One step closer to banning abortion?

AlteredEgo

Mythical Member
Joined
Jan 12, 2006
Posts
19,176
Media
37
Likes
26,249
Points
368
Location
Hello (Sud-Ouest, Burkina Faso)
Sexuality
No Response
Webster said:
_____________________________
...and then, you made no reference as to what you were talking about. When I replied to your PM, I asked you what it was that troubled you because I truly wanted to understand what you were talking about. You ignored my PM.

????????:confused:

I believe i quoted you in the message in question. If after being called on the inapropriateness of yous supposed joke you need an education in why it is wrong, you are beyond my correction.

Meanwhile, back at the ranch, they were discussing abortion.
 

madame_zora

Sexy Member
Joined
May 5, 2004
Posts
9,608
Media
0
Likes
51
Points
258
Location
Ohio
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Freddie53 said:
Oh really now! Since when does Moussaoui have anything to do with abortion? So some think his life should be spared. Those same people may or may not be for or against abortion. The Roman Catholic Church which almost a 1/4 of the world is a member of is both against abortion and against capital punishment. They are on the side of life in both caes. Many people who are ranting so about abortion taking a life are jumping at a chance to kill through capital punishment even a teenager who commits certain crimes.

True! I have seen people on both sides of the abortion debate coming out on different sides on capital punishment. Personally, I'm not sure about executing the only bastard they have left for 9/11- it seems almost like much ado about nothing. Bin Laden's still free, it sounds like bullshit to me.

Abortion is still a religious issue. That is calling a spade a spade as well. Does a fetus less than a week old have a soul that is eternal? We know that Moussaoui does, according to Christina dogma. But not all Christians would say an unborn fetus has a soul. And the state is totally neutral on religion, souls, and the afterlife.

That's the religous difference.

One definition of life is a organism that doesn't have to life off the life of another. A fetus is totally dependent on the mother. It is a group of cells all right and human tissue as well. But so is the gall bladder and we remove it when it is necessary. Not everyone agrees that a sperm and egg that have united is right then a human being, but rather a one cell organism that has potential to be one. So where does that maigical moment happen when it is human with a soul? Let that be a religious decision and leave the state out of it.

Unfortunately, we have the state in it already. I think this is what will have to be defined for this argument to hold any legal validity. Sadly, in our current climate, I think I pretty well know which way it will go.

i'm not so sure that we have any business killing adult people. But then the state has that right to do so. And if the court that decides this is not a kangaro court then it is legal. It can be a religious issue to oppose that as well, or support it as well. There is religious feeling about capital punishment on both sides.

It's tough enough to properly discuss one heated issue without bringing in another, but they both have points that are similar in some respects. It appears to be a question of the right to life, but then you get into where does life begin.

But please spare us the using a different issue that has as many differences as this one does and putting all of us in a camp that we may not belong in.

I for one deplore the use of capital punishment, but I think it is legal and constitutional. I am not going to fight it as my reasons for being against capital punishment are religous reasons, not legal reasons. As I see it, capital punishment interupts God's opportunities to reach this person. That is it. That is not a good enough argument for me to go and try to make the rest of the United States go along with me as it is totally religious. And I am a very strong proponent of religious freedom for those who agree with me and for those who DISAGREE with me.

And this is what makes you special. Religous freedom means freedom OF and FROM religion, not just freedom for people who think alike. Why is that so tough?

And one thing about religion and those who have religious beliefs: They don't have to make sense to anyone except the person who believes them.

Once again, absolutely true. Who's to say that some guy in Alabama isn't the one guy on Earth that has it all right? We all invent a scenario that works best for us, but to claim that one is absolutely right and everything else is absolutely wrong is absurdity at best. We are crumbling under tha weight of being spoon-fed mixed absurdities and it shows no signs of immediate improvement.
 

Webster

Just Browsing
Joined
Jan 21, 2006
Posts
686
Media
0
Likes
0
Points
161
Sexuality
No Response
BronxBombshell said:
I believe i quoted you in the message in question. If after being called on the inapropriateness of yous supposed joke you need an education in why it is wrong, you are beyond my correction.

