A good day!

[Guest]

From Mississippi to Maine to Ohio it turned out to be a pretty good day for Dems. Here's hoping it is a portent for 2012! :wave:

[Guest]

My uncle Charles Colgan got re-elected to the VA state senate. He will be the longest serving state senator in VA history. He is a Democrat.....abit conservative.

[Guest]

A good day, indeed !!

Along with the Ohio workers victory, the ousting of Pearce in Arizona, Maine reinstatin*g same-day registrati*on, and the recall of Rep Paul Scott of Michigan.

Mississipi REJECTING the "personhood" initiative, an attempt by the crazies to declare that life begins at fertilization.

Suffolk County, NY electing a Democrat as County Executive.

[Guest]

God bless him, cologal. He's much appreciated in Northern Virginia and an absolute testament to the American dream. What a story this orphaned child has to tell. I know you are proud.

[Guest]

Yea, but is it a good day for America?

[Guest]

cannot make a simple statement without the partisan venom:

"...an attempt by the crazies..."

Fits the pattern. No matter the subject, if it is in opposition, the poisonous catharsis always follows.

btk

[Guest]

Another step into that dark abyss called socialism.I am just happy that I lived my life and seen America at it's greatest before the big tumble in the near future. Our poor grandchildren.

[Guest]

From Mississippi to Maine to Ohio it turned out to be a pretty good day for Dems. Here's hoping it is a portent for 2012! :wave:

A celebration of PARTY with no mention of COUNTRY !

SAD !!!

[Guest]

A celebration of PARTY with no mention of COUNTRY !

SAD !!!

This is the crux of it ALL.

Union thuggery and party grip on power trumps the solvency, stability and integrity of the USA we knew.

Our nation's founding fathers, immigrant farmers, ranchers and non-union factory workers, and all of our military veterans who fought and died are now "honored" by entitled thugs and parasites making our nation into a laughingstock in the world community.

[Guest]

And here we see the AFL-CIO thug with Columbia U. students shipped in to go house to house in Cleveland.......

http://www.wral.com/news/national_world/national/image/10351428/

[Guest]

Going door-to-door to campaign for issues you strongly believe in - well, some call that democracy.

[Guest]

For the most part all of the wins for the dems had to do with local politics.
It looks like we need to do something but take it from someone else not ME!.
It will all come home to roost when their states have to pay for all of this wonderful stuff they voted for.
It does not suprise me at all in this part of the nation. They bleed union.
Unions once had a place but now really are nothing but political arms for the dems, to hell with the country going broke as long as they get theirs. I guess their grandchildren can figure it out later when they are standing in front of the European Union explaining why the need more money to help the New european nation of Obamaland!

After reading my post I felt I needed to edit it.
I was wrong! These things will not affect our grandchildren, they will affect our CHILDREN. These problems are not 20-30 years out, they are here right now!

[Guest]

A celebration of PARTY with no mention of COUNTRY !

SAD !!!

I had vowed to not post here any more but the elections yesterday prompted me to come back once more. I was remiss in saying that the election results were good news for Dems, therefore implying bad news for Repubs, and not great news for the entire country which I firmly believe is the case. I'm sure you disagree. 'nuff said.

[Guest]

A good day, indeed !!

Along with the Ohio workers victory, the ousting of Pearce in Arizona, Maine reinstatin*g same-day registrati*on, and the recall of Rep Paul Scott of Michigan.

Mississipi REJECTING the "personhood" initiative, an attempt by the crazies to declare that life begins at fertilization.

Suffolk County, NY electing a Democrat as County Executive.

Amen

[Guest]

This is the crux of it ALL.

Union thuggery and party grip on power trumps the solvency, stability and integrity of the USA we knew.

Our nation's founding fathers, immigrant farmers, ranchers and non-union factory workers, and all of our military veterans who fought and died are now "honored" by entitled thugs and parasites making our nation into a laughingstock in the world community.

Amen. These selfish union thugs do not care about anything but themselves. Take, take and take some more and the heck with the private sector who built this country.

[Guest]

some might argue that the unions built this country.

[Guest]

I think it's basic human nature to strive to get a little more, climb the ladder, be a little safer from poverty and want. And it is soooo American.

I am stunned that a group of folks here continue to ridicule and revile people who work, or wish they could, including union members, and even, (perish the thought!), those grungy occupiers...

while at the very same time, go to any lengths to worship and protect every single dollar amassed by millions of people who never worked, and who consume and spend obscenely.

[Guest]

first, about the crazies who say life begins at conception, do you know that a death certificate has to be filed (at least in montana) when an abortion is performed? and secondly, it is not the Unions that built this country, but rather the WORKERS, who are in danger of losing their right to a secret ballot and whose union dues go directly to the democratic party whether they want them to or not...and thirdly, will some of you please read my post on agenda 21 which has gotten lost in the shuffle of our lively debates! :)

[Guest]

A good day, indeed !!

Along with the Ohio workers victory, the ousting of Pearce in Arizona, Maine reinstatin*g same-day registrati*on, and the recall of Rep Paul Scott of Michigan.

Mississipi REJECTING the "personhood" initiative, an attempt by the crazies to declare that life begins at fertilization.

Suffolk County, NY electing a Democrat as County Executive.

coralway, when does life begin?

