Who will pay for the sin of murdering the unborn?

[Porsche-O-Phile]

Life is always preferable to death. Nobody disputes that.

The problem is that for the so-called "pro-life" crowd, it isn't about defending life, it's about establishing a system of control and equipping them with a cudgel to bash women over the head with, control them, keep them in the kitchen barefoot and pregnant and back to the role of second-class citizens in a patriarchal society. That's really what it's all about.

The issue would be much simpler if it was so black and white as to be simply about defending happy innocent beautiful babies from big mean nasty evil murdrous thugs - but it's not. This is a convenient and convoluted misrepresentation of the reality of the situation. This is REALLY about a battle to prevent religious freaks from gaining a foothold into the control of our governmental system. This is something that can be neither allowed nor tolerated at any cost. It's unfortunate, but if a few innocents are martyred for the cause of preventing the reins of our government from being handed over to zealots/control freaks/religio-nazis, it's worth it. The ends justify the means. If you think the suffering of several innocents is disturbing, it's NOTHING compared to the suffering that will be unleashed on this country-at-large if the Pandora's Box of theocracy is opened up. Just look to societies like Saudi Arabia, Iran, Taliban Afghanistan, etc. to see where theocracy leads. That box must be kept tightly closed, without execption, permanently. There are few absolutes in this world, but I believe strongly that this is one of them.

I 100% agree with Wayne that this is an issue that should be left to the states. The founding fathers never intended to have the bloated federal bureaucracy that we have today - they intended to have the STATES decide most of the issues and for a very few specific and limited things (that affect the relationship between the states or the defense of the nation as a whole) to be run by the federal/central government. This has been completely ba$tardized. Roe v. Wade IS a bad decision in the sense that it serves to further erode the principle of "states' rights first". It is imperfect, but we have it and now we must decide how to deal with that.

I applaud those (like Wayne) who are able to see the value and beauty in life, commit themselves to it and defend it. I completely understand that. However, I take strong exception to the notion that human life is somehow more inherently valuable than other types. We have opposable thumbs and the ability to make and use tools. That's really about all that makes us "special". We are different than other animals in this sense, but I find it INTENSELY hypocritical that someone would "defend life" and "reject suffering" by opposing abortion, yet simultaneously believe it's okay to needlessly kill animals or other beings that can certainly suffer just as much as we do, just to validate their own machismo. I despise hunting, I loathe individuals that "get their rocks off" from killing animals and try to hide behind B.S. rationalization for their deep-seeded delight in the torture and killing of other living things. All I can do is choose to not participate in the barbarity and accept the fact that there are some boorish and stupid people out there who place their own convenience and stroking their own egos through pretending to be "tough guys" ahead of living things. I similarly dislike those who would abort an unborn human life. I personally don't do it and for me it probably wouldn't be an option, just as killing an animal for "sport" isn't an option. It's because I value life. Life is more important than convenience. However, as with the issue with hunting and animals, I have to grudgingly accept that there are those out there who are less enlightened than I am (at risk of sounding egotistical here, I don't know how else to put it) and see nothing wrong with putting their own conveniences ahead of life and love.

Love (especially manifested in a living, breathing, self-aware thing) is something so precious and rare in this universe, it should pretty much go without saying that it should be defended and protected - not discarded and abused and treated like a "thing" or a piece of property. Maybe some day, the day will come when the idiots and the wanna-be-tough-guys and the hypocrites and the thugs will all realize this. I really hope so. It would go a long way to making the world a more perfect place. But until then, all I can do is not participate in the hypocrisy, the murder, the suffering and the slaughter, to condemn it and (sadly) accept that in this day and age, the laws are written for people less discriminate, less introspective and probably less enlightened than me (again, not meant to sound egotistical, just making a point).

That said, suffering and dying in the name of the "greater good" of defending and upholding this country's SECULAR principles and keeping the control freaks and fascists from getting control of it and causing untold times MORE suffering is still worth the price. It's sad, but that's the situation we're in. Until people start RESPECTING one another and not trying to dictate their points of view to them or impose their will upon them, we will have to fight this battle and unfortunately people will have to suffer and die just to prevent the march of those with thinly-veiled ulterior motives.

[72doug2,2S]

This is not a religious issue, so that point is wasted.

Theocracy is not going to happen because we don't have a majority of Muslims who promote that.

The point of women being second class citizens is largely dismissed once you realize pregnancy doesn't just happen to women, they have to take actions (rape being an exception) to have children. A women driven to a career has a choice before she gets pregnant, after that adoption is the only humane choice left.

[Shaun @ Tru6]

Christians have been controlling women since Paul entered the scene. here's just one gem of many from what so many call a saint.

1 Corinthians, Chapter 14, 34-35
As in all the congregations of the saints, 34women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the Law says. 35If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church.


Doug, only Satan would sanction men lording over women. God never would.

[dipso]

Originally Posted by 72doug2,2S

Dipso in the pro-death camp says these women who commit abortion are murderers and will murder their children even after they are born, so it won't stop the killing.

Did you ever consider that they will not be set free to repeat their heinous acts against the innocent again?

First of all I don't find the label pro-death offensive. I am for capital punishment, vigilantism, gang on gang murder etc. My grandparents are from Sicily, how can I not be.

I am not saying that drowning a baby is not murder. What I am saying is, that if this woman had used the legal and safe medical procedure known as abortion she could have avoided this drastic measure.
Some anti-choice people are trying to take this right away from her. It almost seems as if the anti-choice crowd wants this kind of behavior to happen more frequently. You know it will.

But then again, that brings us back to the"love the fetus, hate the child" label that the anti-choice crowd so lovingly deserves.

[Mule]

Originally Posted by 72doug2,2S

This is not a religious issue, so that point is wasted.

Theocracy is not going to happen because we don't have a majority of Muslims who promote that.

I'm not worried about a muslim theocracy here, now a baptist theocracy, enter Mike Huckabee.

[72doug2,2S]

Originally Posted by Shaun 84 Targa

Christians have been controlling women since Paul entered the scene. here's just one gem of many from what so many call a saint.

1 Corinthians, Chapter 14, 34-35
As in all the congregations of the saints, 34women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the Law says. 35If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church.


Doug, only Satan would sanction men lording over women. God never would.

Shaun if it were only that easy to shut my wife up, I might agree. Cleary, Paul was speaking to one of my wife's ancestors. You haven't met her yet, so I understand if this seems odd. You will understand if you ever come out to the Midwest and visit me.

[72doug2,2S]

Originally Posted by dipso

First of all I don't find the label pro-death offensive. I am for capital punishment, vigilantism, gang on gang murder etc. My grandparents are from Sicily, how can I not be.

I am not saying that drowning a baby is not murder. What I am saying is, that if this woman had used the legal and safe medical procedure known as abortion she could have avoided this drastic measure.
Some anti-choice people are trying to take this right away from her. It almost seems as if the anti-choice crowd wants this kind of behavior to happen more frequently. You know it will.

But then again, that brings us back to the"love the fetus, hate the child" label that the anti-choice crowd so lovingly deserves.

So paying someone else off to commit murder is less drastic? The courts generally find both parties criminally charged.

[Shaun @ Tru6]

Originally Posted by 72doug2,2S

Shaun if it were only that easy to shut my wife up, I might agree. Cleary, Paul was speaking to one of my wife's ancestors. You haven't met her yet, so I understand if this seems odd. You will understand if you ever come out to the Midwest and visit me.

I would love to visit Doug, but I am disappointed in your response here.

Will be sure to bring a Bible. Paul is full of this garbage and was simply an AD opportunist perverting Christ's message with man's message.

[Jeff Higgins]

Originally Posted by Porsche-O-Phile

Life is always preferable to death. Nobody disputes that.

The problem is that for the so-called "pro-life" crowd, it isn't about defending life, it's about establishing a system of control and equipping them with a cudgel to bash women over the head with, control them, keep them in the kitchen barefoot and pregnant and back to the role of second-class citizens in a patriarchal society. That's really what it's all about.

The issue would be much simpler if it was so black and white as to be simply about defending happy innocent beautiful babies from big mean nasty evil murdrous thugs - but it's not. This is a convenient and convoluted misrepresentation of the reality of the situation. This is REALLY about a battle to prevent religious freaks from gaining a foothold into the control of our governmental system. This is something that can be neither allowed nor tolerated at any cost. It's unfortunate, but if a few innocents are martyred for the cause of preventing the reins of our government from being handed over to zealots/control freaks/religio-nazis, it's worth it. The ends justify the means. If you think the suffering of several innocents is disturbing, it's NOTHING compared to the suffering that will be unleashed on this country-at-large if the Pandora's Box of theocracy is opened up. Just look to societies like Saudi Arabia, Iran, Taliban Afghanistan, etc. to see where theocracy leads. That box must be kept tightly closed, without execption, permanently. There are few absolutes in this world, but I believe strongly that this is one of them.

I 100% agree with Wayne that this is an issue that should be left to the states. The founding fathers never intended to have the bloated federal bureaucracy that we have today - they intended to have the STATES decide most of the issues and for a very few specific and limited things (that affect the relationship between the states or the defense of the nation as a whole) to be run by the federal/central government. This has been completely ba$tardized. Roe v. Wade IS a bad decision in the sense that it serves to further erode the principle of "states' rights first". It is imperfect, but we have it and now we must decide how to deal with that.

I applaud those (like Wayne) who are able to see the value and beauty in life, commit themselves to it and defend it. I completely understand that. However, I take strong exception to the notion that human life is somehow more inherently valuable than other types. We have opposable thumbs and the ability to make and use tools. That's really about all that makes us "special". We are different than other animals in this sense, but I find it INTENSELY hypocritical that someone would "defend life" and "reject suffering" by opposing abortion, yet simultaneously believe it's okay to needlessly kill animals or other beings that can certainly suffer just as much as we do, just to validate their own machismo. I despise hunting, I loathe individuals that "get their rocks off" from killing animals and try to hide behind B.S. rationalization for their deep-seeded delight in the torture and killing of other living things. All I can do is choose to not participate in the barbarity and accept the fact that there are some boorish and stupid people out there who place their own convenience and stroking their own egos through pretending to be "tough guys" ahead of living things. I similarly dislike those who would abort an unborn human life. I personally don't do it and for me it probably wouldn't be an option, just as killing an animal for "sport" isn't an option. It's because I value life. Life is more important than convenience. However, as with the issue with hunting and animals, I have to grudgingly accept that there are those out there who are less enlightened than I am (at risk of sounding egotistical here, I don't know how else to put it) and see nothing wrong with putting their own conveniences ahead of life and love.

Love (especially manifested in a living, breathing, self-aware thing) is something so precious and rare in this universe, it should pretty much go without saying that it should be defended and protected - not discarded and abused and treated like a "thing" or a piece of property. Maybe some day, the day will come when the idiots and the wanna-be-tough-guys and the hypocrites and the thugs will all realize this. I really hope so. It would go a long way to making the world a more perfect place. But until then, all I can do is not participate in the hypocrisy, the murder, the suffering and the slaughter, to condemn it and (sadly) accept that in this day and age, the laws are written for people less discriminate, less introspective and probably less enlightened than me (again, not meant to sound egotistical, just making a point).

