A Conception's Right To Life

[Mare Tranquillity]

Erroneous. You are fabricating stories now Mare ... as you have nothing left. Another obvious fabrication, Mare. You can do better than to commit such a bald-faced lie.

You didn't write all those posts on Siho's thread? My, my, someone has been posting in your name, Chippo.

It's time for you to call it a day, Mare, as anyone who has read through my postings in this thread realizes that I clearly support science and reject religion in this matter.That you would resort to outright lies in an attempt to "argue your point", shows to all who have been reading this thread that you have nothing of substance in your argument.You do realize that everyone reading this thread just watched you make a buffoon and a hypocrite of yourself.So, once again, you are projecting.
You must really be embarrassed ...... Either that or, because you're a moral relativistic utilitarian, you have no grasp of or respect for the truth.

Again with your "angelic women" vs. "evil men" dualism.

That wasn't in my post, you made that up, it's called "lying". I have been discussing with 3 men on this thread and it was to those three men to which I addressed my questions.

I've already answered these questions multiple times.

So if it's murder 1, how many years would you exact in payment? How will you fund the State's care for the children? Will you work to reform the prisons before you start stuffing the new baby murderers into them? Or will you just try to do it later when you have time?

You, Who, and Pale are trying to do something that has never been achieved before, it's reasonable for me to ask questions about how you intend to do it since you'll obviously be wanting tax payer money to accomplish it.

I'm not surprised that you are retreating into personal attacks on me and denial of your other posts when confronted with your sucking up to science now and your disdain for it on the last thread where you subjected me to your own personal brand of pop. psychological abuse.

 

[Mare Tranquillity]

In summation, now that we have heard all the pontification about science and philosophy, the law remains the same and women have the right to control their bodies--as it should be in my opinion.

I agree that education is an excellent first step, but without changing the way pregnant women and children are ignored by the culture I don't see a chance that there will be a drop in the number of abortions any time soon. That's too bad, but putting more children in State care, more women in prison, and forcing women to bear unwanted babies won't make the situation better--only worse.

Very few women would post on a thread like this because they don't want to endure the abuse, personally I don't care. Being forced to live as a man for nearly 50 years taught me a lot about male bombastry.

 

[Dr.Who]

It won't work, it never has. Even Caucescu couldn't force women despite his decree of a death sentence for aborting a child. Do you remember what Romania was like when he was finally killed? Thousands of babies living in their own feces, ill-fed, un-loved, and thousands of families being raised by single fathers whose wives had died or been killed. Not many of us wish to go back to the Dark Ages like that. If you are not willing to use draconian force including sequestering pregnant women in facilities you will not be able to stop it. And no matter what you do, the well-off people will still get abortions, and the weight of your law will fall on the poorest segments of the population. And will you then say as my brother says, "That women's deaths and suffering are God's punishment on them?" And on their families too.

I'm curious though, since it's going to have to be premeditated murder, or murder 1, will a mother who kills her baby be spared if she has other children? Or will they be declared wards of the State like in Romania? Will a doctor who saves the life of a woman who would otherwise die from a botched abortion be killed too? Wouldn't saving the life of a killer be a crime? Or would it be a blessing, so that once the woman was recovered you could THEN kill her? How will this work? Would a woman who took RU-486 be executed just like any other baby killer? Rape of course would not be an excuse for having an abortion because it's not the baby's fault, if it was your wife would you adopt the child, raise it, and pay for it--because it's not the baby's fault?

I don't think that's going to happen, all around the world there are too many examples of men running and ruining women's lives, there are too many people who see the truth that two wrongs don't make a right, coercing women into being baby-machines will end up killing the women and the babies.

But you should not in any way let my reservations about your intentions, integrity, intelligence, nor my suspicions of your misogyny stand in the way of your attempts to enslave women to your way of thinking. People have always tried to force others to bend to their beliefs--why should you be different?

I will oppose you and your agenda no matter what you call me or how you denigrate me.

If abortions were illegal then they would become much much rarer. There would also be far fewer unwanted pregnancies. There are also so many people desperate to adopt babies (presently being shipped here from china) that there would be no lack of homes for the few in need.

During the 50's and 60 (with a total population of 179,323,175) a whopping total of 150 to 260 women died each year from illegal abortions. I got that stat from the pro choice site NOW:
http://www.now.org/issues/abortion/roe30/beforeafter.html

Today we have reliable birth control pills. We should be able to reduce the number of illegal abortions down below that huge big number of 260 (sarcasm).

 

[Dr.Who]

Some things I just learned about abortion:

http://www.lifenews.com/nat4513.html

 

[Dr.Who]

More info:

http://www.clinicquotes.com/illegal abortions.htm

P.S. look for the lie from Ellen Goodman, a professional reporter.

