|
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9688 Posts |
 Posted - 02/13/2004 : 19:27:04 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Robb
Why is it that you do not hold women accountable for their bodies and actions before having sex, but after they are pregnent, you think that all of a sudden they are responsible for their own bodies?
What's your point in this question, besides placing blame? |
Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3
"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse
Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder. |
 |
|
|
ljbrs
SFN Regular
USA
842 Posts |
Posted - 02/13/2004 : 19:37:29 [Permalink]
|
Oh, I am PRO ABORTION. People who are unable or unwilling to care for children kindly should not be forced to have them. However, I think that the abortion should be done ASAP after conception, beginning with the "morning after pill" for a starter.
There are too many lousy parents who do not have the ability to do the job of parenting intelligently. When they bring babies into the world and abuse them during their childhood, the children end up as ruined adults.
If a person truly wants children, then they will know the right way to act with their children. Children should be permitted to be two when they are two, three when they are three, etc., without being punished by stupid parents.
I know a family who permitted their two children (boy and girl) to throw food in McDonalds (the parents picked it up). Their children turned over the family couch and pretended it was a store, etc. They were permitted to view anything that they wanted to view on television, the computer, etc. The dirty stuff went right over their head and bored them. The only time they were yelled at was when they were fighting each other. The parents did not want to let them hurt each other. The parents were always calm. The children grew up when the oldest reached 8 years of age. They never went through "teenage." They acted as their parents did. They also felt sorry for all of the other children they knew. The guy now has three university scholarships -- two academic, and one sports. The younger teen seems to be going in the same direction and is in all of the advanced placement courses at her high school and excellent in sports.
I, personally, did not think that it was going to work. However, those two (and their loving parents) really have everything it takes to succeed.
Anyway, I became a believer in their method. What a pair of great kids! Both are sharp and calm. They do not do any of the stupid stuff that most teenagers do in order to get attention.
I really love to sing the praises for those two parents and their wonderful, interesting, intelligent, capable children who became adults around eight years of age.
ljbrs |
"Innumerable suns exist; innumerable earths revolve about these suns in a manner similar to the way the seven planets revolve around our sun. Living beings inhabit these worlds."
Giordano Bruno
(Burned at the stake by the Roman Catholic Church Inquisition in 1600) |
|
|
|
Trish
SFN Addict
USA
2102 Posts |
Posted - 02/13/2004 : 20:40:32 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Robb
Why is it that you do not hold women accountable for their bodies and actions before having sex, but after they are pregnent, you think that all of a sudden they are responsible for their own bodies?
Huh? I think I spoke sufficiently well enough to indicate that a lack of education regarding the reproductive systems, lack of availability of adequate birth control methods indicate a reason for the US having one of the highest rates of abortion per capita in the western industrialized world. My problem with the pro-life/anit-abortion (take your pick) movement is the desire to preach abstinence as the only means of birth control. Every individual is responsible for their actions, however, when society enforces ignorance upon its citizens in something that should be basic to our education, then denies any form of birth control, up to and including abortion, then it is that societies responsibility to care for those born into conditions that are not ideal for raising of children.
You see, basic knowledge is being denied our young men and women, even with current sex education standards. Were you aware that a young woman can become pregnant when young man who masturbates then fingers a young woman, even if she is a virgin - because there are holes in the hyman, can become pregnant? Most people who complete sex education do not know this. Why, because no one wants to be responsible for open education regarding sexual activity. If the state forces a woman to abrogate her rights to this knowledge and her ability to terminate this pregnancy, then the state assumes responsibility upon itself for pregnancy caused in this fashion. If the state chooses to enforce ignorance in general regarding pregnancy and denies access to safe preventatives or alternative forms of birth control (of which I will define abortion as I do not think it should be the primary form it has become in the US) then the state must assume responsibility for the raising of those children.
If a woman is raped, who is not sexually active, becomes pregnant and the state forces that woman to live for 10 months with the knowledge that she is carrying something that was inflicted upon her without her choice, the state assumes the responsibility for raising that child.
