This Makes Me Furious! - Poor Planned Parenthood?

[HomeschoolrsRUs]

http://www.townhall.com/Columnists/BrentBozellIII/2007/10/24/poor_planned_parenthood?page=full&comments=true

Poor Planned Parenthood?

As much as liberals decry major corporations that act as if they're above the law, there's always quiet when the subject is Planned Parenthood, America's No. 1 corporate provider of abortions. During its 2005-2006 fiscal year, the Planned Parenthood Federation of America performed a record 264,943 abortions, reported a tidy profit of $55.8 million -- and received a record high in taxpayer funding of $305.3 million.

This is one corporation the media hold in the highest regard. They're not "merchants of death." That would be the tobacco companies, or gun manufacturers, or hamburger joints. These are the heroic "providers" of "a woman's right to choose."

They're also sleazy in their business practices. ...

:flame: I encourage you to take the time to read the whole article.:flame:

[Longhorn_Platinum]

:eyemouth: The article sure comes well-illustrated.

http://media.salemwebnetwork.com/creative/Townhall-Emily-158x265.jpg (http://ads.townhall.com/accipiter/adclick/CID=000133d5e02a7cf100000000/site=TOWNHALL/area=TownHall.Web.Columnists.BrentBozellIII/POSITION=TOWN_FUNNY/AAMGEOIP=24.117.28.101)

:moo: *Ahem* Anyway, yes, Planned Parenthood is certainly a crooked outfit, but that's old news.

[Timberwolf]

Yer baaaaaad, Mooo. :grin:

[d'urville]

Well, now it looks like American taxpayers are footing the bill for PP to peddle porn to American children:

(CNSNews.com) - Teenwire.com, the Planned Parenthood Web site that says it was created "to provide medically accurate sexual health information for teens on the Internet," is advising teens that viewing pornography is a normal and "safer" way of enjoying sex.

In a 2007 article, "Birth Control Choices for Teens," the writer for the Planned Parenthood site tells readers about "Outercourse."

Under the subtitle, "lower-risk forms of outercourse," in addition to kissing, masturbation, erotic massage and body rubbing, or frottage, is "fantasy."

link (http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewCulture.asp?Page=/Culture/archive/200802/CUL20080226b.html)

"Outercourse'??? They're making up words again - this:

Another advice piece, "Porn vs. Reality," warns that federal law makes it illegal for anyone under 18 to view pornography; "however, not everyone follows the rules, and you may run across some porn before you turn 18. There are a few things you should know about the images you might see. First of all, many people enjoy pornography alone or with a partner as part of sex play. People have different ideas of what is arousing, and there are many different kinds of porn that appeal to people's different interests."

is moral relativism in the extreme. :unsmile:

[Taylor1]

My friend, his mom is liberal, I don't know bout his dad. But he's got a couple of problems and so do his brothers. He isn't exactly spoiled it might be more of a socialized spoil. But in other words, he doesn't seem right.

[TeenageRepublican]

Liberals yet again show how they are proud for supporting one of the worst holocausts the world has ever seen...

[DoctorDoom]

Last paragraph:

Planned Parenthood is a formidable force in national (and state) politics. One major reason is networks like ABC, news outlets that don't really care whether this corporation plays by the rules, as long as the abortion assembly line keeps running.Brer Bozell, assembly lines put things together.

WARNING: GRAPHIC!

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v349/DocDoom777/Culture/Ab-10weeks.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v349/DocDoom777/Culture/08_10.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v349/DocDoom777/Culture/24WKAbort.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v349/DocDoom777/Culture/Ab-garbage.gif

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v349/DocDoom777/Culture/abort10.jpg

[Chris]

My friend, his mom is liberal, I don't know bout his dad. But he's got a couple of problems and so do his brothers. He isn't exactly spoiled it might be more of a socialized spoil. But in other words, he doesn't seem right.

Taylor (that's my first grandkiddie's name too, btw http://www.freeconservatives.com/vb/images/icons/smile000.gif), I was sort of shocked recently to find out, through a casual conversation that kind of evolved into politics, with self-proclaimed CONSERVATIVE friends, that they were freaked out that I thought abortion was murder. They hammered away at me too, but the the bottomline is something that they didn't have to look at when RvW was argued, and that is the knowledge of DNA and what that means.

Also, the SCOTUS did originally have the whole "due process" thing (14th Amendment) right in front of them but somehow missed addressing it so as not to set a precedent for subsequent abortions in RvW's name. Anyway, this is an interesting read (especially page 45) http://news.lp.findlaw.com/hdocs/docs/abortion/roewade61703brf.pdf.

[Elgalad]

The legalization of wholesale infant slaughter aka "right to women's choice" has become a far greater holocaust than any that has ever been perpetrated by tyrants and despots against humanity. And the tragedy does not simply end with the death of each infant, as horrific as that is in itself, oh no. The physical and mental scarring of countless women caught up in the folly of "choice", the disintegration of the family unit as a core foundation of our society itself, even the very value we as a people place on human life, has been undermined.

