Pro_Life Violence

Pete, read the whole topic, sure your eyes may begin to bleed, but do it. We disscussed that a looong time ago.

Also, it isn't killing! It isn't alive, it can't die. It is like a tapeworm, it's "alive", but it isn't alive. Or a virus, it's "alive" but it isn't. it needs a host or it ceases to exist. A fetus doesn't become human until around the 4-5 months, and abortions are not done in that time period. And it is something the christians came up with as an excuse to kill more people.

Originally posted by Code 3
The reference to a firefighter was the reference to courage. A human life being saved is something that should be held above all else. The mind DOES heal. the dead baby does not.

1. The mind heals? I've known rape victims.. they call themselves 'survivers' because they have to live with the trauma for the rest of their life. If they are emotionally equipped to continue a rape pregnany- good luck to them. If they are not and a forced to have the baby against their will it is akin to rape.
2. Not a dead baby. It is a fetus.. you want to trade the welfare and quality of life of a rape victim for a rapists spawn.

Rape is a horrible thing, but killing an unborn child is worst. Even is it is the offspring of the offending rapist.

A fetus cannot feel suffering or pain [in he first trimester] therefore you can't say it's worse than rape.. the traumatised woman/girl needs to be a priority.

LIFE IS NOT EASY.

Life is not simple.

Somtimes a person weather they volunteered or were chosen by fate, needs to do the right thing.

So rape is just a matter of 'fate' now? :shk: Again you trivialise it.. and justify it. Disgusting. If rape were a matter of fate.. abortion wouldn't have had existed for thousands of years.

We must do what is right. No matter what wrong has been done to us.

The 'right' thing is relative. I would think it sadistic and cruel to lock a woman up until she gives birth to a rapists kin.. would you condone this? Would you rather a woman suicide because she can't deal with carrying her attacker's spawn?

"Courage is not the absence of fear, but rather the judgement that something else is more important than fear"

And wtf does this saying have to do with pregnant rape victims? If you said this to one as if their experience was some sort of 'test of god' [or whatever you're on about] you'd most likely get a smack in the mouth.

[edit on 8-3-2005 by riley]

Originally posted by James the Lesser
Thats another thing, if they perform abortion, and it is killing, won't they be judged by god?

Yes.

Originally posted by James the Lesser
Something the bible says is god's job, not peoples?

Yes. A Christian's only job in this case is to remind them that this judgement is not going to go well for this act. Christians should not and can not live other peoples' lives for them.

Originally posted by James the Lesser
So when someone kills a doctor/nurse/blows something up, they are doing god's job and are sinning.

By definition they cannot do both. They are not doing God's job (because they are breaking commandments and Jesus' teachings) and yes, are sinning.

Originally posted by James the Lesser
Well, more sin with the killing of people.

More people are committing sin, so yes the number is greater. There are two instances in any case: you're either sinning or not sinning. There aren't 'degrees of sin' that I'm aware of.

[edit on 8-3-2005 by saint4God]

But is that any reason to penalize a child for being a product of it? Because the child is borne of this circumstance, does s/he have to grow up to be a rapist too? Is a child merely a product of genetics alone? Show the child unconditional love and the return may surprise you. Nobody disputes rape is horrible. Death is horrible. Destruction is horrible. But we live through them and should not close our eyes to the truth. We cannot continue to live in the past when the present needs us here.

(Precedence: Please do not assume I know nothing about this.)

Originally posted by saint4God
But is that any reason to penalize a child for being a product of it?

I do not think a born child should be penalised at all for being a product of rape.. but the woman should not be penalised for being raped by having to carry it. Either way the decision is harming one or the other.. in essence we are weighing up which life has a higher priority. If the woman is emotionally equiped to carry a rape child she should receive all support available.. but if she isn't emotionally up to it and is on the verge of ending up in the nut house.. she should not be judged for terminating and should be supported as well. Some women may find it harder than others.. depends on the woman I guess. Would be a heart wrenching situation.

Originally posted by riley
I do not think a born child should be penalised at all for being a product of rape.. but the woman should not be penalised for being raped by having to carry it. Either way the decision is harming one or the other..

No, the decision is to harm the mother mentally or kill the baby. There is a difference.

Originally posted by riley
in essence we are weighing up which life has a higher priority.

I cannot speak for anyone else's selfishness but speaking as a parent, if either me or my child could live, guess which I'd choose?

Check out the picture on the page.

A 5 month old (unborn) baby reaches his arm through the incision and grabs the doctors finger.

This is what you abortionists kill.
The doctors were there to operate and save this one.




www.camdenfellowship.org...

[edit on 8-3-2005 by jake1997]

The link is awesome, click on it! I cannot believe they saved his life. I had no idea

[edit on 8-3-2005 by saint4God]

They were performing a C-Section. They tell you in the link they are doing a C-Section. At 5 months is illegal to do an abortion for it is a human at 5 months, can live outside the womb with a ton of machines, unless there is a threat to the mothers life. You do realize that there are rules, right? 5 months is in the second trimester, making any abortion other then life threatning to mother is illegal.

Anyways, look at the area the surgery was done, it is in the stomach area, not the vaginal area, making it a C-Section, not an abortion. And IT SAYS IN THE LINK! C-SECTION! NOT ABORTION! I swear, this is like taking a picture of someone who was shot in a war and then saying "Ban guns! Look what they do to people!" The picture, and the story are 2 different things.

Anyways..... sorry, bad attempt to make abortion look like murder. Now, if you get a picture of a 3 day old fetus doing this, then you would have an arguement. But using a picture of a 5.3 month old baby during a C-Section and then saying abortion kills is wrong.

BTW Great Picture, did the baby not die from the spine thingy? Was the surgery successful?

[edit on 8-3-2005 by James the Lesser]

Originally posted by James the Lesser
Pete, read the whole topic, sure your eyes may begin to bleed, but do it. We disscussed that a looong time ago.

Also, it isn't killing! It isn't alive, it can't die. It is like a tapeworm, it's "alive", but it isn't alive. Or a virus, it's "alive" but it isn't. it needs a host or it ceases to exist. A fetus doesn't become human until around the 4-5 months, and abortions are not done in that time period. And it is something the christians came up with as an excuse to kill more people.

So you are that spiritually barren? You think because if is not what some men/women have deemed to be not human you are going to just take that at face value?

Personally I have seen some pretty terrible things, I have also witnessed miracles. There is something more than man, doesn’t matter what you call it (I call it God) it is there. I have seen his/her work over and over again. It is miraculous, and beautiful. It can also be pretty ugly.

I used to think just like the spitually inept. After a lifetime of miracles and life changing events, there is no way to deny the hand of our maker.

That maker, my God, my savior sometimes makes things really hard. There are reasons for it all; there are reasons for war. Mankind’s soul is here to experience it all. It is not here to be rejected before these experiences. That is an abomination.

How could a mind that thinks that something as beautiful as human conception, the possibility that the PERSON involved may be another Einstein, Galilao, Louse Pasteur or just an ordinary man that just appreciates Gods beautiful blue/green world, be very happy. A tapeworm? A virus? You my friend are lost if you cannot grasp this concept, and I really do feel sorry for you.

You my friend have nothing to offer me so you will be placed on my ignore list. I only state this so you understand why I wont respond to anything you have to say. I hope you get off your road to nowhere and find the road that leads to the grace of God.

One other satement about abortion. How about the morning after pill? You think the hand of evil is not behind the abortion issue to make mankind forget our power of the soul?

RU486.

Translated: Are you for death.

There are great tests being put to man right now. Are you choosing the correct rightuos path? Or RU486?

Edit: Typo, I make them quite often.

[edit on 8-3-2005 by Code 3]

Originally posted by steggyD
You're right about question 5 now. I don't think he avoided it, probably just answered it the wrong way. Now that I reread it, I see that. But guess what. I don't lay the laws of the land here on Earth, so it is not by my demands. But life is a journey, full of tests and challenges. So, even the unwanted child should be allowed to take this journey through life and gain whatever experiences the child wishes. But as I have stated more recently, I am not here to judge, that's for their makers.

Then you answer all of the questions.

Originally posted by saint4God
But is that any reason to penalize a child for being a product of it? Because the child is borne of this circumstance, does s/he have to grow up to be a rapist too? Is a child merely a product of genetics alone? Show the child unconditional love and the return may surprise you. Nobody disputes rape is horrible. Death is horrible. Destruction is horrible. But we live through them and should not close our eyes to the truth. We cannot continue to live in the past when the present needs us here.

(Precedence: Please do not assume I know nothing about this.)

Your remaining responses to my questions are requested.

By the way, are you male or female?

Then you answer all of the questions.

How about if YOU answer my question...

RU486?

Originally posted by saint4God
No, the decision is to harm the mother mentally or kill the baby. There is a difference.

Harming the mother psychologically could either destroy her life or even lead to her own death.. The 'baby' [say 4-10 weeks old] has no self awareness and isn't even capable of feeling pain. Yes there is a big difference.

I cannot speak for anyone else's selfishness but speaking as a parent, if either me or my child could live, guess which I'd choose?

Which kind of parent? A 'selfish' :shk: rape victim or a rapist? Please. You have no idea what you would choose because you are male and couldn't even start to imagine what it would be like to concieve through rape. Calling them selfish is shameful.

Yes, how selfish not wanting the seed of a rapist inside them. So, if a husband beats his wife, is she selfish for calling the cops and stopping him? Is a woman selfish after getting mugged to call the police? Or is she just suppose to let her husband beat her to death, or just get up and keep walking minus purse, wedding ring, watch, shoes, whatever else the mugger took?

Yes, so selfish to get rid of the seed of the rapist.

Originally posted by SomewhereinBetween
Your remaining responses to my questions are requested.