If a woman is raped, who is sexually active, becomes pregnant as a result of that rape and (this is the important part of my argument here again) THE STATE FORCES HER TO CARRY TO TERM, THE STATE ASSUMES THE RESPONSIBILTY for that child.
Why should the state not assume responsibility if it chooses to enforce ignorance upon its citizen? if it chooses to deny free access to birth control? if it chooses to deny access to safe abortions?
Robb, this is about the state taking away a womans right and keeping her in ignorance regarding her own sexuality that causes me to argue that it should then fall to the state to take responsibility for infants born to women that don't want them or can not afford to raise them in adequate fashion, i.e., a roof over its head, food on the table, lights kept on constantly, a phone for access to emergency services, health care, education (beyond HS), and everything else that goes into raising a physically and emotionally healthy child.
Besides, let me ask you one more question, if I were to have an abortion, how does that affect you?
edited: because my grammar in one sentence sucked. |
...no one has ever found a 4.5 billion year old stone artifact (at the right geological stratum) with the words "Made by God."
No Sense of Obligation by Matt Young
"Say what you will about the sweet miracle of unquestioning faith. I consider the capacity for it terrifying and vile!"
Mother Night by Kurt Vonnegut, Jr.
They (Women Marines) don't have a nickname, and they don't need one. They get their basic training in a Marine atmosphere, at a Marine Post. They inherit the traditions of the Marines. They are Marines.
LtGen Thomas Holcomb, USMC
Commandant of the Marine Corps, 1943
|
| Edited by - Trish on 02/13/2004 20:44:00 |
|
|
|
Robb
SFN Regular
USA
1223 Posts |
Posted - 02/14/2004 : 12:45:45 [Permalink]
|
Trish, What I was trying to say in my last post was that if abortion is not legal someday, women would still have the right to choose to have a baby or not. It just moves when the decision needs to take place. I agree with most of what you said in your last post.
Sex education should start when children are born until they are adults and should include more than reproduction. Sex has emotional and financial consequences that need to be taught as well as how pregnancy can happen and contraceptive options. Would you agree to teach children about the physical and emotional consequences of abortion as part of their sex education? Should not women be educated on this procedure before they may need it?
quote:
My problem with the pro-life/anit-abortion (take your pick) movement is the desire to preach abstinence as the only means of birth control.
Again I agree that all forms of contraception should be taught to our children including abstinence. The state should not tell any child which form is best. They need to lay the facts out and let the parents and children decide together. Abstinence is the only sure fire way of not getting pregnant. This should be taught also. Sex is a gift from God given to married people not only for reproduction but for enjoyment as well.
quote:
If a woman is raped, who is not sexually active, becomes pregnant and the state forces that woman to live for 10 months with the knowledge that she is carrying something that was inflicted upon her without her choice, the state assumes the responsibility for raising that child.
Again I agree, Any women that does not want their child for any reason should not be forced to raise the child. The government, churches and individuals should take care of any unwanted babies.
quote:
Why should the state not assume responsibility if it chooses to enforce ignorance upon its citizen? if it chooses to deny free access to birth control? if it chooses to deny access to safe abortions?
Birth control is not a right. If you want to have sex and need contraception shouln't you pay for it? Also do you think the parents are responsible for sex education as well as the government?
quote:
Besides, let me ask you one more question, if I were to have an abortion, how does that affect you?
It doesn't. It affects a child that is denied the right to life. I believe that life starts at conception. Doesn't the child have a right to decide what to do with it's body? or is that a right only reserved for women? When do you think life starts?
|
Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master. - George Washington |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 02/14/2004 : 13:11:36 [Permalink]
|
Robb wrote:quote:
I believe that life starts at conception.
Biology disagrees with you. The first time my wife and I tried for a kid, what resulted from conception was a little blob of cells which didn't have a heartbeat well beyond the time it should have. My wife's doctor explained to us that only about 35% of conceptions result in any chance of life. If correct, it means that many abortions don't actually kill potential children, they simply speed up the inevitable.quote:
Doesn't the child have a right to decide what to do with it's body?
