| Topic: |
Science > Abortion |
| User: |
"Gegenwart911" |
| Date: |
29 Oct 2007 12:49:03 PM |
| Object: |
A View on Abortion |
Hi group-
I must say its a bit difficult at times figuring out exactly what you
all are about...and I thought this was an abortion
Usenet....anyway....to get back to the topic at hand....here's is my
take on abortion. Let's see how it strikes you.
Abortion has nothing to do with a woman's supposed right to her body.
This 'keep your laws off/out of my body' thing is absurd, especially
when laws concerning murder, public protest, theft, compulsory
service, indecent exposure, physical and emotional abuse, driving
while intoxicated, etc are readily accepted. Its no stretch to see
that your body, whether male or female, is fully capable of infringing
on the life and property of others.
Abortion is a prime site for this test as it (would seem to) directly
impact the body of 2 human organisms, one fully formed, the other in a
state of formation. It is the latter with which we should be
concerned. We mostly try to determine whether or not or when such a
forming organism is 'one of us' and subject to our laws.
I hope we remember to go the next step here, to consider context. Law
derives from a culturally-based aparatus (and not on some kind of
absolute such as God). We allow a certain degree of flexibility into
how we define and deal with offenses. There are many different types
of theft and murder, destruction and abuse- each subset with differing
severities influencing differing severities of punishment. This is
only to illustrate that we do not hold offenses in black and white. We
couch them in the context of our society and the context in which the
offense was committed.
It is that nature of societal and interpersonal contextualisation that
should allow for abortion. Sex is easy, pregnancy a little less so,
biologically speaking, but is a natural outcome of unprotected
heterosexual sex. Sex and pregnancy do not imply that one can care for
the resulting child or that one will care for the child at all. If
such a situation occurs in which the parents do not want the child or
cannot support it, they should have the priviledge to choose whether
or not to terminate the pregnancy. This should be allowed (as it
currently is in most cases) with impunity up until the first
trimester. The second trimester should be proscribable, abortion into
the third trimester should be allowable only in the case of extreme
physical/mental impairment or clear and immediate loss of the mother's
life.
We have enough unwanted and impoverished children. They are not to
blame for their position, rather their parents are. Society should
allow those would-be parents the ability to deal with the situation
they have mistankly created (a pregnancy) in a moral and significant
way.
So, to sum it up-
the decision to have a child should be contextually based and subject
to proscription only after the 1st trimester of pregnancy.
.
|
|
| User: "Ray Fischer" |
|
| Title: Re: A View on Abortion |
30 Oct 2007 12:29:35 AM |
|
|
Gegenwart911 <Gegenwart911@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi group-
I must say its a bit difficult at times figuring out exactly what you
all are about...and I thought this was an abortion
Usenet....anyway....to get back to the topic at hand....here's is my
take on abortion. Let's see how it strikes you.
Abortion has nothing to do with a woman's supposed right to her body.
Yes it does.
This 'keep your laws off/out of my body' thing is absurd, especially
when laws concerning murder, public protest, theft, compulsory
service, indecent exposure, physical and emotional abuse, driving
while intoxicated, etc are readily accepted.
NONE, with one except, requires a person's forced servitude, and even
compulsory military service does not allow the mandatory injury of
soldiers.
Your argument is base upon a false premise.
[...]
So, to sum it up-
the decision to have a child should be contextually based and subject
to proscription only after the 1st trimester of pregnancy.
Women are not the property of you, the state, your church, or the
fetus, and yuou have no right to command her abject servitude.
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "Gegenwart911" |
|
| Title: Re: A View on Abortion |
30 Oct 2007 07:23:26 AM |
|
|
On Oct 30, 1:29 am, (Ray Fischer) wrote:
Gegenwart911 <Gegenwart...@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi group-
I must say its a bit difficult at times figuring out exactly what you
all are about...and I thought this was an abortion
Usenet....anyway....to get back to the topic at hand....here's is my
take on abortion. Let's see how it strikes you.
Abortion has nothing to do with a woman's supposed right to her body.
Yes it does.
This 'keep your laws off/out of my body' thing is absurd, especially
when laws concerning murder, public protest, theft, compulsory
service, indecent exposure, physical and emotional abuse, driving
while intoxicated, etc are readily accepted.
NONE, with one except, requires a person's forced servitude, and even
compulsory military service does not allow the mandatory injury of
soldiers.
Your argument is base upon a false premise.
[...]
So, to sum it up-
the decision to have a child should be contextually based and subject
to proscription only after the 1st trimester of pregnancy.
Women are not the property of you, the state, your church, or the
fetus, and yuou have no right to command her abject servitude.
--
Ray Fischer
Hi Ray-
who said anything about property? not me. and I certainly said nothing
about abject servitude. dont respond on a false premise and i will
take your charges that i argue on a false premise seriously.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ray Fischer" |
|
| Title: Re: A View on Abortion |
30 Oct 2007 12:15:19 PM |
|
|
Gegenwart911 <Gegenwart911@gmail.com> wrote:
On Oct 30, 1:29 am, (Ray Fischer) wrote:
Gegenwart911 <Gegenwart...@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi group-
I must say its a bit difficult at times figuring out exactly what you
all are about...and I thought this was an abortion
Usenet....anyway....to get back to the topic at hand....here's is my
take on abortion. Let's see how it strikes you.
Abortion has nothing to do with a woman's supposed right to her body.
Yes it does.
