Who will pay for the sin of murdering the unborn?

[Moneyguy1]

Just a question....

Is an acorn an oak tree, or is it simply a potential oak tree?

[SLO-BOB]

Originally Posted by Moneyguy1

Just a question....

Is an acorn an oak tree, or is it simply a potential oak tree?

It's potentially squirrel food.

[Moneyguy1]

Well, that's one option......

[skipdup]

Originally Posted by Moneyguy1

Just a question....

Is an acorn an oak tree, or is it simply a potential oak tree?

Is a sapling an oak tree?

[sjf911]

Originally Posted by frogger

Nah, Mars doesn't have the magnetic field necessary to keep the solar wind from stripping away its atmosphere, so trying to reestablish an atmosphere is futile. This all comes from stay at Holiday Inn Express last night.

Don't forget the lack of plate tectonics and its effect on atmospheric recycling.

[skipdup]

Originally Posted by Jeff Higgins

So wouldn't the mother's freedom stop at the surface of her unborn child's skin?

What many of you seem to focus on is the "mass of cells" or "zygot". Of course you all realize that where abortion is legal, it is legal well beyond this stage of development. In some places, into the third trimester. No one can honestly say that a life is not being taken at that late stage of development.

Well said.

Re: 3rd tri abortion... don't doctors have to scramble the brains of the "fetus" so that it is not alive outside the mother's body?

- Skip

[Moneyguy1]

skip..

Obviously. However, the original question has not been answered. The sapling could be considered a "newborn". So how about that nice, round, cute little acorn?

[Seahawk]

Originally Posted by nostatic

There is no rational here. That is the whole problem. One side *believes* that "life" begins at conception and that no one has the right to end it. The other side *believes* that "life" begins at some point later in the development.

There is no fact here. Only belief.

Good summation, and I concur...now what?

From Journey to Ixtlan (which I reread recently, this time sans cannibus):

It is stupid for you to scorn the mysteries of the world simply because you know the doing of scorn.

I think apertures need to be opened, without scorn.

Me? I am not prepared to tell anyone what they must do, the difficulty I have is in the, "some point later in the development". I simply cannot find solace in that.

[nostatic]

I don't find solace either. I think abortion is a horrific thing. But I think making it illegal will result in even greater pain and suffering.

[Seahawk]

Originally Posted by nostatic

I don't find solace either. I think abortion is a horrific thing. But I think making it illegal will result in even greater pain and suffering.

Fair. I am now off to Gaza, I've got $hit to do.

[Isabo]

Originally Posted by nostatic

I don't find solace either. I think abortion is a horrific thing. But I think making it illegal will result in even greater pain and suffering.

YES!
That's exactly what prolifers seem unable to grasp.

[Moneyguy1]

Isa:

Sad, but true. And, no matter what the cause, the group demanding that something be made illegal would be among the first to complain if one of the things they believed in was designated in the same way. No compromise that will satisfy everyone is possible.

[peppy]

I am too close to this to continue in a futile debate. I believe that the late term abortions are the biggest problem, after 22 weeks babies can live from what I have read. Maybe that was not true, but I have seen babies that are 23 weeks live.


"By 20 weeks gestation, the unborn child has the physical structures necessary to experience pain. There is evidence that by 20 weeks gestation unborn children evade certain stimuli in a manner which in an infant or an adult would be interpreted to be a response to pain. Anesthesia is routinely administered to unborn children who are 20 weeks gestational age or older who undergo prenatal surgery." copied from the Georgia health resources web page.

I am not trying to tell a woman what to do with their bodies. I just think killing a baby crosses that line, with the progresses in medicine and the knowledge that we now have.
Babies at 16 weeks have heartbeats and at 20 weeks they can hear sounds and voices.

[Normy]

Abortion is a non-issue. The real issue is: Is this a SECULAR country or a RELIGIOUS country.

I've got news for you fundamentalists: The people who wrote the US Constitution were CLEAR in their later writings that they didn't want religion to be recognized at all. That is, the country was to be set up so that you could be completely FREE of religion, and the government wouldn't force anything otherwise.