 

[Chip]

You didn't write all those posts on Siho's thread? My, my, someone has been posting in your name, Chippo.

Topically irrelevant and false allusion.

If you had proof, you would have posted it.

You have nothing ... but lies.

That wasn't in my post, you made that up, it's called "lying". I have been discussing with 3 men on this thread and it was to those three men to which I addressed my questions..

You posted in response to me, which you did by quoting me.

I responded.

Your "angelic women" vs. "evil men" drama is strewn throughout your posts. I simply gave it an accurate name.

Live with the truth of it ... the rest of us reading your posts have.

So if it's murder 1, how many years would you exact in payment? How will you fund the State's care for the children? Will you work to reform the prisons before you start stuffing the new baby murderers into them? Or will you just try to do it later when you have time?

I don't have those answers.

Those who are in charge at the time the law against murderous abortion goes into effect will determine the best course of action.

I would advise a general reform of prisions now, regardless of future inmates.

Nevertheless, no new prisioners deserve special treatment more than any others, health exceptions notwithstanding.

The crime of murderous abortion is not special, no more special than the crime of murdering post-natals.

There should rightly be no special treatment for murderers of pre-natals.

You, Who, and Pale are trying to do something that has never been achieved before, it's reasonable for me to ask questions about how you intend to do it since you'll obviously be wanting tax payer money to accomplish it.

There is nothing special about the matter.

There will be no additional tax drain because people simply won't be commiting murderous abortion.

Your assumption that the prisons will be clogged with pre-natal murderers is false.

People will simply stop murdering pre-natals.

It doesn't matter whether we can answer your questions or not.

The fact remains, that the new law soon in humanity's future to be enacted will make murderous abortion illegal.

How its enactment and enforcement will be carried out will be determined by those in charge at the time.

Your request for all these details of the future is simply your way of stalling your acceptance of the inevitable.

I'm not surprised that you are retreating into personal attacks on me and denial of your other posts when confronted with your sucking up to science now and your disdain for it on the last thread where you subjected me to your own personal brand of pop. psychological abuse.

Erroneous and irrelvant.

Your lie-based ad hominem is of no consequence.

Still, you can do better.

 

[Mare Tranquillity]

Topically irrelevant and false allusion.If you had proof, you would have posted it.

I posted it, but if you remember you refused to read it. My posts remain on the thread to prove my assertion.

The law remains and women still have control of their bodies. Deal with it. Thanks for playing.

 

[Dr.Who]

more info

http://www.forerunner.com/forerunner/X0449_Life_Without_Roe.html

If roe were repealed and abortions became illegal again less women would die as a result of illegal abortions than die today as a result of legal abortions.

And clearly less babies would die.

 

[Mare Tranquillity]

If abortions were illegal then they would become much much rarer. There would also be far fewer unwanted pregnancies. There are also so many people desperate to adopt babies (presently being shipped here from china) that there would be no lack of homes for the few in need.

During the 50's and 60 (with a total population of 179,323,175) a whopping total of 150 to 260 women died each year from illegal abortions. I got that stat from the pro choice site NOW:
http://www.now.org/issues/abortion/roe30/beforeafter.html

Today we have reliable birth control pills. We should be able to reduce the number of illegal abortions down below that huge big number of 260 (sarcasm).

If your figures were right, and your assertions were correct, then there would be no reason for the 40 million abortions that Pale posted about. Somehow the figures don't add up. If there is no need for abortions, and science will convince people as Chippo said, then once again, we have no need for draconian laws. Something doesn't fit here, I'm not sure what but... the law stands.

I looked up your citation: Approximately 50% of all maternal deaths resulted from illegal abortion during the first half of the 20th century

Estimates of the annual number of illegal abortions in the 1950s and 60s range from 200,000 to 1.2 million, even though abortion procedures were unsafe and often life-threatening, in addition to being illegal

During the 1950s and 60s, each year an estimated 160 to 260 women died from illegal abortions, while thousands more were seriously injured

You didn't actually post all the pertinent information, did you? Fifty percent of all maternal deaths, thousands seriously injured, and you want to go back to that?

 

[Mare Tranquillity]

Some things I just learned about abortion:

http://www.lifenews.com/nat4513.html

Once again, I looked up your citation and you didn't post all the pertinent information, did you?

If the laws have not been written, then how can your anti-choice religious site know whether women will be targeted for jail or not? Because they were not in the past will not mollify the Pale Chippos of the world who on this thread are demanding prison sentences. Their first assertion is false.

If there is a Federal law against abortion it will supercede the State laws, so their second assertion is false.

 

[Mare Tranquillity]

More info:

http://www.clinicquotes.com/illegal abortions.htm

P.S. look for the lie from Ellen Goodman, a professional reporter.

I had never seen such inflated figures, I'm glad to know that less women died than some have claimed, thanks.

