|
|
 | | From: | james g. keegan jr. | | Subject: | anti-choice hypocrisy | | Date: | 23 Jan 2005 20:07:55 GMT |
|
|
 | "If abortion is murder, why are pro-lifers so squeamish about proposing
life sentences or capital punishment for women who obtain abortions?
Are they not murderers, or accessories to murder?"
--Chris Lyman, Message-ID: <3a3a82$bt8@jeeves.tccn.com>
|
|
| | From: | legend_89 at hotmail.com | | Subject: | Re: Forgiveness | | Date: | 23 Jan 2005 23:08:40 -0800 |
|
|
|
Pat Winstanley wrote:
> In article <1106541087.428091.318430@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
> legend_89@hotmail.com says...
> > I don't know about most people who believe in Life for all humans.
> > Personally I do not want to see any woman persecuted for having an
> > abortion. Same goes for the providers of these abortions. Although
they
> > are taking a human beings life every abortion, I only want to see
the
> > barbaric practice stopped.
> >
> >
>
> Abortion only very rarely kills a human being...
Very few human young survive an abortion
usually when that
> pregnant human being has all sorts of medical problems anyway,
without
> the pregnancy making things worse for her. Occasionally women die
when
> their pregnancies are aborted. Occasionally women die when their
> pregnancies end in labour/delivery. Both (in developed nations) are
> relatively rare now, because of good access to good medical
attention.
Very very rare, and abortion is needed in this case very very rarely
>
> Understand? Your blanket assertion that abortion kills the pregnant
> women (the only human beings who could die as a result of abortion)
is
> simply not true in the vast majority of abortions,
You either can't read or you are in denial? If the woman is pregnant
she has her young developing inside her. Her young in her womb are
human beings.
just as in the vast
> majority of term deliveries the procedure doesn't kill the pregnant
> woman.
But usually kills her unborn child, thats why abortion is such an issue
Pro aborts often say that pregancy is dangerous, and they try to place
it alongside ual transmitted diseases. Otherwise how could they ever
say that abortion is needed, without the scaremongering that pregnancy
is dangerous.
Why do doctors say 'congratulations' when informing a woman of her
pregnancy?
|
|
| | From: | Pat Winstanley | | Subject: | Re: Forgiveness | | Date: | Mon, 24 Jan 2005 07:57:31 -0000 |
|
|
| In article <1106549265.769665.166150@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
legend_89@hotmail.com says...
> > Abortion only very rarely kills a human being...
>
> Very few human young survive an abortion
>
I repeat, abortion only rarely kills a human being (ie. the pregnant
woman). There is no other human being present for that pregnancy. Whilst
a pregnancy is in progress there is an embryo or foetus present, but
since the status of 'human being' doesn't begin until live birth has
occurred, the embryo or foetus is not (at that time) a human being.
Note also that 'human young' would appear to mean children. There are
none of those in a pregnancy either!
|
|
| | From: | Osprey | | Subject: | Re: Forgiveness | | Date: | Mon, 24 Jan 2005 02:15:34 -0500 |
|
|
|
wrote in message
news:1106549265.769665.166150@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>
> Pat Winstanley wrote:
>> In article <1106541087.428091.318430@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
>> legend_89@hotmail.com says...
>> > I don't know about most people who believe in Life for all humans.
>> > Personally I do not want to see any woman persecuted for having an
>> > abortion. Same goes for the providers of these abortions. Although
> they
>> > are taking a human beings life every abortion, I only want to see
> the
>> > barbaric practice stopped.
>> >
>> >
>>
>> Abortion only very rarely kills a human being...
>
> Very few human young survive an abortion
>
> usually when that
>> pregnant human being has all sorts of medical problems anyway,
> without
>> the pregnancy making things worse for her. Occasionally women die
> when
>> their pregnancies are aborted. Occasionally women die when their
>> pregnancies end in labour/delivery. Both (in developed nations) are
>> relatively rare now, because of good access to good medical
> attention.
>
> Very very rare, and abortion is needed in this case very very rarely
That is the ONLY justifiable reason for abortion, in my opinion. To save a
woman's life.
>>
>> Understand? Your blanket assertion that abortion kills the pregnant
>> women (the only human beings who could die as a result of abortion)
> is
>> simply not true in the vast majority of abortions,
>
> You either can't read or you are in denial?
I think you will find out soon enough why so many killfiled her. She is
totally unreasonable and if she hasn't already she will soon....she will
begin to lie about what you say.
If the woman is pregnant
> she has her young developing inside her. Her young in her womb are
> human beings.
Exactly.
>
> just as in the vast
>> majority of term deliveries the procedure doesn't kill the pregnant
>> woman.
>
> But usually kills her unborn child, thats why abortion is such an issue
>
> Pro aborts often say that pregancy is dangerous,
It is a scare tactic to help get more people to support abortion.
and they try to place
> it alongside ual transmitted diseases. Otherwise how could they ever
> say that abortion is needed, without the scaremongering that pregnancy
> is dangerous.
You got it!
>
> Why do doctors say 'congratulations' when informing a woman of her
> pregnancy?
Why do doctors call the fetus a baby?
|
|
| | From: | legend_89 at hotmail.com | | Subject: | Re: Forgiveness | | Date: | 24 Jan 2005 01:49:17 -0800 |
|
|
|
Pat Winstanley wrote:
> In article <1106549561.849759.151120@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>,
> legend_89@hotmail.com says...
> > > > It never ceases to amaze me how people with absolutely no idea
> > about
> > > > what abortion is persist in rocking up on this NG and spouting
> > about it ;-))
> >
> > Oh they know, they are just in denial. Hard to be a pro abort and
admit
> > that the unborn is a human being (a fact), and then say you
actually
> > care about humanity.
> >
>
> I don't know of anyone who is "pro abort"! ;-))
>
> Incidentally, the embryo/fouetus is not, by definition, a human
being.
Actually the unborn young of a species is the same as the parents.
Therefore the unborn embryo is a human being ;)
TIP: Try any anatomy book
|
|
| | From: | Michael Calwell | | Subject: | Re: anti-choice hypocrisy | | Date: | Sun, 23 Jan 2005 20:03:25 +0000 |
|
|
| james g. keegan jr. wrote:
> "If abortion is murder, why are pro-lifers so squeamish about proposing
> life sentences or capital punishment for women who obtain abortions?
> Are they not murderers, or accessories to murder?"
