11 year old rape victim forced to carry to term thanks to Ohio law.

[Badger]

Reported for ineffective trolling

[Frodo]

Enough. This thread is just reinforced to me that old Atlas conservatives, with only a handful of exceptions, are by and large among the most brainless and heartless individuals even the internet can produce. Just pathetic.

Get a red avatar at the least if you think that us asking for a child not to be murdered is heartless.

People like Badger, who think themselves to be "good people" (and he probably is at an Earthly level) have blinders to the Eternal aspects of situations such as these.  Such a situation makes no sense; a loving God allowing an event such as this to happen.  They are not capable of imagining a plan for both of these lives where each could be blessed beyond human comprehension.

I would not wish such a plight for any of my granddaughters, and I would be taking many thoughts captive if such a thing happened.  But I don't believe that any life is a mistake, and I believe that the Ways of God are, indeed, far above our own ways.  This sounds awful to some, but the alternative here is what others are suggesting, which is "Kill the innocent unborn human and let everyone else forget about it."  That's not more realistic than what I speak of, but I don't expect most people to see this through their Spiritual Blinders (and, yes, many here are blinded to Spiritual realities).  That may sound snotty and condescending, but it is the only way to explain the chasm here.  The carnal cannot see through Spiritual eyes given them by the Holy Spirit.  This is reality also; as real as the sky being blue on a sunny day.

Is that what you would tell the grieving mother of this girl if (and when) she dies in childbirth, along with her unborn child?  And all because nut cases like you refuse to include an exception for rape and incest?   

That's cold comfort, indeed.  

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

I obviously disagree with the people who believes that abortion shouldn't be allowed in most cases, but I can respect their position because they understand there should be exceptions like in the case we've been discussing.

It's kind of telling that the people passing high, inflexible judgment are usually the people who, for reasons obvious, can't possibly ever find themselves in such a horrifying situation as the poor girl, and most likely were never touched by such experience happening to their loved ones.

[Frodo]

Can we please ban anybody who actually believes the Government should force a child to have a child because she was raped by a pedophile. How is this even a credible opinion to hold in the year 2019?

It's a credible opinion because the circumstances of a woman's pregnancy does not affect the humanity of the unborn child.  That unborn child who is the product of this twisted rape is no less human than you or I were at that point in human development.

This 11 year old child either knows that reality right now, or will figure it out as she grows older.  It will hit her one day, and the effect it will have on her on that day is dependent, at least in part, on the decisions she makes regarding life and death for that unborn child.

If people are honest, they can't argue with what I just said.  

That may not be necessary, having died during childbirth.

That would be highly unlikely today in America.

How ignorant are you?

You also might want to look at this:

U.S. Has The Worst Rate Of Maternal Deaths In The Developed World

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

Are you seriously telling me you would force your 11 year old daughter to carry a baby to term?

Yes. Some of us have morals.

That's what fundamentalist Muslims in Podunk Africa would say to justify female genital mutilation.

You people are no less barbaric than they are.

Murdering babies is barbaric.

Please look up the word z y g o t e. Zygote

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zygote

A zygote (from Greek ζυγωτός zygōtos "joined" or "yoked", from ζυγοῦν zygoun "to join" or "to yoke")[1] is a eukaryotic cell formed by a fertilization event between two gametes. The zygote's genome is a combination of the DNA in each gamete, and contains all of the genetic information necessary to form a new individual. In multicellular organisms, the zygote is the earliest developmental stage. In single-celled organisms, the zygote can divide asexually by mitosis to produce identical offspring.

If she knows she's pregnant, we are no longer talking about a zygote.

[Fuzzy Bear]

Enough. This thread is just reinforced to me that old Atlas conservatives, with only a handful of exceptions, are by and large among the most brainless and heartless individuals even the internet can produce. Just pathetic.

Get a red avatar at the least if you think that us asking for a child not to be murdered is heartless.

People like Badger, who think themselves to be "good people" (and he probably is at an Earthly level) have blinders to the Eternal aspects of situations such as these.  Such a situation makes no sense; a loving God allowing an event such as this to happen.  They are not capable of imagining a plan for both of these lives where each could be blessed beyond human comprehension.