This 'keep your laws off/out of my body' thing is absurd, especially
when laws concerning murder, public protest, theft, compulsory
service, indecent exposure, physical and emotional abuse, driving
while intoxicated, etc are readily accepted.
NONE, with one except, requires a person's forced servitude, and even
compulsory military service does not allow the mandatory injury of
soldiers.
Your argument is base upon a false premise.
[...]
So, to sum it up-
the decision to have a child should be contextually based and subject
to proscription only after the 1st trimester of pregnancy.
Women are not the property of you, the state, your church, or the
fetus, and yuou have no right to command her abject servitude.
Hi Ray-
who said anything about property? not me. and I certainly said nothing
about abject servitude.
Pregnancy and childbirth is servitude to the fetus. Forced servitude
is illegal.
dont respond on a false premise
Your premise that servitude may be forced is incorrect.
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "Gegenwart911" |
|
| Title: Re: A View on Abortion |
01 Nov 2007 08:29:22 AM |
|
|
On Oct 30, 1:15 pm, (Ray Fischer) wrote:
Gegenwart911 <Gegenwart...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Oct 30, 1:29 am, (Ray Fischer) wrote:
Gegenwart911 <Gegenwart...@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi group-
I must say its a bit difficult at times figuring out exactly what you
all are about...and I thought this was an abortion
Usenet....anyway....to get back to the topic at hand....here's is my
take on abortion. Let's see how it strikes you.
Abortion has nothing to do with a woman's supposed right to her body.
Yes it does.
This 'keep your laws off/out of my body' thing is absurd, especially
when laws concerning murder, public protest, theft, compulsory
service, indecent exposure, physical and emotional abuse, driving
while intoxicated, etc are readily accepted.
NONE, with one except, requires a person's forced servitude, and even
compulsory military service does not allow the mandatory injury of
soldiers.
Your argument is base upon a false premise.
[...]
So, to sum it up-
the decision to have a child should be contextually based and subject
to proscription only after the 1st trimester of pregnancy.
Women are not the property of you, the state, your church, or the
fetus, and yuou have no right to command her abject servitude.
Hi Ray-
who said anything about property? not me. and I certainly said nothing
about abject servitude.
Pregnancy and childbirth is servitude to the fetus. Forced servitude
is illegal.
dont respond on a false premise
Your premise that servitude may be forced is incorrect.
--
Ray Fischer
- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
But doesnt a fetus survives by forced survitude of his pregnant
parent?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ray Fischer" |
|
| Title: Re: A View on Abortion |
01 Nov 2007 12:14:01 PM |
|
|
Gegenwart911 <Gegenwart911@gmail.com> wrote:
On Oct 30, 1:15 pm, (Ray Fischer) wrote:
Gegenwart911 <Gegenwart...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Oct 30, 1:29 am, (Ray Fischer) wrote:
Gegenwart911 <Gegenwart...@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi group-
I must say its a bit difficult at times figuring out exactly what you
all are about...and I thought this was an abortion
Usenet....anyway....to get back to the topic at hand....here's is my
take on abortion. Let's see how it strikes you.
Abortion has nothing to do with a woman's supposed right to her body.
Yes it does.
This 'keep your laws off/out of my body' thing is absurd, especially
when laws concerning murder, public protest, theft, compulsory
service, indecent exposure, physical and emotional abuse, driving
while intoxicated, etc are readily accepted.
NONE, with one except, requires a person's forced servitude, and even
compulsory military service does not allow the mandatory injury of
soldiers.
Your argument is base upon a false premise.
[...]
So, to sum it up-
the decision to have a child should be contextually based and subject
to proscription only after the 1st trimester of pregnancy.
Women are not the property of you, the state, your church, or the
fetus, and yuou have no right to command her abject servitude.
Hi Ray-
who said anything about property? not me. and I certainly said nothing
about abject servitude.
Pregnancy and childbirth is servitude to the fetus. Forced servitude
is illegal.
dont respond on a false premise
Your premise that servitude may be forced is incorrect.
But doesnt a fetus survives by forced survitude of his pregnant
parent?
No. The vast majority of women who give birth do so willingly.
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "Gegenwart911" |
|
| Title: Re: A View on Abortion |
04 Nov 2007 05:59:25 PM |
|
|
On Nov 1, 12:14 pm, (Ray Fischer) wrote:
Gegenwart911 <Gegenwart...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Oct 30, 1:15 pm, (Ray Fischer) wrote:
Gegenwart911 <Gegenwart...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Oct 30, 1:29 am, (Ray Fischer) wrote:
Gegenwart911 <Gegenwart...@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi group-
I must say its a bit difficult at times figuring out exactly what you
all are about...and I thought this was an abortion
Usenet....anyway....to get back to the topic at hand....here's is my
take on abortion. Let's see how it strikes you.
Abortion has nothing to do with a woman's supposed right to her body.
Yes it does.
This 'keep your laws off/out of my body' thing is absurd, especially
when laws concerning murder, public protest, theft, compulsory
service, indecent exposure, physical and emotional abuse, driving
while intoxicated, etc are readily accepted.
NONE, with one except, requires a person's forced servitude, and even
compulsory military service does not allow the mandatory injury of
soldiers.
Your argument is base upon a false premise.
[...]
So, to sum it up-
the decision to have a child should be contextually based and subject
to proscription only after the 1st trimester of pregnancy.
Women are not the property of you, the state, your church, or the
fetus, and yuou have no right to command her abject servitude.
Hi Ray-
who said anything about property? not me. and I certainly said nothing
about abject servitude.