And it can clearly be shown that the starting point of America's downfall as a great nation began at the very moment we granted public sanction and legal authority to perpetuating this incredible evil.

America was once the last bastion of hope in a world that had rejected God as other nations turned to lustful dreams of conquest, debauched hedonism, brutality, and injustice. Now that we have done the same, there can only be one eventual end. The book of Revelation lays that out very clearly.

I want so very much to believe that there is still time to turn back the clock, to restore the priceless value we Should be placing upon those beautiful innocents who represent our only future. I pray for this every day and night!

But if it is already too late, then may God's judgment come swiftly.


-Elgalad

[Air Force Guy]

If social security was ever supposed to work, it needed millions of workers paying into the system for many decades behind you. Guess what smart aspirin congressmen? A baby aborted in 1973 would be in the prime of their income earning right now. You and selfish American parents have sealed the fate of your cherished program by allowing baby murder to occur at will.

[MrSanity]

How sad and disgusting, those pictures. I wish I could give each of those babies a hug.

[HomeschoolrsRUs]

How sad and disgusting, those pictures. I wish I could give each of those babies a hug.

I wish I could give them a home. :crying:

Nothing can/will ever make up for the crime I allowed, the sin I committed, but I will work tirelessly, endlessly against the forces in this country which perpetuate the LIE that abortion is not murder.

The only knowledge that gets me through is the Truth there is a Loving, Forgiving God who has forgiven me, and holds my daughter in His Hand. Thank you, Yahweh, for loving a sinner such as me.

[DeclinetoState]

Taylor (that's my first grandkiddie's name too, btw http://www.freeconservatives.com/vb/images/icons/smile000.gif), I was sort of shocked recently to find out, through a casual conversation that kind of evolved into politics, with self-proclaimed CONSERVATIVE friends, that they were freaked out that I thought abortion was murder.They might be libertarians, but they're probably not conservatives.

OTOH, Barry Goldwater, a well-known conservative Senator from Arizona, favored the legalization of abortion. (I don't know if he supported Roe v. Wade, or would have repealed it and let the states decide.)

[edgeworth]

Let me be clear. I am pro choice, however, I believe that the period in which a woman can abort her baby should be significantly reduced from nine months.

[DoctorDoom]

I'm pro-"choice". I choose to support the right to life of unborn children. Be glad that your mom didn't decide that you were an inconvenient blob of tissue.

... significantly reduced from nine months.How about 24 weeks? Would that be okay?

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v349/DocDoom777/Culture/24weeks1.jpg

Or maybe 18 weeks?

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v349/DocDoom777/Culture/abort10.jpg

Pick an age, kid.

[S-T]

http://www.CBRinfo.org

[DoctorDoom]

Thanks for the link, Scott. It's bookmarked.

To those who will go visit that site: there is a VERY graphic and uncompromising video that automatically runs. If you're not up to the images of little feet and hands and dismembered body parts, you have ten seconds to stop it.

Two items on the page bear special comment.

WHY CBR USES ABORTED BABY PHOTOSWhy not? The FACTS about this hellish "procedure" cannot be appreciated withoiut them. The beasts who perform or support abortions would rather not have the public see what goes on within the walls of abortuaries. They want to maintain the myth that it's a neat, quick, painless "operation" that removes a piece of extraneous tissue, like removing a skin tag.

The facts are totally different. It's not neat, nor quick, nor painless (at least not for the baby in later-term "procedures"). It's dangerous for the woman. And it's profitable for the baby-killers. Costs range from $400 or so into the thousands, depending on the method and the age of the blob of tissue that only coincidentally looks like a human child.

1 Tim 6:10 For the love of money is the root of all evil:

Director's Blog -- Why Killing Abortionists is Immoral and StupidTaking a page from the book of the baby-killers:

I am personally opposed to killing abortionists, but I don't want to impose my morality on others who don't agree with me.

<hr>
For reference purposes:

Abortion Procedures (http://www.wpclinic.org/abortion/abortion-procedures/)

Major Psychological Sequelae of Abortion (http://www.lifeissues.net/writers/rea/rea_02psycheffect.html)

Health Risks (http://www.wpclinic.org/abortion/health-risks/)

Learn About Abortion Procedures and Abortion Risks (http://www.optionline.org/abortion.html)

A List of Major Physical Sequelae of Abortion (http://www.afterabortion.info/physica.html)

A List of Major Psychological Sequelae of Abortion (http://www.afterabortion.org/psychol.html)

[DoctorDoom]

Planned Parenthood's founder Margaret Sanger - "Always to me any aroused group was a good group, and therefore I accepted an invitation to talk to the women's branch of the Ku Klux Klan..."
-- Margaret Sanger: An Autobiography, P.366

[Wolfcounsel]

"Let me be clear. I am pro choice, however, I believe that the period in which a woman can abort her baby should be significantly reduced from nine months." --edgeworth

You are pro-MURDER. Have the backbone to admit it.
<!-- / message -->

[DoctorDoom]

For ultrasound images that destroy the cold-blooded "blob of tissue" rationalization:

4D ULTRASOUND PICTURES OF UNBORN BABIES (http://www.prolifeamerica.com/4D-Ultrasound-pictures/index.cfm?photo=1)

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v349/DocDoom777/Culture/UltraSound.jpg

And for the face of evil ...

