Abortion hypocracy



 Science > Abortion > Abortion hypocracy

LINK TO THIS PAGE  


rating :  0   |  0


  Page 1 of 5

1

 

2

 

3

 

4

 

5

 
Topic: Science > Abortion
User: "Richard"
Date: 22 Dec 2004 04:55:09 PM
Object: Abortion hypocracy
I often wonder why people consider ok to destroy human life at one stage and
not another?
Why do people consider it ok to kill a child in the womb but not a serial
killer who has murdered many?
Only a very cruel or extremely ignorant person could do this.
Richard
.

User: "carl jones"

Title: Abortion hypocracy... 23 Dec 2004 01:04:42 AM
"Richard" <nospam@nospam.none> wrote in message
news:cqcun6$rqk$1@kermit.esat.net...

I often wonder why people consider ok to destroy human life at one stage

and

not another?

Studies have shown that the unborn child is conscious and feels pain.
However, there are times where abortion means the difference between giiing
to a deformed child who is doomed to death as in Tay Sach's Syndrome and
having a chance for a healthy pregnancy. I thank God for amniocentesis.

Why do people consider it ok to kill a child in the womb but not a serial
killer who has murdered many?

the child in the womb, Richard, may be doomed to death anyway or result from
incest or rape. Would you really want to see a mother go through life with
that?


Only a very cruel or extremely ignorant person could do this.

I am Christian but I am pro-choice.
Merry Yule
Carl

.
User: "Richard"

Title: Re: Abortion hypocracy... 23 Dec 2004 01:50:13 PM
"carl jones" <carljones@usadatanet.net> wrote in message
news:ufudncjal4OT81fcRVn-3w@usadatanet.net...


"Richard" <nospam@nospam.none> wrote in message
news:cqcun6$rqk$1@kermit.esat.net...

I often wonder why people consider ok to destroy human life at one stage

and

not another?


Studies have shown that the unborn child is conscious and feels pain.

However, there are times where abortion means the difference between

giiing

to a deformed child who is doomed to death as in Tay Sach's Syndrome and
having a chance for a healthy pregnancy. I thank God for amniocentesis.

So why not allow the termination of people with disabilities too then? Why
draw the line there?

Why do people consider it ok to kill a child in the womb but not a

serial

killer who has murdered many?


the child in the womb, Richard, may be doomed to death anyway or result

from

incest or rape. Would you really want to see a mother go through life with
that?

Instead of killing human life, yes. Don't people suffer so much in life from
children with diseases or offspring who do bad? Why not kill them too? Why
draw the line with babies?
Richard
.
User: "carl jones"

Title: Re: Abortion hypocracy... 28 Dec 2004 09:48:13 PM
"Richard" <nospam@nospam.none> wrote in message
news:cqf88g$gs8$2@kermit.esat.net...

So why not allow the termination of people with disabilities too then? Why
draw the line there?

The abortion is done to save the mother and child from a severely abnormal.
Do you know what Tay Sach's disease is?
Amniocentesis has allowed people at risk, especially Ashkenazy Jews, the
ability to get pregnant without it being a living nightmare.

Why do people consider it ok to kill a child in the womb but not a

serial

killer who has murdered many?


the child in the womb, Richard, may be doomed to death anyway or result

from

incest or rape. Would you really want to see a mother go through life

with

that?


Instead of killing human life, yes. Don't people suffer so much in life

from

children with diseases or offspring who do bad? Why not kill them too? Why
draw the line with babies?

We are talking of unborn children here, Richard, not babies.
Carl

http://www.alibris.com/search/search.cfm?S=R&wauth=Carl+jones&siteID=1JSk6CbYEf0-OvWaQw0CjLv9tUk1mhtPHA#
.


User: "Ray Fischer"

Title: Re: Abortion hypocracy... 23 Dec 2004 10:33:27 PM
carl jones <carljones@usadatanet.net> wrote:

"Richard" <nospam@nospam.none> wrote in message

I often wonder why people consider ok to destroy human life at one stage

and

not another?


Studies have shown that the unborn child is conscious and feels pain.

Studies show that you're misrepresenting the studies.
A 1st trimester fetus feels nothing. A fetus just weeks from birth
is very much like an infant.
Most abortions are done in the 1st trimester.
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
User: "carl jones"

Title: Re: Abortion hypocracy... 28 Dec 2004 09:49:57 PM
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
news:cqg66m$10b$1@bolt.sonic.net...
Studies show that you're misrepresenting the studies.
<grin> Once I figure how to post web sites I will include cites.