 

[Dr.Who]

an interesting article

http://www.nationalreview.com/flashback/flashback-editors012203.asp

 

[Chip]

In summation, now that we have heard all the pontification

False.

There has been no pontification.

There has been presentation of scientific fact.

about science

Precisely -- that is what has been presented.

and philosophy,

It is the "philosophical" opinion of all but a microscopic few of humanity that muder is wrong.

Unjustified abortion can be murder.

Therefore murderous abortion is wrong.

the law remains the same

For now.

Roe v. Wade's days are, understandably, numbered.

Best would be to prepare for that inevitability ... by accepting that inevitability.

and women have the right to control their bodies--

No person has the right to "control" their body to commit murder.

The horrific and unjust Roe v Wade will be struck down.

as it should be in my opinion.

Which makes it clear you support murder by abortion.

I agree that education is an excellent first step,

Good, then start educating people about murderous abortion, to stop commiting murderous abortion, and to prepare for the comming change in law that will outlaw murderous abortion under the threat of punishment.

but without changing the way pregnant women and children are ignored by the culture

Erroneous and irrelevant.

It is erreoneous in that "pregnant women and children" are not ignored by our culture.

It is irrelevant in that your thereby implied excuse does not justify murderous abortion.

I don't see a chance that there will be a drop in the number of abortions any time soon.

Your myopia is irrelevant.

If given a choice between carrying a child to term or spending many years in prison, only a ***** would choose the latter.

There aren't that many morons out there.

The number of abortions will drop immediately upon enactment of the new law.

That's too bad, but putting more children in State care, more women in prison, and forcing women to bear unwanted babies won't make the situation better--only worse.

Erroneous.

If people choose to break the law, they will go to prison.

Their encarceration, publicized in the media, will get the attention of anyone refusing to respect the right to life of newly conceived people.

There will only need to be a few scoflaws to end murderous abortion.

In addition, when women bear unplanned pregnancies it will indeed make the situation better -- it will mean that newly conceived people won't be murdered.

That's a far better situation than before.

Men and women who participate in sex will understand the new law and they'll make pre-conception adjustments. They will also, as a pleasant byproduct, become more discriminating about whom they choose as partners, more and more they will choose partners with whom they would make a commitment should pregnancy occur.

These are all good things.

Very few women would post on a thread like this because they don't want to endure the abuse,

I've been on boards before where many women post in favor of putting an end to murderous abortion.

There are no "evil men" here abusing "angelic women", Mare. You really would do well to drop that victimization.

The reason less women post on this thread is two fold: first, they recognize the reality of the science and the truth of the personhood of the pre-natal person, they have actually given birth, and they no better, from experience, to deny the truth of it, and second, because to a great degree most posters on this and most political discussion boards are men.

personally I don't care.

Absolutely untrue, as evidenced by your posts.

Being forced to live as a man for nearly 50 years taught me a lot about male bombastry.

Yes, yes, we know, Mare, we know all about your misandry.

You really need to give that male self-hatred a rest, Mare -- it gets really old, not to mention that your illusion is topically irrelevant.

 

[Mare Tranquillity]

more info

http://www.forerunner.com/forerunner/X0449_Life_Without_Roe.html

If roe were repealed and abortions became illegal again less women would die as a result of illegal abortions than die today as a result of legal abortions.

And clearly less babies would die.

I read you citation, it won't carry much weight unless you can find the information from a non-religious site.

If all the stuff you and chippo have posted is true, then abortion is going the way of the dodo bird, science will out, right? And if there is no need for abortions then women won't get them. Perhaps making a law to deny them is the thing that's causing the backlash, maybe if you stop pushing so hard people would stop pushing back.

 

[Chip]

I posted it, but if you remember you refused to read it. My posts remain on the thread to prove my assertion.

Translation: "I, Mare, lied about Chip's rejection of the science I presented about transsexuals."

Give it a rest, Mare -- you're not only compounding your lie, it's topically irrelevant to this thread.

The law remains

Temporarily.

and women still have control of their bodies

Women today are allowed by law to commit murderous abortion.

The revelation of science that a person, a unique individual human being, begins to live at the moment of conception, is making that law's, Roe v. Wade's, days numbered.

Even though murderous abortion is legitimized by the heinous Roe v. Wade, women would do well not to commit murderous abortion, as the taking of their offspring's life via murderous abortion severely damages a woman both physiologically and psychologically.

And, considering the law will soon be changed to outlaw murderous abortion under penalty of law, we would all do well to begin practicing respect for the right to life of newly conceived people.

Deal with it.

Easily, as I have just done.

The one having the difficulties dealing with what the murderous abortion outlawed future has in store for such murderers ... is you.

Thanks for playing.

Yes, your game is truly over.