Life Begins at Conception, Says Department of Health and Human Services

[INVAR]

You are an embarrassment to Christ.   One of the best reasons to believe in Him and His justice is the comfort that hypocrites like you will have to face Him and explain yourselves.

Now you're just mouthing what the Accuser himself has to say.

I'm not afraid of standing up for His Word that you reject for the god of your imagination and the fact you attempt to hide behind a "right" that is not there except by the whim of evil men who spit in the face of the Creator to declare murdering infants as a form of birth control is "legal".

Those who fed their infants to the sacrificial fires of Molech do not hold a candle to what you and yours advocate.

The pure abject evil of stating that 'compassion' is helping a woman kill her infant is more grotesque than all the excuses the Nazis made for exterminating Jews and other undesirables.

I'll take your statement that I am an embarrassment to Christ as confirmation that evil and it's minions are pissed off by what I have to say.

[Jazzhead]

Now you're just mouthing what the Accuser himself has to say.

I'm not afraid of standing up for His Word that you reject for the god of your imagination and the fact you attempt to hide behind a "right" that is not there except by the whim of evil men who spit in the face of the Creator to declare murdering infants as a form of birth control is "legal".

Those who fed their infants to the sacrificial fires of Molech do not hold a candle to what you and yours advocate.

The pure abject evil of stating that 'compassion' is helping a woman kill her infant is more grotesque than all the excuses the Nazis made for exterminating Jews and other undesirables.

I'll take your statement that I am an embarrassment to Christ as confirmation that evil and it's minions are pissed off by what I have to say.

Compassion is helping and supporting a woman to understand and do the right thing.  Your attitude of belittling women as seeking free illicit sex without consequences just drives them to Planned Parenthood.   

Attitudes like yours promote abortion, and drive decent people from the church.   You should be ashamed of yourself.   

[INVAR]

Compassion is helping and supporting a woman to understand and do the right thing.  Your attitude of belittling women as seeking free illicit sex without consequences just drives them to Planned Parenthood.   

Attitudes like yours promote abortion, and drive decent people from the church.   You should be ashamed of yourself.   

Right, compassion is helping and supporting a woman to kill her infant because it is inconvenient and a consequence of illicit sexual behavior out of wedlock. 

The Accuser likes to whisper that stuff in the ears of the saints in order to get them to condone and accommodate evil or remain silent in it's presence -  which is presented as an angel of light by folks like yourself.

I'm not ignorant of his devices, even if puppets like you are willing to be his messengers.

[bigheadfred]

So you, too, think that women who seek abortions want "free illicit sex without consequences"?

Grow the flip up.     

I don't know if it is gravity, DNA, age. But all I can do now, it seems, is mushroom out.

It was actually the last part that made me laugh. I should have bolded it. My bad.

Take the "illicit" out and yeah, I agree.

You want to hear a story? Yes, yes you do.

A former g-friend of my BIL turned up pregnant after they had broken up. (The baby was most likely his) and later took an abortion pill to kill the kid. Almost late term. Since it was winter she put the baby in a shoe box on the back porch. She planned a funeral later in the spring when the ground was thawed enough to dig a grave.

She told my wife about it and, with my advice, my wife called the police to investigate. My wife got an absolute rash of shit from people all over the country for that. The state ended up paying out for a wrongful prosecution.

It is a messed up world we live in. That is one thing I do know fer shur.

[musiclady]

So now I'm a Nazi?   


 

OF COURSE you are not a Nazi!   

The abortionists are the Nazis.  They slaughter Innocents after their mothers send them to the Mengeles.

THAT is (obviously) the comparison I was making.  Most certainly not with you personally.


(However, the people claiming to be pro-life, but who actually aren't, claim they want the slaughter "reduced," not eliminated.  You can draw whatever parallel you want to the part that plays in the continued slaughter of millions of innocent human beings).

@Jazzhead

No need to take this to a PM.  I don't have much more to say to you than I have already said......

Your claim to support women is false.  Your claim to believe in the Constitution is false.   Your claim that a human baby is a woman's body is scientifically daft, and false.  And your claim that it is a woman's "choice" to commit murder, and that stopping it is treating her as "chattel" is so false that it's beyond absurdity.

You're wrong about everything.  And you're not compassionate.

I've said all that before, but before this thread finishes, it all needs to be said again.

That is all.

[Jazzhead]

Right, compassion is helping and supporting a woman to kill her infant because it is inconvenient and a consequence of illicit sexual behavior out of wedlock. 

No, compassion is helping and supporting a woman to NOT kill her infant.   Your abject dishonesty in accusing me of supporting abortion is disgusting.   

The Constitution guarantees to every woman the right to decide for herself the direction her life will take.   That is self-determination, a fundamental and natural right.   It is up to us who defend life to do the hard part of helping shape and mold that choice so that an unborn life can be preserved.  It's hard work, but you'd rather virtue-signal and slut-shame. And replace our Constitutional republic with a Taliban-like theocracy.   

[roamer_1]

I don't know if it is gravity, DNA, age. But all I can do now, it seems, is mushroom out.

I am beginning to suspect that is not gravity, but gravy... Jussayin... 