I would not wish such a plight for any of my granddaughters, and I would be taking many thoughts captive if such a thing happened.  But I don't believe that any life is a mistake, and I believe that the Ways of God are, indeed, far above our own ways.  This sounds awful to some, but the alternative here is what others are suggesting, which is "Kill the innocent unborn human and let everyone else forget about it."  That's not more realistic than what I speak of, but I don't expect most people to see this through their Spiritual Blinders (and, yes, many here are blinded to Spiritual realities).  That may sound snotty and condescending, but it is the only way to explain the chasm here.  The carnal cannot see through Spiritual eyes given them by the Holy Spirit.  This is reality also; as real as the sky being blue on a sunny day.

It just dawned on me. Fuzzy, you were saying you are happily ready and willing for your daughter to do prison time for having an abortion? Because let's remember dear little Defenders of human life, but that is exactly what these laws entail.

It was my son's girlfriend that had the abortion.  I don't have daughters.  I have seven (7) granddaughters, three (3) of whom are adults and two (2) of whom are mothers.

The issue of criminal penalties for having an abortion is a separate conversation.  I will say that my grandchild was aborted solely because abortion was "safe and legal"; the mother of that child would not have had an abortion had it been illegal.  Those are the circumstances surrounding this, and while I'll never know for sure how the matter played out, I'm reasonably certain that there would have been no "back alley butcher job" or something like that.  Making abortion illegal prevents abortions, and anyone who says otherwise is urinating on my leg while trying to convince me that it's raining.

The criminal laws governing abortion can be examined and changed.  The primary issue here is that an unborn child is a human life, and a life deserving of protection, as much as an unhatched sea turtle deserves protection.  The other part can be hashed out, but let's end the legal practice of abortion first.  I will say this:  I prefer abortion being made illegal with Draconian penalties to the idea that abortion should be legalized lest somebody's daughter go to jail for a "poor choice".  You do know, Badger, that it doesn't have to be that way, but you'll false-frame the issue as if this has to be.  Anything for the narrative, I suppose.  I suppose you wish to manipulate me into some sort of Sophie's Choice.  I'm capable of doing the hard thing when it's right, and if such a law is what legislatures come up with to end legal abortion, I'm fine with it, as opposed to what we have now. 

[Fuzzy Bear]

Can we please ban anybody who actually believes the Government should force a child to have a child because she was raped by a pedophile. How is this even a credible opinion to hold in the year 2019?

It's a credible opinion because the circumstances of a woman's pregnancy does not affect the humanity of the unborn child.  That unborn child who is the product of this twisted rape is no less human than you or I were at that point in human development.

This 11 year old child either knows that reality right now, or will figure it out as she grows older.  It will hit her one day, and the effect it will have on her on that day is dependent, at least in part, on the decisions she makes regarding life and death for that unborn child.

If people are honest, they can't argue with what I just said.  

That may not be necessary, having died during childbirth.

That would be highly unlikely today in America.

How ignorant are you?

You also might want to look at this:

U.S. Has The Worst Rate Of Maternal Deaths In The Developed World

None of this justifies the killing of an unborn life.  

The only POSSIBLE exception I would make on the abortion question is if continuing the pregnancy would, truly, kill the mother, and that the abortion was an act of immediate self-defense.  I define this extremely narrowly; such an act would have to truly be something that would prevent a mother from dying in the next half-hour or something like this.  Even here, I am reluctant to give an inch, as the pro-abortion faction will then take a mile.  

As far as ignorance goes, your credentials along those lines are presented every time you log on and post.

[7,052,770]

None of this justifies the killing of an unborn life. 

The only POSSIBLE exception I would make on the abortion question is if continuing the pregnancy would, truly, kill the mother, and that the abortion was an act of immediate self-defense.  I define this extremely narrowly; such an act would have to truly be something that would prevent a mother from dying in the next half-hour or something like this.  Even here, I am reluctant to give an inch, as the pro-infanticide faction will then take a mile. 

As far as ignorance goes, your credentials along those lines are presented every time you log on and post.

     

Anyone paying attention to the news lately knows which side is taking a mile on this issue. We wouldn't even be having this thread right now if one side hadn't decided to take a mile.

[Frodo]

Can we please ban anybody who actually believes the Government should force a child to have a child because she was raped by a pedophile. How is this even a credible opinion to hold in the year 2019?