Pregnancy and childbirth is servitude to the fetus. Forced servitude
is illegal.
dont respond on a false premise
Your premise that servitude may be forced is incorrect.
But doesnt a fetus survives by forced survitude of his pregnant
parent?
No. The vast majority of women who give birth do so willingly.
--
Ray Fischer
- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
yeah, and? skirting the principle here, ray??
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ray Fischer" |
|
| Title: Re: A View on Abortion |
04 Nov 2007 07:29:09 PM |
|
|
Gegenwart911 <Gegenwart911@gmail.com> wrote:
On Nov 1, 12:14 pm, (Ray Fischer) wrote:
Gegenwart911 <Gegenwart...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Oct 30, 1:15 pm, (Ray Fischer) wrote:
Gegenwart911 <Gegenwart...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Oct 30, 1:29 am, (Ray Fischer) wrote:
Gegenwart911 <Gegenwart...@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi group-
I must say its a bit difficult at times figuring out exactly what you
all are about...and I thought this was an abortion
Usenet....anyway....to get back to the topic at hand....here's is my
take on abortion. Let's see how it strikes you.
Abortion has nothing to do with a woman's supposed right to her body.
Yes it does.
This 'keep your laws off/out of my body' thing is absurd, especially
when laws concerning murder, public protest, theft, compulsory
service, indecent exposure, physical and emotional abuse, driving
while intoxicated, etc are readily accepted.
NONE, with one except, requires a person's forced servitude, and even
compulsory military service does not allow the mandatory injury of
soldiers.
Your argument is base upon a false premise.
[...]
So, to sum it up-
the decision to have a child should be contextually based and subject
to proscription only after the 1st trimester of pregnancy.
Women are not the property of you, the state, your church, or the
fetus, and yuou have no right to command her abject servitude.
Hi Ray-
who said anything about property? not me. and I certainly said nothing
about abject servitude.
Pregnancy and childbirth is servitude to the fetus. Forced servitude
is illegal.
dont respond on a false premise
Your premise that servitude may be forced is incorrect.
But doesnt a fetus survives by forced survitude of his pregnant
parent?
No. The vast majority of women who give birth do so willingly.
yeah, and?
The premise that servitude may be forced is incorrect.
skirting the principle here, ray??
No. Are you confused?
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "Gegenwart911" |
|
| Title: Re: A View on Abortion |
05 Nov 2007 03:43:51 PM |
|
|
On Nov 4, 8:29 pm, (Ray Fischer) wrote:
Gegenwart911 <Gegenwart...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Nov 1, 12:14 pm, (Ray Fischer) wrote:
Gegenwart911 <Gegenwart...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Oct 30, 1:15 pm, (Ray Fischer) wrote:
Gegenwart911 <Gegenwart...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Oct 30, 1:29 am, (Ray Fischer) wrote:
Gegenwart911 <Gegenwart...@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi group-
I must say its a bit difficult at times figuring out exactly what you
all are about...and I thought this was an abortion
Usenet....anyway....to get back to the topic at hand....here's is my
take on abortion. Let's see how it strikes you.
Abortion has nothing to do with a woman's supposed right to her body.
Yes it does.
This 'keep your laws off/out of my body' thing is absurd, especially
when laws concerning murder, public protest, theft, compulsory
service, indecent exposure, physical and emotional abuse, driving
while intoxicated, etc are readily accepted.
NONE, with one except, requires a person's forced servitude, and even
compulsory military service does not allow the mandatory injury of
soldiers.
Your argument is base upon a false premise.
[...]
So, to sum it up-
the decision to have a child should be contextually based and subject
to proscription only after the 1st trimester of pregnancy.
Women are not the property of you, the state, your church, or the
fetus, and yuou have no right to command her abject servitude.
Hi Ray-
who said anything about property? not me. and I certainly said nothing
about abject servitude.
Pregnancy and childbirth is servitude to the fetus. Forced servitude
is illegal.
dont respond on a false premise
Your premise that servitude may be forced is incorrect.
But doesnt a fetus survives by forced survitude of his pregnant
parent?
No. The vast majority of women who give birth do so willingly.
yeah, and?
The premise that servitude may be forced is incorrect.
skirting the principle here, ray??
No. Are you confused?
--
Ray Fischer
- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
OMG. this is like arguing with a 3 year old. Go ***** yourself, Ray.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ray Fischer" |
|
| Title: Re: A View on Abortion |
05 Nov 2007 10:25:43 PM |
|
|
Gegenwart911 <Gegenwart911@gmail.com> wrote:
On Nov 4, 8:29 pm, (Ray Fischer) wrote:
Gegenwart911 <Gegenwart...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Nov 1, 12:14 pm, (Ray Fischer) wrote:
Gegenwart911 <Gegenwart...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Oct 30, 1:15 pm, (Ray Fischer) wrote:
Gegenwart911 <Gegenwart...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Oct 30, 1:29 am, (Ray Fischer) wrote:
Gegenwart911 <Gegenwart...@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi group-
I must say its a bit difficult at times figuring out exactly what you
all are about...and I thought this was an abortion
Usenet....anyway....to get back to the topic at hand....here's is my
take on abortion. Let's see how it strikes you.
Abortion has nothing to do with a woman's supposed right to her body.
Yes it does.
This 'keep your laws off/out of my body' thing is absurd, especially
when laws concerning murder, public protest, theft, compulsory
service, indecent exposure, physical and emotional abuse, driving
while intoxicated, etc are readily accepted.