>
> --Chris Lyman, Message-ID: <3a3a82$bt8@jeeves.tccn.com>
No, they're generally choiceless, oppressed women, and killing people is
wrong.
|
|
| | From: | james g. keegan jr. | | Subject: | Re: anti-choice hypocrisy | | Date: | 23 Jan 2005 20:37:51 GMT |
|
|
| Michael Calwell wrote in news:41f40677$0
$15405$db0fefd9@news.zen.co.uk:
> james g. keegan jr. wrote:
>> "If abortion is murder, why are pro-lifers so squeamish about proposing
>> life sentences or capital punishment for women who obtain abortions?
>> Are they not murderers, or accessories to murder?"
>>
>> --Chris Lyman, Message-ID: <3a3a82$bt8@jeeves.tccn.com>
>
> No, they're generally choiceless, oppressed women, and killing people is
> wrong.
>
*smirk*
|
|
| | From: | Pat Winstanley | | Subject: | Re: anti-choice hypocrisy | | Date: | Sun, 23 Jan 2005 20:58:26 -0000 |
|
|
| In article ,
keegan@nycap.rr.com says...
> Michael Calwell wrote in news:41f40677$0
> $15405$db0fefd9@news.zen.co.uk:
>
> > james g. keegan jr. wrote:
> >> "If abortion is murder, why are pro-lifers so squeamish about proposing
> >> life sentences or capital punishment for women who obtain abortions?
> >> Are they not murderers, or accessories to murder?"
> >>
> >> --Chris Lyman, Message-ID: <3a3a82$bt8@jeeves.tccn.com>
> >
> > No, they're generally choiceless, oppressed women, and killing people is
> > wrong.
> >
>
> *smirk*
>
ROFL!
|
|
| | From: | james g. keegan jr. | | Subject: | Re: anti-choice hypocrisy | | Date: | 23 Jan 2005 21:43:39 GMT |
|
|
| Pat Winstanley wrote in
news:MPG.1c5e2048673c508498c015@news.uni-berlin.de:
> In article ,
> keegan@nycap.rr.com says...
>> Michael Calwell wrote in
>> news:41f40677$0 $15405$db0fefd9@news.zen.co.uk:
>>
>> > james g. keegan jr. wrote:
>> >> "If abortion is murder, why are pro-lifers so squeamish about
>> >> proposing life sentences or capital punishment for women who
>> >> obtain abortions? Are they not murderers, or accessories to
>> >> murder?"
>> >>
>> >> --Chris Lyman, Message-ID: <3a3a82$bt8@jeeves.tccn.com>
>> >
>> > No, they're generally choiceless, oppressed women, and killing
>> > people is wrong.
>> >
>>
>> *smirk*
>>
>
> ROFL!
it was amusing to watch michael run away from the implications of the
position he claims.
of course he lies about his position too.
|
|
| | From: | Michael Calwell | | Subject: | Re: anti-choice hypocrisy | | Date: | Sun, 23 Jan 2005 21:31:53 +0000 |
|
|
| james g. keegan jr. wrote:
> Pat Winstanley wrote in
> news:MPG.1c5e2048673c508498c015@news.uni-berlin.de:
>
>
>>In article ,
>>keegan@nycap.rr.com says...
>>
>>>Michael Calwell wrote in
>>>news:41f40677$0 $15405$db0fefd9@news.zen.co.uk:
>>>
>>>
>>>>james g. keegan jr. wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>"If abortion is murder, why are pro-lifers so squeamish about
>>>>>proposing life sentences or capital punishment for women who
>>>>>obtain abortions? Are they not murderers, or accessories to
>>>>>murder?"
>>>>>
>>>>>--Chris Lyman, Message-ID: <3a3a82$bt8@jeeves.tccn.com>
>>>>
>>>>No, they're generally choiceless, oppressed women, and killing
>>>>people is wrong.
>>>>
>>>
>>>*smirk*
>>>
>>
>>ROFL!
>
>
> it was amusing to watch michael run away from the implications of the
> position he claims.
>
> of course he lies about his position too.
>
WTF do two intellectual lightweights appending the words "smirk" and
"ROFL" prove?
|
|
| | From: | Somewriter | | Subject: | Re: anti-choice hypocrisy | | Date: | Sun, 23 Jan 2005 17:03:46 -0500 |
|
|
| On Sun, 23 Jan 2005 21:31:53 +0000, Michael Calwell
wrote:
>james g. keegan jr. wrote:
>> Pat Winstanley wrote in
>> news:MPG.1c5e2048673c508498c015@news.uni-berlin.de:
>>
>>
>>>In article ,
>>>keegan@nycap.rr.com says...
>>>
>>>>Michael Calwell wrote in
>>>>news:41f40677$0 $15405$db0fefd9@news.zen.co.uk:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>james g. keegan jr. wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>"If abortion is murder, why are pro-lifers so squeamish about
>>>>>>proposing life sentences or capital punishment for women who
>>>>>>obtain abortions? Are they not murderers, or accessories to
>>>>>>murder?"
>>>>>>
>>>>>>--Chris Lyman, Message-ID: <3a3a82$bt8@jeeves.tccn.com>
>>>>>
>>>>>No, they're generally choiceless, oppressed women, and killing
>>>>>people is wrong.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>*smirk*
>>>>
>>>
>>>ROFL!
>>
>>
>> it was amusing to watch michael run away from the implications of the
>> position he claims.
>>
>> of course he lies about his position too.
>>
>
>WTF do two intellectual lightweights appending the words "smirk" and
>"ROFL" prove?
It proves that they find the bullshit of the psuedo-intellectual,
Michael Calwell, amusing.
|
|
| | From: | james g. keegan jr. | | Subject: | Re: anti-choice hypocrisy | | Date: | 23 Jan 2005 21:54:54 GMT |
|
|
| Michael Calwell wrote in news:41f41b33
$0$21773$fa0fcedb@news.zen.co.uk:
> james g. keegan jr. wrote:
>> Pat Winstanley wrote in
>> news:MPG.1c5e2048673c508498c015@news.uni-berlin.de:
>>
>>
>>>In article ,
>>>keegan@nycap.rr.com says...
>>>
>>>>Michael Calwell wrote in
>>>>news:41f40677$0 $15405$db0fefd9@news.zen.co.uk:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>james g. keegan jr. wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>"If abortion is murder, why are pro-lifers so squeamish about
>>>>>>proposing life sentences or capital punishment for women who
>>>>>>obtain abortions? Are they not murderers, or accessories to
>>>>>>murder?"