It's a credible opinion because the circumstances of a woman's pregnancy does not affect the humanity of the unborn child.  That unborn child who is the product of this twisted rape is no less human than you or I were at that point in human development.

This 11 year old child either knows that reality right now, or will figure it out as she grows older.  It will hit her one day, and the effect it will have on her on that day is dependent, at least in part, on the decisions she makes regarding life and death for that unborn child.

If people are honest, they can't argue with what I just said.  

That may not be necessary, having died during childbirth.

That would be highly unlikely today in America.

How ignorant are you?

You also might want to look at this:

U.S. Has The Worst Rate Of Maternal Deaths In The Developed World

None of this justifies the killing of an unborn life.

The only POSSIBLE exception I would make on the abortion question is if continuing the pregnancy would, truly, kill the mother, and that the abortion was an act of immediate self-defense.  I define this extremely narrowly; such an act would have to truly be something that would prevent a mother from dying in the next half-hour or something like this.  Even here, I am reluctant to give an inch, as the pro-infanticide faction will then take a mile.

That is for the mother and her doctor to decide, not you.  They would know better than you.  

Mind your own goddamn business, old man.  

As far as ignorance goes, your credentials along those lines are presented every time you log on and post.

You really need to stop projecting.  You already had to back down just now when I presented you with evidence contrary to your statement that mothers-to-be in the United States don't have to worry about dying in child-birth.

And in response to yet another one of your idiotic statements, this time that banning abortions would prevent abortions:

The Bad Old Days: Abortion in America Before Roe v. Wade

For an old man, I thought you'd know about all this first hand.  Or is this another case of you having selective memory loss?  

   

[7,052,770]

For an old man, I thought you would know about all this first-hand.    

Don't be surprised. Older members of the Religious Right have no choice to but to delete all memories about abortion from before the 1980s, lest they remember that their denominations explicitly supported Roe v. Wade when it came out, that Ronald Reagan is responsible for elective abortion being legalized in California (and remember, it was illegal because it wasn't considered safe, not because "life begins at fertilization), or that the biggest proponent of abortion rights in Congress back then was a Catholic priest.

[TDAS04]

If there is even a chance that denying a woman an abortion will kill her, an abortion should be granted.  Even if you're against abortion, I don't get how risking the mother's life is ever justified.  If a woman feels a pregnancy is physically endangering her, and an experienced doctor believes she might be correct, no questions should be asked.  No government red tape should get in the way of a potentially life-saving procedure.

[Fuzzy Bear]

Can we please ban anybody who actually believes the Government should force a child to have a child because she was raped by a pedophile. How is this even a credible opinion to hold in the year 2019?

It's a credible opinion because the circumstances of a woman's pregnancy does not affect the humanity of the unborn child.  That unborn child who is the product of this twisted rape is no less human than you or I were at that point in human development.

This 11 year old child either knows that reality right now, or will figure it out as she grows older.  It will hit her one day, and the effect it will have on her on that day is dependent, at least in part, on the decisions she makes regarding life and death for that unborn child.

If people are honest, they can't argue with what I just said.  

That may not be necessary, having died during childbirth.

That would be highly unlikely today in America.

How ignorant are you?

You also might want to look at this:

U.S. Has The Worst Rate Of Maternal Deaths In The Developed World

None of this justifies the killing of an unborn life.

The only POSSIBLE exception I would make on the abortion question is if continuing the pregnancy would, truly, kill the mother, and that the abortion was an act of immediate self-defense.  I define this extremely narrowly; such an act would have to truly be something that would prevent a mother from dying in the next half-hour or something like this.  Even here, I am reluctant to give an inch, as the pro-infanticide faction will then take a mile.

That is for the mother and her doctor to decide, not you.  They would know better than you.  

Mind your own goddamn business, old man.  
 

As far as ignorance goes, your credentials along those lines are presented every time you log on and post.

You really need to stop projecting.  You already had to back down just now when I presented you with evidence contrary to your statement that mothers-to-be in the United States don't have to worry about dying in child-birth.

And in response to yet another one of your idiotic statements, this time that banning abortions would prevent abortions:

The Bad Old Days: Abortion in America Before Roe v. Wade

I didn't read those stats about maternal mortality.  Of course, dying in childbirth can happen, but that doesn't change the issue one bit for me.

I notice, however, that your goal is to get me to "back down".  