NONE, with one except, requires a person's forced servitude, and even
compulsory military service does not allow the mandatory injury of
soldiers.
Your argument is base upon a false premise.
[...]
So, to sum it up-
the decision to have a child should be contextually based and subject
to proscription only after the 1st trimester of pregnancy.
Women are not the property of you, the state, your church, or the
fetus, and yuou have no right to command her abject servitude.
Hi Ray-
who said anything about property? not me. and I certainly said nothing
about abject servitude.
Pregnancy and childbirth is servitude to the fetus. Forced servitude
is illegal.
dont respond on a false premise
Your premise that servitude may be forced is incorrect.
But doesnt a fetus survives by forced survitude of his pregnant
parent?
No. The vast majority of women who give birth do so willingly.
yeah, and?
The premise that servitude may be forced is incorrect.
skirting the principle here, ray??
No. Are you confused?
OMG. this is like arguing with a 3 year old. Go ***** yourself, Ray.
The final argument of the 12-year-old halfwit.
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "Gegenwart911" |
|
| Title: Re: A View on Abortion |
06 Nov 2007 09:56:39 AM |
|
|
On Nov 5, 11:25 pm, (Ray Fischer) wrote:
Gegenwart911 <Gegenwart...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Nov 4, 8:29 pm, (Ray Fischer) wrote:
Gegenwart911 <Gegenwart...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Nov 1, 12:14 pm, (Ray Fischer) wrote:
Gegenwart911 <Gegenwart...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Oct 30, 1:15 pm, (Ray Fischer) wrote:
Gegenwart911 <Gegenwart...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Oct 30, 1:29 am, (Ray Fischer) wrote:
Gegenwart911 <Gegenwart...@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi group-
I must say its a bit difficult at times figuring out exactly what you
all are about...and I thought this was an abortion
Usenet....anyway....to get back to the topic at hand....here's is my
take on abortion. Let's see how it strikes you.
Abortion has nothing to do with a woman's supposed right to her body.
Yes it does.
This 'keep your laws off/out of my body' thing is absurd, especially
when laws concerning murder, public protest, theft, compulsory
service, indecent exposure, physical and emotional abuse, driving
while intoxicated, etc are readily accepted.
NONE, with one except, requires a person's forced servitude, and even
compulsory military service does not allow the mandatory injury of
soldiers.
Your argument is base upon a false premise.
[...]
So, to sum it up-
the decision to have a child should be contextually based and subject
to proscription only after the 1st trimester of pregnancy.
Women are not the property of you, the state, your church, or the
fetus, and yuou have no right to command her abject servitude.
Hi Ray-
who said anything about property? not me. and I certainly said nothing
about abject servitude.
Pregnancy and childbirth is servitude to the fetus. Forced servitude
is illegal.
dont respond on a false premise
Your premise that servitude may be forced is incorrect.
But doesnt a fetus survives by forced survitude of his pregnant
parent?
No. The vast majority of women who give birth do so willingly.
yeah, and?
The premise that servitude may be forced is incorrect.
skirting the principle here, ray??
No. Are you confused?
OMG. this is like arguing with a 3 year old. Go ***** yourself, Ray.
The final argument of the 12-year-old halfwit.
--
Ray Fischer
- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
indeed.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Robert" |
|
| Title: Re: A View on Abortion |
06 Nov 2007 02:47:23 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 05 Nov 2007 21:43:51 -0000, Gegenwart911
<Gegenwart911@gmail.com> wrote:
Ray Fischer
rfisc...@sonic.net - Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
OMG. this is like arguing with a 3 year old. Go ***** yourself, Ray.
Actually most 3 year old children understand simple logic, far moreso
than Ray. He's convinced that he's right, and any thing to the
contrary has to be wrong.
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ray Fischer" |
|
| Title: Re: A View on Abortion |
07 Nov 2007 01:05:56 AM |
|
|
Robert <robpar@netportusa.com> wrote:
Gegenwart911
Ray Fischer
- Show quoted text -
OMG. this is like arguing with a 3 year old. Go ***** yourself, Ray.
Actually most 3 year old children understand simple logic, far moreso
than Ray. He's convinced that he's right, and any thing to the
contrary has to be wrong.
That's because he usually is right and your childish little whining
doesn't alter that fact.
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "elizabeth" |
|
| Title: Re: A View on Abortion |
07 Nov 2007 07:54:50 PM |
|
|
On Nov 6, 11:05 pm, (Ray Fischer) wrote:
Robert <rob...@netportusa.com> wrote:
Gegenwart911
Ray Fischer
- Show quoted text -
OMG. this is like arguing with a 3 year old. Go ***** yourself, Ray.
Actually most 3 year old children understand simple logic, far moreso
than Ray. He's convinced that he's right, and any thing to the
contrary has to be wrong.
That's because he usually is right and your childish little whining
doesn't alter that fact.
But 3 year olds don't understand logic, but are self centered beings
with no empathy.
that's probably why he identifies with them
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "elizabeth" |
|
| Title: Re: A View on Abortion |
05 Nov 2007 08:51:09 PM |
|
|
On Nov 5, 1:43 pm, Gegenwart911 <Gegenwart...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Nov 4, 8:29 pm, (Ray Fischer) wrote:
Gegenwart911 <Gegenwart...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Nov 1, 12:14 pm, (Ray Fischer) wrote:
Gegenwart911 <Gegenwart...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Oct 30, 1:15 pm, (Ray Fischer) wrote:
Gegenwart911 <Gegenwart...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Oct 30, 1:29 am, (Ray Fischer) wrote:
Gegenwart911 <Gegenwart...@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi group-
I must say its a bit difficult at times figuring out exactly what you
all are about...and I thought this was an abortion
Usenet....anyway....to get back to the topic at hand....here's is my
take on abortion. Let's see how it strikes you.
