Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: narses
He later claimed I had said his sister had "lived too long" or some such nonsense. Neither is true.

Exactly how else is one to interpret the following statement, which YOU made:

How many babies were killed so that your sister could have a few more years of life?

815 posted on 11/13/2004 8:37:16 PM PST by Howlin (I love the smell of mandate in the morning.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 620 | View Replies ]


To: Howlin

One could interpret the question to mean that it is wrong to take the life of some humans for the benefit of others.

It *is* wrong to take the life of some for the benefit of others.


People are not simply a collection of useful parts or interchangeable units to be disposed in a utilitarian manner.

It does not matter whether the one killed is unborn or a Chinese political prisoner with the right tissue type. It does not matter whether the one benefited is someone's sister or a Chinese politician. The act of infringing the rights of one human for others who have more power - of what ever type - endangers the rights of all.


831 posted on 11/13/2004 8:57:50 PM PST by hocndoc (Choice is the # 1 killer in the US)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 815 | View Replies ]

To: Howlin

Read your answer and mine. If there was no fetal death involved, no harm, no foul. An EASY to interpret question and answer set. Now as to your ORIGINAL lie about me in 271 that you defend by screeching, show me again where I have attacked the GOP.


852 posted on 11/13/2004 9:16:12 PM PST by narses (The fight to protect the unborn is THE civil rights battle of the 21st century. + Vivo Christo Rey!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 815 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson