He believes in abortion. NM below
Posted By: Defintely NOT a Christian. on 2009-06-05
In Reply to: .Sure, O is Christian. His mother was Christian - ()
x
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
My belief? "late-term abortion" or partial-birth abortion" = infanticide, it is sickening
So in these cases I do think, as in most things, there is no ABSOLUTE, but a judicious guideline for this should be investigated and established by the medical community, as far as survival/outcome, but then we must be willing to prosecute mothers and doctors who go outside the guidelines...with established jail terms....and more money to house these "criminals" for years. Why not let God by the ultimate judge, He has the wisdom and the power, and eternity without God is worse than anything we as humans can mandate, don't you think?
meant is against abortion...didn't mean supports abortion (NM)
If he believes what you just said, then no
The Federal Reserve IS the reason for this problem and has been the same problem each and every time this country has seen economic downfall, all because of banks and reserves. Please take the time to watch this and it will help you understand.......this is a wake up call for why government SHOULD NOT EVER be this big
Have you EVER known the government to do anything worthwhile with your money, and now this????
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-466210540567002553
If he believes that, then YUP.... his is
... that the U.S. is turning into an armpit. Makes me wonder which other country in the world will eventually take us over. (If anyone would even WANT TO, that is.)
So anyone that believes in God does not have
xx
Uh huh. Like anyone here believes you -
And yes, you ARE wasting your time here.
LOL! She believes she can do anything ugly she wants because she
wraps herself up in the Bible and Jesus is her *special friend* and just gives her a wink and a nod every time she does something heinous. At least that's what she herself said in a post not long ago. (Aggressive denial by her to follow, I'm sure, like she lies about everything else.)
It's obvious that none of these people have Jesus in their hearts because there's no room for love and peace and truth in those jaded, hateful, dishonest, angry people. I wonder if they even have a hint of how laughable they really are! LOL! 
Okay...if he really believes this "stuff" why does he not...
lead by example and conserve...he lives in a house the size of a small town in some countries. He uses more electricity than 4 or 5 households. I don't know what he drives, but I do know that every time he flies coast to coast he puts more emissions in the atmosphere than someone driving a HUMMER for TWO YEARS. And he does that how many times a month??? Geez. I am sure you mean well, but...if he is really so interested in saving this beautiful planet...he should be the FIRST to conserve. THis is his job now. It is all about the money.
I realize that not everyone believes the same
And sorry to offend you but in fact the poster is a fanatic, in my opinion.
Also, it's not a FACT that Palin is a fanatic; she is a Christian. You call her a fanatic, your opinion.
Well, I happen to be one who believes
God has a sense of humor. After all He created us didn't He? Yeah, I "profess" to be a Christian but I take a pretty dim view of self-righteous "Christians" who question other's opinions and thoughts that don't fit into their definition of "Christian." Christian = "one who follows Christ" or tries to in my case. I am not perfect but I'm not the one to tell you that you "profess" to be a Christian. Maybe you are, maybe you aren't, I don't know.
Don't give a fig who believes it or not.
x
but I'm sure the vast majority believes
that life begins at conception, however, I know I'm not going to change your mind, so I'll leave it at that.
Half of U.S. still believes Iraq had WMD
Half of U.S. still believes Iraq had WMD
By CHARLES J. HANLEY, AP Special Correspondent Sun Aug 6, 7:43 PM ET
Do you believe in Iraqi WMD? Did
Saddam Hussein's government have weapons of mass destruction in 2003?
Half of America apparently still thinks so, a new poll finds, and experts see a raft of reasons why: a drumbeat of voices from talk radio to die-hard bloggers to the Oval Office, a surprise headline here or there, a rallying around a partisan flag, and a growing need for people, in their own minds, to justify the war in
Iraq.
People tend to become independent of reality in these circumstances, says opinion analyst Steven Kull.
The reality in this case is that after a 16-month, $900-million-plus investigation, the U.S. weapons hunters known as the Iraq Survey Group declared that Iraq had dismantled its chemical, biological and nuclear arms programs in 1991 under U.N. oversight. That finding in 2004 reaffirmed the work of U.N. inspectors who in 2002-03 found no trace of banned arsenals in Iraq.