>>>>>>
>>>>>>--Chris Lyman, Message-ID: <3a3a82$bt8@jeeves.tccn.com>
>>>>>
>>>>>No, they're generally choiceless, oppressed women, and killing
>>>>>people is wrong.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>*smirk*
>>>>
>>>
>>>ROFL!
>>
>>
>> it was amusing to watch michael run away from the implications of the
>> position he claims.
>>
>> of course he lies about his position too.
>>
>
> WTF do two intellectual lightweights appending the words "smirk" and
> "ROFL" prove?
that we each laugh at your dishonesty and hypicrisy.
|
|
| | From: | Michael Calwell | | Subject: | Re: anti-choice hypocrisy | | Date: | Sun, 23 Jan 2005 21:50:48 +0000 |
|
|
| james g. keegan jr. wrote:
> Michael Calwell wrote in news:41f41b33
> $0$21773$fa0fcedb@news.zen.co.uk:
>
>
>>james g. keegan jr. wrote:
>>
>>>Pat Winstanley wrote in
>>>news:MPG.1c5e2048673c508498c015@news.uni-berlin.de:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>In article ,
>>>>keegan@nycap.rr.com says...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Michael Calwell wrote in
>>>>>news:41f40677$0 $15405$db0fefd9@news.zen.co.uk:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>james g. keegan jr. wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>"If abortion is murder, why are pro-lifers so squeamish about
>>>>>>>proposing life sentences or capital punishment for women who
>>>>>>>obtain abortions? Are they not murderers, or accessories to
>>>>>>>murder?"
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>--Chris Lyman, Message-ID: <3a3a82$bt8@jeeves.tccn.com>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>No, they're generally choiceless, oppressed women, and killing
>>>>>>people is wrong.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>*smirk*
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>ROFL!
>>>
>>>
>>>it was amusing to watch michael run away from the implications of the
>>>position he claims.
>>>
>>>of course he lies about his position too.
>>>
>>
>>WTF do two intellectual lightweights appending the words "smirk" and
>>"ROFL" prove?
>
>
>
> that we each laugh at your dishonesty and hypicrisy.
>
>
No, all it proves is that you have nothing to say.
|
|
| | From: | james g. keegan jr. | | Subject: | Re: anti-choice hypocrisy | | Date: | 23 Jan 2005 22:22:38 GMT |
|
|
| Michael Calwell wrote in
news:41f41fa2$0$15398$db0fefd9@news.zen.co.uk:
> james g. keegan jr. wrote:
>> Michael Calwell wrote in
>> news:41f41b33 $0$21773$fa0fcedb@news.zen.co.uk:
>>
>>
>>>james g. keegan jr. wrote:
>>>
>>>>Pat Winstanley wrote in
>>>>news:MPG.1c5e2048673c508498c015@news.uni-berlin.de:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>In article ,
>>>>>keegan@nycap.rr.com says...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>Michael Calwell wrote in
>>>>>>news:41f40677$0 $15405$db0fefd9@news.zen.co.uk:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>james g. keegan jr. wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>"If abortion is murder, why are pro-lifers so squeamish about
>>>>>>>>proposing life sentences or capital punishment for women who
>>>>>>>>obtain abortions? Are they not murderers, or accessories to
>>>>>>>>murder?"
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>--Chris Lyman, Message-ID: <3a3a82$bt8@jeeves.tccn.com>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>No, they're generally choiceless, oppressed women, and killing
>>>>>>>people is wrong.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>*smirk*
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>ROFL!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>it was amusing to watch michael run away from the implications of
>>>>the position he claims.
>>>>
>>>>of course he lies about his position too.
>>>>
>>>
>>>WTF do two intellectual lightweights appending the words "smirk" and
>>>"ROFL" prove?
>>
>>
>>
>> that we each laugh at your dishonesty and hypicrisy.
>>
>>
>
> No,
denial is as unhealthy as when you lie, michael.
|
|
| | From: | legend_89 at hotmail.com | | Subject: | Re: anti-choice hypocrisy | | Date: | 24 Jan 2005 02:31:42 -0800 |
|
|
|
Somewriter wrote:
> On 23 Jan 2005 20:33:48 -0800, legend_89@hotmail.com wrote:
>
> >
> >Somewriter wrote:
> >> On Sun, 23 Jan 2005 21:31:53 +0000, Michael Calwell
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> >james g. keegan jr. wrote:
> >> >> Pat Winstanley wrote in
> >> >> news:MPG.1c5e2048673c508498c015@news.uni-berlin.de:
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>>In article ,
> >> >>>keegan@nycap.rr.com says...
> >> >>>
> >> >>>>Michael Calwell wrote in
> >> >>>>news:41f40677$0 $15405$db0fefd9@news.zen.co.uk:
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>>james g. keegan jr. wrote:
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>>>"If abortion is murder, why are pro-lifers so squeamish
about
> >> >>>>>>proposing life sentences or capital punishment for women who
> >> >>>>>>obtain abortions? Are they not murderers, or accessories to
> >> >>>>>>murder?"
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>--Chris Lyman, Message-ID: <3a3a82$bt8@jeeves.tccn.com>
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>>No, they're generally choiceless, oppressed women, and
killing
> >> >>>>>people is wrong.
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>*smirk*
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>ROFL!
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> it was amusing to watch michael run away from the implications
of
> >the
> >> >> position he claims.
> >> >>
> >> >> of course he lies about his position too.
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >WTF do two intellectual lightweights appending the words "smirk"
and
> >
> >> >"ROFL" prove?
> >>
> >> It proves that they find the bullshit of the psuedo-intellectual,
> >> Michael Calwell, amusing.
> >No it just proves that they had nothing intelligent to say.
>
> How else should they have responded to such horse's shit, Damian?
Accept that we don't want to persecute anyone, only for abortions to
stop. Women who have abortions are easily forgiven and shown a helping
hand.
Centrecare's Loss and Grief Service provides a confidential and
non-judgemental counselling service for women and their families who
have had a terminated pregnancy or are carrying an unplanned pregnancy
to term.
http://www.centrecare.com.au/frames.asp?section=services&content=content.asp
|
|
| | From: | legend_89 at hotmail.com | | Subject: | Re: anti-choice hypocrisy | | Date: | 23 Jan 2005 20:33:48 -0800 |
|
|
|
Somewriter wrote:
> On Sun, 23 Jan 2005 21:31:53 +0000, Michael Calwell
> wrote:
>
> >james g. keegan jr. wrote:
> >> Pat Winstanley wrote in
> >> news:MPG.1c5e2048673c508498c015@news.uni-berlin.de:
> >>
> >>
> >>>In article ,
> >>>keegan@nycap.rr.com says...