[Guest]

first, about the crazies who say life begins at conception, do you know that a death certificate has to be filed (at least in montana) when an abortion is performed? and secondly, it is not the Unions that built this country, but rather the WORKERS, who are in danger of losing their right to a secret ballot and whose union dues go directly to the democratic party whether they want them to or not...and thirdly, will some of you please read my post on agenda 21 which has gotten lost in the shuffle of our lively debates! :)

AMEN!!!!!!:beer3:

[Guest]

first, about the crazies who say life begins at conception, do you know that a death certificate has to be filed (at least in montana) when an abortion is performed? and secondly, it is not the Unions that built this country, but rather the WORKERS, who are in danger of losing their right to a secret ballot and whose union dues go directly to the democratic party whether they want them to or not...and thirdly, will some of you please read my post on agenda 21 which has gotten lost in the shuffle of our lively debates! :)

Dear lady,
Good luck to you proving when life begins, on this forum. Certain folk are convinced that they are the keepers of the facts and won't accept a thousand well supported facts that prove them wrong! I think the reason is possibly to be found in this quote:

"Abortion kills twice. It kills the body of the baby and it kills the conscience of the mother. Abortion is profoundly anti-women. Three quarters of its victims are women: Half the babies and all the mothers." ~ Blessed Mother Teresa of Calcutta

[Guest]

God bless him, cologal. He's much appreciated in Northern Virginia and an absolute testament to the American dream. What a story this orphaned child has to tell. I know you are proud.

Thanks..... the whole family is proud of him.

[Guest]

Dear lady,
Good luck to you proving when life begins, on this forum. Certain folk are convinced that they are the keepers of the facts and won't accept a thousand well supported facts that prove them wrong! I think the reason is possibly to be found in this quote:

"Abortion kills twice. It kills the body of the baby and it kills the conscience of the mother. Abortion is profoundly anti-women. Three quarters of its victims are women: Half the babies and all the mothers." ~ Blessed Mother Teresa of Calcutta

I really wouldn't take much from Mother Theresa. I know I'll catch flak for this but that woman was sufferring from SOMETHING. All those hospitals she set up? Why are patients denied pain medication? Why are they denied visitation? Because Mother Theresa thought it put them closer to godliness to suffer 'like Christ did on the cross'.

And her charities? When her charity was forced by a new law in France to publicly disclose their books, they packed up and left.

Not too many people looked beyond the image that was being carefully cultivated - but sometimes, the truth leaks out:

http://www.newstatesman.com/200508220019

[Guest]

Dear lady,
Good luck to you proving when life begins, on this forum. Certain folk are convinced that they are the keepers of the facts and won't accept a thousand well supported facts that prove them wrong! I think the reason is possibly to be found in this quote:

"Abortion kills twice. It kills the body of the baby and it kills the conscience of the mother. Abortion is profoundly anti-women. Three quarters of its victims are women: Half the babies and all the mothers." ~ Blessed Mother Teresa of Calcutta

And it is posts like this that perpetuation the delusion that women who make the choice to abort are somehow inferior to those who do not. Telling a women that she kills her conscience? Maybe she is concerned about providing for the children she already has and that is on her conscience....If abortions do become illegal, it will not stop them...it will stop them from being safe. And I am talking about the old back door abortions, not the ones performed in clinics by a medically trained person..

And once again...you have NO right to make this decision for any woman. It is not your decision to make. You don't like government meddling in people's lives except for this most personal and private of decisons.....

[Guest]

The Republicans took over the Virginia Senate and the Mississippi House and won the ballot in Ohio with the overwhelming rejection of ObamaCare mandates by the voters.

Not a bad day on the important issues if you're Republican.

I feel sorry for people who think that the dehumanization of a baby in the womb is a political victory, but that's just me.

[Guest]

And it is posts like this that perpetuation the delusion that women who make the choice to abort are somehow inferior to those who do not. Telling a women that she kills her conscience? Maybe she is concerned about providing for the children she already has and that is on her conscience....If abortions do become illegal, it will not stop them...it will stop them from being safe. And I am talking about the old back door abortions, not the ones performed in clinics by a medically trained person..

And once again...you have NO right to make this decision for any woman. It is not your decision to make. You don't like government meddling in people's lives except for this most personal and private of decisons.....

It is not just the woman involved, it is the father, the baby and God. You make it sound like the "woman" only has the right to determine life and death. What a selfish opinion!!!

[Guest]

And once again...you have NO right to make this decision for any woman. It is not your decision to make. You don't like government meddling in people's lives except for this most personal and private of decisons.....

and once again...I have DO have the right-Freedom of Speech- to speak in defense of the INNOCENTS who are MURDERED daily in our country under the guise of women's rights.
I find it interesting that certain posters on this forum always show up when the subject of abortion comes up. Like I said, Mother Theresa's quote may just hold the answer...

[Guest]

Tell this delightful young lady that her mom had the right to choose to end her right to live a wonderful life...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kPF1FhCMPuQ

[Guest]

some might argue that the unions built this country.

The ones who say that, and I would be one of them, are never talking about the unions of public sector employees.

[Guest]

I think it's basic human nature to strive to get a little more, climb the ladder, be a little safer from poverty and want. And it is soooo American.

I am stunned that a group of folks here continue to ridicule and revile people who work, or wish they could, including union members, and even, (perish the thought!), those grungy occupiers...

while at the very same time, go to any lengths to worship and protect every single dollar amassed by millions of people who never worked, and who consume and spend obscenely.

Have no idea what you talking about.