And I love when people tell me how this issue is between a woman and her doctor.  They know best, and that's none of my business.  The slave-owner said the same thing to the abolitionist.  The Jim Crow Southern White Man said this to Freedom Riders.  "This is between us, and it's none of your business." said these people to those who would upset the status quo.

The reality is that slavery and Jim Crow segregation stopped when other people made it their business.  Apartheid stopped when other people made it their business.  Oppressive Voter ID Laws are being challenged because people outside the states that pass these laws are making it their business.  Child abuse and neglect are actively intervened on because people outside the immediate relationship made the issue their business.  The treatment of the mentally retarded at Willowbrook was exposed and reformed because Geraldo Rivera (yes, THAT Geraldo Rivera, the guy who's something of a joke today) made their plight his business.

So I'm advocating for the unborn in that very spirit.  I'm making it my business for unborn human beings whose lives depend on others making their lives their business. And I do believe abortion to be infanticide.  There is no reason for me to advocate as I do if I did not believe that.

[Frodo]

I suggest you put as much value on the life of the mother (especially if she herself is a child) as highly as you do the unborn.  It doesn't seem to me like you do.  In fact, you don't seem to value a girl's or woman's life all that highly.    

And LOL on your comparison on your fight to drag us back to the pre Roe v Wade era to that against slavery, Jim Crow, and apartheid.  

[Frodo]

For an old man, I thought you would know about all this first-hand.    

Don't be surprised. Older members of the Religious Right have no choice to but to delete all memories about abortion from before the 1980s, lest they remember that their denominations explicitly supported Roe v. Wade when it came out, that Ronald Reagan is responsible for elective abortion being legalized in California (and remember, it was illegal because it wasn't considered safe, not because "life begins at fertilization), or that the biggest proponent of abortion rights in Congress back then was a Catholic priest.

For Fuzzy, it is all about controlling women and what they do with their bodies.  If presented with facts that contradict his ill-conceived notions, he will ignore them.  And accuse you of being ignorant and politically-driven in the process.  

He is perhaps the most intellectually dishonest poster I have ever come across.  It is a shame he is so articulate and intelligent.  

[Boobs]

The reality is that slavery and Jim Crow segregation stopped when other people made it their business.  Apartheid stopped when other people made it their business.  Oppressive Voter ID Laws are being challenged because people outside the states that pass these laws are making it their business.  Child abuse and neglect are actively intervened on because people outside the immediate relationship made the issue their business.  The treatment of the mentally retarded at Willowbrook was exposed and reformed because Geraldo Rivera (yes, THAT Geraldo Rivera, the guy who's something of a joke today) made their plight his business.

Thank you for bravely fighting for an 11-year-old girl's right to die on a hospital bed. You are a modern Lincoln, with the eloquence to boot.

[Fuzzy Bear]

For an old man, I thought you would know about all this first-hand.    

Don't be surprised. Older members of the Religious Right have no choice to but to delete all memories about abortion from before the 1980s, lest they remember that their denominations explicitly supported Roe v. Wade when it came out, that Ronald Reagan is responsible for elective abortion being legalized in California (and remember, it was illegal because it wasn't considered safe, not because "life begins at fertilization), or that the biggest proponent of abortion rights in Congress back then was a Catholic priest.

But, of course, Ted Kennedy, Al Gore, Dick Gephardt, the entire Massachusetts Congressional delegation (and, indeed, most every single Catholic Democratic liberal) was pro-life in the 1970s.  Did they delete memories?

You will have to cite specifics as to which denominations changed positions on abortions.  I do remember when Nelson Rockefeller signed NY's liberal abortion law (oddly enough, during a phase of his career where he was shifting rightward).  

I grew up in a rather mainline denomination, and I will tell you that most people didn't think one way or another on abortion.  I became pro-life, oddly enough, during my days as a Democratic activist when one of my closest friends in the party convinced me of the pro-life position, and I viewed it as logical.  

I will suggest, however, that it is proper to change one's position on an issue when they become convinced that their position has been wrong, and/or when new information is presented that changes this issue.  If denominations came to a spiritual understanding that abortion, an issue they gave little thought to before the late 1960s, was wrong, and changed their stance accordingly, that is how it should be.

[TDAS04]

None of this justifies the killing of an unborn life. 

