Posted on 02/08/2016 9:51:35 AM PST by xzins
When we regularly went to sit with my grandson (neuroblastoma patient), we had all kinds of washing rituals we had to go through.
There seems to be some sense that washing and antiseptics on the skin are important things to do to kill these things on contact so they don’t have the opportunity to become internal in some way.
Is there no way to do the same thing internally? To scrub? Flush? Herpes, HPV, etc....are they immediately penetrated, activated, etc. (I’m not really sure how to ask what I’m wondering.)
It just seems that if they can be killed externally, that they can be killed internally if immediately attacked.
All I’m saying is that he’s new at his pro-life position unlike the others.
Would you kill the puppy out of revenge?
If I was a swat team cop I would...
I just read the whole thread. I’m so glad that they are both doing so well!
Thank you, Salvation!
I haven’t honestly sat down to noodle out these ‘muddied waters’, but I’ll lay it out and listen to all comers.
For the ‘life of Mother’ exemption (VERY rare, if at all, from all I’m read/heard), I would leave that to doctors to determine before ‘mom’ had any say. Best to documented to the nines if it goes through for any indication it was not so, doc loses their license. Overall, I think it a moot talking point vs. % chance of it happening/happened.
As for rape and incest, here, it gets tricky for me.
Incest: We talking ‘rape’ incest? Or knowing before (cousins in love) vs. after (long lost family member/adopted)?
Incest? No.
Rape? Yes, I understand the basis of ‘child did no harm’. I too understand you’re asking someone, possibly a CHILD, to bear the burden until birth. IMO, that can be *worse* than a victim reliving the event in their mind/memory (having that physical reminder).
How do you tell someone to STILL treat it right, don’t drink/drugs/etc., no harm-to-self to abort?
True, there will be some you can talk into going to term and giving up for adoption (best worst case scenario), maybe even bribe them to do so (on the taxpayer dime??), but to demand, by LAW, they *MUST*?? IMO, THAT is a bridge too far.
If they do XYZ to abort? Do they go to jail?
If they abort for no reason of its own?
How do you separate self-induced vs. ‘environmental’ or ‘conditional’? You lock ‘em up for 9-mo to ENSURE they treat themselves and the new life properly? The law barely does squat vs. the crack-head mother who continues to pop out brood after brood; but ‘this/these’ case(s) are different??
Just this ONE area opens up a lifetimes worth of questions. Just how much harm do you visit upon the host?
I sometimes wish all men would keep their noses out of the abortion debate
You do, huh...?
given that they’re never going to be the impregnated gender.
considering that males are indeed being aborted, then indeed males can have an opinion in the matter...they can ‘stick their noses in it’ so to speak...
This is my Catholic thinking coming into play.
Catholic doctrine teaches the virtues of the ‘morning after pill’, does it...? I must have missed that little tidbit in catechism...
It’s an act of love Heb!
Kasich. Ugh. I don’t get the appeal at all.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.