> >>>
> >>>>Michael Calwell wrote in
> >>>>news:41f40677$0 $15405$db0fefd9@news.zen.co.uk:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>james g. keegan jr. wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>"If abortion is murder, why are pro-lifers so squeamish about
> >>>>>>proposing life sentences or capital punishment for women who
> >>>>>>obtain abortions? Are they not murderers, or accessories to
> >>>>>>murder?"
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>--Chris Lyman, Message-ID: <3a3a82$bt8@jeeves.tccn.com>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>No, they're generally choiceless, oppressed women, and killing
> >>>>>people is wrong.
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>*smirk*
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>ROFL!
> >>
> >>
> >> it was amusing to watch michael run away from the implications of
the
> >> position he claims.
> >>
> >> of course he lies about his position too.
> >>
> >
> >WTF do two intellectual lightweights appending the words "smirk" and
> >"ROFL" prove?
>
> It proves that they find the bullshit of the psuedo-intellectual,
> Michael Calwell, amusing.
No it just proves that they had nothing intelligent to say.
|
|
| | From: | Somewriter | | Subject: | Re: anti-choice hypocrisy | | Date: | Mon, 24 Jan 2005 03:00:30 -0500 |
|
|
| On 23 Jan 2005 20:33:48 -0800, legend_89@hotmail.com wrote:
>
>Somewriter wrote:
>> On Sun, 23 Jan 2005 21:31:53 +0000, Michael Calwell
>> wrote:
>>
>> >james g. keegan jr. wrote:
>> >> Pat Winstanley wrote in
>> >> news:MPG.1c5e2048673c508498c015@news.uni-berlin.de:
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>>In article ,
>> >>>keegan@nycap.rr.com says...
>> >>>
>> >>>>Michael Calwell wrote in
>> >>>>news:41f40677$0 $15405$db0fefd9@news.zen.co.uk:
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>>james g. keegan jr. wrote:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>>"If abortion is murder, why are pro-lifers so squeamish about
>> >>>>>>proposing life sentences or capital punishment for women who
>> >>>>>>obtain abortions? Are they not murderers, or accessories to
>> >>>>>>murder?"
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>--Chris Lyman, Message-ID: <3a3a82$bt8@jeeves.tccn.com>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>No, they're generally choiceless, oppressed women, and killing
>> >>>>>people is wrong.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>*smirk*
>> >>>>
>> >>>
>> >>>ROFL!
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> it was amusing to watch michael run away from the implications of
>the
>> >> position he claims.
>> >>
>> >> of course he lies about his position too.
>> >>
>> >
>> >WTF do two intellectual lightweights appending the words "smirk" and
>
>> >"ROFL" prove?
>>
>> It proves that they find the bullshit of the psuedo-intellectual,
>> Michael Calwell, amusing.
>No it just proves that they had nothing intelligent to say.
How else should they have responded to such horse's shit, Damian?
|
|
| | From: | legend_89 at hotmail.com | | Subject: | Re: Forgiveness | | Date: | 23 Jan 2005 23:03:18 -0800 |
|
|
|
> >> >
> >> > It never ceases to amaze me how people with absolutely no idea
> > about
> >> > what abortion is persist in rocking up on this NG and spouting
> > about it ;-))
> >
> > Oh they know, they are just in denial. Hard to be a pro abort and
admit
> > that the unborn is a human being (a fact), and then say you
actually
> > care about humanity.
>
> That's the truth!
Unfortunately so. Some are worse, some freely admit that of course the
unborn is a human, they just don't care. Even born babies, which are as
sentient as late term ones in the womb, are being killed by dutch
doctors. The slippery slope of death has begun, hang on and hope no
ones defines you as expendable.
|
|
| | From: | Osprey | | Subject: | Re: Forgiveness | | Date: | Mon, 24 Jan 2005 02:12:57 -0500 |
|
|
|
wrote in message
news:1106550198.765708.267530@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>
>> >> >
>> >> > It never ceases to amaze me how people with absolutely no idea
>> > about
>> >> > what abortion is persist in rocking up on this NG and spouting
>> > about it ;-))
>> >
>> > Oh they know, they are just in denial. Hard to be a pro abort and
> admit
>> > that the unborn is a human being (a fact), and then say you
> actually
>> > care about humanity.
>>
>> That's the truth!
>
> Unfortunately so. Some are worse, some freely admit that of course the
> unborn is a human,
That is rare, I have never met one of these pro-abortionist yet to admit
that.
For the most part, they can't admit it. It hurts their argument.
they just don't care. Even born babies, which are as
> sentient as late term ones in the womb, are being killed by dutch
> doctors. The slippery slope of death has begun, hang on and hope no
> ones defines you as expendable.
|
|
| | From: | legend_89 at hotmail.com | | Subject: | Re: Forgiveness | | Date: | 24 Jan 2005 01:59:11 -0800 |
|
|
|
Osprey wrote:
> wrote in message
> news:1106549265.769665.166150@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> >
> > Pat Winstanley wrote:
> >> In article
<1106541087.428091.318430@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
> >> legend_89@hotmail.com says...
> >> > I don't know about most people who believe in Life for all
humans.
> >> > Personally I do not want to see any woman persecuted for having
an
> >> > abortion. Same goes for the providers of these abortions.
Although
> > they
> >> > are taking a human beings life every abortion, I only want to
see
> > the
> >> > barbaric practice stopped.
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >> Abortion only very rarely kills a human being...
> >
> > Very few human young survive an abortion
> >
> > usually when that
> >> pregnant human being has all sorts of medical problems anyway,
> > without
> >> the pregnancy making things worse for her. Occasionally women die
> > when
> >> their pregnancies are aborted. Occasionally women die when their
> >> pregnancies end in labour/delivery. Both (in developed nations)
are
> >> relatively rare now, because of good access to good medical
> > attention.
> >
> > Very very rare, and abortion is needed in this case very very
rarely
>
> That is the ONLY justifiable reason for abortion, in my opinion. To
save a
> woman's life.
> >> Understand? Your blanket assertion that abortion kills the
pregnant
> >> women (the only human beings who could die as a result of
abortion)
> > is
> >> simply not true in the vast majority of abortions,
> >
> > You either can't read or you are in denial?