10 commandments in court houses? That is the government imposing the silly christian religion on people coming to court. Prayer in schools? That is the government imposing A religion on the children. If one kid is mine and is an athiest, then the other kids will pick on him if he doesn't bow his head for the daily prayer. And what if the school system institutes the Jewish religion, and your kids are Baptist? Hello? Finally, the procedure known as abortion is ONLY abhorent to religious people, in my view. This is a legitimate birth control method in my opinion. I will say that it isn't the best, since it would be better for the body of the woman if this didn't happen. The world is certainly overpopulated, we are destroying the environment slowly but surely, and we need to come to a conclusion as to what exact number of people the world should ideally hold.

All of this implies that "god" doesn't exist. Again...I'm an athiest. I think the bible is a good read, and much can be learned from it, but it SHOULD NOT be taken as law!!!!!

Hello? It says in one place that you shouldn't eat shrimp~

THINK people THINK!

The long and short: The only reason that fundamentalists want to remove a woman's Constitutional right to terminate her pregnancy is because it [I]proves that their favporite book is a load of bull*****[I].

N

[kang]

I still don’t see any good suggestions for dealing with the real problem: unwanted pregnancies. Doesn’t anyone have any ideas there?

On another note, do the pro-lifers really want to force a woman to carry a rapist’s baby? What about carrying her uncle’s baby? How about her brother? Or even her father? Should a woman be forced to carry her father’s baby to term? People talk about the psychological damage abortion does to women, what about the psychological damage due to carrying a rapist or incest baby?

What do the pro-lifers suggest we do with these unwanted babies?

[fast911ray]

Sort of. RA was my 'home track'. I lived in Chicago until late 2003, raced with PCA and VSCDA there. Last race at RA was Brian-Redman International Challenge in 2001. Running 2nd overall, 1st in class until red flag 2 laps from the end. On the last lap of the restarted 2 laps, I lost a chunk of my new presure plate going into the 'kink'. Car twitched but I kept my foot in it riding the barrier..holding position. Great said I, a trophy!..until I tried to steer right. The impact bent the left trailing arm and front strut. End of story at Canada Corner, where I parked it. Bummer.

Do you live in Elkhart? Plymouth?

[strupgolf]

Ahhhh, I guess some of us want them to race at Road America.

[Normy]

Abortion is a non-issue. The real issue is: Is this a SECULAR country or a RELIGIOUS country.

I've got news for you fundamentalists: The people who wrote the US Constitution were CLEAR in their later writings that they didn't want religion to be recognized at all. That is, the country was to be set up so that you could be completely FREE of religion, and the government wouldn't force anything otherwise.

10 commandments in court houses? That is the government imposing the silly christian religion on people coming to court. Prayer in schools? That is the government imposing A religion on the children. If one kid is mine and is an athiest, then the other kids will pick on him if he doesn't bow his head for the daily prayer. And what if the school system institutes the Jewish religion, and your kids are Baptist? Hello? Finally, the procedure known as abortion is ONLY abhorent to religious people, in my view. This is a legitimate birth control method in my opinion. I will say that it isn't the best, since it would be better for the body of the woman if this didn't happen. The world is certainly overpopulated, we are destroying the environment slowly but surely, and we need to come to a conclusion as to what exact number of people the world should ideally hold.

All of this implies that "god" doesn't exist. Again...I'm an athiest. I think the bible is a good read, and much can be learned from it, but it SHOULD NOT be taken as law!!!!!

Hello? It says in one place that you shouldn't eat shrimp~

THINK people THINK!

The long and short: The only reason that fundamentalists want to remove a woman's Constitutional right to terminate her pregnancy is because it [I]proves that their favporite book is a load of bull*****[I].

N

[Seahawk]

Originally Posted by Normy

I've got news for you fundamentalists: The people who wrote the US Constitution were CLEAR in their later writings that they didn't want religion to be recognized at all. That is, the country was to be set up so that you could be completely FREE of religion, and the government wouldn't force anything otherwise.

Nope. Your post is an abortion.

http://www.loc.gov/exhibits/religion/

[cool_chick]

Originally Posted by SLO-BOB

Just stay the hell away from those big eggs!