A 1st trimester fetus feels nothing. A fetus just weeks from birth
is very much like an infant.

Most abortions are done in the 1st trimester.

I agree
Carl

http://www.alibris.com/search/search.cfm?S=R&wauth=Carl+jones&siteID=1JSk6CbYEf0-OvWaQw0CjLv9tUk1mhtPHA#
.



User: "Anonymous"

Title: Re: Abortion hypocracy 23 Dec 2004 12:19:47 AM
In article <cqcun6$rqk$1@kermit.esat.net>
"Richard" <nospam@nospam.none> wrote: Only a very cruel or
extremely ignorant person could do this.
Richard
- * -
Only a very cruel or extremely ignorant man such as yourself
could have sex without a condom causing an unwanted pregnancy.
Said unwanted pregnancy causing the women to abort. So you're
the hypocrite.
-=-
This message was sent via two or more anonymous remailing services.
.
User: "Richard"

Title: Re: Abortion hypocracy 23 Dec 2004 01:47:00 PM
"Anonymous" <Apple2Remailer@bigapple.dynalias.net> wrote in message
news:PC8QKVSY38344.0554050926@anonymous...

In article <cqcun6$rqk$1@kermit.esat.net>
"Richard" <nospam@nospam.none> wrote: Only a very cruel or
extremely ignorant person could do this.

Richard

- * -

Only a very cruel or extremely ignorant man such as yourself
could have sex without a condom causing an unwanted pregnancy.
Said unwanted pregnancy causing the women to abort. So you're
the hypocrite.

What has this got to do with killing human life?
Richard
.


User: "Attila"

Title: Re: Abortion hypocracy 23 Dec 2004 04:04:37 AM
On Wed, 22 Dec 2004 22:55:09 -0000, "Richard" <nospam@nospam.none> in
alt.abortion with message-id <cqcun6$rqk$1@kermit.esat.net> wrote:

I often wonder why people consider ok to destroy human life at one stage and
not another?

You never wash your hands?


Why do people consider it ok to kill a child in the womb but not a serial
killer who has murdered many?

Personally I have no problem with the death penalty, and I have not
seen it as an issue here.


Only a very cruel or extremely ignorant person could do this.

That sounds like an opinion to me.
.
User: "Richard"

Title: Re: Abortion hypocracy 23 Dec 2004 01:51:35 PM
"Attila" <prochoice@here.now> wrote in message
news:iv5ls05oues5tbuisosd9668jkoj6rm459@4ax.com...

On Wed, 22 Dec 2004 22:55:09 -0000, "Richard" <nospam@nospam.none> in
alt.abortion with message-id <cqcun6$rqk$1@kermit.esat.net> wrote:

I often wonder why people consider ok to destroy human life at one stage

and

not another?


You never wash your hands?

Excuse me?

Why do people consider it ok to kill a child in the womb but not a serial
killer who has murdered many?


Personally I have no problem with the death penalty, and I have not
seen it as an issue here.

Ok, so why should innocent human life die for convenience?

Only a very cruel or extremely ignorant person could do this.


That sounds like an opinion to me.

Absolutely.
Richard
.
User: "Attila"

Title: Re: Abortion hypocracy 23 Dec 2004 04:25:53 PM
On Thu, 23 Dec 2004 19:51:35 -0000, "Richard" <nospam@nospam.none> in
alt.abortion with message-id <cqf8b1$gsc$1@kermit.esat.net> wrote:

"Attila" <prochoice@here.now> wrote in message
news:iv5ls05oues5tbuisosd9668jkoj6rm459@4ax.com...

On Wed, 22 Dec 2004 22:55:09 -0000, "Richard" <nospam@nospam.none> in
alt.abortion with message-id <cqcun6$rqk$1@kermit.esat.net> wrote:

I often wonder why people consider ok to destroy human life at one stage

and

not another?


You never wash your hands?


Excuse me?

Washing your hands destroys human life.


Why do people consider it ok to kill a child in the womb but not a serial
killer who has murdered many?


Personally I have no problem with the death penalty, and I have not
seen it as an issue here.


Ok, so why should innocent human life die for convenience?

Since use of the word 'innocent ' in this context almost always
indicates a religious factor why should anyone else according to or
pay any attention to your religion?
Why is it necessary for every possible person to exist? Are humans an
endangered species?


Only a very cruel or extremely ignorant person could do this.


That sounds like an opinion to me.


Absolutely.

And my opinion is that the freedom of choice is proper and should
stand.
.
User: "Richard"

Title: Re: Abortion hypocracy 24 Dec 2004 06:45:27 AM
"Attila" <prochoice@here.now> wrote in message
news:29hms0l1qt66gscqqdt6bsjvcmm79qjm5i@4ax.com...

