Skip to comments.
PARTIAL BIRTH ABORTION BAN - THE BETRAYAL IS NOW COMPLETE [BARF ALERT - ANTI-GOP PROPAGANDA]
NewsWithViews.com ^
| May 9, 2003
| By David Brownlow
Posted on 08/02/2003 10:39:40 PM PDT by Uncle Bill
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 381-400, 401-420, 421-440 ... 921-940 next last
To: honeygrl
Maybe so. What, then, was the point of Luis's rude question to me, "Are you a doctor?" What was the point of his challenge regarding "What if it was YOUR wife or daughter whose life was in danger?"
Honestly, I think Luiz was talking out of both sides of his mouth.
401
posted on
08/05/2003 9:52:57 PM PDT
by
Judith Anne
(O, ICURAQT. IMAQT2. ;-D)
To: Fred Mertz; Luis Gonzalez; Jim Robinson; Sabertooth; TigersEye; cpforlife.org; rhema; carenot
Partial birth abortion was 'invented' for the convenience of the serial killers offing the alive VIABLE little ones. It had nothing to do with saving a woman's life (the 'procedure' takes from two to three days to execute) and everything to do with guaranteeing a dead child who was VIABLE to live outside the woman's body ... with the side benefit to the serial killers that they would not be dismembering an alive child inside the woman's body which is highly risky to the aborticutionist's liabilities in the killing rooms.
By the sixteenth week, the alive baby is becoming more strongly held together so that the baby may be grasped with forceps and turned for breach delivery (a leg or arm does occasionally come off during this step in the execution, but if the abortionists can persuade a female to wait but a two or three week period, the grasping, crushing and yanking will not as likely tear off limbs).
At twenty weeks, the alive child is but two to five weeks from having lungs developed sufficiently to sustain life in the air world (that would be a baby aged 24 to 26 weeks, still 16 weeks from normal delivery date). There isn't a known emergency at that age in a child's life when his or her existence is such a threat that killing that child using a two to three day methodology is the only way to save the mother. And anyone trying to pose such an argument is a liar and is a defender of the indefensible.
Partial birth abortion begins with a technique to open and spread the cervical os sufficiently to allow the killer access to the little one alive and dependant in the womb. This 'spreading' is a slow process with most females (that's why it takes two to three days with most females who are nulliparous), but it can happen 'too quickly' causing a delivery emergency before the final day for killing.
Partial birth abortion was 'invented' for the convenience of the serial killers making their blood money off of killing innocent, vulnerable, voiceless individual human beings. PERIOD. That so many democrats continue to defend this indefensible infanticide methodology ought to begin to sink in with average Americans, as they awaken to understand what this ban is seeking to stop and WHY! The process of fighting this particular battle has allowed untold numbers of Americans to come awake to the ghoulish truth of abortion and those who would defend it for political empowerment. I can personally attest to more than a dozen people with whom I've been able to discuss this ghoulish kill method ... and every one of them, leaving out not a single one, has been astonished that people like Boxer, Harkin, clinton, and Feintstein continue to defend this evil. The opened hearts and minds during the past eight years have been worth every minute of the struggle to accomplish this small, seemingly insignificant goal of banning this particular killing method.
Incidentally, has anyone ever approximated the number of partial birth slaughters that would have been prevented had sinkEmperor signed the first ban that came to his desk? ... The number is larger, substantially larger than the number of people in my town of 50,000 residents!
402
posted on
08/05/2003 9:53:08 PM PDT
by
MHGinTN
(If you can read this, you've had life support from someone. Promote life support for others.)
To: Fred Mertz
Answer my question Fred.
403
posted on
08/05/2003 9:53:24 PM PDT
by
Luis Gonzalez
(LP is bragging that they got over 100 new members this month...they were all me guys :-))
To: Yeti
I mentioned the matter of it only banning one type of late term abortion when I first saw the bill passed and heard about the difference.
Nobody said a word. Now, all of a sudden you people come out of the woodwork to criticize.
At the time, I was disturbed by the few areas actually covered by the bill.
But, then I thought about who introduced and backed the amendment to make it restrict more types........NOT CONSERVATIVES, BUT LIBERALS. Thus, they did it for an underhanded reason of some sort and I trust the GOP judgment to pass on that amendment.
Unfortunately, this is the only type of bill that might pass SCOTUS muster and THIS WILL go before the SCOTUS.
I want more, but am willing to wait since trying to do more now would end up blowing up in our faces. The public is growing more pro-life and the most pro-life group is GENERATION X!!!!!!!!!!!!!! There is incredible hope for the future and we can't afford to see these gains in the public's hearts gone. It is amazing that when Bush said he wanted to change hearts on this issue that hearts are actually changing. Amazing. Just mentioning the sanctity of all life in his speeches seems to do a lot.