What I miss? I thought I hit them all but you're saying I didn't answer one. Please restate.

Originally posted by SomewhereinBetween
By the way, are you male or female?

Irrelevant to the discussion between moral and amoral, nor am I looking for a 'date' here.

Originally posted by riley
You have no idea what you would choose because you are male and couldn't even start to imagine what it would be like to concieve through rape. Calling them selfish is shameful.

Believe what you wish. You do not know my life. Do not claim you do. I can not think of any other justification for a mother to decide to get an abortion other than for herself. Key word being -decide-. I know there are family members who force it and that is wrong. I've read (and posted on this thread) the statistics so I'm not making this assessment SOLELY on my accord as some apparently think.

[edit on 9-3-2005 by saint4God]

Originally posted by James the Lesser
They were performing a C-Section. They tell you in the link they are doing a C-Section. At 5 months is illegal to do an abortion for it is a human at 5 months, can live outside the womb with a ton of machines, unless there is a threat to the mothers life. You do realize that there are rules, right? 5 months is in the second trimester, making any abortion other then life threatning to mother is illegal.

Anyways, look at the area the surgery was done, it is in the stomach area, not the vaginal area, making it a C-Section, not an abortion. And IT SAYS IN THE LINK! C-SECTION! NOT ABORTION! I swear, this is like taking a picture of someone who was shot in a war and then saying "Ban guns! Look what they do to people!" The picture, and the story are 2 different things.

Anyways..... sorry, bad attempt to make abortion look like murder. Now, if you get a picture of a 3 day old fetus doing this, then you would have an arguement. But using a picture of a 5.3 month old baby during a C-Section and then saying abortion kills is wrong.

BTW Great Picture, did the baby not die from the spine thingy? Was the surgery successful?

[edit on 8-3-2005 by James the Lesser]

So-called "Partial-birth" abortion is performed in the second and third trimesters and entails (1) inducing a breech delivery with forceps, (2) delivering the legs, arms and torso only, (3) puncturing the back of the skull with scissors or a trochar, (4) inserting a suction curette into the skull, (4) suctioning the contents of the skull so as to collapse it, (5) completing the delivery. A partial breech delivery is not considered a "birth" at common law, where it is the passage of the head that is essential.

Laws to ban this uniquely controversial late-term abortion procedure have been passed in at least thirty states, including: Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Louisiana, Michigan, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, New Jersey, Ohio, Oklahoma, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah, Virginia and Wisconsin. The Utah statute applies only after viability (as defined by the statute). Additionally, Massachusetts and Indiana have a specific ban on state funding of these procedures.



THis looks fairly old. MURDERING a baby at 5 months old and OLDER has been practiced for quite some time.

The House of Representatives passed the bill, followed by Congress. President Clinton vetoed the bill in 1996.

The Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act of 1997: This bill was very similar to the 1995 bill, and was also passed by the House and Congress. President Clinton vetoed this bell as well.

President Bush signed a ban on this procedure into law in November, 2003



Before that... you people were murdering babies at any age inside the womb.

Current Status
The House voted overwhelmingly to ban the procedure with a vote of 281-142 (63 Democrats joined most Republicans in favor). The Senate voted 64 to 34 to ban the abortions. President Bush signed the bill into a law (read the full text here) on November 4th. Kate Michelman, head of NARAL has declared that they will challenge the law, and trials are going on across the nation. Many judges have struck down the ban.





# It is estimated that approximately 3,000 to 4,000 third-trimester abortions are performed annually in the United States. This represents 1% of all abortions performed every year.

# The late-term abortion procedure became widely know in 1992 when an abortion provider named Dr. Martin Haskell presented a paper on the procedure at a meeting of the National Abortion Federation.

Do you understand THIRD TRIMESTER??

7,8,9 the MONTH. Thats murder my friend. Stalin, Hitler, the pope....they aint got nothing on modern man where blood thirstyness is concerned.

Still...Christ forgives...but you have to ask



[edit on 9-3-2005 by jake1997]

Sure, but they didn't tell you the circumstances did they??? "Statistics say 10,000,000 people were killed by guns in Gemrany in 1943!" Sure, they don't tell you it was during WWII, and that they were soilders, but the statistics show guns killing people. Did you know there are cases where your god #s up? Where if the baby is born it will kill both the mother and the baby? Where if born it will kill the mother or itself, where the baby will be crippled from the neck down for life? Oh no, the baby should be "born" so the mother and baby die.

I already stated this, maybe using to small of font..... but that late term abortions are done when there is a threat to the mothers life. There are many cases where if born, both will die, so it is aborted so the mother may live. If you force the mother to give birth, you are a murderer for you are killing two people.

I like this logic, show the numbers, but leave the facts/backround out. "In 1862 over 100,000,000 million kids were killed by guns!" Oh wait, Civil War... where 18, 17, 19, whatever year olds kids fought in it. See? I can skew the facts/numbers to.