[Guest]

And it is posts like this that perpetuation the delusion that women who make the choice to abort are somehow inferior to those who do not. Telling a women that she kills her conscience? Maybe she is concerned about providing for the children she already has and that is on her conscience....If abortions do become illegal, it will not stop them...it will stop them from being safe. And I am talking about the old back door abortions, not the ones performed in clinics by a medically trained person..

And once again...you have NO right to make this decision for any woman. It is not your decision to make. You don't like government meddling in people's lives except for this most personal and private of decisons.....

Ignoring the life within the mother again. You were once that life. I don't have to say anything else.

[Guest]

It is not just the woman involved, it is the father, the baby and God. You make it sound like the "woman" only has the right to determine life and death. What a selfish opinion!!!

Her body...her decision.

[Guest]

I really wouldn't take much from Mother Theresa. I know I'll catch flak for this but that woman was sufferring from SOMETHING. All those hospitals she set up? Why are patients denied pain medication? Why are they denied visitation? Because Mother Theresa thought it put them closer to godliness to suffer 'like Christ did on the cross'.

And her charities? When her charity was forced by a new law in France to publicly disclose their books, they packed up and left.

Not too many people looked beyond the image that was being carefully cultivated - but sometimes, the truth leaks out:

http://www.newstatesman.com/200508220019

I did not know any of that. Very interesting. Thank you for sharing this information.

[Guest]

Her body...her decision.

Again, a selfish attitude. It is the decision of the father, mother and God. The female carrier of the child is not the only soul involved.

[Guest]

Her body...her decision.

Surprised that such an accomplished doctor of research can continue to blatantly ignore the fact that the unborn child, complete with it's own distinctly different and seperate set of DNA, is not "her body"...
Lame arguements like this are designed to gain the emotional and sympathetic support of the masses who have not been taught the facts yet. Hmmm....another undesireable intent from reputable honest researcher.:oops:

[Guest]

Surprised that such an accomplished doctor of research can continue to blatantly ignore the fact that the unborn child, complete with it's own distinctly different and seperate set of DNA, is not "her body"...
Lame arguements like this are designed to gain the emotional and sympathetic support of the masses who have not been taught the facts yet. Hmmm....another undesireable intent from reputable honest researcher.:oops:

Of course you are correct. The unborn baby genetic code differs entirely from the mother's. It's not part of the woman's body. The baby merely resides in the mother's womb. It is not a physical part or organ belonging to the mother. So, I would say, the mother's "right" to "control her own body" ends at the edge of the womb.

I know I'm not speaking from what has become legal in this country, but just what is pure fact and what is moral.

[Guest]

Of course you are correct. The unborn baby genetic code differs entirely from the mother's. It's not part of the woman's body. The baby merely resides in the mother's womb. It is not a physical part or organ belonging to the mother. So, I would say, the mother's "right" to "control her own body" ends at the edge of the womb.

I know I'm not speaking from what has become legal in this country, but just what is pure fact and what is moral.

:eclipsee_gold_cup: :eclipsee_gold_cup: :eclipsee_gold_cup: :eclipsee_gold_cup:

[Guest]

Surprised that such an accomplished doctor of research can continue to blatantly ignore the fact that the unborn child, complete with it's own distinctly different and seperate set of DNA, is not "her body"...
Lame arguements like this are designed to gain the emotional and sympathetic support of the masses who have not been taught the facts yet. Hmmm....another undesireable intent from reputable honest researcher.:oops:

You cannot legislate morality. I guess I was too concrete in my original statement, so let me expand so you might understand. When I said her body, her decision, I assumed you understood that implied that she took into consideration the input of the father and her doctor. It is still her body and her decision. Your statement puts women on the level of being incubators.
We will never come to a common ground on this issue and I think this constant repartee is useless.....

[Guest]

You cannot legislate morality. I guess I was too concrete in my original statement, so let me expand so you might understand. When I said her body, her decision, I assumed you understood that implied that she took into consideration the input of the father and her doctor. It is still her body and her decision. Your statement puts women on the level of being incubators.
We will never come to a common ground on this issue and I think this constant repartee is useless.....

Of course it's useless to continue this "repartee", as you say, as long as you continue to ignore the biological facts of a pregnancy.

[Guest]

You cannot legislate morality. I guess I was too concrete in my original statement, so let me expand so you might understand. When I said her body, her decision, I assumed you understood that implied that she took into consideration the input of the father and her doctor. It is still her body and her decision. Your statement puts women on the level of being incubators.
We will never come to a common ground on this issue and I think this constant repartee is useless.....

More lame statements meant to appeal to the emotional responses and place the mother to be in the "poor me, victim, help me out of this mess category"...
If the constant repartee is useless, why do you continue to initiate &/or engage?

[Guest]

Of course it's useless to continue this "repartee", as you say, as long as you continue to ignore the biological facts of a pregnancy.

How would you react to people who would be biologically correct in referring to the fertilized egg as a blastocyte or, to use a term that is correct but has some emotional charge to it - a parasite?

[Guest]

Of course you are correct. The unborn baby genetic code differs entirely from the mother's. It's not part of the woman's body. The baby merely resides in the mother's womb. It is not a physical part or organ belonging to the mother. So, I would say, the mother's "right" to "control her own body" ends at the edge of the womb.

I know I'm not speaking from what has become legal in this country, but just what is pure fact and what is moral.

:bigbow::bigbow::bigbow:

[Guest]

How would you react to people who would be biologically correct in referring to the fertilized egg as a blastocyte or, to use a term that is correct but has some emotional charge to it - a parasite?


A rose is a rose is a rose...A rose by any other name would still smell wonderfully sweet!

[Guest]

I really wouldn't take much from Mother Theresa...

And her charities? When her charity was forced by a new law in France to publicly disclose their books, they packed up and left.

[/url]

Who cares what the French think about Blessed Mother Teresa?

..."Abortion kills twice. It kills the body of the baby and it kills the conscience of the mother. Abortion is profoundly anti-women. Three quarters of its victims are women: Half the babies and all the mothers."
Blessed Mother Teresa of Calcutta

[Guest]

~"Those who supported slavery were free. Those who support abortion are already been born. That's how opression works." (Ronald Reagan)


~"...is it surprising that today we have become so morally blind (for wickedness blinds) that we save the baby whales at great cost, and murder millions of unborn children?"
(Alice von Hildebrand)


~"It is a poverty to decide that a child must die so that you may live as you wish."
(Blessed Mother Teresa)

[Guest]

From Mississippi to Maine to Ohio it turned out to be a pretty good day for Dems. Here's hoping it is a portent for 2012! :wave:
Not good for Dems
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204358004577030481545613916.html?m od=opinion_newsreel


Of all the noise of this week's state election results, what mattered most for Election 2012 came out of Virginia. It was the sound of the air leaking out of the Plouffe plan.

[Guest]

How would you react to people who would be biologically correct in referring to the fertilized egg as a blastocyte or, to use a term that is correct but has some emotional charge to it - a parasite?

Don't waste your time with this...I am no longer going to waste mine. Women are not incubators.

[Guest]

Don't waste your time with this...I am no longer going to waste mine. Women are not incubators.

They are for 9 months, sorta. Sorry, biology is biology.

[Guest]

Who used the term incubator?...oh, that would be post #38 on this thread.

...but after searching out the definition of an incubator, I am happy to say it is a privilege and an honor as a woman and a mom to be labelled as such...THANKS!
1. (Medicine) Med an enclosed transparent boxlike apparatus for housing prematurely born babies under optimum conditions until they are strong enough to survive in the normal environment...http://www.thefreedictionary.com/incubator

[Guest]

Who used the term incubator?...oh, that would be post #38 on this thread.

...but after searching out the definition of an incubator, I am happy to say it is a privilege and an honor as a woman and a mom to be labelled as such...THANKS!
1. (Medicine) Med an enclosed transparent boxlike apparatus for housing prematurely born babies under optimum conditions until they are strong enough to survive in the normal environment...http://www.thefreedictionary.com/incubator

Katz,
Even without seeing you, I have a feeling that you are not "an enclosed transparent boxlike apparatus". Sorry, you just don't qualify.

[Guest]

How would you react to people who would be biologically correct in referring to the fertilized egg as a blastocyte or, to use a term that is correct but has some emotional charge to it - a parasite?

Good question! It always amazes me how some people take whatever spin they close to put on a political, religious, or scientific statement and declare that it is a fact.

[Guest]

Katz,
Even without seeing you, I have a feeling that you are not "an enclosed transparent boxlike apparatus". Sorry, you just don't qualify.

Thanks for sticking up for me but I am not the one who labelled women as such. See #38 on this thread in which I take that to imply that it would be a derogatory label... I am just saying that I am honored to have fulfilled a similar function by providing a safe place for my own babies under optimum conditions until they are strong enough to survive in the normal environment
:thumbup:

[Guest]

Good question! It always amazes me how some people take whatever spin they close to put on a political, religious, or scientific statement and declare that it is a fact.

????

[Guest]

Good question! It always amazes me how some people take whatever spin they close to put on a political, religious, or scientific statement and declare that it is a fact.

Hi Helen..I am the one who said that it is always the woman's decision to make. I also said in post 38 that when you want to interfer in a woman's right of choice and want to force her carry an embryo you are casting her in the role of an incubator....meaning that you discard her choices and desires and want to reduce her to an incubator. I stand by that post.

[Guest]

Here are several definitions of PARASITE taken from the same dictionary website...http://www.thefreedictionary.com/parasite

~Biology- An organism that grows, feeds, and is sheltered on or in a different organism while contributing nothing to the survival of its host....I suppose an unborn baby fits this definition...unless different organism means as in a different species or something like that. Either way, it doesn't seem like a derogatory comparison

~parasite [ˈpӕrəsait]-an animal or plant that lives on another animal or plant without giving anything in return
No problem here, not derogatory either


~ (Life Sciences & Allied Applications / Biology) an animal or plant that lives in or on another (the host) from which it obtains nourishment. The host does not benefit from the association and is often harmed by itDoesn't fit this definition for couple of reasons...the host is not often harmed by it and the host, mother, will definitely be benefitted by it with the joy of a brand new baby!

[Guest]

Here are several definitions of PARASITE taken from the same dictionary website...http://www.thefreedictionary.com/parasite

~Biology- An organism that grows, feeds, and is sheltered on or in a different organism while contributing nothing to the survival of its host....I suppose an unborn baby fits this definition...unless different organism means as in a different species or something like that. Either way, it doesn't seem like a derogatory comparison

~parasite [ˈpӕrəsait]-an animal or plant that lives on another animal or plant without giving anything in return
No problem here, not derogatory either


~ (Life Sciences & Allied Applications / Biology) an animal or plant that lives in or on another (the host) from which it obtains nourishment. The host does not benefit from the association and is often harmed by itDoesn't fit this definition for couple of reasons...the host is not often harmed by it and the host, mother, will definitely be benefitted by it with the joy of a brand new baby!