The only POSSIBLE exception I would make on the abortion question is if continuing the pregnancy would, truly, kill the mother, and that the abortion was an act of immediate self-defense.  I define this extremely narrowly; such an act would have to truly be something that would prevent a mother from dying in the next half-hour or something like this.  Even here, I am reluctant to give an inch, as the pro-infanticide faction will then take a mile. 

As far as ignorance goes, your credentials along those lines are presented every time you log on and post.

That's pretty awful.  You don't even know if the fetus would survive, but don't save the mother!

[Fuzzy Bear]

For an old man, I thought you would know about all this first-hand.    

Don't be surprised. Older members of the Religious Right have no choice to but to delete all memories about abortion from before the 1980s, lest they remember that their denominations explicitly supported Roe v. Wade when it came out, that Ronald Reagan is responsible for elective abortion being legalized in California (and remember, it was illegal because it wasn't considered safe, not because "life begins at fertilization), or that the biggest proponent of abortion rights in Congress back then was a Catholic priest.

For Fuzzy, it is all about controlling women and what they do with their bodies.  If presented with facts that contradict his ill-conceived notions, he will ignore them.  And accuse you of being ignorant and politically-driven in the process.  

He is perhaps the most intellectually dishonest poster I have ever come across.  It is a shame he is so articulate and intelligent.  

The reality is that slavery and Jim Crow segregation stopped when other people made it their business.  Apartheid stopped when other people made it their business.  Oppressive Voter ID Laws are being challenged because people outside the states that pass these laws are making it their business.  Child abuse and neglect are actively intervened on because people outside the immediate relationship made the issue their business.  The treatment of the mentally retarded at Willowbrook was exposed and reformed because Geraldo Rivera (yes, THAT Geraldo Rivera, the guy who's something of a joke today) made their plight his business.

Thank you for bravely fighting for an 11-year-old girl's right to die on a hospital bed. You are a modern Lincoln, with the eloquence to boot.

High praise, indeed, from such giants of Atlas!  Here, Here!

[Boobs]

For an old man, I thought you would know about all this first-hand.    

Don't be surprised. Older members of the Religious Right have no choice to but to delete all memories about abortion from before the 1980s, lest they remember that their denominations explicitly supported Roe v. Wade when it came out, that Ronald Reagan is responsible for elective abortion being legalized in California (and remember, it was illegal because it wasn't considered safe, not because "life begins at fertilization), or that the biggest proponent of abortion rights in Congress back then was a Catholic priest.

For Fuzzy, it is all about controlling women and what they do with their bodies.  If presented with facts that contradict his ill-conceived notions, he will ignore them.  And accuse you of being ignorant and politically-driven in the process.  

He is perhaps the most intellectually dishonest poster I have ever come across.  It is a shame he is so articulate and intelligent.  

The reality is that slavery and Jim Crow segregation stopped when other people made it their business.  Apartheid stopped when other people made it their business.  Oppressive Voter ID Laws are being challenged because people outside the states that pass these laws are making it their business.  Child abuse and neglect are actively intervened on because people outside the immediate relationship made the issue their business.  The treatment of the mentally retarded at Willowbrook was exposed and reformed because Geraldo Rivera (yes, THAT Geraldo Rivera, the guy who's something of a joke today) made their plight his business.

Thank you for bravely fighting for an 11-year-old girl's right to die on a hospital bed. You are a modern Lincoln, with the eloquence to boot.

High praise, indeed, from such giants of Atlas!  Here, Here!

What a disgusting ad hominem attack. Welcome to my ignore list.

[Fuzzy Bear]

None of this justifies the killing of an unborn life. 

The only POSSIBLE exception I would make on the abortion question is if continuing the pregnancy would, truly, kill the mother, and that the abortion was an act of immediate self-defense.  I define this extremely narrowly; such an act would have to truly be something that would prevent a mother from dying in the next half-hour or something like this.  Even here, I am reluctant to give an inch, as the pro-infanticide faction will then take a mile. 

As far as ignorance goes, your credentials along those lines are presented every time you log on and post.

That's pretty awful.  You don't even know if the fetus would survive, but don't save the mother!

The folks I am debating here are a combination of intellectually dishonest and unreasonable.

