General Music Chat

http://youtu.be/M0aNxzF7MAk

"Abortions for some...miniature American flags for others." - Kang

I used to get upset about folks getting abortions. Then I was less upset when I understood why some folks needed abortions. Then, I actually became thankful for abortions when I began to realize that it circumvented the birth of a few Epic failures. (That is to say ...Some people should never be allowed to breed...)

YOD, I understand your sentiments totally...But nobody gets off this planet alive. Aborted babies are simply given an early -out from what amounts to a cess-pool of assholes , sh*t heads and pricks.

(And some folks here think I am an optimist? Ha ha!)

It really doesn't matter to me anymore, who supports abortions...I know they don't represent me, and I know I will never have to fill their shoes. I wont get caught making some frumpy ho pregnant with my child (cause I can say 'no" before that problem arises) In short I have been blessed with will power and sensibilities.

Most people on this planet are already dead ... even As I smile at them. ...Why? Because as they have revealed their lack of spiritual cognizance .. lets face it... One typically cant add new spots to leopards , who cant even have their old spots changed. Besides, its not my call to persuade others. I merely try to set my own examples.

Its futile to spread gospel and then expect warm, fuzzy reception. Human minds have been made up long ago, when the Earth was still volcanic.

Thrive in Peace YOD, and let not the forests of human props dissuade your own system of belief. One day you will wake up on a new plane and will recognize that all you held dear (nothing more, nothing less) will be there with you. I guess what remains is what we choose to hold dear. I feel very sorry for those who have nothing to hold to.

Legal abortions are the law of the land using a dishonest interpretation of our Constitution. There was never a "guarantee" of abortion intended by the framers of the Constitution. They would roll over in their graves to know we had found this "right" in the document guaranteeing LIFE for every person.

In every abortion, at least 3 people are involved but only one of them gets to make a choice.

If people make a decision based on the truth, then it's their decision to suffer the consequences and no longer my business. However, when a lie is the basis of their decision, it is our collective responsibility to make sure that the truth is known.

Here's the truth: the person most affected by abortion is not being given a choice. They are murdered indiscriminately with malice.











.

just curious...yod, are for the death penalty? what about abortions in the case of incest or rape?

hey yod.....where are you on this????

I believe it's more examples of liberal hypocrisy.


Capital punishment is done to protect the innocent. Do you know where I stand on that?

wouldn't the so called "innocent" be protected by having a murderer locked away for the rest of his day w/o parole?

Incest and rape account for less that .01% of abortions, and this lame excuse has been used to murder more than than 50 MILLION babies.

Though rape and incest are special circumstances which should be considered (since the father is a criminal and has given up any right of choice), I have a close friend who is the product of a rape. She is a blessing to every person who has ever met her.

Are you saying we should kill her because her father was a criminal?

i didn't say that.

what i object to is the hypocrites who invoke the mantra that it's against god's will to take a life when it comes to abortion...and THEN hypocritically are for the death penalty.

..implying it's ok to take SOME lives...but not others. and i asked about rape and incest along similar lines....those folks who are against abortion for religious reasons...but are willing to make exceptions in the cases of rape and incest.....as if one is "murder" and the other isn't. either it's wrong to take a "life" or it isn't.





.[/quote]

Legal abortions are the law of the land using a dishonest interpretation of our Constitution. There was never a "guarantee" of abortion intended by the framers of the Constitution. They would roll over in their graves to know we had found this "right" in the document guaranteeing LIFE for every person.

In every abortion, at least 3 people are involved but only one of them gets to make a choice.

If people make a decision based on the truth, then it's their decision to suffer the consequences and no longer my business. However, when a lie is the basis of their decision, it is our collective responsibility to make sure that the truth is known.

Here's the truth: the person most affected by abortion is not being given a choice. They are murdered indiscriminately with malice.

If abortion is murder, then blowjobs are cannibalism, and any woman who's had more than one menstruation is a serial killer.

The interpretation of the constitution that every person owns their own body and life is where the right to an abortion is derived from.