You don't think that parasitic behavior is deragatory? A parasite takes and does not give. This is not deragatory?

[Guest]

Thanks for sticking up for me but I am not the one who labelled women as such. See #38 on this thread in which I take that to imply that it would be a derogatory label... I am just saying that I am honored to have fulfilled a similar function by providing a safe place for my own babies under optimum conditions until they are strong enough to survive in the normal environment
:thumbup:

Katzpajamas: You are so well versed on this subject. Clearly the underlying basis for agreeing to an abortion is individual selfishness vis a vis individual responsibility permeates our country and is destroying our culture. The inexhaustive list of reasons as to why a woman wants an abortion can never cover up that fact because the basic decision comes down to "its me or my baby". Pro abortionist conveniently ignore the fact that "the woman's decision ostenibly occurs before conception. Say that and they instantly come back with well what if the woman is raped. Statistically how often does this occur?

Beside which this dramtic attack is meant to distract from the hundreds and hundreds of woman that use abortion as a method of conception and performed repeatedly by those well doers as Planned Parenthood whose organizational name is intentionally mischaracterized.

With all the methods available to women to prevent pregnancy, including educational opportunities starting with grade school you would think that women would be better at "planned parenthood". I guess all those sex education classes offered at school that liberals are so fond of ain't working.

As to the issue of unions the argument is not about workers its about the political influence unions have even over those workers who disagree with their union choices. Union members by theway that are beginning to see that Obama is not their friend. the recent decision by Obama to set track Keystone XL is an eye opener. Green trumps blue, environmentalist trump blue collar workers. For the upteenth, we find Obama throwing supporters under the bus. Referring back to one of my early statement Obama personifies this "individual selfishness" Poor Michelle she's probaby sitting at her desk tapping her lip with her index finger and thinking to herself" Naw he would do that to me?" "Would he? "

[Guest]

Katzpajamas: You are so well versed on this subject. Clearly the underlying basis for agreeing to an abortion is individual selfishness vis a vis individual responsibility permeates our country and is destroying our culture. The inexhaustive list of reasons as to why a woman wants an abortion can never cover up that fact because the basic decision comes down to "its me or my baby". Pro abortionist conveniently ignore the fact that "the woman's decision ostenibly occurs before conception. Say that and they instantly come back with well what if the woman is raped. Statistically how often does this occur?

Beside which this dramtic attack is meant to distract from the hundreds and hundreds of woman that use abortion as a method of conception and performed repeatedly by those well doers as Planned Parenthood whose organizational name is intentionally mischaracterized.

With all the methods available to women to prevent pregnancy, including educational opportunities starting with grade school you would think that women would be better at "planned parenthood". I guess all those sex education classes offered at school that liberals are so fond of ain't working.

As to the issue of unions the argument is not about workers its about the political influence unions have even over those workers who disagree with their union choices. Union members by theway that are beginning to see that Obama is not their friend. the recent decision by Obama to set track Keystone XL is an eye opener. Green trumps blue, environmentalist trump blue collar workers. For the upteenth, we find Obama throwing supporters under the bus. Referring back to one of my early statement Obama personifies this "individual selfishness" Poor Michelle she's probaby sitting at her desk tapping her lip with her index finger and thinking to herself" Naw he would do that to me?" "Would he? "

OMG-I guess you forget that it takes two to fertilize an egg. How about spreading some of that holier than thou about a woman's behavior to the man? How arcaic are you? Males also take those sex ed classes. GEEZ!!!

[Guest]

OMG-I guess you forget that it takes two to fertilize an egg. How about spreading some of that holier than thou about a woman's behavior to the man? How arcaic are you? Males also take those sex ed classes. GEEZ!!!

???????? Wow, are we angry here? What is an arcaic?

[Guest]

You don't think that parasitic behavior is deragatory? A parasite takes and does not give. This is not deragatory?


I only responded djplong comment about unborn baby being considered by science as a parasite. Then Helen said that some just couldn't accept facts. So I looked up parasite...and now I am OK with it...so now that I am OK with it, it becomes a derogatory term...??

[Guest]

How would you react to people who would be biologically correct in referring to the fertilized egg as a blastocyte or, to use a term that is correct but has some emotional charge to it - a parasite?

While there are many different religious and philosophic beliefs and theories pertaining to when life begins, SCIENTIFICALLY life begins at conception. At the very moment of fertilization or conception, the moment when the father's sperm joins the mother's ovum, the fetus contains all the genetic information that baby will have for the remainder of his or her lifetime.

Any medical embryology book you reference will confirm that this new unique human creation is a defined sex and is alive, complete and growing.

At the very moment of conception, this creation is completely human, unique from any other living organism. This new developing baby has the same 46 chromosomes he or she will have until death. The fetus is a living human being who contains SEPERATE and UNIQUE chromosomal structures from it's mother.

That means they deserve all the same rights to life that other INDIVIDUALS enjoy. There can be no doubt that human life exists from the very onset of pregnancy.

No human being should be discriminated against based on his or her stage of development, place of residence (inside the womb) or arbitrary notion of "when life begins".