Abortion has nothing to do with a woman's supposed right to her body.
Yes it does.
This 'keep your laws off/out of my body' thing is absurd, especially
when laws concerning murder, public protest, theft, compulsory
service, indecent exposure, physical and emotional abuse, driving
while intoxicated, etc are readily accepted.
NONE, with one except, requires a person's forced servitude, and even
compulsory military service does not allow the mandatory injury of
soldiers.
Your argument is base upon a false premise.
[...]
So, to sum it up-
the decision to have a child should be contextually based and subject
to proscription only after the 1st trimester of pregnancy.
Women are not the property of you, the state, your church, or the
fetus, and yuou have no right to command her abject servitude.
Hi Ray-
who said anything about property? not me. and I certainly said nothing
about abject servitude.
Pregnancy and childbirth is servitude to the fetus. Forced servitude
is illegal.
dont respond on a false premise
Your premise that servitude may be forced is incorrect.
But doesnt a fetus survives by forced survitude of his pregnant
parent?
No. The vast majority of women who give birth do so willingly.
yeah, and?
The premise that servitude may be forced is incorrect.
skirting the principle here, ray??
No. Are you confused?
--
Ray Fischer
- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
OMG. this is like arguing with a 3 year old. Go ***** yourself, Ray.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Yes, you are a newbie fuckwad!
Go ***** your daddy, if you know who he is. Or are you already?
.
|
|
|
| User: "mom0f4boys" |
|
| Title: Re: A View on Abortion |
05 Nov 2007 09:36:18 PM |
|
|
Gegenwart911... having fun yet? You made very good points in your
original post. It is very frustrating, when one wants to discuss
abortion rationally, to have the discussion boil down so quickly to
'go ***** your daddy'. This subject brings out the worst in people,
and reading these boards, it actually seems to bring out the worst
people, period. If only there was some code word, to create a group
where people could talk about abortion politely and intelligently,
away from the rage-heads.
As it is, any mention of abortion brings out the nuts on both
sides of the issue.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Gegenwart911" |
|
| Title: Re: A View on Abortion |
06 Nov 2007 09:56:02 AM |
|
|
On Nov 5, 10:36 pm, mom0f4boys <momsh...@msn.com> wrote:
Gegenwart911... having fun yet? You made very good points in your
original post. It is very frustrating, when one wants to discuss
abortion rationally, to have the discussion boil down so quickly to
'go ***** your daddy'. This subject brings out the worst in people,
and reading these boards, it actually seems to bring out the worst
people, period. If only there was some code word, to create a group
where people could talk about abortion politely and intelligently,
away from the rage-heads.
As it is, any mention of abortion brings out the nuts on both
sides of the issue.
quite right, it seems. alas...
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "elizabeth" |
|
| Title: Re: A View on Abortion |
06 Nov 2007 12:59:57 PM |
|
|
On Nov 5, 7:36 pm, mom0f4boys <momsh...@msn.com> wrote:
Gegenwart911... having fun yet? You made very good points in your
original post.
More proof you're on the left side of the bell shaped curve.
It is very frustrating, when one wants to discuss
abortion rationally,
It's very simple. If you don't like abortion, don't get one. Banning
abortion doesn't end it, only makes it expensive and dangerous.
That's why laws banning abortion were eliminated in countries that
consider women to be human beings. However, a sow like you, whose
only value to self is that of a breeding animal, would find the idea
of optional breeding to be a threat to your identity.
to have the discussion boil down so quickly to
'go ***** your daddy'.
Geg is a troll, and not a very bright one. Those of us who have been
here for years have heard that sort of ***** before. And it's
still as invalid as ever.
This subject brings out the worst in people,
and reading these boards, it actually seems to bring out the worst
people, period.
that would include you, sowella.
If only there was some code word, to create a group
where people could talk about abortion politely and intelligently,
away from the rage-heads.
No need to do that.
As it is, any mention of abortion brings out the nuts on both
sides of the issue.
At least the nuts on my side don't murder people and blow up clinics.
It's too bad you think of yourself as just a ***** with legs, but there
are women who are much more than you'll ever be. And we don't like
you dragging us down.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Gegenwart911" |
|
| Title: Re: A View on Abortion |
08 Nov 2007 07:26:27 AM |
|
|
It's very simple. If you don't like abortion, don't get one. Banning
abortion doesn't end it, only makes it expensive and dangerous.
Gosh, I wish them good ole boys would have used this argument on that
Mr Lincoln fella! You were born far after your time!!
Geg is a troll, and not a very bright one. Those of us who have been
here for years have heard that sort of ***** before. And it's
still as invalid as ever.
Ah yes, a troll who signs on to a Usenet group hoping for some good
debate, finds a bunch a garbage, and posts a reasoned argument to
which she attends almost daily. Interesting to note that the simple
(and embarrasing, for you ) statement that you have 'been here for
years' is supposed to make anything "Geg the troll" has to write
'invalid as ever.' Interesting still because you have chosen to ignore
the Geg-troll's comments in favor of your own off-topic stuff. Cali-
for-nia Drea-ming...
