Posted on 05/11/2005 2:11:51 PM PDT by EnigmaticAnomaly
Your Scoratic performance on this thread leaves something to be desired. If man emerged from some sucessful mutuation, along with other species, that means the original gene pool was very small, in fact just one pair. Subsequent incest is just playing Russian roulette again and again, and soon one loses, and the lucky breakthrough is terminated in that incestuous line.
Yes.
This is your second reference on this thread to religious zealot/fanatics in reference to an anti-abortion position and as a pro-life agnostic I must take issue with your assumption.
There are many stances from which many people take a pro-life position: feminist, agnostic, atheist, libertarian, even vegetarian. I won't get into the abortion/life debate with you...it's too late at night you're simply too cookie-cutter tedious on the matter but please refrain from lumping into the reliable "religious-zealot-and-therefore-may-be-dismissed-trashcan" all those who find abortion barbaric and unacceptable in a humane society.
It is rather insulting isn't it? Debating the merits of an issue, rather than just flaming one group or another, and name calling in a effort to give position a noisome air, is a more worthy and productive exercise.
I do not lump all anti-abortion people into that category. In most cases abortion is barbaric - in some cases it is the best but difficult choice. The key here is how and who decides the exception. Do we want the government or any particular religious group to do that or do we want the woman and her family to do that? Easy answer for me. This country was founded upon the principle of individual freedom and restrained government with a separation of religion from that restrained government. If you don't approve of abortion, don't get one even if it means your wife dies as a result.
even if it means your wife dies as a result. >>
dies? most women do not die from being pregnant, it they do die, it's "during" childbirth way too late for an abortion. A woman may face a greater risk having an abortion than by carrying the baby to term.
But you have. Twice, on this thread alone.
In the future I hope you'll refer to those opposing a woman's "right" to lay down her body and sacrifice her child for the convenience of society as "disgusting, arrogant religious zealots (your words) AND agnostic, vegetarian feminists."
As I said in my earlier message I don't wish to get into a debate on the matter, just ask that you stop using the tiresome and false stereotype. However I might suggest that you revisit the topic with an open mind -- give it some original thought.
Huh?
Here's where the ACLU went to court to defend a Christian Church facing eviction:
http://www.aclu.org/ReligiousLiberty/ReligiousLiberty.cfm?ID=16295&c=142
Here's where they defended a Catholic who faced discrimination (in court):
www.aclu.org/ReligiousLiberty/ReligiousLiberty.cfm?ID=16138&c=142
Here's where they threatened to sue when a water park in Virginia tried to stop baptisms (they got the park to back down:
http://www.aclu.org/ReligiousLiberty/ReligiousLiberty.cfm?ID=15897&c=141
Here's where they joined a lawsuit on the same side as Jerry Falwell (!): http://www.aclu.org/ReligiousLiberty/ReligiousLiberty.cfm?ID=10147&c=142
Here's where they stood up for a Christian missionary having the right to be in a jury:
http://www.aclu.org/ReligiousLiberty/ReligiousLibertylist.cfm?c=141
Here's where they fought for a religious fairness bill, alongside the Family Research Council, the Baptist Joint Committee, the Christian Legal Society, etc.
http://www.aclu.org/ReligiousLiberty/ReligiousLiberty.cfm?ID=8053&c=142
It goes on and on. Just because they don't want the 10 commandments posted on the courtroom walls doesn't mean that they won't stick up for your right to have your beliefs.
Looks like he trolled one to many threads (and he was ALL OVER the place with sarcasm and criticism today):
"This account has been banned or suspended."
You do REALIZE that the left was actually selling "I had an abortion" shirts to boast of their deed.
There is also the book titled something like, "The Sacrament of Abortion" calling it a valid rite of passage for women to experience and enjoy. It is them controlling their bodies ("Ha, mother nature, abortion means never having to say 'I do'").
If Terri was in a "tormented state" then she had feeling. Being starved to death for two weeks is a HORRIBLE way to die.
"Do we want the government or any particular religious group to do that or do we want the woman and her family to do that?"
The government has already ruled in and said that the family has no say in this matter. Unlike ANY other medical procedure, youths (who are BELOW the age of consent, and often experiencing a pregnancy by an adult statutory rapist/molestor) are free to decide to commit the act of infanticide without notifying anyone.
Certainly the increased risk of breast cancer (after abortion) can be life threatening.
Dueling and slavery were legal at the founding of this country. Abortion was not.
I wouldn't say that there is justification for any of them.
As "bad" as it is for a rape victim to be "forced" to bear a child she did not consent to, why should the child suffer the greatest tragedy as a result? Should that same "tragedy" be expanded to include cases where the child happens to have a birth defect or simply be of the "wrong sex" or the sire of an ex-lover (fell out of fashion)?
Acts have consequences.
Abortion and suicide are permanent solutions to temporary problems. Where is the shame in bringing the child of a rapist to full term? Not asking the victim to raise this bastard child, there are plenty who will take over. Or is rape a hereditary condition? If it is, then rape should be as legal a sex act a homosexuality (it's nature!).
Not from me. I grew up with "Question Authority" as the moto. It is refreshing to see a kid standing up to it these days. I've often wondered why kids being told they could not pray in school simply did not do it anyhow. What are they going to do, suspend them for praying.
We used to laugh at their threats to suspend us. "You mean we don't have to come to school for 10 days! Surfs Up!"
They would give us some malarky about it going on our record. Yea, like we cared about that. Guess we saw then that the school record they tried to hold over our heads really meant nothing.
The kid in this story is to be commended.
Come on. It is not a distraction. And if it is, it is only because everyone in this country seems to have gone off the "it offends me" deep end.
I don't remember the t-shirts everyone wore in school being a distraction. What a lot of nonsense.
Again the free speech issue comes up vs. 'distraction.'
Two girls were going to be suspended from high school for wearing t-shirts that said, "I (heart=Love) My Vagina." There idea apparently came from the Vagina Monologues presented on campuses in the past.
They proclamed their right to free speech.
Makes me wonder if two guys wore "I Love Your Vagina" t-shirts. Then along comes a female offended by it. How far do you think the free speech argument would be tolerated by the PC clowns?.
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.