100 Abortion Pictures (http://www.100abortionpictures.com/Aborted_Baby_Pictures_Abortion_Photos/)

[DoctorDoom]

In America today, almost as many African-American children are aborted as are born.

A black baby is three times more likely to be murdered in the womb than a white baby.

Since 1973, abortion has reduced the black population by over 25 percent.

Twice as many African-Americans have died from abortion than have died from AIDS, accidents, violent crimes, cancer, and heart disease combined.

Every three days, more African-Americans are killed by abortion than have been killed by the Ku Klux Klan in its entire history.

Planned Parenthood operates the nation's largest chain of abortion clinics and almost 80 percent of its facilities are located in minority neighborhoods.

About 13 percent of American women are black, but they submit to over 35 percent of the abortions.

What the Ku Klux Klan Could Only Dream About The Abortion Industry is Accomplishing.Planned Parenthood clinics kill more Blacks than the Ku Klux Klan (http://www.100abortionpictures.com/History_of_Abortion_Statistics/)

[edgeworth]

"Let me be clear. I am pro choice, however, I believe that the period in which a woman can abort her baby should be significantly reduced from nine months." --edgeworth

You are pro-MURDER. Have the backbone to admit it.
<!-- / message -->

Maybe you didnt understand me. I said I was pro choice NOT pro abortion. I don't believe that abortion is the best way. Nor, do I believe that it is the safest way if you don't want your baby. However, I regocnize that, that is not my choice to make. If the woman wants to have an abortion thats her buisness not mine. Anyway even if you make abortion illegal its not going to stop it from happening, instead it will continue in back alleys and elsewhere.

[HomeschoolrsRUs]

Maybe you didnt understand me. I said I was pro choice NOT pro abortion.

We understood you perfectly crystal clear. You won't commit murder yourself, but it's not your "right" or responsibility to stop other people from murdering their unborn child.

I don't believe that abortion is the best way. Nor, do I believe that it is the safest way if you don't want your baby. However, I regocnize that, that is not my choice to make.

Murder is murder.

If the woman wants to have an abortion thats her buisness not mine.

If a man wants to kill his wife that's his business not yours either, right?

Anyway even if you make abortion illegal its not going to stop it from happening, instead it will continue in back alleys and elsewhere.

Where they belong. We shouldn't be legitimizing murder, it is crime.

[Gato es Verde]

Maybe you didnt understand me. I said I was pro choice NOT pro abortion. I don't believe that abortion is the best way. Nor, do I believe that it is the safest way if you don't want your baby. However, I regocnize that, that is not my choice to make. If the woman wants to have an abortion thats her buisness not mine. Anyway even if you make abortion illegal its not going to stop it from happening, instead it will continue in back alleys and elsewhere.

Where the hell are these back alleys people are always talking about? Apparently, prior to 1972, every sidestreet in town used to be an abortion clinic and I missed it.

[DoctorDoom]

Interesting factoids:

First, Dr. Bernard Nathanson -- who was one of the original leaders of the American pro-abortion movement and co-founder of N.A.R.A.L. (National Abortion Rights Action League), and who has since become pro-life -- admits that he and others in the abortion rights movement intentionally fabricated the number of women who allegedly died as a result of illegal abortions.How many deaths were we talking about when abortion was illegal? In N.A.R.A.L. we generally emphasized the drama of the individual case, not the mass statistics, but when we spoke of the latter it was always "5,000 to 10,000 deaths a year." I confess that I knew the figures were totally false, and I suppose the others did too if they stopped to think of it. But in the "morality" of the revolution, it was a useful figure, widely accepted, so why go out of our way to correct it with honest statistics. The overriding concern was to get the laws eliminated, and anything within reason which had to be done was permissible. [11]Second, Dr. Nathanson's observation is borne out in the best official statistical studies available. According to the U.S. Bureau of Vital Statistics, there were a mere 39 women who died from illegal abortions in 1972, the year before Roe v. Wade. [12] Dr. Andre Hellegers, the late Professor of Obstetrics and Gynecology at Georgetown University Hospital, pointed out that there has been a steady decrease of abortion-related deaths since 1942. That year there were 1,231 deaths. Due to improved medical care and the use of penicillin, this number fell to 133 by 1968. [13] The year before the first state-legalized abortion, 1966, there were about 120 abortion-related deaths. [14]

Third, it is simply false to claim that there were nearly a million illegal abortions per year prior to legalization. There is no reliable statistical support for this claim. [16] In addition, a highly sophisticated recent study has concluded that "a reasonable estimate for the actual number of criminal abortions per year in the prelegalization era [prior to 1967] would be from a low of 39,000 (1950) to a high of 210,000 (1961) and a mean of 98,000 per year. [17]