This subject brings out the worst in people,
and reading these boards, it actually seems to bring out the worst
people, period.
that would include you, sowella.
If only there was some code word, to create a group
where people could talk about abortion politely and intelligently,
away from the rage-heads.
No need to do that.
As it is, any mention of abortion brings out the nuts on both
sides of the issue.
At least the nuts on my side don't murder people and blow up clinics.
It's too bad you think of yourself as just a ***** with legs, but there
are women who are much more than you'll ever be. And we don't like
you dragging us down.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ray Fischer" |
|
| Title: Re: A View on Abortion |
08 Nov 2007 11:20:57 AM |
|
|
Gegenwart911 <Gegenwart911@gmail.com> wrote:
It's very simple. If you don't like abortion, don't get one. Banning
abortion doesn't end it, only makes it expensive and dangerous.
Gosh, I wish them good ole boys would have used this argument on that
Mr Lincoln fella! You were born far after your time!!
It wouldn't have worked. Like those "good ole boys" your argument
depends upon ignoring the humanity of people. Pregnant women, in
your case.
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "Gegenwart911" |
|
| Title: Re: A View on Abortion |
08 Nov 2007 04:54:22 PM |
|
|
On Nov 8, 12:20 pm, (Ray Fischer) wrote:
Gegenwart911 <Gegenwart...@gmail.com> wrote:
It's very simple. If you don't like abortion, don't get one. Banning
abortion doesn't end it, only makes it expensive and dangerous.
Gosh, I wish them good ole boys would have used this argument on that
Mr Lincoln fella! You were born far after your time!!
It wouldn't have worked. Like those "good ole boys" your argument
depends upon ignoring the humanity of people. Pregnant women, in
your case.
--
Ray Fischer
So "humanity" is now the magic word? It has an absolute meaning? We
just slap it on some identity and everything goes? You really are a
snob, Ray. So this is like your thing- this grandfatherly slop. OK.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ray Fischer" |
|
| Title: Re: A View on Abortion |
08 Nov 2007 11:01:27 PM |
|
|
Gegenwart911 <Gegenwart911@gmail.com> wrote:
rfisc...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
Gegenwart911 <Gegenwart...@gmail.com> wrote:
It's very simple. If you don't like abortion, don't get one. Banning
abortion doesn't end it, only makes it expensive and dangerous.
Gosh, I wish them good ole boys would have used this argument on that
Mr Lincoln fella! You were born far after your time!!
It wouldn't have worked. Like those "good ole boys" your argument
depends upon ignoring the humanity of people. Pregnant women, in
your case.
So "humanity" is now the magic word?
No.
It has an absolute meaning?
Don't be childish.
We
just slap it on some identity and everything goes? You really are a
snob, Ray.
It's your strawman, pro-liar. You're the snob.
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "elizabeth" |
|
| Title: Re: A View on Abortion |
08 Nov 2007 12:55:07 PM |
|
|
On Nov 8, 5:26 am, Gegenwart911 <Gegenwart...@gmail.com> wrote:
It's very simple. If you don't like abortion, don't get one. Banning
abortion doesn't end it, only makes it expensive and dangerous.
Gosh, I wish them good ole boys would have used this argument on that
Mr Lincoln fella! You were born far after your time!!
Wart, dearie, regicide has always been a very big no no in every legal
system. Abortion, OTOH, has not been illegal in all systems. That
means that regicide is a mala in se crime, and abortion is a mala
prohibita crime. Therefore, your comparison is as full of ***** as
your trollery has been.
Geg is a troll, and not a very bright one. Those of us who have been
here for years have heard that sort of ***** before. And it's
still as invalid as ever.
Ah yes, a troll who signs on to a Usenet group hoping for some good
debate,
but you have provided no such debate yourself.
finds a bunch a garbage, and posts a reasoned argument to
which she attends almost daily.
Reasoned argument? As if, Trolletta. You spewing opinions and
invalid comparisons with no cites is not reasoned arguments.
Interesting to note that the simple
(and embarrasing, for you ) statement that you have 'been here for
years' is supposed to make anything "Geg the troll" has to write
'invalid as ever.'
That's because the abortion ngs attract many trolls. Like you, you
even have a trollish handle.
Interesting still because you have chosen to ignore
the Geg-troll's comments in favor of your own off-topic stuff. Cali-
for-nia Drea-ming...
I really don't give a damn about your "approval" Trolletta.
Now go back under your bridge, I think some billygoats want to chat
with you.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Gegenwart911" |
|
| Title: Re: A View on Abortion |
08 Nov 2007 02:26:03 PM |
|
|
On Nov 8, 1:55 pm, elizabeth <efran...@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Nov 8, 5:26 am, Gegenwart911 <Gegenwart...@gmail.com> wrote:
It's very simple. If you don't like abortion, don't get one. Banning
abortion doesn't end it, only makes it expensive and dangerous.
Gosh, I wish them good ole boys would have used this argument on that
Mr Lincoln fella! You were born far after your time!!
Wart, dearie, regicide has always been a very big no no in every legal
system. Abortion, OTOH, has not been illegal in all systems. That
means that regicide is a mala in se crime, and abortion is a mala
prohibita crime. Therefore, your comparison is as full of ***** as
your trollery has been.
Geg is a troll, and not a very bright one. Those of us who have been
here for years have heard that sort of ***** before. And it's
still as invalid as ever.
Ah yes, a troll who signs on to a Usenet group hoping for some good
debate,
but you have provided no such debate yourself.
finds a bunch a garbage, and posts a reasoned argument to
which she attends almost daily.