>
> I think you will find out soon enough why so many killfiled her. She
is
> totally unreasonable and if she hasn't already she will soon....she
will
> begin to lie about what you say.
She can try, but she's only lying to herself. I have noticed already
her denial.
>
> If the woman is pregnant
> > she has her young developing inside her. Her young in her womb are
> > human beings.
>
> Exactly.
> > just as in the vast
> >> majority of term deliveries the procedure doesn't kill the
pregnant
> >> woman.
> >
> > But usually kills her unborn child, thats why abortion is such an
issue
> >
> > Pro aborts often say that pregancy is dangerous,
>
> It is a scare tactic to help get more people to support abortion.
As I see more and more, as a teacher of health it amazes me the
intolerance shown to being a mother. Teenagers have it drummed into
them that pregnancy will 'ruin their life' etc. Lovely way to help out
young mothers, make them seem like they have a contagious disease.
Pregnancy is placed alongside aquring AIDS in the PP propaganda.
>
> and they try to place
> > it alongside ual transmitted diseases. Otherwise how could they
ever
> > say that abortion is needed, without the scaremongering that
pregnancy
> > is dangerous.
>
> You got it!
>
> >
> > Why do doctors say 'congratulations' when informing a woman of her
> > pregnancy?
>
>
> Why do doctors call the fetus a baby?
I've heard pregnant women say, "feel my baby kicking"
|
|
| | From: | legend_89 at hotmail.com | | Subject: | Re: Forgiveness | | Date: | 23 Jan 2005 22:52:41 -0800 |
|
|
|
David W. Barnes wrote:
> In article <41f49519$0$21776$fa0fcedb@news.zen.co.uk>, Michael
Calwell
> wrote:
>
> > Pat Winstanley wrote:
> > > In article
<1106541087.428091.318430@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
> > > legend_89@hotmail.com says...
> > >
> > >>I don't know about most people who believe in Life for all
humans.
> > >>Personally I do not want to see any woman persecuted for having
an
> > >>abortion. Same goes for the providers of these abortions.
Although they
> > >>are taking a human beings life every abortion, I only want to see
the
> > >>barbaric practice stopped.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > > Abortion only very rarely kills a human being... usually when
that
> > > pregnant human being has all sorts of medical problems anyway,
without
> > > the pregnancy making things worse for her. Occasionally women die
when
> > > their pregnancies are aborted. Occasionally women die when their
> > > pregnancies end in labour/delivery. Both (in developed nations)
are
> > > relatively rare now, because of good access to good medical
attention.
> > >
> > > Understand? Your blanket assertion that abortion kills the
pregnant
> > > women (the only human beings who could die as a result of
abortion) is
> > > simply not true in the vast majority of abortions, just as in the
vast
> > > majority of term deliveries the procedure doesn't kill the
pregnant
> > > woman.
> > >
> >
> > Sorry Pat, got to correct you there. In every abortion an unborn
child
> > dies. If you want, there are some photographs on the web of those
children.
> >
> > It never ceases to amaze me how people with absolutely no idea
about
> > what abortion is persist in rocking up on this NG and spouting
about it ;-))
Oh they know, they are just in denial. Hard to be a pro abort and admit
that the unborn is a human being (a fact), and then say you actually
care about humanity.
> >
> > Please Pat, in future, do your homework!!
>
> Tell us why you claim to care so much about children but refuse to
> adopt or create and fund social programs that will help these
children,
> hypocrite.
why would you want to fund social programs to help human beings when
you support aborting them before birth? Hypocrite.
without life there is no liberty
|
|
| | From: | Osprey | | Subject: | Re: Forgiveness | | Date: | Mon, 24 Jan 2005 01:59:21 -0500 |
|
|
|
wrote in message
news:1106549561.849759.151120@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
>
> David W. Barnes wrote:
>> In article <41f49519$0$21776$fa0fcedb@news.zen.co.uk>, Michael
> Calwell
>> wrote:
>>
>> > Pat Winstanley wrote:
>> > > In article
> <1106541087.428091.318430@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
>> > > legend_89@hotmail.com says...
>> > >
>> > >>I don't know about most people who believe in Life for all
> humans.
>> > >>Personally I do not want to see any woman persecuted for having
> an
>> > >>abortion. Same goes for the providers of these abortions.
> Although they
>> > >>are taking a human beings life every abortion, I only want to see
> the
>> > >>barbaric practice stopped.
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > Abortion only very rarely kills a human being... usually when
> that
>> > > pregnant human being has all sorts of medical problems anyway,
> without
>> > > the pregnancy making things worse for her. Occasionally women die
> when
>> > > their pregnancies are aborted. Occasionally women die when their
>> > > pregnancies end in labour/delivery. Both (in developed nations)
> are
>> > > relatively rare now, because of good access to good medical
> attention.
>> > >
>> > > Understand? Your blanket assertion that abortion kills the
> pregnant
>> > > women (the only human beings who could die as a result of
> abortion) is
>> > > simply not true in the vast majority of abortions, just as in the
> vast
>> > > majority of term deliveries the procedure doesn't kill the
> pregnant
>> > > woman.
>> > >
>> >
>> > Sorry Pat, got to correct you there. In every abortion an unborn
> child
>> > dies. If you want, there are some photographs on the web of those
> children.
>> >
>> > It never ceases to amaze me how people with absolutely no idea
> about
>> > what abortion is persist in rocking up on this NG and spouting
> about it ;-))
>
> Oh they know, they are just in denial. Hard to be a pro abort and admit
> that the unborn is a human being (a fact), and then say you actually
> care about humanity.
That's the truth!
>> >
>> > Please Pat, in future, do your homework!!
>>
>> Tell us why you claim to care so much about children but refuse to
>> adopt or create and fund social programs that will help these
> children,
>> hypocrite.
>
> why would you want to fund social programs to help human beings when
> you support aborting them before birth? Hypocrite.
> without life there is no liberty
|
|
| | From: | Pat Winstanley | | Subject: | Re: Forgiveness | | Date: | Mon, 24 Jan 2005 07:59:22 -0000 |
|
|
| In article <1106549561.849759.151120@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>,
legend_89@hotmail.com says...
> > > It never ceases to amaze me how people with absolutely no idea
> about
> > > what abortion is persist in rocking up on this NG and spouting
> about it ;-))
>
> Oh they know, they are just in denial. Hard to be a pro abort and admit
> that the unborn is a human being (a fact), and then say you actually
> care about humanity.