Adults already regularly forbid children from making many decisions about their own bodies, based upon the idea that kids aren't wise enough to make such choices for themselves. Examples include what to eat, how often to bathe, getting tattoos or piercings, recreational drug use, prostitution, etc. I submit to you that embryos have even less experience on which to draw when making choices about themselves than 10-year-olds. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Renae
SFN Regular
543 Posts |
Posted - 02/14/2004 : 13:14:37 [Permalink]
|
Hi Robb. Welcome.
I know you put a lot of thought into your post and I agree with parts of it.
I had to chuckle when I read this, though:
quote:
Sex is a gift from God given to married people not only for reproduction but for enjoyment as well.
Even if I believed in God, no way would I think that my sexuality was a gift from Him. Nor would I believe it's only for married people.
Heaven help me if I'd gotten married to some of the men I'd dated just so I could have sex with them.
*Renae gets down on her knees and thanks Gloria Steinem, Betty Friedan, and the other early feminists for helping save her from the tyranny of having her sex life yoked to a jerky husband* |
|
|
|
Trish
SFN Addict
USA
2102 Posts |
Posted - 02/14/2004 : 14:05:20 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Robb
Trish, What I was trying to say in my last post was that if abortion is not legal someday, women would still have the right to choose to have a baby or not. It just moves when the decision needs to take place. I agree with most of what you said in your last post.
Sex education should start when children are born until they are adults and should include more than reproduction. Sex has emotional and financial consequences that need to be taught as well as how pregnancy can happen and contraceptive options. Would you agree to teach children about the physical and emotional consequences of abortion as part of their sex education? Should not women be educated on this procedure before they may need it?
When contraception fails, that's when abortion, the morning after pill, RU486, etc, should be employed as a means of birth control. Are you aware, that I who have had one child, am 35 years of age can not currently get my tubes tied - because I might want to have another child. THAT decision is not in MY hands where it BELONGS! Why? Who should decide that I might want another child - no one but me. A friend of mine can not have her tubes tied because she's 26 and doesn't want any children at all - she might change her mind. Why isn't it HER decision to make? Yes, educate women and MEN regarding contraception. I've already dealt with the effects on friends who've had abortions, procedure is explained before they begin. There are support options for dealing with grief after abortion, that are presented. Others are fully aware of what they are walking into when having an abortion.
quote:
Again I agree that all forms of contraception should be taught to our children including abstinence. The state should not tell any child which form is best. They need to lay the facts out and let the parents and children decide together. Abstinence is the only sure fire way of not getting pregnant. This should be taught also. Sex is a gift from God given to married people not only for reproduction but for enjoyment as well.
Too many parents don't know how pregnancy can occur. You are looking at two or more generations before the knowledge penetrates far enough to be useful in this regard. Why should anyone teach me or my child that sex is a gift from god? We who don't believe in god? Why should a school or government agency push your views of god on me? That's not their responsibility. I have educated my daughter well enough on the subject, that I hope she is comfortable enough with it to come to me when she wants/needs birth control before she turns 18.
quote:
Again I agree, Any women that does not want their child for any reason should not be forced to raise the child. The government, churches and individuals should take care of any unwanted babies.
You would then agree that forcing her to relive/live with the consequences of an action that was out of her control when she was raped is ok? That is more cruel than my idea of what should happen to rapists - i.e., being tied behind a horse and drug naked through the center of town. This can not be done because the constitution guarantees protection from cruel and unusual punishment. Yet you would declare, because you believe that life begins at conception, that a woman be subjected to cruel and inhumane punishment for 10 months and then subjected to the pain of child birth (yes it's still painful after the drugs wear off) for being the victim of a crime?
quote:
Birth control is not a right. If you want to have sex and need contraception shouln't you pay for it? Also do you think the parents are responsible for sex education as well as the government?
Well, control over your own body should be a right. If you want to make abortion illegal - then we need to provide an alternative because abstinence ain't cuttin' it. Don't have sex, but it feels good and it'll piss mom off no end. Full blown teenage rebellion. The saddest part of all, it's those that can least afford a child who can not afford contraceptives and are kept in the most ignorance regarding conception. These are young women without access to adequate medical coverage, without access to counselling services, without access to adequate child care, without access to furthering their education, without access to finding employment that might support their children. Or at least the perception that they are without access to these things. Perception is a big part of why many of these women remain in poverty, raising children without hope for a future. Who suffers here, the women, yes, but also the children. Which is better, preventing the suffering and supplying hope for when these youngsters are ready to raise a child or forcing the continuation of the cycle?
quote:
It doesn't.