Despite this, a Harris Poll released July 21 found that a full 50 percent of U.S. respondents — up from 36 percent last year — said they believe Iraq did have the forbidden arms when U.S. troops invaded in March 2003, an attack whose stated purpose was elimination of supposed WMD. Other polls also have found an enduring American faith in the WMD story.
I'm flabbergasted, said Michael Massing, a media critic whose writings dissected the largely unquestioning U.S. news reporting on the Bush administration's shaky WMD claims in 2002-03.
This finding just has to cause despair among those of us who hope for an informed public able to draw reasonable conclusions based on evidence, Massing said.
I don't see where anyone believes Bush has done no wrong
It's the fact that several of us don't believe he is the cause of all the suffering in the world like many of you here do. Some of us are not blinded by Bush hatred nor are we Bush loyalists to the point where we think he's done everything right. I believe several of the *crashers* on this board have said that, but you refused to either read the body of their posts or believe what they say.
Oops! Don't say Amen - not everyone believes the same!
=)
She used the quote because she believes the words....
This Pegler fellow used it when Harry Truman was elected: When Truman came into the Presidency, Pegler welcomed him "We grow good people in our towns, with honesty, sincerity and dignity." But earlier, Pegler had told his readers the man from Missouri was someone to watch out for "This Truman", he wrote, when Harry was nominated for Vice President "is thin-lipped, a hater, and not above offering you his hand to yank you off balance and work you over with a chair leg, a pool cue or something out of his pocket."
Sounds like politics to me. However, the sentiments are true. We DO grow good people in our towns, with honesty, sincerity and dignity.
The poster probably believes what Hollywood says
nm
Well anyone who believes that garbage deserves
And the greatest majority of those come with NO NAME....false names, names they can't even identify the source. Wanna guess where they really are coming from?
Maybe Senator Obama believes in following the
"First Admendment" to the Constitution of the United States.
My sister believes this stuff
My sister's church tells her this stuff to scare her and get her tithe. Let me tell you in the 80s she was no saint. It makes me feel bad for her that her church makes her so afraid and discourages her from thinking for herself.
Michael Steele..Does he even know what he believes? (sm)
By Philip Klein on 3.11.09 @ 10:15PM
In 1983, Woody Allen made the mockumentary film Zelig about a man who longs for approval so badly that he changes to fit the people who are surrounding him. The movie may as well have been written about Michael Steele, who continues to tie himself in knots as part of his effort to reach out to moderates.
Steele already has been ridiculed by all sides of the political spectrum for blasting Rush Limbaugh on CNN only to apologize when he received blowback. But now, via Matt Lewis, I see he told GQ that he believes abortion is an individual choice. Here's the portion of the interview:
How much of your pro-life stance, for you, is informed not just by your Catholic faith but by the fact that you were adopted?
Oh, a lot. Absolutely. I see the power of life in that—I mean, and the power of choice! The thing to keep in mind about it… Uh, you know, I think as a country we get off on these misguided conversations that throw around terms that really misrepresent truth.
Explain that.
The choice issue cuts two ways. You can choose life, or you can choose abortion. You know, my mother chose life. So, you know, I think the power of the argument of choice boils down to stating a case for one or the other.
Are you saying you think women have the right to choose abortion?
Yeah. I mean, again, I think that’s an individual choice.
You do?
Yeah. Absolutely.
So basically, in an effort to seem more inclusive, Steele tried to appropriate the language of the left by saying life is a choice, but then he allowed himself to be backed into a corner in which he said that women have the right to choose abortion -- by definition, a pro-choice postion. Perhaps realizing what he had just said, Steele then tried to add nuance to his point:
Are you saying you don’t want to overturn Roe v. Wade?
I think Roe v. Wade—as a legal matter, Roe v. Wade was a wrongly decided matter.
Okay, but if you overturn Roe v. Wade, how do women have the choice you just said they should have?
The states should make that choice. That’s what the choice is. The individual choice rests in the states. Let them decide.
Do pro-choicers have a place in the Republican Party?
Absolutely!