Fourth, it is misleading to say that pre-Roe illegal abortions were performed by "back-alley butchers" with rusty coat hangers. While president of Planned Parenthood, Dr. Mary Calderone pointed out in a 1960 American Journal of Health article that Dr. Kinsey showed in 1958 that 84% to 87% of all illegal abortions were performed by licensed physicians in good standing. Dr. Calderone herself concluded that "90% of all illegal abortions are presently done by physicians." [18] It seems that the vast majority of the alleged "back-alley butchers" eventually became the "reproductive health providers" of our present day.More on Illegal Abortion Myths (http://www.tnrtl.org/human_life_issues/human_life_issues_abortion_lies_and_myths.htm#lies _myths2)

[DeclinetoState]

I don't believe that abortion is the best way. Nor, do I believe that it is the safest way if you don't want your baby. However, I regocnize that, that is not my choice to make.Why not? If the woman wants to have an abortion thats her buisness not mine.Why?

[Gato es Verde]

As you all know, the "coat hanger lobby" was staunchly against Roe v. Wade.

Asked how the law would effect his job, one employee of Haggar Hangers said, "If this law passes, we'll be out of business and you'll be hanging your clothes in piles."

It's sad to think of all those blue collar coat hanger laborers out of work due to that court decision.

[edgeworth]

We understood you perfectly crystal clear. You won't commit murder yourself, but it's not your "right" or responsibility to stop other people from murdering their unborn child.
Exactly, it is the mothers right what she does to her own body. A woman goes into an abortion knowing what will happen to the baby and possibly to her. Therefore, if she decides to have an abortion it is her choice and is none of my concern.


Murder is murder.



If a man wants to kill his wife that's his business not yours either, right?
Of course not, if a man wants to kill his wife then it would be my duty to stop him from doing it. However, abortion is a little more complicated than that. A fetus is dependent on its mother until it is concieved and is a seperate being. So, until that stage, the fetus is one with the mother and threrefore it is her right to do what she wants to her own body.


Where they belong. We shouldn't be legitimizing murder, it is a crime.
Don't you realize that making abortion illegal is NOT going to stop it. If someone wants an abortion they will get it, whether its in a clinic, or a back alley, or even at home with a coathanger.

[HomeschoolrsRUs]

Don't you realize that making abortion illegal is NOT going to stop it. If someone wants an abortion they will get it, whether its in a clinic, or a back alley, or even at home with a coathanger.

Yeah, it's never going to stop ... just like murders, theft, and rapes are never going to stop. Should we decriminalize those too??? :rolleyes: There's no such place as Utopia, we're never going to stop all bad things from happening. Making it illegal WILL stop most abortions from happening, it will most certainly stop most "convenience" abortions.

I know it would have stopped mine.

[MrSanity]

Don't you realize that making abortion illegal is NOT going to stop it. If someone wants an abortion they will get it, whether its in a clinic, or a back alley, or even at home with a coathanger.For some sickos, that holds true.

However, for too many women, the legalization of abortion has legitimized their decision to terminate an innocent life - a permanent solution to a temporary inconvenience - that many women have lived to regret each and every day.

Criminalizing abortion and/or overturning Roe will greatly reduce the amount of abortions, which is what we all want.

Here's an even bigger problem - the liberals are hoodwinking the population into believing that before Roe, it was hell on earth, and everyone was "having" to undergo back-alley abortions. False! The states had the rights to determine the legalization of abortion before the judicial tyrants started tampering with our laws and knowingly violated the constitution as they claimed that the very document they violated contained a privacy clause through a penumbra.

Well, bullshit!

This national culture war is what you get when you tamper with our founding documents and throw strict constructionism out the window.

[DoctorDoom]

Don't you realize that making abortion illegal is NOT going to stop it. If someone wants an abortion they will get it, whether its in a clinic, or a back alley, or even at home with a coathanger.Kid, did you bother reading the cited text in post #25 re the myth of the coat-hanger abortions that you're robotically reciting? Or are you too much of a liberal to expose yourself to facts?

[edgeworth]

Kid, did you bother reading the cited text in post #25 re the myth of the coat-hanger abortions that you're robotically reciting? Or are you too much of a liberal to expose yourself to facts?

Yes I did and I must admit I didn't know that. However, just because many of the alleged claims were disproven doesn't mean that coathanger abortions don't happen. If you try to illegalize aboortion, then these practices will happen more often because desperate women will start trying anything to get rid of their unwanted babies. Secondly, it is never a good idea to have the federal government make moral decisions for all of us. Last time they attempted that, alcohol was the target and the results of prohibition were disastorous to our society. Simply put, I believe that the whole abortion issue should be on a state level and not a federal one. I say we should let the individual states decide whether or not abortion is acceptable and go from there.

[HomeschoolrsRUs]

Is murder only a "moral" issue? What about theft? Rape?

Abortion stops a beating heart.

[edgeworth]

Is murder only a "moral" issue? What about theft? Rape?

Abortion stops a beating heart.

Yes, there are also state laws that illegalize rape and theft. Whats your point?