[bigheadfred]

I am beginning to suspect that is not gravity, but gravy... Jussayin... 

I think you nailed it. My wife made some potato soup the other day. It was so superbly creamy....I cried when it was gone.

[roamer_1]

I think you nailed. My wife made some potato soup the other day. It was so superbly creamy....I cried when it was gone.

I was just thinking of that my own self - I have a whole bunch of celery fixin to go bad, and the only thing I have to use it all up is tater soup. Man, that's some guuuud fall food right there.

[INVAR]

No, compassion is helping and supporting a woman to NOT kill her infant.   Your abject dishonesty in accusing me of supporting abortion is disgusting. 

The fact you think we have short memories or are stupid on this board is astounding.

You were the person who stated repeatedly that making abortion murder is the equivalent of the state forcing a woman to procreate, notwithstanding the numerous outrages you posted to this thread to justify abortion.

What has been disgusting is your posts, and more than just I pointed that out to you.

The Constitution guarantees to every woman the right to decide for herself the direction her life will take. That is self-determination, a fundamental and natural right. 

Killing infants as a fundamental and 'natural right' is as heinous and disgusting a position as any genocidal regime of men has ever perpetrated. Yet here you post it, when the foundational documents of this nation repeatedly mention the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness - which somehow in your perverted theology means a woman can kill her baby when it's inconvenient and a consequence of sex outside of marriage.

It is up to us who defend life to do the hard part of helping shape and mold that choice so that an unborn life can be preserved. 

It is an amazing feat to witness someone talk out their mouth and ass at the exact same time.  But - given what spirit you speak from - I've witnessed weirder things animate those possessed with similar spirits.

It's hard work, but you'd rather virtue-signal and slut-shame. And replace our Constitutional republic with a Taliban-like theocracy.   

I find it enlightening that anytime someone points out evil as biblically defined, immediately the purveyors of wickedness accuse us of installing a Taliban-esque theocracy.

And yes, at one time in this country - sin brought shame and shaming was an effective method of causing repentance or thwarting institutionalized wickedness.

You've done no "hard work" to preserve life except to promote evil as a virtue.

Edited by Mod8 to correct misquote.

[IsailedawayfromFR]

No, compassion is helping and supporting a woman to NOT kill her infant.   Your abject dishonesty in accusing me of supporting abortion is disgusting.   

The Constitution guarantees to every woman the right to decide for herself the direction her life will take.   That is self-determination, a fundamental and natural right.   It is up to us who defend life to do the hard part of helping shape and mold that choice so that an unborn life can be preserved.  It's hard work, but you'd rather virtue-signal and slut-shame. And replace our Constitutional republic with a Taliban-like theocracy.   

You know, I don't care how many times you tell a lie, it is still a lie.

And you really like to tell a lot of lies.

[Jazzhead]

You were the person who stated repeatedly that making abortion murder is the equivalent of the state forcing a woman to procreate

How is it not?  Why should a woman be denied by the state the ability to decide for herself the direction her life will take?  Persuasion - that's fine, that's what a Christian should do.  Coercion - that's what the Taliban does.   

And by the way, you edited a quote of mine and made no indication you had done so.   That's dishonest. 

[Jazzhead]

You know, I don't care how many times you tell a lie, it is still a lie.

And you really like to tell a lot of lies.

How is that statement a lie? 

[thackney]

Why should a woman be denied by the state the ability to decide for herself the direction her life

Does that apply to late term abortion?

[IsailedawayfromFR]

How is that statement a lie?

There are always boundaries to every, how did you put it?, 'direction her life will take'.

[INVAR]

How is it not?  Why should a woman be denied by the state the ability to decide for herself the direction her life will take?  Persuasion - that's fine, that's what a Christian should do.  Coercion - that's what the Taliban does.   

Again, you have applauded using the government to coerce business owners to cater to and serve homosexual celebrations against their consciences, faith and religious exercise. Not to mention you approve abolishing their freedom of association and imposition of forced labor to serve a behavior they find repugnant and evil.

You have stated you applaud efforts in using the government to 'punish bigots'.  Coercion is perfectly acceptable good with you when it serves your imposition of tyranny.  You are your own perverted version of the Taliban that is engaged in pushing homosexual Sharia.

There there's the fact you have opined nearly the same coercion when it comes to healthcare insurance and taxation on the wealthy.  Coercion via government is applauded by you in those cases.  Persuasion - not so much.

[Jazzhead]

Does that apply to late term abortion?

Not in my view.  The right to choose must be able to be effectively exercised, but that doesn't mean it is unlimited.  Some states have enacted laws which restrict abortion after 20 weeks.  I have no objection to such laws (so long as there's an exception to save the life of the mother);  a woman can in normal situations be expected to be responsible and make her decision before the fetus becomes viable and/or can feel pain.

I liken the situation to that of the legal status of a fiduciary - a fiduciary is legally responsible to protect and "do no harm" to the individual in his or her charge, but no one can be compelled to be a fiduciary without consent.   I'd say it's reasonable to tell a woman that, for the first 20 -25 weeks of pregnancy, the decision to proceed is hers.  After that, she will be deemed to have assumed a fiduciary duty of care toward her unborn child,  and to do it no harm so that it can be born (and relinquished for adoption, if that is her choice).   