Reasoned argument? As if, Trolletta. You spewing opinions and
invalid comparisons with no cites is not reasoned arguments.
Interesting to note that the simple
(and embarrasing, for you ) statement that you have 'been here for
years' is supposed to make anything "Geg the troll" has to write
'invalid as ever.'
That's because the abortion ngs attract many trolls. Like you, you
even have a trollish handle.
Interesting still because you have chosen to ignore
the Geg-troll's comments in favor of your own off-topic stuff. Cali-
for-nia Drea-ming...
I really don't give a damn about your "approval" Trolletta.
Now go back under your bridge, I think some billygoats want to chat
with you.
Nice job on the latin. How long did you spend on Google for that? You
do give a damn for my approval and everyone else's. Your denial of
that is pathetic. I make no apologies for my handle or how I have
chosen to enter this group. Call me a troll. OK. That still doesnt
make overpopulation justify abortion. But you just cant resist
commenting, can you? You would rather waste time on whether or not I
am troll and not dealing with the issues I believe full well are good
ones.
.
|
|
|
| User: "elizabeth" |
|
| Title: Re: A View on Abortion |
08 Nov 2007 04:37:00 PM |
|
|
On Nov 8, 12:26 pm, Gegenwart911 <Gegenwart...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Nov 8, 1:55 pm, elizabeth <efran...@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Nov 8, 5:26 am, Gegenwart911 <Gegenwart...@gmail.com> wrote:
It's very simple. If you don't like abortion, don't get one. Banning
abortion doesn't end it, only makes it expensive and dangerous.
Gosh, I wish them good ole boys would have used this argument on that
Mr Lincoln fella! You were born far after your time!!
Wart, dearie, regicide has always been a very big no no in every legal
system. Abortion, OTOH, has not been illegal in all systems. That
means that regicide is a mala in se crime, and abortion is a mala
prohibita crime. Therefore, your comparison is as full of ***** as
your trollery has been.
Geg is a troll, and not a very bright one. Those of us who have been
here for years have heard that sort of ***** before. And it's
still as invalid as ever.
Ah yes, a troll who signs on to a Usenet group hoping for some good
debate,
but you have provided no such debate yourself.
finds a bunch a garbage, and posts a reasoned argument to
which she attends almost daily.
Reasoned argument? As if, Trolletta. You spewing opinions and
invalid comparisons with no cites is not reasoned arguments.
Interesting to note that the simple
(and embarrasing, for you ) statement that you have 'been here for
years' is supposed to make anything "Geg the troll" has to write
'invalid as ever.'
That's because the abortion ngs attract many trolls. Like you, you
even have a trollish handle.
Interesting still because you have chosen to ignore
the Geg-troll's comments in favor of your own off-topic stuff. Cali-
for-nia Drea-ming...
I really don't give a damn about your "approval" Trolletta.
Now go back under your bridge, I think some billygoats want to chat
with you.
Nice job on the latin. How long did you spend on Google for that?
Learned it years ago, in Crim 101. Great course, great prof.
You
do give a damn for my approval and everyone else's. Your denial of
that is pathetic.
Nope. You are suffering from Delusions of Adequacy.
I make no apologies for my handle or how I have
chosen to enter this group. Call me a troll. OK. That still doesnt
make overpopulation justify abortion.
But it sure proves that mandatory gestation is insane.
But you just cant resist
commenting, can you? You would rather waste time on whether or not I
am troll and not dealing with the issues I believe full well are good
ones
Again, if you don't like abortion, don't get one.
What is so hard about that?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Gegenwart911" |
|
| Title: Re: A View on Abortion |
08 Nov 2007 04:49:51 PM |
|
|
Again, if you don't like abortion, don't get one.
What is so hard about that?
So thats your big message? thats why you "debate" these topics?
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "=?iso-8859-1?q?Gwyne=F0_Bennetdottir?=" |
|
| Title: Re: A View on Abortion |
07 Nov 2007 10:53:44 AM |
|
|
On Nov 5, 9:36 pm, mom0f4boys <momsh...@msn.com> wrote:
Gegenwart911... having fun yet? You made very good points in your
original post. It is very frustrating, when one wants to discuss
abortion rationally, to have the discussion boil down so quickly to
'go ***** your daddy'. This subject brings out the worst in people,
and reading these boards, it actually seems to bring out the worst
people, period. If only there was some code word, to create a group
where people could talk about abortion politely and intelligently,
away from the rage-heads.
As it is, any mention of abortion brings out the nuts on both
sides of the issue.
There wouldn't be abortion discussion forums such as these if pro-life
proponents keep their respective proboscises out of the business of
others.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Gegenwart911" |
|
| Title: Re: A View on Abortion |
08 Nov 2007 06:19:30 AM |
|
|
On Nov 7, 11:53 am, Gwyne=F0 Bennetdottir <bennetwitho...@gmail.com>
wrote:
On Nov 5, 9:36 pm, mom0f4boys <momsh...@msn.com> wrote:
Gegenwart911... having fun yet? You made very good points in your
original post. It is very frustrating, when one wants to discuss
abortion rationally, to have the discussion boil down so quickly to
'go ***** your daddy'. This subject brings out the worst in people,
and reading these boards, it actually seems to bring out the worst
people, period. If only there was some code word, to create a group
where people could talk about abortion politely and intelligently,
away from the rage-heads.