You seem to be a bit better than the Frodos and Harrys of this thread.  I can imagine speaking to you and at least have an understanding of where each of us is coming from.  What I'm advocating is that abortion MIGHT be permissible if there were some medical condition where the fetus was actually killing the mother in the here and now.  What I'm NOT advocating is prescribing an abortion due to the mother's mental health issue, potential for postpartum depression, etc.  Those scenarios are advanced by some in the "life of the mother" argument.  I don't agree with that thinking.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

Can we please ban anybody who actually believes the Government should force a child to have a child because she was raped by a pedophile. How is this even a credible opinion to hold in the year 2019?

It's a credible opinion because the circumstances of a woman's pregnancy does not affect the humanity of the unborn child.  That unborn child who is the product of this twisted rape is no less human than you or I were at that point in human development.

This 11 year old child either knows that reality right now, or will figure it out as she grows older.  It will hit her one day, and the effect it will have on her on that day is dependent, at least in part, on the decisions she makes regarding life and death for that unborn child.

If people are honest, they can't argue with what I just said.  

That may not be necessary, having died during childbirth.

That would be highly unlikely today in America.

How ignorant are you?

You also might want to look at this:

U.S. Has The Worst Rate Of Maternal Deaths In The Developed World

None of this justifies the killing of an unborn life.

The only POSSIBLE exception I would make on the abortion question is if continuing the pregnancy would, truly, kill the mother, and that the abortion was an act of immediate self-defense.  I define this extremely narrowly; such an act would have to truly be something that would prevent a mother from dying in the next half-hour or something like this.  Even here, I am reluctant to give an inch, as the pro-infanticide faction will then take a mile.

That is for the mother and her doctor to decide, not you.  They would know better than you.  

Mind your own goddamn business, old man.  
 

As far as ignorance goes, your credentials along those lines are presented every time you log on and post.

You really need to stop projecting.  You already had to back down just now when I presented you with evidence contrary to your statement that mothers-to-be in the United States don't have to worry about dying in child-birth.

And in response to yet another one of your idiotic statements, this time that banning abortions would prevent abortions:

The Bad Old Days: Abortion in America Before Roe v. Wade

I didn't read those stats about maternal mortality.  Of course, dying in childbirth can happen, but that doesn't change the issue one bit for me.

I notice, however, that your goal is to get me to "back down".  Duly noted.  This illuminates who's deciding the issue on principle and who's deciding the issue based on politics.  Because there's no great principle that drives you; your support for infanticide on demand is nothing more than you showing loyalty to part of the Red Avatar Coalition, of which the Feminist Left is part.[/u]

And I love when people tell me how this issue is between a woman and her doctor.  They know best, and that's none of my business.  The slave-owner said the same thing to the abolitionist.  The Jim Crow Southern White Man said this to Freedom Riders.  "This is between us, and it's none of your business." said these people to those who would upset the status quo.

The reality is that slavery and Jim Crow segregation stopped when other people made it their business.  Apartheid stopped when other people made it their business.  Oppressive Voter ID Laws are being challenged because people outside the states that pass these laws are making it their business.  Child abuse and neglect are actively intervened on because people outside the immediate relationship made the issue their business.  The treatment of the mentally retarded at Willowbrook was exposed and reformed because Geraldo Rivera (yes, THAT Geraldo Rivera, the guy who's something of a joke today) made their plight his business.

So I'm advocating for the unborn in that very spirit.  I'm making it my business for unborn human beings whose lives depend on others making their lives their business.

All due respect, but you might wanna reread the Ten Commandments.  I'm pretty sure there's something in them about not bearing false witness against your neighbor.  I know how passionately you feel about this, but the quoted post is completely over the top and I'm pretty sure you know better than to accuse folks you disagree with of wanting to murder a bunch of babies to impress an internet clique.  I mean, seriously, what even is that?

[Fuzzy Bear]

For an old man, I thought you would know about all this first-hand.    

Don't be surprised. Older members of the Religious Right have no choice to but to delete all memories about abortion from before the 1980s, lest they remember that their denominations explicitly supported Roe v. Wade when it came out, that Ronald Reagan is responsible for elective abortion being legalized in California (and remember, it was illegal because it wasn't considered safe, not because "life begins at fertilization), or that the biggest proponent of abortion rights in Congress back then was a Catholic priest.

For Fuzzy, it is all about controlling women and what they do with their bodies.  If presented with facts that contradict his ill-conceived notions, he will ignore them.  And accuse you of being ignorant and politically-driven in the process.  