[mountaineer]

How is it not?  Why should a woman be denied by the state the ability to decide for herself the direction her life will take?  Persuasion - that's fine, that's what a Christian should do.  Coercion - that's what the Taliban does.   

Who coerced her into engaging in sexual relations without taking contraceptive precautions?

[INVAR]

The logic of evil is amazing to behold.  The right to kill your infant must be able to be effectively exercised, but that doesn't mean it is unlimited.  Some states have enacted laws which restrict murder after 20 weeks.   A woman can in normal situations be expected to be responsible and make her decision whether or not to kill her baby before it becomes obvious to even her that she is committing murder.

I liken the situation to that of the Nazi extermination camps which were roundly asserted to be a beneficial service to the Fatherland and those eliminated were not considered murdered because those people were not really viable human beings in the eyes of the state to begin with.

Which by the way - we have murdered more innocent human beings than the Nazis did.

[roamer_1]

How is it not?  Why should a woman be denied by the state the ability to decide for herself the direction her life will take? 

It isn't her life that is the question.
It is conceivable that the consequence for her bad decision is served upon her for a mere 9 months, whereupon she can turn the child over to his father, or any adoption service and be on her way - As awful and unconcerned as that would be, it is still more in line with sanctifying the life that she bears.

And being (and containing) the crucible of life within her, that consequence must necessarily and needfully be there, if one is to protect the sanctity of life at all.

The consequence for a man who sows his seed is generally recognized and enforced - He will marry her, or he will pay out of his treasure for 20 years of his life for the sake of the child, whether he wants it or not, or even recognizes the child as his own. That consequence is just assigned, often without trial, or even according to his ability, and is not dissolved by any means, to include bankruptcy, with the singular exception of disability.

What comparable consequence is upon the woman who can kill her child with abandon, and go right back to her poor decisions?

[thackney]

Not in my view.  The right to choose must be able to be effectively exercised, but that doesn't mean it is unlimited.  Some states have enacted laws which restrict abortion after 20 weeks.  I have no objection to such laws (so long as there's an exception to save the life of the mother);  a woman can in normal situations be expected to be responsible and make her decision before the fetus becomes viable and/or can feel pain.

I liken the situation to that of the legal status of a fiduciary - a fiduciary is legally responsible to protect and "do no harm" to the individual in his or her charge, but no one can be compelled to be a fiduciary without consent.   I'd say it's reasonable to tell a woman that, for the first 20 -25 weeks of pregnancy, the decision to proceed is hers.  After that, she will be deemed to have assumed a fiduciary duty of care toward her unborn child,  and to do it no harm so that it can be born (and relinquished for adoption, if that is her choice).

Then we agree the government does have the right for a woman be denied the ability to decide for herself the direction her life, because it impacts the life of another.

We just disagree on when that time starts.

[Smokin Joe]

The logic of evil is amazing to behold.  The right to kill your infant must be able to be effectively exercised, but that doesn't mean it is unlimited.  Some states have enacted laws which restrict murder after 20 weeks.   A woman can in normal situations be expected to be responsible and make her decision whether or not to kill her baby before it becomes obvious to even her that she is committing murder.

I liken the situation to that of the Nazi extermination camps which were roundly asserted to be a beneficial service to the Fatherland and those eliminated were not considered murdered because those people were not really viable human beings in the eyes of the state to begin with.

Which by the way - we have murdered more innocent human beings than the Nazis did.

The latest count I saw indicated we have lost over a thousand times more babies to Roe than killed and MIA servicemen in the Vietnam War. Over 50 million now, and approaching 60.
Jesus wept.

edit to correct numbers. SJ

[bigheadfred]

The latest count I saw indicated we have lost more babies to Roe than killed and MIA servicemen in the Vietnam War. Over 50 million now, and approaching 60.
Jesus wept.

Joe. I just got home from work, but that seems off by a zero or two. I think "only" 50,000+ lives were lost in Viet nam. Not 50 Million. What I am am saying is there is a difference in numbers, but not to the horror..

[sneakypete]

First off, No. The right to keep and bear arms is spelled out.

Now, maybe I missed something in one of the many times I have read the Constitution, so please point to the part that gives anyone the right to deprive a baby of life with neither charge, nor trial, nor conviction by a jury of their peers. I missed it, and I thought I was passably familiar with the Document and Amendments.

@Smokin Joe

The right to self-defense is a universal right. It doesn't need to be codified.

Granted,the genuine "to preserve the life of  the mother" abortions are rare,but they can't be ignored.

[Smokin Joe]

Joe. I just got home from work, but that seems off by a zero or two. I think "only" 50,000+ lives were lost in Viet nam. Not 50 Million. What I am am saying is there is a difference in numbers, but not to the horror..

You are correct. Thanks for catching that, @bigheadfred ! I will edit it to correct that.

It is a full order of magnitude greater, not thousands, but millions.

Ironically enough, people of the same stripe marched against both our servicemen and the rights of babies, and had the gall to call our servicemen "baby killers".