[Guest]

???????? Wow, are we angry here? What is an arcaic?


When you throw a rock into a pack of dogs, it is the one who got hit that howls, growls, or barks the loudest....

[Guest]

:eclipsee_gold_cup:While there are many differtent religious and philosophic beliefs and theories pertaining to when life begins, SCIENTIFICALLY life begins at conception. At the very moment of fertilization or conception, the moment when the father's sperm joins the mother's ovum, the fetus contains all the genetic information that baby will have for the remainder of his or her lifetime.

Any medical embryology book you reference will confirm that this new unique human creation is a defined sex and is alive, complete and growing.

At the very moment of conception, this creation is completely human, unique from any other living organism. This new developing baby has the same 46 chromosomes he or she will have until death. The fetus is a living human being who contains SEPERATE and UNIQUE chromosomal structures from it's mother.

That means they deserve all the same rights to life that other INDIVIDUALS enjoy. There can be no doubt that human life exists from the very onset of pregnancy.

No human being should be discriminated against based on his or her stage of development, place of residence (inside the womb) or arbitrary notion of "when life begins".
:eclipsee_gold_cup::eclipsee_gold_cup::eclipsee_go ld_cup:

[Guest]

Who cares what the French think about Blessed Mother Teresa?

..."Abortion kills twice. It kills the body of the baby and it kills the conscience of the mother. Abortion is profoundly anti-women. Three quarters of its victims are women: Half the babies and all the mothers."
Blessed Mother Teresa of Calcutta

That is an opinion stated as a fact. Stating it as a fact doesn't not make it any less an OPINION. Mother Theresa also said it's good for the sick to suffer so that they could experience Christ's sufferring.

[Guest]

While there are many different religious and philosophic beliefs and theories pertaining to when life begins, SCIENTIFICALLY life begins at conception. At the very moment of fertilization or conception, the moment when the father's sperm joins the mother's ovum, the fetus contains all the genetic information that baby will have for the remainder of his or her lifetime.

Any medical embryology book you reference will confirm that this new unique human creation is a defined sex and is alive, complete and growing.

At the very moment of conception, this creation is completely human, unique from any other living organism. This new developing baby has the same 46 chromosomes he or she will have until death. The fetus is a living human being who contains SEPERATE and UNIQUE chromosomal structures from it's mother.

That means they deserve all the same rights to life that other INDIVIDUALS enjoy. There can be no doubt that human life exists from the very onset of pregnancy.

No human being should be discriminated against based on his or her stage of development, place of residence (inside the womb) or arbitrary notion of "when life begins".

This is one reason that the term 'viability' gets thrown around a lot. Studies show that 1/3 of pregnancies end in miscarriages - so if you suddenly give 'rights' to a fertilized egg, do you see an explosion of negligent manslaughter cases (alleging the woman didn't take care of herself).

And what about twins? Now we're finding out that there are more cases of one twin surviving and absorbing the other 'failed' twin than was ever suspected. To be a little ridiculous, do we have judges on standby in the maternity ward to press charges against a newborn baby for killing it's sibling?

How does this view correlate with the public expenditures required to keep, for example, preemies alive? A single premature birth can cost anywhere from a quarter to several million dollars to keep that *born* baby alive.

It's a discussion we don't like to have in this country. Do we save one preemie and deny care to others out of cost control?

It's a terrible thought to think about the strictly financial aspects of the abortion debate. But, remember, abortion is something that is more common among the lower socioeconomic classes. The middle and upper classes generally have kids when they want them because of birth control. So, those lower on the totem pole who already can't afford health care are suddenly those people that you want to require even MORE health care?

It's one of the reasons I've long said that abortion is the symptom, not the disease.

[Guest]

How would you react to people who would be biologically correct in referring to the fertilized egg as a blastocyte or, to use a term that is correct but has some emotional charge to it - a parasite?


Kinda like this opinion stated as fact?
Sure would like to see the medical book where this came from...

I personally don't care what the French think...

Mother Theresa also said it's good for the sick to suffer so that they could experience Christ's sufferring...Wow, another excellent quote from Mother Teresa of Calcutta. Thanks!

[Guest]

This is one reason that the term 'viability' gets thrown around a lot. Studies show that 1/3 of pregnancies end in miscarriages - so if you suddenly give 'rights' to a fertilized egg, do you see an explosion of negligent manslaughter cases (alleging the woman didn't take care of herself).

And what about twins? Now we're finding out that there are more cases of one twin surviving and absorbing the other 'failed' twin than was ever suspected. To be a little ridiculous, do we have judges on standby in the maternity ward to press charges against a newborn baby for killing it's sibling?

How does this view correlate with the public expenditures required to keep, for example, preemies alive? A single premature birth can cost anywhere from a quarter to several million dollars to keep that *born* baby alive.

It's a discussion we don't like to have in this country. Do we save one preemie and deny care to others out of cost control?

It's a terrible thought to think about the strictly financial aspects of the abortion debate. But, remember, abortion is something that is more common among the lower socioeconomic classes. The middle and upper classes generally have kids when they want them because of birth control. So, those lower on the totem pole who already can't afford health care are suddenly those people that you want to require even MORE health care?

It's one of the reasons I've long said that abortion is the symptom, not the disease.

Your suppositions are not as hard to answer as you think.