>
I don't know of anyone who is "pro abort"! ;-))
Incidentally, the embryo/fouetus is not, by definition, a human being.
|
|
| | From: | legend_89 at hotmail.com | | Subject: | Re: Forgiveness | | Date: | 24 Jan 2005 01:47:31 -0800 |
|
|
|
Pat Winstanley wrote:
> In article <1106549265.769665.166150@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
> legend_89@hotmail.com says...
> > > Abortion only very rarely kills a human being...
> >
> > Very few human young survive an abortion
> >
>
> I repeat, abortion only rarely kills a human being
No the unborn human offspring of the mother usually dies
(ie. the pregnant
> woman). There is no other human being present for that pregnancy.
You fallacy. Cite some scientific evidence?
Whilst
> a pregnancy is in progress there is an embryo or foetus present,
Which are stages of A humans development
but
> since the status of 'human being' doesn't begin until live birth has
> occurred,
Human being is not a status. Your definition ends at your
countries/states border. Human being is a definition of species.
Human being n: any living or extinct member of the family Hominidae
[syn: homo, man, human]
Source: WordNet =AE 2.0, =A9 2003 Princeton University
the embryo or foetus is not (at that time) a human being.
LOL @ 'at that time'. You are a human being or you aren't, there is no
in between, you do not become 'more human' with age.
>
> Note also that 'human young' would appear to mean children. There are
> none of those in a pregnancy either!
The woman wouldn't be pregnant if she did not bear her
young/offspring/child in her womb. Note also that you can't
read/comprehend and have no proof ;)
"Pregnant adj. 1 (of a woman or female animal) having a child or
young developing in the uterus." Oxford English Reference Dictionary.
Oxford University Press 1995, 1996. Chief ed. Patrick Hanks, P1141
"Embryo (em-bre-o) the young of any organism in an early stage of
development; in humans, the developing organism from fertilization to
the end of the eighth week in utero." Tortora, G. (1995) Harper
Collins College Publishers. Principles of Human anatomy 7th Edition, p
G-15.
Seriously Pat, didn't you ever do high school biology? or even health
education? You should know (if you are going to talk about abortion)
about when reproduction ends and development begins. i.e fertilisation.
|
|
| | From: | legend_89 at hotmail.com | | Subject: | Re: Forgiveness | | Date: | 24 Jan 2005 01:38:22 -0800 |
|
|
|
Osprey wrote:
> wrote in message
> news:1106550198.765708.267530@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> > It never ceases to amaze me how people with absolutely no
idea
> >> > about
> >> >> > what abortion is persist in rocking up on this NG and
spouting
> >> > about it ;-))
> >> >
> >> > Oh they know, they are just in denial. Hard to be a pro abort
and
> > admit
> >> > that the unborn is a human being (a fact), and then say you
> > actually
> >> > care about humanity.
> >>
> >> That's the truth!
> >
> > Unfortunately so. Some are worse, some freely admit that of course
the
> > unborn is a human,
>
> That is rare, I have never met one of these pro-abortionist yet to
admit
> that.
> For the most part, they can't admit it. It hurts their argument.
True. But they also play the 'pregnancy is dangerous', motherhood is a
burden bullshit.
>
> they just don't care. Even born babies, which are as
> > sentient as late term ones in the womb, are being killed by dutch
> > doctors. The slippery slope of death has begun, hang on and hope no
> > ones defines you as expendable.
|
|
| | From: | legend_89 at hotmail.com | | Subject: | Forgiveness | | Date: | 23 Jan 2005 20:31:27 -0800 |
|
|
|
james g. keegan jr. wrote:
> "If abortion is murder, why are pro-lifers so squeamish about
proposing
> life sentences or capital punishment for women who obtain abortions?
> Are they not murderers, or accessories to murder?"
>
> --Chris Lyman, Message-ID: <3a3a82$bt8@jeeves.tccn.com>
I don't know about most people who believe in Life for all humans.
Personally I do not want to see any woman persecuted for having an
abortion. Same goes for the providers of these abortions. Although they
are taking a human beings life every abortion, I only want to see the
barbaric practice stopped.
Love your enemy, judge not etc etc.
As many pro life groups provide couselling for victims of abortion,
your article is little more than propaganda.
|
|
| | From: | Pat Winstanley | | Subject: | Re: Forgiveness | | Date: | Mon, 24 Jan 2005 06:23:51 -0000 |
|
|
| In article <1106541087.428091.318430@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
legend_89@hotmail.com says...
> I don't know about most people who believe in Life for all humans.
> Personally I do not want to see any woman persecuted for having an
> abortion. Same goes for the providers of these abortions. Although they
> are taking a human beings life every abortion, I only want to see the
> barbaric practice stopped.
>
>
Abortion only very rarely kills a human being... usually when that
pregnant human being has all sorts of medical problems anyway, without
the pregnancy making things worse for her. Occasionally women die when
their pregnancies are aborted. Occasionally women die when their
pregnancies end in labour/delivery. Both (in developed nations) are
relatively rare now, because of good access to good medical attention.
Understand? Your blanket assertion that abortion kills the pregnant
women (the only human beings who could die as a result of abortion) is
simply not true in the vast majority of abortions, just as in the vast
majority of term deliveries the procedure doesn't kill the pregnant
woman.
A couple of years ago statistics** showed that in fact a woman was about
10 times more likely to die from continuing her pregnancy than from
aborting her pregnancy. I doubt that proportion has changed radically
since. Women don't always seek proper care when continuing a pregnancy
- they don't necessarily see a doctor when complications set in. A woman
seeking a legal abortion *has* to have proper medical attention in order
to have the pregnancy aborted. Also add on the fact that the longer a
pregnancy lasts, the more chances there are for things to go wrong, and
the more medical problems the woman has to cope with - remember that
pregnancies ending in birth typically last 3-4 times as long as aborted
pregnancies. It's hardly surprising that, statistically, continued
pregnancy is seemingly rather more dangerous for the woman than
abortion!
** No, before anyone asks, I don't think I have the stats and their
sources handy at the moment - probably sitting on a backup CD somewhere!
|
|
| | From: | Michael Calwell | | Subject: | Re: Forgiveness | | Date: | Mon, 24 Jan 2005 06:26:32 +0000 |
|
|
| Pat Winstanley wrote:
> In article <1106541087.428091.318430@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
> legend_89@hotmail.com says...
>
>>I don't know about most people who believe in Life for all humans.