404
posted on
08/05/2003 9:53:57 PM PDT
by
rwfromkansas
(http://www.collegemedianews.com *some interesting radio news reports here; check it out*)
To: Judith Anne
Sounds to me like you're talking out of both sides of your mouth. That is a little unfair, Judith. Luis has about ten screen names so it is possible he just talks out of the one side of each mouth.
405
posted on
08/05/2003 9:54:23 PM PDT
by
jjbrouwer
(Sometimes THE GREATS come back...)
To: Jim Robinson
This bill prohibits partial birth abortion only. Sorry, Jim, it gives PBA the same status as it had before. They changed the terminology and gave it a nice title.
To: rwfromkansas
"There is incredible hope for the future and we can't afford to see these gains in the public's hearts gone. It is amazing that when Bush said he wanted to change hearts on this issue that hearts are actually changing. Amazing. Just mentioning the sanctity of all life in his speeches seems to do a lot."
Thank you.
407
posted on
08/05/2003 9:55:57 PM PDT
by
CWOJackson
(Now batting for the visiting team, the Short Stump, Fritz Mirth...)
To: jjbrouwer
Luis has about ten screen names so it is possible he just talks out of the one side of each mouth.
Tagline!
408
posted on
08/05/2003 9:57:25 PM PDT
by
Sabertooth
(Dump Davis)
To: Judith Anne
I take it you don't consider claiming somebody is talking out of both sides of their mouth is being rude, right?
409
posted on
08/05/2003 9:57:48 PM PDT
by
Howlin
To: Fred Mertz
"Sorry, Jim, it gives PBA the same status as it had before."My Lord but you are thick.
Before this bill, partial birth abortions were legal, now they have been narrowed down to only being allowed under the rarest of circumstances. You don't see what you don't want to see.
410
posted on
08/05/2003 9:58:38 PM PDT
by
Luis Gonzalez
(LP is bragging that they got over 100 new members this month...they were all me guys :-))
To: Sabertooth
You're never going to get over that, are you?
411
posted on
08/05/2003 9:59:05 PM PDT
by
DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet
(Green Bay Packers: "Millions Of Animals Were Harmed In The Making Of This Team Nickname.")
To: Sabertooth
I don't think I had as many as Gawain...do you?
And you know I know...
412
posted on
08/05/2003 9:59:28 PM PDT
by
Luis Gonzalez
(LP is bragging that they got over 100 new members this month...they were all me guys :-))
To: DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet
It's beginning to look almost like "harping," isn't it?
413
posted on
08/05/2003 9:59:49 PM PDT
by
Howlin
To: jjbrouwer
LOL!
414
posted on
08/05/2003 10:00:19 PM PDT
by
Judith Anne
(O, ICURAQT. IMAQT2. ;-D)
To: Howlin
Was I rude? Was Luiz?
415
posted on
08/05/2003 10:01:20 PM PDT
by
Judith Anne
(O, ICURAQT. IMAQT2. ;-D)
To: Howlin
Harpies?
Is that what they mean by harpies?
416
posted on
08/05/2003 10:02:23 PM PDT
by
Luis Gonzalez
(LP is bragging that they got over 100 new members this month...they were all me guys :-))
To: Howlin
Well now that you and daughter are here I'm sure there will be some posts about biddies, etc.
It's kind of a shame that some folks are so insecure in their feminity/masculinity that they have to go to those lengths when confronted with strong ladies.
417
posted on
08/05/2003 10:02:23 PM PDT
by
CWOJackson
(Now batting for the visiting team, the Short Stump, Fritz Mirth...)
To: Judith Anne
He asked you a simple question after you made a definitive statement.
418
posted on
08/05/2003 10:02:30 PM PDT
by
Howlin
To: Fred Mertz
Fred, hate to have to say it, but you are a sad case. So wrapped up in hate for Bush and the GOP that your thinking processes have become muddled. It is a ban on PBA. Doctors who continue performing this barbaric procedure after it becomes law will be headed for prison. Think about it.
419
posted on
08/05/2003 10:02:33 PM PDT
by
Jim Robinson
(Conservative by nature... Republican by spirit... Patriot by heart... AND... ANTI-Liberal by GOD!)
To: Luis Gonzalez
Yes, Luis. I hate to tell you this but you have harpies.
420
posted on
08/05/2003 10:02:57 PM PDT
by
CWOJackson
(Now batting for the visiting team, the Short Stump, Fritz Mirth...)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 381-400, 401-420, 421-440 ... 921-940 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson