[LPM1888]

Please go ahead and rub a few brain cells together and *explain* your comment that being pro-life implies being a Theocrat.

It's very simple. Subscribing to the Pro-life agenda requires subscribing to your views of Christianity. That's fine and a admirable goal until you want to make it a law. Then you are trying to force your view of religon on the nation as a whole.

Requiring the nation as a whole to follow your religous views is by defintion a Theocracy. That makes you a Theocrat not a Republican.

If required, I will defend to my death your right to have and hold your religous views but I will also defend to my death keeping the American government from becoming a Theocracy.

Now if that qualifies as a disruptor, deal with it.

[Skooz]

Subscribing to the Pro-life agenda requires subscribing to your views of Christianity. That's fine and a admirable goal until you want to make it a law. Then you are trying to force your view of religon on the nation as a whole.

Nonsense. My Pro-life views are based entirely on science. It is an irrefutable scientific fact that a fetus is a human being. Therefore, killing the fetus is the killing of a human being. It's that simple.

[NittanyLion]

Nonsense. Killing unborn humans is little different than killing any other human. Even atheists recognize the concept of rights, and are capable of recognizing the idea that human life begins at the moment of conception.

[WOSG]

Finally an argument:

"It's very simple. Subscribing to the Pro-life agenda requires subscribing to your views of Christianity. That's fine and a admirable goal until you want to make it a law. Then you are trying to force your view of religon on the nation as a whole."

An incorrect and false argument, of course. Stealing and bearing false witness are in the Ten Commandments, does that mean laws against theft and perjury impose a Theocracy? Of course not! The flaw in your argument is that the *motivation* for a law is not the same thing as the law itself.

Protecting unborn humans doesnt require you to worship God or worship Christ or profess a particular belief. Laws against abortion only requires that you dont kill unborn humans during their natural gestation in the womb.
Since the unborn humans are undoubtably alive (humans at 8 weeks gestation have heart beats and brain function), the issue of abortion is most properly conceived (no pun intended) as a balance of the rights of pre-born humans and the rights and responsibilies of the mother, father and society.

It is an extremist position indeed to suggest no human has a right to life at all unless it happens to have made it through the birth canal. That give baby seals more rights than baby humans. But whatever the 'right' answer, any laws or no law - none would constitute a theocracy.

"If required, I will defend to my death your right to have and hold your religous views but I will also defend to my death keeping the American government from becoming a Theocracy."

I am the last person to want a Theocracy and would defend your own rights to believe what you will.
I will defend to the death your *right* to make strawman arguments, but will challenge you on your flawed and phony logic when you do make such bogus statements.

[Ahban]

Dear LPM1888,

It was with great pleasure that I read your forthright posts. I would like to take this opportunity to encourage you to intensify your campaign to drive the Christian Conservatives from the Republican party. I wish you great success in your endeavor. Whatever you do, keep posting.

Cordially,
Ahban
Chairman, Constitution Party of Arkansas

[MichiganConservative]

Subscribing to the Pro-life agenda requires subscribing to your views of Christianity.

Have you had an introductory course in biology that covered SEXUAL REPRODUCTION? That's pretty much all you need to know to make a scientific, pro-life, argument. But why waste my time on such a special person as you?

[DLfromthedesert]

Excuse me, but states had laws against abortion until 1973; don't you believe that it's up to the states to pass laws, not the Federal Government?

Why should the states have to get permission from the Feds to outlaw partial birth abortion, or to allow mothers to have INFORMED consent before having the procedure?

Do you realize how much better technology has become since that decision?