Meanwhile, back at the ranch, they were discussing abortion.
______________________________________
Since it is virtually impossible to address a vague accusation, I am choosing to walk away from this one.

Anyone who knows me, would find throwing the race card at me quite laughable.

No hard feelings.

:wink:
 

madame_zora

Sexy Member
Joined
May 5, 2004
Posts
9,608
Media
0
Likes
51
Points
258
Location
Ohio
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
BronxBombshell said:
I'm not forcing him. The offer is always on the table for me to go home. I almost never invite myself over either. If you invite a woman over for the express purpose of having sex with her, and she's already told you that if that sex results in a pregnancy, you will be a father, and that you can choose your level of physical involvement with your new child, but that a judge will choose your level of financial involvement, you are agreeing to her terms.

I can see your point there, and I do agree that he is making his own bed, so to speak. The thing is, I just wouldn't WANT a guy to be the father of my kid if I knew going in he didn't want to be. He's obviously very irresponsible already and not interested in having kids. I wouldn't want to go into that knowing the kid wouldn't be wanted by his father, that's a tough place to be for a child. I know it happens often enough, but I'd rather try to at least stack the odds in my favor. I feel that if your give men a chioce and they WANT to have the kid, then they have no gripe if the relationship doesn't work out about supporting the kids they helped create. So often fatherhood is just pinned on a guy without his consent (Not that he's blameless either, I'm playing devil's advocate to a degree) and he resents the responibility from the get-go. I know we see the abortion argument differently, but an aborted fetus will never live a life of neglect or feel the anguish that can cause.

I'm not pushing my view on him any more than I'm pushing sex on him. He knows my position. The first time we talked about this, we ended up just cuddling and going to sleep. The next morning, he made his decision by penetrating me. He's not the most responsible person I've ever met. But he's tons of fun to be around, I always learn something amazing from him, and he's great in bed. At least I've been honest with him from the word go. I wonder what the three women he's fatherd boys with told him.

If I believed abortion was wrong, this bolded part would be a problem for me.



I think all Webster's saying is that anyone should be free to hold their own views, but when it comes to things that financially impact others, those others also have a say. I am very much in favor of programs to help those in difficult situations, but I think it's very fair to expect that we make what adjustments are POSSIBLE to reduce the weight load. If we are in effect planning to have unwanted children born to lower income women who may or may not have a man to help, that's not a system that feels fair to me to be forced to support. I planned my kid, I paid her way, and I don't see it as my job to raise someone else's kids who don't believe in abortion OR family planning. The potential for condom failure is always there, this I know. I am of the opinion that being against abortion is a very weighty position to take, I couldn't do it. I don't see a fetus's right to life as being higher than my right to enjoy my life with sex being only done for procreation. If you do support that stance, it's going to take a lot of willpower that I don't have. Still, my right to enjoy sex, knowing that as a fertile woman, at some point I may have to encounter this issue, should not be funded by the state. Failing to plan is planning to fail, and I don't see the personal chioces of others as MY responsibility.
 

ceg1526

Experimental Member
Joined
May 19, 2004
Posts
272
Media
0
Likes
5
Points
488
Age
34
Freddie53 said:
... Translation: The Native Americans will have abortion clinics in practically every state in the union if Roe vs. Wade is oversturned just by this often overlooked stlipulation on sovereignty for Native Americans...
It looks like Native Americans will be the profiteers of the rest of America's problems. They've already made it on gambling. Maybe after abortion clinics, they may look into Amsterdam style Smoking Bars.
 

Freddie53

Superior Member
Gold
Joined
Nov 19, 2004
Posts
5,842
Media
0
Likes
2,609
Points
333
Location
Memphis (Tennessee, United States)
Gender
Male
ceg1526 said:
It looks like Native Americans will be the profiteers of the rest of America's problems. They've already made it on gambling. Maybe after abortion clinics, they may look into Amsterdam style Smoking Bars.
Now that is a thought. And we can add "prositution houses" as well. Sounds like the reservations will be propering big time soon.