So, after getting boxed in, he suddenly shifts from "individual choice" meaning "women have the right to choose an abortion" to it meaning that states have an "individual choice" about whether or not to permit women to exercise choice. Liz Mair, charitably, thinks that Steele was trying to express the pro-choice, anti-Roe, position but that he just was clumsy about it. Even if that were the case, however, it wouldn't be consistent with other recent statements he made on the subject.
In December, when he was under fire during the RNC race for being a member of Christine Todd Whitman's moderate Republican Leadership Council, he portrayed himself as emphatically pro-life to CBN's David Brody, barbing, "I was a monk for goodness sakes ok?" Appearing on Fox News Sunday after his election to serve as RNC chair, Steele declared, "I'm a pro-life Roman Catholic conservative, always have been."
In a debate moderated by Tim Russert during the 2006 U.S. Senate race in Maryland, Steele was all over the place on Roe. Check out the following exchange:
MR. RUSSERT: Would, would you encourage — would you hope the U.S. Supreme Court overturns Roe vs. Wade?
LT. GOV. STEELE: I think that that’s a matter that’s going to rightly belong to the courts to decide ultimately whether or not that, that issue should be addressed. The, the Court has taken a position, which I agree, stare decisis, which means that the law is as it is and, and so this is a matter that’s ultimately going to be adjudicated at the states. We’re seeing that. The states are beginning to decide for themselves on, on this and a host of other issues. And the Supreme Court would ultimately decide that.
MR. RUSSERT: But you hope that the Court keeps Roe v. Wade in place?
LT. GOV. STEELE: I think the Court will evaluate the law as society progresses, as the Court is supposed to do.
MR. RUSSERT: But what’s your position? Do you want them to sustain it or overturn it?
LT. GOV. STEELE: Well, I think, I think, I think Roe vs. Wade, Roe vs. Wade is a, is a matter that
should’ve been left to the states to decide, ultimately. But it, it is where it is today, and the courts will ultimately decide whether or not this, this gets addressed by the states, goes back to the states in some form or they overturn it outright.
MR. RUSSERT: Is is your desire to keep it in place?
LT. GOV. STEELE: My desire is that we follow what stare decisis is at this point, yes.
Huh?
The problem with Steele's defenders is that they like the idea of Steele -- i.e., the idea that Steele is going to reach out to moderates. But the reality of Steele is quite different. He is proving himself to be a shape shifter who is trying to please everybody, but in the end delivering a completely muddled message. Ultimately no pro-choice independent or Democrat is going to be more inclined to become a Republican as a result of that GQ interview, because Steele comes off like a bumbling clown who is trying to have it both ways. The mere fact that we have to have a whole debate over what he means demonstrates that he's doing a terrible job at communicating. And lest we forget, communication was supposed to be his strong suit.
http://spectator.org/blog/2009/03/11/michael-zelig-steele
Obama truly believes he is "the one". McCain would
nm
I am interested why any of us should know his personal reasons for EVERYTHING he believes in? sm
It does seem that President Obama is now under a microscope and every tiny minute aspect of his life, any beliefs he holds, are scrutinize for a NEFARIOUS HIDDEN MEANING? yes, perhaps it is a religious belief, I have a close girlfriend who was born Catholic and has been a Jehovah Witness for several years, but is that wrong? The focus of their lives, their spending, etc., is around Our Savior and they minimize celebrations of self, as I understand. Would that be bad or evil in some way? I have been silently reading this board since the primaries first started, and it seems that ever since Mr. Obama became a frontrunner, candidate, and finally president, people are picking apart EVERY SINGLE area of his life. Why? Would anyone want to live under this scrutiny? Why not just pray for him he has a HUGE job ahead of him that I personally would never want, judge him by his policies, his intentions for this country, the way he represents our country, for his proposals and hard work, but not his personal beliefs which should be private, as my religion is to me. What's next, analyzing his favorite color for hidden meaning? I am really praying hard for a successful and safe presidency.
Palin believes teaching abstinence only is the thing to do - nm
x
What makes you think that everyone who believes in Jesus grew up in the church?
I most definitely did not, and it is an absolute MIRACLE that I even came to the Lord. My parents are as far from Christ as can be. I literally came to Christ "kicking and screaming". I did not want to believe in him. Mostly because I did not want to have to follow HIS rules. But I am here, and I am saved, and I thank God that I am! It is the best thing to ever happen to my SOUL.
