Planned Parenthood Sells Dead Baby Parts

This whole pro-choice/anti-choice (ahem) discussion grows tedious nd remains totally off topic. I can't blame the mods from staying far, far way from this thread.

But since this went there, let's see...what laws shall we make to control pregnant women? as we roll down this slippery slope? And just who is going to enforce them? The uterus police? And just what wiould the penalties be? Oh, my, how are we ever going to control a pregnant woman's life? Put them in homes and strap them down and force feed them through their internment?

1. Eat right (if you have the money to)
2. Drink right
3. Don't drink alcohol
3. Sleep right
4. Don't smoke
5. Get medical attention (if you're covered)
6. Be judged by everyone for every action you take
7. Give birth

No laws and no opinions are ever going to stop a woman who doesn't want to be pregnant (the reason does not matter) to give birth. There really isn't any discussion past that, and certainly no discussion or compromise on the things that really might make a difference, so why do we even bother? So tht lobbyists and politicians can get the dumbass, distracted-by-Honey Booboo and shiny things vote?

Back on topic, this video is deception, smoke and mirrors, manipulative. That's a hoax.

originally posted by: Ignatian

It is not morally unacceptable to terminate a pregnancy to save the life of the mother. Any procedure, treatment or medication that directly treats a known pathology in a pregnant woman, and that can't wait until that baby is born, but unfortunately kills the baby, is morally acceptable. So, we'll have to wait and see how this turns out. It's happened here in the States, quite a few times. There's precedent.

a reply to: dawnstar

Uh ... are you stating your own opinion here, or commenting on what you believe Irish law to be?

No, you dont have them correct.

I am against the death penalty, personally, but the state has a right to order it for the common good. It should be so rare that it never happens. We have ways of making sure they don't escape (at least, I thought lol, dig a freakin tunnel! Duh!)

No, cops get to shoot people, that's the law.

I believe in Just War Theory


a reply to: Gryphon66

a reply to: Ignatian

It's okay for the State to decide to kill people i.e. to take their lives then?

So, you're not pro-LIFE then ... because there are "circumstances" that justify taking the life of another human being?

I cant comment on Irish Law, and really dont care.

That comment stems from The US Conference of Catholic Bishops, and I am a Catholic. A Catholic follows moral law, first and foremost. Caesar's law is secondary.



a reply to: Gryphon66

a reply to: ~Lucidity

you forgot one, imprison women who miscarry....
rhrealitycheck.org...

the thing is that she was found guilty of both killing the baby in the womb and killing it through neglect after the miscarriage....
could she have really done both?

originally posted by: Ignatian
I cant comment on Irish Law, and really dont care.

That comment stems from The US Conference of Catholic Bishops, and I am a Catholic. A Catholic follows moral law, first and foremost. Caesar's law is secondary.



a reply to: Gryphon66

LOL ... haven't seen that on in a while ... "Caesar's Law" ...

So, even in the case of terminating a pregnancy then, there actually ARE situations in which you approve?

From abortion being wrong and evil and a tool of Satan in EVERY instance, we're finding out a somewhat different truth here, eh? All kinds of circumstantial ethical modifications keep popping up ... to put it nicely.

What does the US Conference of Bishops say about overtly lying in public, or do they have a position on that?

a reply to: dawnstar

Yep. Sad situation that. But I was thinking more like...it's all about control and control freaks. And what the hell do these people actually do but lie, screech, belittle, shame, and torture to gain that control? Nothing constructive.

a reply to: ~Lucidity

ya, there's one law, don't know if it was passed though that actually had it so that if women took any drug (didn't matter if it was something the doctor perscribed for her, and it could be linked to her miscarriage well she could be arrested for the death of the fetus.

a reply to: Gryphon66

No, I'm pro-life. And you know exactly what that means. We're talking about abortion here. But, yes there are "circumstances" that justify killing. Just War Theory covers all that.

Jesus got the death penalty. Many thousands of Christian martyrs get the death penalty, even today. 50+ million babies in The US have gotten the death penalty since RoevWade. So, yeah, the death penalty exists. I happen to be against it.

originally posted by: Ignatian
a reply to: Gryphon66

No, I'm pro-life.

So, does that mean you think abortion should be illegal?

Wow, thats really immature, you're better than that. Found some small print huh? A technicality? So now I'm a hypocrite as well as a hater and a bigot?

Those are your conclusions based on your extremely limited, selfish worldview, and your closed heart, where truth can rarely pry its way in.

It's all amusing to me though, albeit unfair, but I just like to put pebbles in people's shoes.


a reply to: Gryphon66

Yes, in a civilized, truly progressive, modern society where truth prevailed, abortion should be illegal. It was, until RoevWade. For centuries.

Abortion has been around since the dawn of man though, but that doesn't mean we should parade it around and make it the rallying cry of our society. That's kinda demented.

a reply to: Benevolent Heretic

a reply to: Ignatian

but you came into the discussion with the view that there was absolutely no reason to abort a baby... but when showed a real case where that wasn't true you changed your proclamation. we are all just people chatting on an online forum here so there really isn't much harm done when we spout off our wild views but when lawmakers go into their chambers and write laws on this kind of view, well, all you need to do is do a search with the words "women denied abortion dies" you can find some really sad stories from countries where laws were passed on this premise.

a reply to: Ignatian

just remember that the person who you give the right to chose for the women weather or not her pregnancy should be terminated more than likely will also eventually get the right to chose for the women weather or not she should not get an abortion. there's alot of moms out there chosing to carry keep their deformed babies, who could possibly lose that right also if our medical system is overtaxed by a large number of high risk childbirths.

a reply to: Ignatian

What is immature? Stating the easily observable truth?

You said that abortion is always wrong ... and then we find out it isn't if the Church tells you so?

You claimed to be pro-LIFE and yet you support State mandated DEATH?

Quote me calling you a hater.

Quote me calling you a bigot.

Heck, quote me even calling you a hypocrite.

To be precise, I heavily implied you are lying about your true beliefs.

Although, if the rest of the shoes fit ...

a reply to: Ignatian

It is not morally unacceptable to terminate a pregnancy to save the life of the mother.

Tell that to your mother, your wife, your daughter, your son's wife and your grand kids! Because you clearly have put the value of one life above another, and relegated all women's worth to that of biological incubators.

a reply to: Gryphon66

What does the US Conference of Bishops say about overtly lying in public, or do they have a position on that?

If they have any Jesuit influence, then, The Ends Justify the Means

originally posted by: Ignatian
Yes, in a civilized, truly progressive, modern society where truth prevailed, abortion should be illegal.

So, you think the government should choose, not the woman. Just wanted to clarify that, because on the last page, you said it was "insidious" for the government to choose. If abortion were made illegal, that IS the government choosing.

originally posted by: Ignatian
No, its not the governments choice., thats insideous.

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: Gryphon66

What does the US Conference of Bishops say about overtly lying in public, or do they have a position on that?

If they have any Jesuit influence, then, The Ends Justify the Means

I may have been side-swiping the Church a bit on their history of telling the truth about other types of concerns about the health and welfare of children *cough organizational pedophilia* ... but yeah, I am both terrified and enthralled by the Jesuit Order.

Glad most of them are at least soft atheists, LOL.