If I have a tumor growing inside of me I have the right to have it removed.
The tumor has no say in the issue.
And until it begins having significant brain activity it is just a collection of cells, like my toenails.

I know the argument that "life begins at conception."
No, it began millions of years ago and continues to keep rolling along.
So, don't bother going there either.

If abortion is murder, then blowjobs are cannibalism, and any woman who's had more than one menstruation is a serial killer.

More hypocrisy.

Yes, if flesh is chewed and digested then it's cannabalism.

Menstruation doesn't end a beating heart.

The interpretation of the constitution that every person owns their own body and life is where the right to an abortion is derived from.

When it's a separate heartbeat, a separate DNA, and a separate bloodtype, then it's a separate body, a PERSON.

That (innocent) person deserves to be involved with any decision about his/her life being terminated.

If someone wants to kill you, wouldn't you want a voice in the decision?

If I have a tumor growing inside of me I have the right to have it removed.
The tumor has no say in the issue.
And until it begins having significant brain activity it is just a collection of cells, like my toenails.

So you would support no abortions after the 22nd day?

That is when the heart starts beating, and with a separate blood system.

wouldn't the so called "innocent" be protected by having a murderer locked away for the rest of his day w/o parole?

A murderer can murder even in jail so that doesn't necessarily stop them. I am for protecting even the lives of prisoners from a murderer.

Prison time is what is done in the overwhelming majority of heinous crimes of murder. I am not opposed to that, yet even in the case of capitol punishment, the accused has many appeals and opportunities for mercy, unlike his/her victims had.

Only in the most egregious crimes is capitol punishment even considered. In those cases, I support a fair and impartial jury to make the right decision based on protecting the innocent.

If there is any doubt or uncertainty then there should be allowances made. But one thing is for sure....an executed murderer can't go kill innocent people again.

what i object to is the hypocrites who invoke the mantra that it's against god's will to take a life when it comes to abortion...and THEN hypocritically are for the death penalty.

You are mischaracterizing mine (and God's) position so I'll repeat it for you.


I am against the taking of INNOCENT life. I am for protecting INNOCENT life.


that is 100% consistent with everything I've said and it is your position that is contradictory if you support the indiscriminate murder of innocent children while protecting heinous criminals....or even minnows in the canals around Fresno.

You keep saying 'person' Yod - an unborn child is technically a fetus until it is in fact born. The act of being born bestows the baby wth personhood and the rights that go along with being a person.

That said, I do not believe abortion should be available up until birth (or partial birth abortions either); in fact, there needs to be a cutoff in place where afterwards an abortion is not allowed unless the health of the mother is in jeopardy. I would throw out 90 days after conception as a start, but I am not qualified to determine what this limit should be. 30 days after conception sounds logical, however many women are not aware that they are pregnant that early.

If abortion is murder, then blowjobs are cannibalism, and any woman who's had more than one menstruation is a serial killer.

More hypocrisy.

Yes, if flesh is chewed and digested then it's cannabalism.

Menstruation doesn't end a beating heart.

The interpretation of the constitution that every person owns their own body and life is where the right to an abortion is derived from.

When it's a separate heartbeat, a separate DNA, and a separate bloodtype, then it's a separate body, a PERSON.

That (innocent) person deserves to be involved with any decision about his/her life being terminated.

If someone wants to kill you, wouldn't you want a voice in the decision?

If I have a tumor growing inside of me I have the right to have it removed.
The tumor has no say in the issue.
And until it begins having significant brain activity it is just a collection of cells, like my toenails.

So you would support no abortions after the 22nd day?

That is when the heart starts beating, and with a separate blood system.

I'm no medical expert. But, a heartbeat does not qualify as significant brain activity. Generally, the longer that gestation is prolonged, the less time left that abortion should be an option, unless the woman's life is at risk. Late-term abortions are pretty rare and that's the usual criteria for doing them, as far as I know.