That said, suffering and dying in the name of the "greater good" of defending and upholding this country's SECULAR principles and keeping the control freaks and fascists from getting control of it and causing untold times MORE suffering is still worth the price. It's sad, but that's the situation we're in. Until people start RESPECTING one another and not trying to dictate their points of view to them or impose their will upon them, we will have to fight this battle and unfortunately people will have to suffer and die just to prevent the march of those with thinly-veiled ulterior motives.

That has to be one of the more distorted world views I think I have ever read, here or anywhere else. And, in spite of your disclaimers to the contrary, one of the more egotistical and self serving as well. It's actually so fraught with misperceptions, misunderstandings, and stereotypes that it is difficult to even begin to address them. Well done.

[lendaddy]

Originally Posted by Porsche-O-Phile

The problem is that for the so-called "pro-life" crowd, it isn't about defending life, it's about establishing a system of control and equipping them with a cudgel to bash women over the head with, control them, keep them in the kitchen barefoot and pregnant and back to the role of second-class citizens in a patriarchal society. That's really what it's all about.

Seriously? Man I am sick and tired of being the last to know on this ****!!

Once, just effin once I'd like to be involved in the planning stages of one of our plots. Hell, it would be nice if they just let me in on it before I have to read about it from the other side. I'm a smart guy, I've got ideas.

What else have we got going that I'm gonna hear about later? Unreal man, just friggen unreal.

[72doug2,2S]

Originally Posted by lendaddy

Seriously? Man I am sick and tired of being the last to know on this ****!!

Once, just effin once I'd like to be involved in the planning stages of one of our plots. Hell, it would be nice if they just let me in on it before I have to read about it from the other side. I'm a smart guy, I've got ideas.

What else have we got going that I'm gonna hear about later? Unreal man, just friggen unreal.

It's always the ones closest who are the last to know. I've known for about a week now and it still burns me up. Did you know we control global weather patters too? Dude, don't even ask about the standardized testing.

Where's my Prozac?

[Mule]

Originally Posted by lendaddy

Seriously? Man I am sick and tired of being the last to know on this ****!!

Once, just effin once I'd like to be involved in the planning stages of one of our plots. Hell, it would be nice if they just let me in on it before I have to read about it from the other side. I'm a smart guy, I've got ideas.

What else have we got going that I'm gonna hear about later? Unreal man, just friggen unreal.

I'm fed up with this too Len. What say we start our own plot!

[dipso]

Originally Posted by 72doug2,2S

So paying someone else off to commit murder is less drastic? The courts generally find both parties criminally charged.

That's not true. The courts don't charge either party with murder after an abortion. Do you know why?
Because you can't kill the unborn. Birth-Born...same thing.
I know you don't like it, but the line has been drawn. All you are doing is proving that you can't be trusted to follow the law. If the line is moved back a little further, who is to say that you won't want it moved again.
Sorry

[72doug2,2S]

Originally Posted by dipso

That's not true. The courts don't charge either party with murder after an abortion. Do you know why?
Because you can't kill the unborn. Birth-Born...same thing.
I know you don't like it, but the line has been drawn. All you are doing is proving that you can't be trusted to follow the law. If the line is moved back a little further, who is to say that you won't want it moved again.
Sorry

DIPSO wrote "You can't kill the unborn"
Denial
look it up.

You can't even make your first statement categorically true. Even today there are such things as illegal abortions (outside the arbitrary date).

[dafischer]

[cool_chick]

Originally Posted by 72doug2,2S

Dipso in the pro-death camp ...

He supports the death penalty, goes hunting, and embraces war?

[72doug2,2S]

Originally Posted by cool_chick

He supports the death penalty, goes hunting, and embraces war?

War on the unborn? Yes, it's called abortion.

[Mule]

War on common sense, it's called religion.

[72doug2,2S]

Originally Posted by Mule

War on common sense, it's called religion.

Mule your posts are so bizarre. Do you babble incoherently at home too?

[skipdup]

Wait, since when is abortion a religious issue? I know many people that are anti-abortion that are also NOT Christion/Religious/etc. How can this be???