And half the country believes this....good grief....nm
From point #1: "Anyone who believes otherwise is a tin-foil hat fringe conspiracist."
Ah, those pinko lefty Presbyterians!!! They hate America,are unpatriotic, traitorous, out-of-touch, terrorists....did I forget anything?
http://www.courier-journal.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?Date=20060814&Category=NEWS01&ArtNo=608140369&SectionCat=&Template=printart
Monday, August 14, 2006
9/11 book from church publishing house causes uproar
Author claims U.S. orchestrated attacks
By Peter Smith
psmith@courier-journal.com
The Courier-Journal
By Peter Smith
psmith@courier-journal.com
The Courier-Journal
The official publishing house of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) has printed a new book about the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks that has outraged conservatives in the church and elsewhere.
The book, Christian Faith and the Truth Behind 9/11, written by David Ray Griffin, a professor emeritus at Claremont School of Theology in California, accuses the Bush administration of carrying out the attacks as a pretext for expanding America's demonic imperial power.
Griffin argues, among other things, that the World Trade Center towers collapsed because of secretly planted explosives -- he quotes eyewitnesses who claim that's what it looked and sounded like -- and not because airliners crashed into the buildings, causing fires.
Writers on conservative Presbyterian Web sites have been responding by saying officials of the Louisville-based denomination are out of touch with members and by calling for a boycott of Presbyterian Publishing Corp.
The corporation funds itself from book sales and has editorial independence in deciding what to publish, although its board is elected by the denomination's legislative General Assembly.
But as word of the book spreads, some Presbyterians lament that it comes as the 2.3 million-member denomination struggles with financial troubles, declining membership and a controversial General Assembly vote to open the door to ordaining gays.
It is sad that at this time in the life of our denomination, yet another silly and inflammatory step would be taken by the church's bureaucracy, said the Rev. Michael Walker, executive director of Presbyterians for Renewal, a conservative group based in Louisville.
The Rev. Parker Williamson of the North Carolina-based Presbyterian Lay Committee asked how these wild accusations make it through the editorial process.
Davis Perkins, president of the publishing company, said the book's stances are not those of the corporation or of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.).
But in recent written statements, he defended the decision to publish the book, saying it is not an off-the-wall polemic but rather a considered work with 49 pages of extensive scholarly notes.
Perkins said Griffin's claims will not be universally accepted by his readers, but the arguments supporting those claims merit careful consideration by serious-minded Christians and Americans concerned with truth and the meaning of their faith.
The publisher would not say how many of the 7,500 copies of the book have been sold since its publication last month.
The book was published under the corporation's prestigious Westminster John Knox imprint, which produces works on theology and popular spirituality from a range of scholars, including liberal and evangelical Christians and also Jews. It also produces popular works such as The Gospel According to The Simpsons.
But Perkins said such works haven't stirred controversy over whether they reflect the church's official position.
Publishing a range of views is what academic/trade publishers do, he said. The corporation publishes specifically Presbyterian works under a separate imprint, Geneva Press.
Griffin is part of a wider movement whose books and Web sites challenge the official version of what happened on Sept. 11, 2001. Similar claims by University of Wisconsin-Madison instructor Kevin Barrett have brought calls for him to be fired.
In his book, Griffin claims that the U.S. military could have intercepted the four hijacked jets if it had wanted to and that the hijacker accused of slamming an airliner into the Pentagon lacked the flying skills to do so.
Griffin calls on Christians to oppose the Bush administration's foreign policy, just as ancient Christians opposed the Roman Empire. He said that although he doesn't believe in literal evil spirits, such empires have demonic power to do great harm.
Our first allegiance must be to God, he writes. … If we believe that our political and military leaders are acting on the basis of policies that are diametrically opposed to divine purposes, it is incumbent upon us to say so.
Griffin is a member of another Protestant denomination, the Christian Church (Disciples of Christ). The Presbyterian Publishing Corp. has published several of his books on theology.
Griffin said in an interview last week that for the first year and a half after Sept. 11, he believed the attacks simply were carried out by Arab terrorists angry about American foreign policy. I didn't think … even the Bush administration would do such a thing, he said.