EXACTLY! It doesn't affect you? So why are you concerned with what has no affect on you?
quote:
It affects a child that is denied the right to life.
Which is better, no life at all or a life of pain? Why would you force a child to grow up where it might be abused, killed in a drive by, join a gang, spend the rest of its life in prison, suffer from some disease? Or any of the myriad problems facing a child growing up where its NOT WANTED?
quote:
I believe that life starts at conception.
Good for you. But so?
quote:
Doesn't the child have a right to decide what to do with it's body? or is that a right only reserved for women? When do you think life starts?
6 months is about the time of what is called quickening. It's about the time that the fetus actually starts to look human. It's about the time that there are recognizable brain wave activity. 6 months is a lot of things. But it still isn't breathing on it's own yet. It is still a parasite in the mothers body. Life starts when it is capable of surviving on its own ex-utero. |
...no one has ever found a 4.5 billion year old stone artifact (at the right geological stratum) with the words "Made by God."
No Sense of Obligation by Matt Young
"Say what you will about the sweet miracle of unquestioning faith. I consider the capacity for it terrifying and vile!"
Mother Night by Kurt Vonnegut, Jr.
They (Women Marines) don't have a nickname, and they don't need one. They get their basic training in a Marine atmosphere, at a Marine Post. They inherit the traditions of the Marines. They are Marines.
LtGen Thomas Holcomb, USMC
Commandant of the Marine Corps, 1943
|
|
|
|
Doomar
SFN Regular
USA
714 Posts |
Posted - 02/15/2004 : 10:25:48 [Permalink]
|
Sea Sobust said:
"What kind of idiot statement is this? Of course! it's a human just after the moment of conception. A human baby, no matter what it looks like.
Gorgo has it right: You have to draw the line somewhere and we Americans have decided that it is alright to kill a baby if the baby is young enough. End of subject; the decision had to be made and we made it through legislation and judicial edict."
Correction, Sea, it was done by judicial activism and edict, not by legislation. In fact 46 state laws against abortion were overruled by 7 judges in '73, leading to the death of 50,000,000+ and counting human babies. So the will of the American people was clearly not to allow the wholesale slaughter of innocents.
You had it right, though, when you acknowledged the human baby at conception. It sure wasn't a seal or whale.
Why do you think Americans or any people have the right to kill a baby at any time? What brainwashing one must have gone through to come to this startling conclusion. It is frightening to see the kind of proselytes that abortionists have created, people who acknowledge the human baby at conception, yet cold-bloodedly can kill it without the bat of an eye. Reminds me of training a dog to kill and then seeing the dog turn on its owner and kill him. In fact, most original abortionists would not acknowledge that life began at conception or that the life was even human...just a lump of cells. The reality of this cold-blooded belief in ending human life before it has a chance to survive is still shocking. When I call an abortionist a murderer it no longer seems shocking. They are, in fact, cold-blooded, calculating killers, thriving financially, by the slaughter of little babies in mother's wombs. They are mass murderers beyond comprehension, surpassing Hitler, Stalin and Mao Tse Tung. The mother's, though deceived many times by abortionist attitudes, are still the main instigators of the murder with their own cold, selfish, and wicked motivations for taking this life. If the "rights" of selfish women to kill are more important than the "rights" of a helpless baby to live, what wicked, twisted people we are. |
Mark 10:27 (NKJV) 27But Jesus looked at them and said, “With men it is impossible, but not with God; for with God all things are possible.”