As it is, any mention of abortion brings out the nuts on both
sides of the issue.
There wouldn't be abortion discussion forums such as these if pro-life
proponents keep their respective proboscises out of the business of
others.
yeah, discussion is totally bad, especially in a so-called democracy!
.
|
|
|
| User: "=?iso-8859-1?q?Gwyne=F0_Bennetdottir?=" |
|
| Title: Re: A View on Abortion |
08 Nov 2007 07:20:17 AM |
|
|
On Nov 8, 6:19 am, Gegenwart911 <Gegenwart...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Nov 7, 11:53 am, Gwyne=F0 Bennetdottir <bennetwitho...@gmail.com>
wrote:
On Nov 5, 9:36 pm, mom0f4boys <momsh...@msn.com> wrote:
Gegenwart911... having fun yet? You made very good points in your
original post. It is very frustrating, when one wants to discuss
abortion rationally, to have the discussion boil down so quickly to
'go ***** your daddy'. This subject brings out the worst in people,
and reading these boards, it actually seems to bring out the worst
people, period. If only there was some code word, to create a group
where people could talk about abortion politely and intelligently,
away from the rage-heads.
As it is, any mention of abortion brings out the nuts on both
sides of the issue.
There wouldn't be abortion discussion forums such as these if pro-life
proponents keep their respective proboscises out of the business of
others.
yeah, discussion is totally bad, especially in a so-called democracy!- Hi=
de quoted text -
yeah, especially when your usenet oppoents reject your inanity.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "elizabeth" |
|
| Title: Re: A View on Abortion |
07 Nov 2007 08:04:56 PM |
|
|
On Nov 7, 8:53 am, Gwyne=F0 Bennetdottir <bennetwitho...@gmail.com>
wrote:
On Nov 5, 9:36 pm, mom0f4boys <momsh...@msn.com> wrote:
Gegenwart911... having fun yet? You made very good points in your
original post. It is very frustrating, when one wants to discuss
abortion rationally, to have the discussion boil down so quickly to
'go ***** your daddy'. This subject brings out the worst in people,
and reading these boards, it actually seems to bring out the worst
people, period. If only there was some code word, to create a group
where people could talk about abortion politely and intelligently,
away from the rage-heads.
As it is, any mention of abortion brings out the nuts on both
sides of the issue.
There wouldn't be abortion discussion forums such as these if pro-life
proponents keep their respective proboscises out of the business of
others.
We have a new group of posters who hate women more than they care
about fetuses or babies. They tend to be young males, those with no
futures, and they hate women because they are just hateful little
shits whose mothers should have aborted.
Certainly hatred of women motivates the "old fashioned" antiaborts,
but some of the asswads, such as Andre the Unfucked and Unfuckable, is
just out to attack women online, and is just a pathetic waste of
protoplasm. This is why crossposting is a bad thing to do, he would
still be spewing his blather on soc.men had he not found women here to
"attack" . ..sorta like being "gummed to death by newts"
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "elizabeth" |
|
| Title: Re: A View on Abortion |
29 Oct 2007 03:59:32 PM |
|
|
On Oct 29, 10:49 am, Gegenwart911 <Gegenwart...@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi group-
I must say its a bit difficult at times figuring out exactly what you
all are about...and I thought this was an abortion
Usenet....anyway....to get back to the topic at hand....here's is my
take on abortion. Let's see how it strikes you.
Abortion has nothing to do with a woman's supposed right to her body.
This 'keep your laws off/out of my body' thing is absurd, especially
when laws concerning murder, public protest, theft, compulsory
service, indecent exposure, physical and emotional abuse, driving
while intoxicated, etc are readily accepted. Its no stretch to see
that your body, whether male or female, is fully capable of infringing
on the life and property of others.
Abortion is a prime site for this test as it (would seem to) directly
impact the body of 2 human organisms, one fully formed, the other in a
state of formation. It is the latter with which we should be
concerned. We mostly try to determine whether or not or when such a
forming organism is 'one of us' and subject to our laws.
I hope we remember to go the next step here, to consider context. Law
derives from a culturally-based aparatus (and not on some kind of
absolute such as God). We allow a certain degree of flexibility into
how we define and deal with offenses. There are many different types
of theft and murder, destruction and abuse- each subset with differing
severities influencing differing severities of punishment. This is
only to illustrate that we do not hold offenses in black and white. We
couch them in the context of our society and the context in which the
offense was committed.
It is that nature of societal and interpersonal contextualisation that
should allow for abortion. Sex is easy, pregnancy a little less so,
biologically speaking, but is a natural outcome of unprotected
heterosexual sex. Sex and pregnancy do not imply that one can care for
the resulting child or that one will care for the child at all. If
such a situation occurs in which the parents do not want the child or
cannot support it, they should have the priviledge to choose whether
or not to terminate the pregnancy. This should be allowed (as it
currently is in most cases) with impunity up until the first
trimester. The second trimester should be proscribable, abortion into
the third trimester should be allowable only in the case of extreme
physical/mental impairment or clear and immediate loss of the mother's
life.
We have enough unwanted and impoverished children. They are not to
blame for their position, rather their parents are. Society should
allow those would-be parents the ability to deal with the situation
they have mistankly created (a pregnancy) in a moral and significant
way.
So, to sum it up-
the decision to have a child should be contextually based and subject
to proscription only after the 1st trimester of pregnancy.
Fine, and you get to decide what to do when you get pregnant. I say
let overpopulation kill everyone in a generation or less. I don't
care.
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