>>Personally I do not want to see any woman persecuted for having an
>>abortion. Same goes for the providers of these abortions. Although they
>>are taking a human beings life every abortion, I only want to see the
>>barbaric practice stopped.
>>
>>
>
>
> Abortion only very rarely kills a human being... usually when that
> pregnant human being has all sorts of medical problems anyway, without
> the pregnancy making things worse for her. Occasionally women die when
> their pregnancies are aborted. Occasionally women die when their
> pregnancies end in labour/delivery. Both (in developed nations) are
> relatively rare now, because of good access to good medical attention.
>
> Understand? Your blanket assertion that abortion kills the pregnant
> women (the only human beings who could die as a result of abortion) is
> simply not true in the vast majority of abortions, just as in the vast
> majority of term deliveries the procedure doesn't kill the pregnant
> woman.
>
Sorry Pat, got to correct you there. In every abortion an unborn child
dies. If you want, there are some photographs on the web of those children.
It never ceases to amaze me how people with absolutely no idea about
what abortion is persist in rocking up on this NG and spouting about it ;-))
Please Pat, in future, do your homework!!
|
|
| | From: | David W. Barnes | | Subject: | Re: Forgiveness | | Date: | Sun, 23 Jan 2005 22:28:33 -0800 |
|
|
| In article <41f49519$0$21776$fa0fcedb@news.zen.co.uk>, Michael Calwell
wrote:
> Pat Winstanley wrote:
> > In article <1106541087.428091.318430@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
> > legend_89@hotmail.com says...
> >
> >>I don't know about most people who believe in Life for all humans.
> >>Personally I do not want to see any woman persecuted for having an
> >>abortion. Same goes for the providers of these abortions. Although they
> >>are taking a human beings life every abortion, I only want to see the
> >>barbaric practice stopped.
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> > Abortion only very rarely kills a human being... usually when that
> > pregnant human being has all sorts of medical problems anyway, without
> > the pregnancy making things worse for her. Occasionally women die when
> > their pregnancies are aborted. Occasionally women die when their
> > pregnancies end in labour/delivery. Both (in developed nations) are
> > relatively rare now, because of good access to good medical attention.
> >
> > Understand? Your blanket assertion that abortion kills the pregnant
> > women (the only human beings who could die as a result of abortion) is
> > simply not true in the vast majority of abortions, just as in the vast
> > majority of term deliveries the procedure doesn't kill the pregnant
> > woman.
> >
>
> Sorry Pat, got to correct you there. In every abortion an unborn child
> dies. If you want, there are some photographs on the web of those children.
>
> It never ceases to amaze me how people with absolutely no idea about
> what abortion is persist in rocking up on this NG and spouting about it ;-))
>
> Please Pat, in future, do your homework!!
Tell us why you claim to care so much about children but refuse to
adopt or create and fund social programs that will help these children,
hypocrite.
|
|
| | From: | Michael Calwell | | Subject: | Re: Forgiveness | | Date: | Mon, 24 Jan 2005 06:36:28 +0000 |
|
|
| David W. Barnes wrote:
> In article <41f49519$0$21776$fa0fcedb@news.zen.co.uk>, Michael Calwell
> wrote:
>
>
>>Pat Winstanley wrote:
>>
>>>In article <1106541087.428091.318430@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
>>>legend_89@hotmail.com says...
>>>
>>>
>>>>I don't know about most people who believe in Life for all humans.
>>>>Personally I do not want to see any woman persecuted for having an
>>>>abortion. Same goes for the providers of these abortions. Although they
>>>>are taking a human beings life every abortion, I only want to see the
>>>>barbaric practice stopped.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Abortion only very rarely kills a human being... usually when that
>>>pregnant human being has all sorts of medical problems anyway, without
>>>the pregnancy making things worse for her. Occasionally women die when
>>>their pregnancies are aborted. Occasionally women die when their
>>>pregnancies end in labour/delivery. Both (in developed nations) are
>>>relatively rare now, because of good access to good medical attention.
>>>
>>>Understand? Your blanket assertion that abortion kills the pregnant
>>>women (the only human beings who could die as a result of abortion) is
>>>simply not true in the vast majority of abortions, just as in the vast
>>>majority of term deliveries the procedure doesn't kill the pregnant
>>>woman.
>>>
>>
>>Sorry Pat, got to correct you there. In every abortion an unborn child
>>dies. If you want, there are some photographs on the web of those children.
>>
>>It never ceases to amaze me how people with absolutely no idea about
>>what abortion is persist in rocking up on this NG and spouting about it ;-))
>>
>>Please Pat, in future, do your homework!!
>
>
> Tell us why you claim to care so much about children but refuse to
> adopt or create and fund social programs that will help these children,
> hypocrite.
What's any of that got to do with abortion.
Do you support rape?
|
|
| | From: | David W. Barnes | | Subject: | Re: Forgiveness | | Date: | Sun, 23 Jan 2005 22:38:59 -0800 |
|
|
| In article <41f4976c$0$21776$fa0fcedb@news.zen.co.uk>, Michael Calwell
wrote:
> David W. Barnes wrote:
> > In article <41f49519$0$21776$fa0fcedb@news.zen.co.uk>, Michael Calwell
> > wrote:
> >
> >
> >>Pat Winstanley wrote:
> >>
> >>>In article <1106541087.428091.318430@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
> >>>legend_89@hotmail.com says...
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>I don't know about most people who believe in Life for all humans.
> >>>>Personally I do not want to see any woman persecuted for having an
> >>>>abortion. Same goes for the providers of these abortions. Although they
> >>>>are taking a human beings life every abortion, I only want to see the
> >>>>barbaric practice stopped.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>Abortion only very rarely kills a human being... usually when that
> >>>pregnant human being has all sorts of medical problems anyway, without
> >>>the pregnancy making things worse for her. Occasionally women die when
> >>>their pregnancies are aborted. Occasionally women die when their
> >>>pregnancies end in labour/delivery. Both (in developed nations) are
> >>>relatively rare now, because of good access to good medical attention.
> >>>
> >>>Understand? Your blanket assertion that abortion kills the pregnant
> >>>women (the only human beings who could die as a result of abortion) is
> >>>simply not true in the vast majority of abortions, just as in the vast
> >>>majority of term deliveries the procedure doesn't kill the pregnant
> >>>woman.
> >>>
> >>
> >>Sorry Pat, got to correct you there. In every abortion an unborn child
> >>dies. If you want, there are some photographs on the web of those children.