[Timberwolf]

Yes I did and I must admit I didn't know that. However, just because many of the alleged claims were disproven doesn't mean that coathanger abortions don't happen. If you try to illegalize aboortion, then these practices will happen more often because desperate women will start trying anything to get rid of their unwanted babies.
Fine. If they take a life, theirs should also be forfeit. It's called "due process" and it's specifically addressed in the Bill of Rights (5th Amendment):
Amendment V


No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
Maybe, just maybe, if they kept their legs together, they wouldn't get themselves into that situation in the first place....but, then again, that would get in the way of YOUR fun, wouldn't it?

Secondly, it is never a good idea to have the federal government make moral decisions for all of us. Last time they attempted that, alcohol was the target and the results of prohibition were disastorous to our society. Simply put, I believe that the whole abortion issue should be on a state level and not a federal one. I say we should let the individual states decide whether or not abortion is acceptable and go from there.
So, in other words, you are saying Roe v. Wade should be overturned. Because that is EXACTLY how it was before that travesty of justice was decided.

For the record, government at all levels make moral decisions for us all every day. That is a VERY weak argument.

[HomeschoolrsRUs]

Yes, there are also state laws that illegalize rape and theft. Whats your point?

The right to life is found in the very first document associated with the founding of this country. It is established fact, it is written, it is an integral and specific part of the founding of this country --

"We hold these truths(1) to be self-evident(2), that all men(3) are created equal(4), that they are endowed by their Creator(5) with certain(6) unalienable(7) Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."
~~ The Declaration of Independence

To break it down:

The rights above are 1) truth, 2) self-evident, 3) concern all men (mankind), 4) equal, 5) endowed by a Creator, 6) certain, and 7) unalienable.

It is a right that is ...
a self-evident right, (crystal clear, no ambiguity, absolute)

an equal right, (ALL human life is equal, regardless of stage of development, disability, infirmity, gender, race, ethnicity)

an endowed right, endowed by the Creator (NOT granted, bestowed, or endowed by man, therefore not eligible to be altered by man, other than the one whose life it is)

a certain right, (specfic, fixed, indisputable)

an unalienable right (incapable of being alienated, transferred, negated, separated, terminated)

In other words they are completely understood, recognized, agreed upon, and individually specific. The first right listed is that of "Life." It can ONLY mean the right of existence, BECAUSE the other two rights deal with HOW we have a right to live that existence ... with liberty, and with the ability to pursue happiness (we are not granted the right TO happiness).

Ergo, each and every person's "right to life" (right to exist) is first and foremost before all other rights and extended equally to all, it is endowed by a Creator NOT man and therefore it is not man's to negate for another, it applies to ALL human life, it is individual specific, and is NOT negated by the right to "pursue happiness" (which could be claimed by the (so-called) "mother."

That said, it is a right that should be federally protected because it was federally recognized (foundationally to the creation of this country), documented and recorded that ALL men (not just Americans, not just those that traveled through the birth canal, not just those who are mentally stable, not just those who are socially acceptable, not just those who are physically capable -- but ALL men/women) are endowed with the right to life.

One final note, the DoE precedes the Constitution, SO if it is not specifically listed IN the Constitution, that means it was already agreed upon and settled PRIOR to the Constitution, and not forseen that anybody would EVER question or refute it.

The issue of abortion is a non-issue -- it is a procedure that denies a right to life, therefore it should not be open up for debate, interpretation, or vote. Abortion should be illegal in all 50 states in accordance with the unalienable, self-evident, right to life each person is granted certainly and equally by their Creator.

[edgeworth]

Fine. If they take a life, theirs should also be forfeit. It's called "due process" and it's specifically addressed in the Bill of Rights (5th Amendment):
Amendment V

How does due process of law translate into the death penalty for women who perform an abortion.

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
Maybe, just maybe, if they kept their legs together, they wouldn't get themselves into that situation in the first place....but, then again, that would get in the way of YOUR fun, wouldn't it?


Unfortunately, universal abstinence is not nor ever will be a sucessful remedy, simply because not everyone will follow it. The closest thing that we have to stopping unwanted preganancies is safe sex practices and birth control.

So, in other words, you are saying Roe v. Wade should be overturned. Because that is EXACTLY how it was before that travesty of justice was decided.



Essentialy yes, I believe that the abortion issue should be settled within the statesgovernments.

For the record, government at all levels make moral decisions for us all every day. That is a VERY weak argument.

I never once denied that. All I said is that I would prefer it if individual state governments and not the federal government made these moral decisions.

[edgeworth]

The right to life is found in the very first document associated with the founding of this country. It is established fact, it is written, it is an integral and specific part of the founding of this country --

"We hold these truths(1) to be self-evident(2), that all men(3) are created equal(4), that they are endowed by their Creator(5) with certain(6) unalienable(7) Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."
~~ The Declaration of Independence

To break it down:

The rights above are 1) truth, 2) self-evident, 3) concern all men (mankind), 4) equal, 5) endowed by a Creator, 6) certain, and 7) unalienable.

It is a right that is ...
a self-evident right, (crystal clear, no ambiguity, absolute)

an equal right, (ALL human life is equal, regardless of stage of development, disability, infirmity, gender, race, ethnicity)

an endowed right, endowed by the Creator (NOT granted, bestowed, or endowed by man, therefore not eligible to be altered by man, other than the one whose life it is)

a certain right, (specfic, fixed, indisputable)

an unalienable right (incapable of being alienated, transferred, negated, separated, terminated)

In other words they are completely understood, recognized, agreed upon, and individually specific. The first right listed is that of "Life." It can ONLY mean the right of existence, BECAUSE the other two rights deal with HOW we have a right to live that existence ... with liberty, and with the ability to pursue happiness (we are not granted the right TO happiness).

Ergo, each and every person's "right to life" (right to exist) is first and foremost before all other rights and extended equally to all, it is endowed by a Creator NOT man and therefore it is not man's to negate for another, it applies to ALL human life, it is individual specific, and is NOT negated by the right to "pursue happiness" (which could be claimed by the (so-called) "mother."

That said, it is a right that should be federally protected because it was federally recognized (foundationally to the creation of this country), documented and recorded that ALL men (not just Americans, not just those that traveled through the birth canal, not just those who are mentally stable, not just those who are socially acceptable, not just those who are physically capable -- but ALL men/women) are endowed with the right to life.

One final note, the DoE precedes the Constitution, SO if it is not specifically listed IN the Constitution, that means it was already agreed upon and settled PRIOR to the Constitution, and not forseen that anybody would EVER question or refute it.

The issue of abortion is a non-issue -- it is a procedure that denies a right to life, therefore it should not be open up for debate, interpretation, or vote. Abortion should be illegal in all 50 states in accordance with the unalienable, self-evident, right to life each person is granted certainly and equally by their Creator.

Would you agree with this then? If we let some states who want abortion to be illegal the power to make it so. Then, we carefully monitor the states that chose to illegalize it and see if the abortion rates drop significantly in those states. Then, we would also investigate whether or not a large number of illegal abortions were taking place. If we did that, then we could really see if making abortion illegal would truly effect society positively.

[HomeschoolrsRUs]

Would you agree with this then?

No, why should I? There's no reason to agree with it, you've not negated my argument. This country was founded on the principle that we have the right to life, to live it in liberty, and with the ability to pursue happiness. Why then should I agree to negating an unalienable right? A right guaranteed by the founding document of this country?

[edgeworth]

No, why should I? There's no reason to agree with it, you've not negated my argument. This country was founded on the principle that we have the right to life, to live it in liberty, and with the ability to pursue happiness. Why then should I agree to negating an unalienable right? A right guaranteed by the founding document of this country?

I never suggested the negation of any unalienable rights. All I said is that before we go and make it a federal law to illegalize abortion, we should see what the effects of it will be by using several states to test it.

[HomeschoolrsRUs]

I never suggested the negation of any unalienable rights.

Yes you did. Abortion negates the unalienable right to life. To compromise, in anyway, in allowing abortions negates the unalienable right to life afforded and recognized since the founding of this country.

All I said is that before we go and make it a federal law to illegalize abortion, we should see what the effects of it will be by using several states to test it.

You know what the effects of abortion are? A dead baby, whose unalienable right to life was denied without due process., What's there to test? You are completely avoiding the the fact that as American citizens we are afforded a recognized self-evident, unalienable right to life.

What reason could there possible be for me to agree with what you proposed? Again, you've said nothing to counter my argument. So why should I agree?

Your argument holds no water. And for someone who claims NOT to be pro-abortion, me thinks thou dost protest way to much.

[DoctorDoom]

Yes I did and I must admit I didn't know that.One learns a lot at FC.

However, just because many of the alleged claims were disproven doesn't mean that coathanger abortions don't happen.Where is your evidence that they do? It's pure pro-abortion propaganda. Has anyone demonstrated that it's even possible to abort a baby by using a bent coathanger?

If you try to illegalize aboortion, then these practices will happen more often because desperate women will start trying anything to get rid of their unwanted babies.Few of them are "desperate". For many if not most of them, it's retroactive birth control. And some brag about it.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v349/DocDoom777/Culture/Feminist.jpg

I can't wrap my mind around how that skank became pregnant, but that's secondary to the thought that she's publicly announcing it. And what about the T-shirts that the PPFA had for proud ex-"mothers"?

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v349/DocDoom777/Culture/AbT-shirt0.jpg

I hereby suggest two more.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v349/DocDoom777/Culture/AbT-shirt1.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v349/DocDoom777/Culture/AbT-shirt2.jpg

Secondly, it is never a good idea to have the federal government make moral decisions for all of us.Standard liberal rationalization #9213: you can't legislate morality. Wrong. Every law that exists legislates someone's morality. Liberals try to do it all the time.

Simply put, I believe that the whole abortion issue should be on a state level and not a federal one. I say we should let the individual states decide whether or not abortion is acceptable and go from there.And no doubt the liberals will accept that "compromise". Reality time: the baby-killers used the SCOTUS (a federal court) and Roe v Wade (a case based on a fraud) to abolish all state laws on abortion.

Ergo when you say that the fedgov should not be involved in the abortion issue, you are advocating the overturning of Roe v Wade. Very good, kid. There may be hope for you after all.