It is the mother's body and she can eat what she wants. The baby should have a right to a great environment, but some people's parents are wonderful people and some are not. Life's not always fair. If the mother is neglectful, it's sad, but not always criminal.

The point you keep making about one twin absorbing another is unadulterated b.s., and you know it. If a child were to pick up a gun and shoot his 3 yr. old twin there would be nobody who'd consider THAT a crime of the child. So just stuff that one back in you duffel bag of imaginative scenarios.

Money?; you want to talk about the cost of keeping a person alive. Really? Get off that road before you lose your soul.

You've got no case counselor. I suggest you cut your losses.

[Guest]

From Richie:
It is the mother's body and she can eat what she wants.

Well, I might take issue with that bodily function.

My sister in law and her best friend were both pregnant at the same time. Both did drugs daily. Both of their sons are special needs children. Coincidence? Maybe, but my SIL had a previous child born normal and didn't do drugs when she was carrying him.

Nobody in the family will talk about it to each other, but it almost borders on criminal to me.

[Guest]

From Richie:


Well, I might take issue with that bodily function.

My sister in law and her best friend were both pregnant at the same time. Both did drugs daily. Both of their sons are special needs children. Coincidence? Maybe, but my SIL had a previous child born normal and didn't do drugs when she was carrying him.

Nobody in the family will talk about it to each other, but it almost borders on criminal to me.

That's because leftists have indoctrinated young people over the years to "not JUDGE" others.

You're not supposed to identify nor confront behaviors that are illegal and health-destroying.

You're supposed to let them have their self-esteem however they built it.

[Guest]

From Richie:


Well, I might take issue with that bodily function.

My sister in law and her best friend were both pregnant at the same time. Both did drugs daily. Both of their sons are special needs children. Coincidence? Maybe, but my SIL had a previous child born normal and didn't do drugs when she was carrying him.

Nobody in the family will talk about it to each other, but it almost borders on criminal to me.

The mother taking drugs IS criminal and the effect of her criminal act upon her child should be no different than if she gave a born baby drugs. It does not excuse killing the child before birth, which amazingly some think is just fine.

[Guest]

That's because leftists have indoctrinated young people over the years to "not JUDGE" others.

You're not supposed to identify nor confront behaviors that are illegal and health-destroying.

You're supposed to let them have their self-esteem however they built it.

On that note, (OPINION) we are reaping the crop from sowing this CRAP...I LOVE (OPINION) this guy's remedy!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OAOrT0OcHh0&fb_source=message

[Guest]

From Mississippi to Maine to Ohio it turned out to be a pretty good day for Dems. Here's hoping it is a portent for 2012! :wave:

DaleMN: Every day we wake up to the rising sun with the thought of how we will manage the course that day is a "good day" And as subsequent days fade away it brings us closer and closer to remember that the day's political events are just ,as my Jewish friends say, "bupkus".

[Guest]

???????? Wow, are we angry here? What is an arcaic?

Do you have a daughter? How could you read the post I responded to and NOT be angry? Blame it all on women...again. I repeat...it takes 2 to fertilize an egg and both sexes take sex ed classes. Why smear just women?

My post is the one you respond to and ask if I am angry? The rant of the person whose post I responded to did not make you ask why they was so angry? Oh, let me guess. You agree with the original poster. Now I get it.

I typed archaic wrong, please forgive my terrible terrible error. My original post said "how arcaic are you?" Given the context of the sentence, obviously it was not a noun, a thing. Archaic is very old fashioned.

[Guest]

DaleMN: Every day we wake up to the rising sun with the thought of how we will manage the course that day is a "good day" And as subsequent days fade away it brings us closer and closer to remember that the day's political events are just ,as my Jewish friends say, "bupkus".

I can't disagree....it's certainly enough for me....but I fear for the future of those younger of the 99% as the Repubs try to protect and advance only the 1%. :doh:

[Guest]

OMG-I guess you forget that it takes two to fertilize an egg. How about spreading some of that holier than thou about a woman's behavior to the man? How arcaic are you? Males also take those sex ed classes. GEEZ!!!

ladydoc: But abortion proponents make it clear that "its a woman's choice only" to decide to keep or abort. Its also a woman's choice to enter into a union that may or may not 'fertilize an egg. You suggest I am being archiac when I am actually just repeating what feminist have been telling woman for years. I am however old fashion enough to say that a man should man up and if he has shared in the responsibility of concepton then he needs to own up to it and do the right thing.

It is obvious that we are on different philosophical planes and will never come to an agreement.

[Guest]

Your suppositions are not as hard to answer as you think.

It is the mother's body and she can eat what she wants. The baby should have a right to a great environment, but some people's parents are wonderful people and some are not. Life's not always fair. If the mother is neglectful, it's sad, but not always criminal.

The point you keep making about one twin absorbing another is unadulterated b.s., and you know it. If a child were to pick up a gun and shoot his 3 yr. old twin there would be nobody who'd consider THAT a crime of the child. So just stuff that one back in you duffel bag of imaginative scenarios.

Money?; you want to talk about the cost of keeping a person alive. Really? Get off that road before you lose your soul.

You've got no case counselor. I suggest you cut your losses.

You're making my point for me. Warning me about losing my soul? That's EXACTLY the response I expected and actually WANTED from you because it demonstrates just how volatile the subject matter is. In that respect I *completely* agree with you.

My point about the whole 'failed twin' thing was in regards to the idea that a zygote is supposed to have human rights - ALL of them - which is what I'm lead to believe the Mississippi proposal was all about.