www.pastorsb.com.htm |
| Edited by - Doomar on 02/15/2004 10:41:10 |
|
|
|
Trish
SFN Addict
USA
2102 Posts |
Posted - 02/15/2004 : 17:30:07 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Doomar
Why do you think Americans or any people have the right to kill a baby at any time? What brainwashing one must have gone through to come to this startling conclusion. It is frightening to see the kind of proselytes that abortionists have created, people who acknowledge the human baby at conception, yet cold-bloodedly can kill it without the bat of an eye. Reminds me of training a dog to kill and then seeing the dog turn on its owner and kill him. In fact, most original abortionists would not acknowledge that life began at conception or that the life was even human...just a lump of cells. The reality of this cold-blooded belief in ending human life before it has a chance to survive is still shocking. When I call an abortionist a murderer it no longer seems shocking. They are, in fact, cold-blooded, calculating killers, thriving financially, by the slaughter of little babies in mother's wombs. They are mass murderers beyond comprehension, surpassing Hitler, Stalin and Mao Tse Tung. The mother's, though deceived many times by abortionist attitudes, are still the main instigators of the murder with their own cold, selfish, and wicked motivations for taking this life. If the "rights" of selfish women to kill are more important than the "rights" of a helpless baby to live, what wicked, twisted people we are.
First, we'll look at your ad hominem attack in calling all women who have an abortion selfish.
Not all of them are selfish. Is it selfish in the case of a woman who is raped, has no desire to be a mother to seek an abortion? I say no. Simply because it was the by product of a crime committed against the woman. Why should she be the one to suffer a decision that was brutally taken from her? As in the decision to have control over her own reproductive system.
Now we'll look at your response in it's entirety. You've constructed your argument to elicit an emotional response. You've loaded your argument in such a manner that one must draw the conclusion that anything other than agreement with you means we (those opposed to your position) are morally bankrupt. This is simply not the case. In addition to using emotive language, you are asking us to believe your false dichotomy in drawing a conclusion.
You fail to acknowledge that there are some instances where it would be kinder to the child to never have been than to be born and raised where the life they face is worse than anything you would appreciate in your worst nightmares.
Perhaps, an abortionist is sympathetic to the plight of a woman who's husband doesn't care about abusing their children, or a woman who can not financially afford another child in her household, or a woman who is young and terrified about the possibility of being a mother, a woman who hasn't the time nor the temperament and recognizes this within herself well enough to know that she would make a terrible mother. Or maybe he is sympathetic to the woman who questions the necessity of an abortion when her amnio comes back showing that the fetus has a terrible disease that will inflict pain upon the child continously. Yet, you who know what is best to do with my body, with my limited resources, with my future, call me callous, when it has no direct affect on your life, no direct affect on you as an individual. You are not the one that might have to sit and watch your child suffer for the first few months of life wondering how and why you chose to carry to term something that would do nothing but suffer. Someone who would have no chance at life.
A woman's right to choose her future is to the better when that woman has the wherewithall to raise a child. It's better for the woman and especially better for the child when the woman decides what she will and will not do with her body.
Now, your preaching, your beliefs, are not mine. I don't know that you've ever considered the futures that some children who've been aborted would face. That is one of those decisions that necessarily go into the decision made when having an abortion, but it is made by the woman, who probably knows her own circumstances better than you or any other. |
...no one has ever found a 4.5 billion year old stone artifact (at the right geological stratum) with the words "Made by God."
No Sense of Obligation by Matt Young
"Say what you will about the sweet miracle of unquestioning faith. I consider the capacity for it terrifying and vile!"
Mother Night by Kurt Vonnegut, Jr.
They (Women Marines) don't have a nickname, and they don't need one. They get their basic training in a Marine atmosphere, at a Marine Post. They inherit the traditions of the Marines. They are Marines.
LtGen Thomas Holcomb, USMC
Commandant of the Marine Corps, 1943
|
|
|
|
Robb
SFN Regular
USA
1223 Posts |
Posted - 02/16/2004 : 19:36:10 [Permalink]
|
Trish, I will not comment on the other aspects of your post since the key difference is we disagree on when life begins and if this is not resolved then all debate is futile.
quote:
Life starts when it is capable of surviving on its own ex-utero.
