So. Does one human being's "right" to not be inconvenienced really outweigh another human being's actual right to live?
no it does not
So. Does one human being's "right" to not be inconvenienced really outweigh another human being's actual right to live?
You credit people with being special and then disingenuously claim that I am calling for the deaths of millions when I simply point out that we have used are "specialness" for greed and stupidity. Kind of a leap, isn't it?
Oh dear....you knew I would have to answer this ....
Despite my inability to refute the logic of our last conversation - I still believe in a seperation of "person" and "human being". I do not think abortion should ever be something undertaken lightly and I do not think most women do so. However until the fetus has brainwaves, the mother's rights overide any presumed rights it might have. It's her body and no other person has any right to force an unwanted choice on her - whether it's the government of China forcing abortions on mothers to be or a group of strangers preventing abortion in the US.
You credit people with being special and then disingenuously claim that I am calling for the deaths of millions when I simply point out that we have used are "specialness" for greed and stupidity. Kind of a leap, isn't it?
Well, Congressman, let me say with respect to your comments about Margaret Sanger, you know, I admire Thomas Jefferson. I admire his words and his leadership and I deplore his unrepentant slaveholding. I admire Margaret Sanger being a pioneer in trying to empower women to have some control over their bodies and I deplore statements that you have referenced. That is the way we often are when we look at flawed human beings. There are things that we admire and things we deplore.
http://www.weeklystandard.com/weblogs/TWSFP/2009/04/sec_clinton_nonsensically_comp_1.asp
This is the common comment that truely amazes me as being so disengeuous to the point of arrogance:
"I admire Margaret Sanger being a pioneer in trying to empower women to have some control over their bodies "
When did women not have control over their bodies? Save for the cases of rape (incest, sex slave, domestic abuse, are all forms of rape) does not the woman choose to have sex? Is someone somehow forcing her to have sex? Does she not have the willpower to refrain from sex, or is she an abject slave to "raging hormones"?
Women want to claim for their own that they are stronger, wiser, yada, yada, then men, yet when it comes to this one topic all of a sudden they are weak, and just slightly better then animals.
In regard to the other persons comment about man having created war, the nuclear bomb, etc., you have really never looked at the animal kingdom.
Abortion is the epitome of evil!!!
Please God forgive us! Please God protect the unborn and change the minds of the baby murderers!
Maybe you could circulate a petition.
That's always a good way to combat pure evil.
it reminds me of this verse:Abortion is the epitome of evil!!!
Please God forgive us! Please God protect the unborn and change the minds of the baby murderers!
I will.
Can I count on you signing the petition?
Oh, no. I support a woman's right to choose.
You mean to say - you support a mother's right to murder her child for convenience seek.
Very evil indeed.