[Timberwolf]

Yes you did...you said the states should decide the issue. Homes is saying an inalienable right is just that..."inalienable". The Constitution trumps State Law.
inalienable

Main Entry:in·alien·able http://www.merriam-webster.com/images/audio.gif (javascript:popWin('/cgi-bin/audio.pl?inalie01.wav=inalienable'))<dl><dt class="pron">Pronunciation:\(ˌ)i-ˈnāl-yə-nə-bəl, -ˈnā-lē-ə-nə-\</dt><dd class="pron">
</dd><dt class="func">Function: adjective</dt><dd class="func">
</dd><dt class="ety">Etymology: probably from French inaliénable, from in- + aliénable alienable</dt><dd>
</dd><dt class="date">Date: circa 1645</dt></dl>: incapable of being alienated, surrendered, or transferred <inalienable rights>
The right to life can only be suspended after "due process of law". Abortion violates that portion of the 5th amendment of the Bill of Rights.

[DoctorDoom]

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v349/DocDoom777/Culture/200000502KEL1-01.gif

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v349/DocDoom777/Culture/kelleyhjk.gif

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v349/DocDoom777/Culture/godwhy2.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v349/DocDoom777/Culture/Ab2.gif

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v349/DocDoom777/Culture/Ab4.gif

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v349/DocDoom777/Culture/Ab5.gif

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v349/DocDoom777/Culture/PBA.gif

[edgeworth]

One learns a lot at FC.

Where is your evidence that they do? It's pure pro-abortion propaganda. Has anyone demonstrated that it's even possible to abort a baby by using a bent coathanger?

Few of them are "desperate". For many if not most of them, it's retroactive birth control. And some brag about it.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v349/DocDoom777/Culture/Feminist.jpg

I can't wrap my mind around how that skank became pregnant, but that's secondary to the thought that she's publicly announcing it. And what about the T-shirts that the PPFA had for proud ex-"mothers"?

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v349/DocDoom777/Culture/AbT-shirt0.jpg

I hereby suggest two more.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v349/DocDoom777/Culture/AbT-shirt1.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v349/DocDoom777/Culture/AbT-shirt2.jpg

Standard liberal rationalization #9213: you can't legislate morality. Wrong. Every law that exists legislates someone's morality. Liberals try to do it all the time.

And no doubt the liberals will accept that "compromise". Reality time: the baby-killers used the SCOTUS (a federal court) and Roe v Wade (a case based on a fraud) to abolish all state laws on abortion.

Ergo when you say that the fedgov should not be involved in the abortion issue, you are advocating the overturning of Roe v Wade. Very good, kid. There may be hope for you after all.

Exactly, I do wish that Roe v. Wade was overturned and that power was given back to the individual states like it was before Roe v. Wade. However, that is just my opionon, so I will leave it at that.

[HomeschoolrsRUs]

Exactly, I do wish that Roe v. Wade was overturned and that power was given back to the individual states like it was before Roe v. Wade. However, that is just my opionon, so I will leave it at that.

Your statements bear out that you are pro-abortion. You've done nothing to negate the fact that there is an unalienable right to life, so the only way to justify your desire for abortion to be legal, is to harken back to state's rights

[Trevelyan]

Secondly, it is never a good idea to have the federal government make moral decisions for all of us.

Well, it is not really morality. It is science. Upon fertilization a new life is created. That cannot be disputed.

[DoctorDoom]

Why is it that those who are atheistic and/or anti-religioius always claim to be moral, but they invariably shriek that government-imposed morality is religious?

[HomeschoolrsRUs]

Well, it is not really morality. It is science. Upon fertilization a new life is created. That cannot be disputed.

Though it cannot be disputed, the SCOTUS can apparently negate it, or at the very least avoid recognizing it.

[edgeworth]

Why is it that those who are atheistic and/or anti-religioius always claim to be moral, but they invariably shriek that government-imposed morality is religious?

First off,who said that I was an atheist, did you EVER here me make that claim? Secondly, I am NOT anti-religoius I just don't believe that the federal government should try and ram morality down our throats. Moral law, in my opinon is a seperate governing force created by a higher being than us. However, I do think that crimes like stealing, rape, etc should be a part of our law, simply because it is society's duty to protect its people from any and all harm that may befall them.

[DoctorDoom]

First off,who said that I was an atheist, did you EVER here me make that claim?Did you see your name, or anyone's name, on the comment? That aside, your contributions here make it evident.

Secondly, I am NOT anti-religoius I just don't believe that the federal government should try and ram morality down our throats.The dictionary definition of morality never mentions religion.

Main Entry: mo·ral·i·ty (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/morality)
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural mo·ral·i·ties
Date: 14th century

1 a: a moral discourse, statement, or lesson
b: a literary or other imaginative work teaching a moral lesson
2 a: a doctrine or system of moral conduct
b plural : particular moral principles or rules of conduct
3: conformity to ideals of right human conduct
4: moral conduct : virtue

However, when the Godless/liberals wail about rights or laws, their vacuous protests about legislating morality either directly cite or strongly intimate that morality = religion. For example, your statement does just that.