He is perhaps the most intellectually dishonest poster I have ever come across.  It is a shame he is so articulate and intelligent.  

The reality is that slavery and Jim Crow segregation stopped when other people made it their business.  Apartheid stopped when other people made it their business.  Oppressive Voter ID Laws are being challenged because people outside the states that pass these laws are making it their business.  Child abuse and neglect are actively intervened on because people outside the immediate relationship made the issue their business.  The treatment of the mentally retarded at Willowbrook was exposed and reformed because Geraldo Rivera (yes, THAT Geraldo Rivera, the guy who's something of a joke today) made their plight his business.

Thank you for bravely fighting for an 11-year-old girl's right to die on a hospital bed. You are a modern Lincoln, with the eloquence to boot.

High praise, indeed, from such giants of Atlas!  Here, Here!

What a disgusting ad hominem attack. Welcome to my ignore list.

This is rich, is it not?  I mean how reasonable is it to trash me with sarcasm and expect me to say "Thank you, sir!  May I have another?".

[7,052,770]

None of this justifies the killing of an unborn life. 

The only POSSIBLE exception I would make on the abortion question is if continuing the pregnancy would, truly, kill the mother, and that the abortion was an act of immediate self-defense.  I define this extremely narrowly; such an act would have to truly be something that would prevent a mother from dying in the next half-hour or something like this.  Even here, I am reluctant to give an inch, as the pro-infanticide faction will then take a mile. 

As far as ignorance goes, your credentials along those lines are presented every time you log on and post.

That's pretty awful.  You don't even know if the fetus would survive, but don't save the mother!

The folks I am debating here are a combination of intellectually dishonest and unreasonable.

You seem to be a bit better than the Frodos and Harrys of this thread.  I can imagine speaking to you and at least have an understanding of where each of us is coming from.  What I'm advocating is that abortion MIGHT be permissible if there were some medical condition where the fetus was actually killing the mother in the here and now.  What I'm NOT advocating is prescribing an abortion due to the mother's mental health issue, potential for postpartum depression, etc.  Those scenarios are advanced by some in the "life of the mother" argument.  I don't agree with that thinking.

Yeah, I'm going to need a retraction and sincere public apology for that. You know that I have always stuck up for you and insisted that your viewpoints (warped and illogical as I believe they are) be portrayed accurately and fairly. You repay me with venom and cheap shots that aren't even true.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

For an old man, I thought you would know about all this first-hand.    

Don't be surprised. Older members of the Religious Right have no choice to but to delete all memories about abortion from before the 1980s, lest they remember that their denominations explicitly supported Roe v. Wade when it came out, that Ronald Reagan is responsible for elective abortion being legalized in California (and remember, it was illegal because it wasn't considered safe, not because "life begins at fertilization), or that the biggest proponent of abortion rights in Congress back then was a Catholic priest.

For Fuzzy, it is all about controlling women and what they do with their bodies.  If presented with facts that contradict his ill-conceived notions, he will ignore them.  And accuse you of being ignorant and politically-driven in the process.  

He is perhaps the most intellectually dishonest poster I have ever come across.  It is a shame he is so articulate and intelligent.  

The reality is that slavery and Jim Crow segregation stopped when other people made it their business.  Apartheid stopped when other people made it their business.  Oppressive Voter ID Laws are being challenged because people outside the states that pass these laws are making it their business.  Child abuse and neglect are actively intervened on because people outside the immediate relationship made the issue their business.  The treatment of the mentally retarded at Willowbrook was exposed and reformed because Geraldo Rivera (yes, THAT Geraldo Rivera, the guy who's something of a joke today) made their plight his business.

Thank you for bravely fighting for an 11-year-old girl's right to die on a hospital bed. You are a modern Lincoln, with the eloquence to boot.

High praise, indeed, from such giants of Atlas!  Here, Here!

What a disgusting ad hominem attack. Welcome to my ignore list.

This is rich, is it not?  I mean how reasonable is it to trash me with sarcasm and expect me to say "Thank you, sir!  May I have another?".

Matt 5:39 "But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also."  

I always assumed that meant "lead by example, not by rolling around in the mud with the hogs."

[Stockdale for Veep]

5 year old contracts terminal leukemia.



"Thank you sir, may I have another!"