> >>
> >>It never ceases to amaze me how people with absolutely no idea about
> >>what abortion is persist in rocking up on this NG and spouting about it ;-))
> >>
> >>Please Pat, in future, do your homework!!
> >
> >
> > Tell us why you claim to care so much about children but refuse to
> > adopt or create and fund social programs that will help these children,
> > hypocrite.
>
>
> What's any of that got to do with abortion.
It has to do with YOU.
>
> Do you support rape?
Nope.
|
|
| | From: | Osprey | | Subject: | Re: Forgiveness | | Date: | Mon, 24 Jan 2005 01:42:22 -0500 |
|
|
|
"Michael Calwell" wrote in message
news:41f4976c$0$21776$fa0fcedb@news.zen.co.uk...
> David W. Barnes wrote:
>> In article <41f49519$0$21776$fa0fcedb@news.zen.co.uk>, Michael Calwell
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Pat Winstanley wrote:
>>>
>>>>In article <1106541087.428091.318430@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
>>>>legend_89@hotmail.com says...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>I don't know about most people who believe in Life for all humans.
>>>>>Personally I do not want to see any woman persecuted for having an
>>>>>abortion. Same goes for the providers of these abortions. Although they
>>>>>are taking a human beings life every abortion, I only want to see the
>>>>>barbaric practice stopped.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Abortion only very rarely kills a human being... usually when that
>>>>pregnant human being has all sorts of medical problems anyway, without
>>>>the pregnancy making things worse for her. Occasionally women die when
>>>>their pregnancies are aborted. Occasionally women die when their
>>>>pregnancies end in labour/delivery. Both (in developed nations) are
>>>>relatively rare now, because of good access to good medical attention.
>>>>
>>>>Understand? Your blanket assertion that abortion kills the pregnant
>>>>women (the only human beings who could die as a result of abortion) is
>>>>simply not true in the vast majority of abortions, just as in the vast
>>>>majority of term deliveries the procedure doesn't kill the pregnant
>>>>woman.
>>>>
>>>
>>>Sorry Pat, got to correct you there. In every abortion an unborn child
>>>dies. If you want, there are some photographs on the web of those
>>>children.
>>>
>>>It never ceases to amaze me how people with absolutely no idea about what
>>>abortion is persist in rocking up on this NG and spouting about it ;-))
>>>
>>>Please Pat, in future, do your homework!!
>>
>>
>> Tell us why you claim to care so much about children but refuse to
>> adopt or create and fund social programs that will help these children,
>> hypocrite.
>
>
> What's any of that got to do with abortion.
>
> Do you support rape?
>
How about this Michael. They claim they care for people, liberals claim
they are the ones who care the most. How many poor family's from the
Kentucky Mountains do you see liberals like Barnes adopting? How many
family's have they help buy food for, clothes, shelter?
Of course you know they have not helped one single family out, they could
care less. As long as they can continue expanding Government programs to
keep these people dependent upon, they turn their head and look the other
way.
Meanwhile, we have many churches in this country who are helping, who do
donate food, clothes, and even offer shelter...and these same liberals who
claim they care about women and children, who don't lift a finger to help
anyone...will bash a church in a heartbeat.
|
|
| | From: | David W. Barnes | | Subject: | Re: Forgiveness | | Date: | Sun, 23 Jan 2005 22:44:58 -0800 |
|
|
| In article , Osprey
wrote:
> "Michael Calwell" wrote in message
> news:41f4976c$0$21776$fa0fcedb@news.zen.co.uk...
> > David W. Barnes wrote:
> >> In article <41f49519$0$21776$fa0fcedb@news.zen.co.uk>, Michael Calwell
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>Pat Winstanley wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>In article <1106541087.428091.318430@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
> >>>>legend_89@hotmail.com says...
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>I don't know about most people who believe in Life for all humans.
> >>>>>Personally I do not want to see any woman persecuted for having an
> >>>>>abortion. Same goes for the providers of these abortions. Although they
> >>>>>are taking a human beings life every abortion, I only want to see the
> >>>>>barbaric practice stopped.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>Abortion only very rarely kills a human being... usually when that
> >>>>pregnant human being has all sorts of medical problems anyway, without
> >>>>the pregnancy making things worse for her. Occasionally women die when
> >>>>their pregnancies are aborted. Occasionally women die when their
> >>>>pregnancies end in labour/delivery. Both (in developed nations) are
> >>>>relatively rare now, because of good access to good medical attention.
> >>>>
> >>>>Understand? Your blanket assertion that abortion kills the pregnant
> >>>>women (the only human beings who could die as a result of abortion) is
> >>>>simply not true in the vast majority of abortions, just as in the vast
> >>>>majority of term deliveries the procedure doesn't kill the pregnant
> >>>>woman.
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>Sorry Pat, got to correct you there. In every abortion an unborn child
> >>>dies. If you want, there are some photographs on the web of those
> >>>children.
> >>>
> >>>It never ceases to amaze me how people with absolutely no idea about what
> >>>abortion is persist in rocking up on this NG and spouting about it ;-))
> >>>
> >>>Please Pat, in future, do your homework!!
> >>
> >>
> >> Tell us why you claim to care so much about children but refuse to
> >> adopt or create and fund social programs that will help these children,
> >> hypocrite.
> >
> >
> > What's any of that got to do with abortion.
> >
> > Do you support rape?
> >
>
> How about this Michael. They claim they care for people, liberals claim
> they are the ones who care the most.
How about you crawl out from under that rock you are in and actually
have the balls to speak directly to the pro-choice?
> How many poor family's from the
> Kentucky Mountains do you see liberals like Barnes adopting?
Why would I adopt. And your bigotry is showing again.
> How many
> family's have they help buy food for, clothes, shelter?
Far more than you, that is for certain.
> Of course you know they have not helped one single family out, they could
> care less.
More making up of reality? And as I have told you dozens of times, the
expression is "they couldn't care less." (Uneducated asshole...)
> As long as they can continue expanding Government programs to
> keep these people dependent upon, they turn their head and look the other
> way.
From the guy who works for the government and takes government welfare
for his health care and goes to school on taxpayer money.
> Meanwhile, we have many churches in this country who are helping, who do
> donate food, clothes, and even offer shelter...and these same liberals who
> claim they care about women and children, who don't lift a finger to help
> anyone...will bash a church in a heartbeat.
Churches are interested only in helping themselves.
|
|
|