You keep saying 'person' Yod - an unborn child is technically a fetus until it is in fact born. The act of being born bestows the baby wth personhood and the rights that go along with being a person.

That said, I do not believe abortion should be available up until birth (or partial birth abortions either); in fact, there needs to be a cutoff in place where afterwards an abortion is not allowed unless the health of the mother is in jeopardy. I would throw out 90 days after conception as a start, but I am not qualified to determine what this limit should be. 30 days after conception sounds logical, however many women are not aware that they are pregnant that early.

fetus is latin for "baby"



There are so many levels to this subject that all need to be considered, but of utmost importance is what is "right".

I see in you a desire to do what is right when you admit there is a point where a fetus becomes a viable life with the ability to feel pain. I commend you for your honesty.

I have no desire to impose a Theocracy upon a secular nation. I firmly believe that this battle is won on a person-by-person basis and put absolutely no trust in the government to do what is "right" as opposed to what is "legal".

However, I do think that decision should be consistent with our Constitution and based on truth.

I support those American citizens who also have the right to petition the government for changes in our legal system. My focus is on saving people, not defending a religion.

I have felt this way a lonnnng time before I became a christian. I dropped out of high school to marry a young lady because I had made her pregnant. I don't blame women who get abortions, I blame the irresponsible men who forced that decision upon them.



.

I'm no medical expert. But, a heartbeat does not qualify as significant brain activity.

From day 1 all human chromosomes are present and a unique human life begins. Brain activity is not "detected" until about 6 weeks, but I'm not sure that means the brain isn't working since it regulates our heartbeat.

So, ok, I concede that you appear to be making a decision based on what is "right". You would support ending abortions performed after the 6th weeks then?

Generally, the longer that gestation is prolonged, the less time left that abortion should be an option, unless the woman's life is at risk.

I agree

Late-term abortions are pretty rare and that's the usual criteria for doing them, as far as I know.

No, most partial birth abortions are done for personal convenience like the rest of them. They grab the baby's head with forceps and crush their skull, then suck out the brains, and crush the body so it will stop resistance and come out. The baby is squirming and screaming all the while...

Though they might be "rarer" than other forms of abortion, they are grisly and should not be happening at all.

Can we agree on that?

Some of my best friends are anorted feti.

It's hard to hold deer. They are stronger than they look and kick and bite.

I'm no medical expert. But, a heartbeat does not qualify as significant brain activity.

Brain activity is not "detected" until about 6 weeks, but I'm not sure that means the brain isn't working since it regulates our heartbeat.


So, ok, I concede that you appear to be making a decision based on what is "right". You would support ending abortions performed after the 6th week?

Generally, the longer that gestation is prolonged, the less time left that abortion should be an option, unless the woman's life is at risk.

I agree

Late-term abortions are pretty rare and that's the usual criteria for doing them, as far as I know.

Though they might be "rarer" than other forms of abortion, they are grisly and should not be happening at all.

Can we agree on that?

If you mean just let the woman die, then no.
I am not if favor of men deciding what women should do with their bodies at all, period.
If women can reach an agreement on the issue I'd rather just leave it to their judgement and stay out of it altogether.
It's not my business, or yours.
And I expect women to take a more compassionate position on it than men would anyway.
Men would do anything for the unborn.
But, once you're born, you're on your own.

I believe as the old Jews believe.
Soul joins with the body at first breath.

The abortion argument is unwinnable, one way or the other. IN THIS COUNTRY it is still legal to get an abortion. While I think it is reprehensible in situations other than rape or the health of the mother and/or fetus, I do not want to make it illegal. What I would like to see happen is in cases other than rape or health issues, if a woman wants to get an abortion that SHE pays for it out of her own pocket. Federal tax dollars shouldn't pay a penny. If she has health insurance and it covers abortion, then I'm okay with that. If her impregnator helps her pay for it that's okay too. We had another thread about drugs and welfare, where I said the federal government shouldn't bail out irresponsibility. This is the same issue for me. The federal government shouldn't enable people who carelessly screw around get a free abortion.