But to something that happens more often, the part where you wrote about, for example, the mother's diet. If MI's measure had passed, you know SOMEONE was going to go along the lines of pointing out how a woman could be charged with negligent homicide if their infant died of neglect - THEREFORE the same standard should be exercised in defense of the fetus. As you said, it's not always criminal - but you know very well there are times it WOULD be.. And just where would we draw the line on that? Heck, it's hard enough drawing the line on viability (and that line moves with technological development).

Now, I give you credit for bringing up the "3 year old shoots sibling" scenario - took me a few seconds to find 37 *million* hits on or related to young children shooting others - and the arguments going on trying to decide just WHEN to hold someone responsible for their actions. I should have thought of that myself.

[Guest]

...a rose by any other name would still smell sweet :thumbup:
zygote...embryo...fetus...parasite...ALL of which have it's own seperate and distinctly unigue set of chromosomes-hence a totally seperate and distinct life from that of ANY other living thing. By the way-Not OPINION-It's BIOLOGICAL FACT...

[Guest]

On that note, (OPINION) we are reaping the crop from sowing this CRAP...I LOVE (OPINION) this guy's remedy!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OAOrT0OcHh0&fb_source=message

BRILLIANT!!; What a concise and easy to understand commentary that even a socialist might understand.

Deserves it's own thread. Cogent and timely.

[Guest]

Do you have a daughter? How could you read the post I responded to and NOT be angry? Blame it all on women...again. I repeat...it takes 2 to fertilize an egg and both sexes take sex ed classes. Why smear just women?

My post is the one you respond to and ask if I am angry? The rant of the person whose post I responded to did not make you ask why they was so angry? Oh, let me guess. You agree with the original poster. Now I get it.

I typed archaic wrong, please forgive my terrible terrible error. My original post said "how arcaic are you?" Given the context of the sentence, obviously it was not a noun, a thing. Archaic is very old fashioned.

Rubicon never seems upset and angry with his posts. He was not ranting, as you put it. You also ended your tirade with the word GEEZ!!!

[Guest]

You want to talk about the man/father's responsibility?!

~A man who tries but falls behind in support payments is reviled as a “deadbeat” and uncaring parent. A women who refuses all responsibility and kills her baby faces no such insults, and no questions about good parenting and responsibility. Some will even laud her for her “choice” and frame it as a civil rights victory.

~“I am the father of an aborted baby and your article strikes very close to my heart. 5 years ago I was completely powerless to save the life of my unborn child and have suffered depression ever since.” - Marlon

~Many sympathetic emails were from women. “I have personally experienced watching a man helplessly discover his girlfriend aborted a child he wanted dearly, and not a THING could be done.” T-Muncy.


~Kathryn shared, “My brother-in-law's girlfriend decided she didn't want to be with him anymore. She flew to Seattle (we live in AK) to get an abortion at 6 months. My Brother-in-law was crushed!”


~Anastasia asked women to consider the man’s position by reversing the roles: “Imagine if a man did not want a baby, and the woman was forced to get an abortion. Outrageously unfair, right?”

~Another email noted: If the Supreme Court were to tell the average woman that the father of the child could kill her unborn child for reasons of “finding himself, or he’s not ready for a child, or he finds a child inconvenient to his career path,” watch the women of this country rise up!

http://justifiedright.typepad.com/justified_right/2009/01/fathers-of-aborted-babies-speak-out.html

~Most often it is best to have a man counsel a post-abortive father. He needs a safe and minimally gender-neutral environment in which to become vulnerable. He needs to know that he will not be judged or condemned and that everything he shares will be held in the strictest of confidence. Allow him to grieve his loss and shame. Let him cry as much as he needs to. The grief is as real as that caused by the death of a two-year-old toddler. This was his child and, in his heart, he instinctively knows it.

~Mark Twain said, "Forgiveness is the fragrance that the violet sheds on the heel that has crushed it." This is truly poignant for post-abortive parents. A crucial aspect of post-abortion counseling is the realization of divine forgiveness. This paves the way for forgiving others and - sometimes the hardest step of all - himself.

More proof of the devastation that abortion can cause for the daddys of these little humans
http://www.lifeissues.org/men/daddy.htm

[Guest]

I can't disagree....it's certainly enough for me....but I fear for the future of those younger of the 99% as the Repubs try to protect and advance only the 1%. :doh:

Where do you get the facts to back such a ridiculous statement? Maybe if socialists and former government servants understood capitalism as much as they understand parasites and wealth distribution, they would know how wealth is created for everyone. ( hint: wealth is not created solely for our government)

[Guest]

Rubicon never seems upset and angry with his posts. He was not ranting, as you put it. You also ended your tirade with the word GEEZ!!!

You think that was a tirade? LOL If you agree with a position, it is rational and well put; if you don't, it is a tirade. Pretty transparent....It is indeed in the eye of the beholder. The word geez somehow also offends you? Well, GEEZ!!!! Geez means a statement of disbelief.

[Guest]

You think that was a tirade? LOL If you agree with a position, it is rational and well put; if you don't, it is a tirade. Pretty transparent....It is indeed in the eye of the beholder. The word geez somehow also offends you? Well, GEEZ!!!! Geez means a statement of disbelief.

Sorry, your posts seem disconnected and not directed to the subject. Somehow the ignore list is looking reasonable.