A baby cannot live long outside the womb without the mothers and fathers help. A mother is providing the same functions outside the womb as inside. She is feeding and protecting the baby. It is a considerable time before a child can live independently outside the womb. I think your definition of life when life starts needs to be modified. |
Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master. - George Washington |
|
|
|
Robb
SFN Regular
USA
1223 Posts |
Posted - 02/16/2004 : 19:47:09 [Permalink]
|
Dave W.
quote:
Biology disagrees with you. The first time my wife and I tried for a kid, what resulted from conception was a little blob of cells which didn't have a heartbeat well beyond the time it should have. My wife's doctor explained to us that only about 35% of conceptions result in any chance of life. If correct, it means that many abortions don't actually kill potential children, they simply speed up the inevitable.
If correct many abortions do not kill children but then 35% of all abortions do kill children.
quote:
Adults already regularly forbid children from making many decisions about their own bodies, based upon the idea that kids aren't wise enough to make such choices for themselves. Examples include what to eat, how often to bathe, getting tattoos or piercings, recreational drug use, prostitution, etc. I submit to you that embryos have even less experience on which to draw when making choices about themselves than 10-year-olds.
Yes, parents make decisions for children until they can make them for themselves. Every child should be able to someday make those decisions. |
Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master. - George Washington |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 02/16/2004 : 21:02:55 [Permalink]
|
Robb wrote:quote:
If correct many abortions do not kill children but then 35% of all abortions do kill children.
So is there a good reason to ban all abortions?quote:
Yes, parents make decisions for children until they can make them for themselves. Every child should be able to someday make those decisions.
Well, 'should' asks for quite a bit, I think. Certainly there are children born who, through birth defects or childhood illness, never reach the point where they can make big decisions for themselves.
And thinking about a Christian perspective I've heard, if diseases which kill children are "a part of God's Plan," who is to say that the potential children which never see daylight due to abortion are not also part of "God's Plan?" When God created Eve, He could have done so in such a way that any tampering with a pregnancy would kill the mother, making abortion a completely unacceptable option. He did not. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9688 Posts |
Posted - 02/16/2004 : 23:40:40 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Robb
A baby cannot live long outside the womb without the mothers and fathers help.
You are missing something here...
A baby cannot live long outside the wob without a mother's help. That mother does not have to be its biological mother, but could be any mother. But as long as the foetus is inside its biological mother, it's parasitical in nature.
quote:
A mother is providing the same functions outside the womb as inside.
No. Go to school and finish Biology 101.
quote:
She is feeding and protecting the baby.
That she does, but as I just said, inside the womb only the biological mother can do that. Once the baby is born anyone could do it.
quote:
It is a considerable time before a child can live independently outside the womb.
Yes, but that is not relevant in this discussion.
|
Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3
"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse
Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder. |
|
|
|
Trish
SFN Addict
USA
2102 Posts |
Posted - 02/17/2004 : 10:37:59 [Permalink]
|
| Thank you Dr. Mabuse. Excellently answered. Robb, See his answer, since I can't do much to improve upon what was said there. |
...no one has ever found a 4.5 billion year old stone artifact (at the right geological stratum) with the words "Made by God."
No Sense of Obligation by Matt Young
"Say what you will about the sweet miracle of unquestioning faith. I consider the capacity for it terrifying and vile!"
Mother Night by Kurt Vonnegut, Jr.
They (Women Marines) don't have a nickname, and they don't need one. They get their basic training in a Marine atmosphere, at a Marine Post. They inherit the traditions of the Marines. They are Marines.
LtGen Thomas Holcomb, USMC
Commandant of the Marine Corps, 1943
|
|
|
|
Doomar
SFN Regular
USA
714 Posts |
Posted - 02/19/2004 : 03:18:29 [Permalink]
|
[quote]Originally posted by ljbrs
Oh, I am PRO ABORTION. People who are unable or unwilling to care for children kindly should not be forced to have them. However, I think that the abortion should be done ASAP after conception, beginning with the "morning after pill" for a starter.
There are too many lousy parents who do not have the ability to do the job of parenting intelligently. When they bring babies into the world and abuse them during their childhood, the children end up as ruined adults.
ljbrs,
H E L L O O O! It's called adoption. |
Mark 10:27 (NKJV) 27But Jesus looked at them and said, “With men it is impossible, but not with God; for with God all things are possible.”
www.pastorsb.com.htm |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