But skeptics of the widely accepted accounts convinced him that the attacks were an inside job used to justify the administration's expansion of military powers and the adoption of the doctrine of pre-emptive war, the basis of the 2003 invasion of Iraq.
Griffin has written two previous books on this theme under different publishers. The third book seeks to rally church groups into challenging the official accounts.
Griffin said he's heard the recent criticisms from Presbyterians but not from anybody who's actually read the book.
It's remarkable how certain people can be that this idea is wrong, he said.
Reporter Peter Smith can be reached at (502) 582-4469.
McCain BELIEVES IN GLOBAL WARMING - GASP, BOY IS HE STUPID
He also terms global warming "a serious and urgent economic, environmental and national security challenge" and adds that "the problem isn't a Hollywood invention," according to excerpts of planned remarks his campaign made available Sunday.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18269994/
Russian Professor of Economics Believes U.S. Will Split into Six States
Abortion is for men. nm
This isn't abortion!
Read it again: the child is already out of the womb and breathing! the child is BORN. Not a fetus.
Your telling me that a child that is born from a botched abortion should be left to die?
That is what this bill is about. If a child is born after an abortion attempt, that it should be treated as a US citizen with all rights of a citizen given, including the right to lifesaving medical care. You don't think that's fair?
Abortion
Haven't you guys who are going on about this given any thought that every time politicians start speaking of abortion, gay marriage, etc., it is a smoke screen. They know how to push our buttons, but then they are always hiding something else. The know if they keep our minds on these types of issues, we won't be paying attention to other under-handed things that are going on.
This is not about abortion. It is about a man who...
voted AGAINST giving medical care infants who survive abortion, who are living and breathing outside the mother and unattached even by the umbilical cord. That is horrific, and frankly I don't feel real good about someone who wants to fight for that TO happen, instead of AGAINST it happening. If he can't muster up enough sympathy for poor children dying alone in a dirty clothes closet, how could I possibly believe he cares about the "middle class?"
Talk about a STRETCH.
abortion
I think that it is sad that people do not believe abortion is murder. I am pregnant by surprise and had an ultrasound at 12 weeks (when many abortions are performed) and was able to see my baby move around and his hands and feet. If that is not a baby, heaven help us all. Having said that, I am not sure that abortion should be illegal. In my heart, I know that it is wrong, but in my head, I also know that it will continue to happen in an unsafe manner if it were to become illegal. However, perhaps not so prevalently, so this is a toughie for me, but I cannot believe that God condones it.
ABORTION
who KNOWS there are other alternatives out there? Come on people!! We all type this stuff...There are sooooo many different kinds of birth control out there. Why wait and kill a baby? Bottom line, that's what abortion is. I just cannot believe the mentality of some of you people. I may not have all the fancy words some of you use but I think this is just common sense. I don't even know that I think a woman should have her "choice" taken away but I do think abortion should not be considered birth control. If you don't want to have a baby and CHOOSE abortion, and it happens again and again, how about an old fashioned TUBAL LIGATION? All this talk truly makes me ill to my stomach.
I'm curious how many of you out there are willing to fess up about an abortion and sharing your feelings about your "choice." My sister had a "choice" to make years ago and she has nightmares about it still. The guilt she has felt is unreal. Maybe some of you do live with yourselves and I honestly think any woman who has made this "choice" and can live with herself without any sort of guilt EVER, is just a very hard person.
Abortion
I agree
you won't go into abortion because........ sm
somewhere, deep inside, you know it is murder...a sin in God's eyes just as much as adultery.
The issue is not about choice (and I have other views on that word as well) but about the taking of innocent lives who have no voice to speak for themselves. As far as welfare....it's coming already and it won't be me who pays, unless that top income bracket keeps spiraling downward into the low 5-figure numbers which is not an impossibility.
On abortion
Solomon's wisdom still at work today.....
A worried woman went to her gynecologist and said:
'Doctor, I have a serious problem and desperately need your help! My baby is not even 1 yr. old and I'm
pregnant again. I don't want kids so close together.'
So the doctor said: 'Ok, and what do you want me to do?'
She said: 'I want you to end my pregnancy, and I'm counting on your help with this.'
The doctor thought for a little, and after some silence he said to the lady: 'I think I have a better solution
for your problem. It's less dangerous for you too.' She smiled, thinking that the doctor was going to accept
her request.
Then he continued: 'You see, in order for you not to have to take care of 2 babies at the same time, let's
kill the one in your arms. This way, you could rest some before the other one is born. If we're going to kill
one of them, it doesn't matter which one it is. There would be no risk for your body if you chose the one in your
arms.'
The lady was horrified and said: 'No doctor! How terrible! It's a crime to kill a child!'
'I agree', the doctor replied. 'But you seemed to be ok with it, so I thought maybe that was the best
solution.' The doctor smiled, realizing that he had made his point.
He convinced the mom that there is no difference in killing a child that's already been born and one that's
still in the womb. The crime is the same!
Oh if our current judicial system could only understand this fact.
Abortion..............s/m
You can talk your heart out, I was, am and will always be pro-abortion.
Till to the end of the 3rd month of pregnancy it is the mother who has the right to end the pregnancy.
Who is going to help me in all aspects if I, as the mother, know that I will most probably not be able to care and provide for this child? Not for all mothers is the option of adoption, this means GIVING AWAY one's flesh and blood to STRANGERS an acceptable option.
I am against partial birth abortion.
Really, no one is pro-abortion......
The term is pro-choice and there are a lot of Americans who are pro-choice. If you think they are going to overturn Roe vs Wade to satisfy less than half the population - you will be disappointed. This is just a political joust to get people arguing - with no end in sight. Give it up. They thought they'd win another election with this tired, worn out "issue" - and they were wrong.
And this is different from abortion... How? sm
Abortion is the ending of a life, plain and simple. Yet people get all up in arms when their "right to choose" is taken away from them.
I am not advocating this woman's choice in the least. I personally think she should be prosecuted for what she has done, just as I believe women who have abortions and the doctors who perform them should be prosecuted. There is no difference.
I feel the same way about abortion. sm
nm
I don't know where they want to go with it, but abortion is a choice..sm
and last time I checked it was not limited to one race. Can that same one prove that more blacks abort than whites? There goes that theory.
abortion will always be, whether legal or not
What these anti pro choice people dont seem to realize is, termination of pregnancy will continue whether it is legal or not. The only difference is it will go underground, performed by people who are not licensed and the rich women, they will just make an appointment in a progressive not backward country like America and have their abortion. Essentially women will be baby makers for the government, their bodies controlled by the government. What it comes down to is..the neocons need to mind their own business.
What bothers me about abortion is...
the enormous numbers that need to be performed. In an age where birth control is so readily available and so reliably effective, that there are still SO MANY women seeking abortions, tells me one thing.....
People are careless, that is all. What other conclusion could you draw? If you only had true accidental pregnancies resulting from the small percentage failure rate of most contraceptives, the incest, the rapes, and the abortions to save a woman's life, it still wouldn't add up to a tiny fraction of the abortions we have now.
Every time I hear someone say that that it's a woman's right to choose, or to control her own body, I can't help but hear a little voice saying... THEN CHOOSE NOT TO GET PREGNANT, BE RESPONSIBLE, DON'T HOOK UP WITH SOME LOSER IN A BACK SEAT WHILE YOU'RE LOADED UP ON BOOZE, AND CONTROL YOUR BODY.
Why does choicie and control of one's body only begin after conception takes place?
Okay....McCain is against abortion....
is that better than calling him pro life?
"He voted against sending innocent Americans to a country we had no business going to all because of lies put out by the "republicans"."
First, I am not a Republican, but you cannot lay all the blame for going to war at the feet of Republicans, that's number one. A good many Democrats voted to go to war, otherwise we would not have gone to war. They were talking about regime change in Iraq when Clinton was President. Bush did not invent it. In fact, when Bush was elected the first time, he kept Richard Clarke and George Tenet over from the Clinton administration...both of whom brought with them the idea of regime change in Iraq from the Clinton administration. You should read the quotes from Democrats from the Clinton era through 2003. Either they were all lying too or they believed the intelligence too. I just don't get how people can read those quotes, totally ignore them, and say it was all Bush's lie or the Republicans' lies. I refer you to a post below that illustrates all those quotes. Either they were all lying, Clinton, Bush, CLarke, Tenet, all those Democrats including Teddy Kennedy, John Kerry, Hillary Clinton, and on and on...either they were ALL lying or they ALL believed the intelligence. That is the ONLY thing that makes any sense based on their own quotes out of their own mouths. This old chestnut of "Bush lied men died" and "all caused by Republican lies" is the biggest lie of all.
How you vote is your business and you should do whatever your conscience tells you to do, as I am.
As to Jill Stanek...google her. The story is true. If the story were NOT true, the hospital she names would sue her, don't you think? They don't sue because it happened. They issued a birth and death certificate for that child. Everyone knows what happened. She came forward to try to get a law passed that would prohibit that from every happening again (and bless her for doing so) and Obama voted against it...3 times. That is a matter of record in the Illinois state senate. He and his wife are vocal supporters of all forms of abortion, including partial birth abortion. You heard him say in the video that "options should not be limited." That is exactly what he meant. And that, my friend, devalues human life and makes him doubly dangerous as far as I am concerned. And he said it with equal "lack of emotion."
Yes, it was barbaric to let that poor child just die. Horrific. Just as horrific is partial birth abortion. Look that up some time, what they actually do during that procedure, just to avoid what happened above...a live birth. They turn the child breech so that all the body except the head can be born. Then the needle at the base of the skull, suck the brain out and collapse the skill, killing the baby so that it is "born dead." Because if the head came first and the baby took a breath and THEN the brain was sucked out...THAT would be murder. So some inventive doctor figured turn the baby around and suck the brain out while the head is still inside the mother. That is barbaric. And it happens every day in this country. Legally. John McCain is against that. Barack Obama is for that. Enough said as far as I am concerned. And I agree...when are enough murdered babies enough? How many more million?
Spontaneous abortion is hardly....
the same thing as induced abortion...that's a stretch.
Okay, if where I get my polls is wrong and where you get yours is right, why not put it a vote of the people? Because, no matter what someone "says," it is a different story when you have to pull the lever and put what you say into action. Congress would never act on it or you would have a real abortion law instead of one shoved down our throats by judges. Just a question here...suppose a conservative majority got in the supreme court and struck down Roe vs. Wade? Would you defend their right to do that the same away you defend their right to strike down a law making abortion illegal? Somehow I doubt it. Would probably be first in line to say you can't legislate from the bench...just like I am saying. They are to interpret law..not make law. But, doesn't matter. It's a done deed. But last time I looked I had the right as s citizen to oppose it. Just exercising my right. Sorry if it chaps.
Good grief...silly statement. Of course I don't picture a 9-month gestation. I picture a human life being snuffed out. I see one human being given total control over the life of another. And to me, that is wrong. Especially one who is defenseless.
There is much more there than a "mass of cells" at 8, 10, 12 weeks. And if it makes you feel better to think it feels no pain, fine. I am not willing to assume that.
I agree whole-heartedly with everything you said in your last paragraph, but I would like to add teach responsibility for one's own actions. There are Planned Parenthood Clinics everywhere and if not, your local health department will dole out birth control. That is a pretty lame excuse as far as I am concerned. But what is the motivation for anyone to seek it? We already have a legal "oops" method in place.
Wow....have seen abortion videos before but....
whew. The responsibility of knowledge. People should realize the ramifications of "choice." They should know what they are choosing and supporting. Absolutely horrific. Can't hardly type this for the tears.
Abortion is murder....
plan and simple. People scream and complain about the war and how we are killing innocent people.....yet they never seem to focus on the innocent children who are murdered by their mothers every day in our own country. Those are the real baby killers. That is a human life that you are getting rid of....disposing off like it is trash.
It amazes me how a pregnant woman can be killed and it is considered a double homicide and yet other pregnant woman can go kill the baby themselves at a clinic and that is okay.....no big deal. Talk about a contradiction. I living thing is a living thing whether it is still in the womb or not. You kill it.....you are a murderer!!!
You hypocrites..abortion is ok, but
nm
And how do you feel about abortion?
nm
|
