinking.
I hope so too. I am really not judging others, no more than you have judged me by opposing my views.
Also, you don’t have to resort to 4-letter words that you would probably not have the nerve to say to my face in order to make your points.
You seem like an intelligent young man and we can discuss these things in a civil manner. Just because we are behind computers doesn’t mean we cannot disagree in an agreeable manner.
As far as government assitance goes steveo, it has a lot to do with where your from. The best paying job in my town starts out at 15k. Some people work all they can and still can’t afford to support their families.
Also, I have a real problem with christian people, but not with Christ.
When i was 5 or 6, I went through the flood of 93. I don’t remember to much about it, but I remember my mom telling me about how local churches helped just their members. The bar that my mom waited tables at had a bike run, and did several fundraisers, and helped all flood vicitims. Bar people helped all, Christians helped only their kind. Here where I live, they have bikers poker runs to help the needy all the time. Churches help their members, but people who might be considered relatively un-christian help anybody in need.
My conservative neighbor gets mad when I mow my lawn on sunday. My liberal neighbor helped me sharpen the blades on it, on sunday, all why drinking beer and wearing a hustler shirt. So, I ask, who is right, the one helping or the one judging? I guess I look at people actions more then I look at their beleifs. If Christian people were more into helping others, we wouldn’t need federal aid. It just doesn’t happen though. I have never been on welfare, nor has any of my family, but I did get a 200 dollar pell grant. And I am glad I did. What about unemployment? is that government assistance? I am sorry that I am such an angry person steveo, but I get tired of other people judging other people and using there beliefs as justification. Some of the people at my work have helped to cause this. A week or two after Katrina, some of the people that keep Bibles on their workbenches said that Katrina was punishment for sins. Most of the rest of us were passing a hat around to give to the red cross.
Our town is small. Most of our volunteer fire-fighters are beer-drinking harley riding pre-marital sex having fellers. But they’ll gladly risk their lives for a whole ten dollars per fire. When I used to go to church, if someone missed a day, everyone looked down on them. That REALLY turned me off towards church. I just feel like too many times Christian people are out to hurt/and judge others and use their beleifs as justification.
Steveo, We are both Americans at the end of the day. In our country, We have the freedom to choose our religion, and the freedom to not have one at all if it suits us.
As far as abortion goes, I wish there was a way to extract the fetus from the mothers body intact, and raise the fetus in-vitro, then giving the child to a suitable family wanting to adopt. Win-win situation right there.