"I am NOT anti-religoius I just don't believe that the federal government should try and ram morality down our throats."

The Godless/liberals are terrified that the law of God may find its way into human law and society and impose limits on their self-worshipping, self-gratifying hedonism, e.g., engaging in sexual promiscuity and killing the results.

We have hundreds of times mentioned the unarguable fact that every law on the books imposes someone's morality on society. The facts runs off of their tiny minds like the proverbial water off a duck's back. And the mindless mantra continues.

[edgeworth]

Did you see your name, or anyone's name, on the comment? That aside, your contributions here make it evident.

The dictionary definition of morality never mentions religion.

Main Entry: mo·ral·i·ty (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/morality)
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural mo·ral·i·ties
Date: 14th century

1 a: a moral discourse, statement, or lesson
b: a literary or other imaginative work teaching a moral lesson
2 a: a doctrine or system of moral conduct
b plural : particular moral principles or rules of conduct
3: conformity to ideals of right human conduct
4: moral conduct : virtue

However, when the Godless/liberals wail about rights or laws, their vacuous protests about legislating morality either directly cite or strongly intimate that morality = religion. For example, your statement does just that.

"I am NOT anti-religoius I just don't believe that the federal government should try and ram morality down our throats."

The Godless/liberals are terrified that the law of God may find its way into human law and society and impose limits on their self-worshipping, self-gratifying hedonism, e.g., engaging in sexual promiscuity and killing the results.

We have hundreds of times mentioned the unarguable fact that every law on the books imposes someone's morality on society. The facts runs off of their tiny minds like the proverbial water off a duck's back. And the mindless mantra continues.
First of all, how you can say that my contributions here make it evident that I am an atheist after I already said in my previous posts that I believe that morality was created by a higher being is beyond me, but whatever. Now, your second statement that atheists think morality= religion struck me as odd because the very belief system of atheism says the exact opposite- that man can be moral WITHOUT religion and doesn't need god to rule over him. Now, onto the point about being scared about religion finding its way into our government. I must admit that I am scared of such a thing but so was many of our founding fathers who said that to inject too much religion into the government would have disastrous consequences. Its not the fear of limits being imposed on anything. Its the fear that too much of any religion in government can crush the power of the people and bend them to the will of an almighty force that dictates every step of their lives. That's what Im afraid of.

[Taylor1]

I'm not one to debate abortions with it being right or wrong, but I am starting to find it disgusting and un-human like.

[HomeschoolrsRUs]

However, I do think that crimes like stealing, rape, etc should be a part of our law, simply because it is society's duty to protect its people from any and all harm that may befall them.

Society's duty to protect SOME people from any and all harm that may befall them -- just not unborn people, right? Isn't it the very people society SHOULD be protecting that are being victimized -- innocent lives who are unable to defend themselves? You can keep harping on "morality," but you've yet to prove that the wholesale slaughter of innocent babies is simply a "moral" issue. Nor have you made any attempt to refute the argument I put forth, that ALL (human) life has an unalienable right to life.

[DoctorDoom]

First of all, how you can say that my contributions here make it evident that I am an atheist after I already said in my previous posts that I believe that morality was created by a higher being is beyond me, but whatever.Your posts give me the distinct impression of atheism, but I'm willing to acknowledge the possibility, however improbable, of agnosticism.

The "higher being" (God, to us) created the universe and the laws that govern it—and us. However, you will not find any variation of "moral" in the Bible, even though the word predates the English Bible. The M-W definition of "morality" (post #51), definitions 2 and 3, do not specify an absolute standard of morality.

"a doctrine or system of moral conduct; particular moral principles or rules of conduct; conformity to ideals of right human conduct"

The definition refers to what man believes is "moral conduct", and that leaves it open to a wide range of interpretations. Whatever a nation, a culture or an individual deems to be "moral conduct" is the morality of the entity. God does not define it unless His law is the basis for it.

Now, your second statement that atheists think morality= religion struck me as odd because the very belief system of atheism says the exact opposite- that man can be moral WITHOUT religion and doesn't need god to rule over him.Reread it with understanding.

However, when the Godless/liberals wail about rights or laws, their vacuous protests about legislating morality either directly cite or strongly intimate that morality = religion. For example, your statement does just that.Nowhere did I state that atheists personally equate morality to religion. What the text clearly says is that whenever atheists/liberals want to bitch about laws or rules that allegedly infringe on their "rights", they whine about morality being imposed on them, with either a direct statement or a crystal clear implication that morality is per se religious. Your quoted sentence is a textbook example of it.

[DeclinetoState]

Secondly, it is never a good idea to have the federal government make moral decisions for all of us.Unless you're a libertarian who opposes virtually all government legislation, you cannot be consistent and support that statement. After all, welfare is government enforcement of a "moral decision" that we must help the poor. There are many other examples at both the federal and state levels of government laws that are based in large part on morality.

[bannerman]

all common sense law is based on MORALITY

a lucky guess?

what else would one base law on EXPEDIENCY?