On Thu, 23 Dec 2004 19:51:35 -0000, "Richard" <nospam@nospam.none> in
alt.abortion with message-id <cqf8b1$gsc$1@kermit.esat.net> wrote:

"Attila" <prochoice@here.now> wrote in message
news:iv5ls05oues5tbuisosd9668jkoj6rm459@4ax.com...

On Wed, 22 Dec 2004 22:55:09 -0000, "Richard" <nospam@nospam.none> in
alt.abortion with message-id <cqcun6$rqk$1@kermit.esat.net> wrote:

I often wonder why people consider ok to destroy human life at one

stage

and

not another?


You never wash your hands?


Excuse me?


Washing your hands destroys human life.

Evidence please as to what individual looses its life.

Why do people consider it ok to kill a child in the womb but not a

serial

killer who has murdered many?


Personally I have no problem with the death penalty, and I have not
seen it as an issue here.


Ok, so why should innocent human life die for convenience?


Since use of the word 'innocent ' in this context almost always
indicates a religious factor why should anyone else according to or
pay any attention to your religion?

Why do you avoid the question? Why is it ok to destroy human life at one
stage and not another?
In my experience most people don't need religion to stop them from killing.
So what is different about abortion? Out of sight out of mind?

Why is it necessary for every possible person to exist? Are humans an
endangered species?

I never said it was. What I asked is:
Why is it ok to destroy human life at one stage and not another?

Only a very cruel or extremely ignorant person could do this.


That sounds like an opinion to me.


Absolutely.

And my opinion is that the freedom of choice is proper and should
stand.

Lots of people choose to do all sorts of things. Doesn't make it acceptable.
Why is it ok to destroy human life at one stage and not another?
Richard
.
User: "David W. Barnes"

Title: Re: Abortion hypocracy 24 Dec 2004 09:12:55 AM
In article <cqh3o7$236$1@kermit.esat.net>, Richard <nospam@nospam.none>
wrote:

"Attila" <prochoice@here.now> wrote in message
news:29hms0l1qt66gscqqdt6bsjvcmm79qjm5i@4ax.com...

On Thu, 23 Dec 2004 19:51:35 -0000, "Richard" <nospam@nospam.none> in
alt.abortion with message-id <cqf8b1$gsc$1@kermit.esat.net> wrote:

"Attila" <prochoice@here.now> wrote in message
news:iv5ls05oues5tbuisosd9668jkoj6rm459@4ax.com...

On Wed, 22 Dec 2004 22:55:09 -0000, "Richard" <nospam@nospam.none> in
alt.abortion with message-id <cqcun6$rqk$1@kermit.esat.net> wrote:

I often wonder why people consider ok to destroy human life at one

stage

and

not another?


You never wash your hands?


Excuse me?


Washing your hands destroys human life.


Evidence please as to what individual looses its life.

Why do people consider it ok to kill a child in the womb but not a

serial

killer who has murdered many?


Personally I have no problem with the death penalty, and I have not
seen it as an issue here.


Ok, so why should innocent human life die for convenience?


Since use of the word 'innocent ' in this context almost always
indicates a religious factor why should anyone else according to or
pay any attention to your religion?


Why do you avoid the question? Why is it ok to destroy human life at one
stage and not another?

What ever happened to "independent morality?" And why is it NOT OK?


In my experience most people don't need religion to stop them from killing.

In my experience most people need religion to justify killing.

So what is different about abortion? Out of sight out of mind?

Their choice. Independent morality, remember?


Why is it necessary for every possible person to exist? Are humans an
endangered species?


I never said it was. What I asked is:

Why is it ok to destroy human life at one stage and not another?

Why is it OK to do anything? Independent morality. Why is it OK to
offer your opinion on a newsgroup? What problem do you have with
abortion?


Only a very cruel or extremely ignorant person could do this.


That sounds like an opinion to me.


Absolutely.

And my opinion is that the freedom of choice is proper and should
stand.


Lots of people choose to do all sorts of things. Doesn't make it acceptable.

What does then?


Why is it ok to destroy human life at one stage and not another?

Same reason it is OK to do anything. Our choice. Freedom. Civil
Liberties. No law against it.
.
User: "Richard"

Title: Re: Abortion hypocracy 24 Dec 2004 09:21:47 AM
"David W. Barnes" <spam@aol.com> wrote in message
news:241220040712555517%spam@aol.com...

In article <cqh3o7$236$1@kermit.esat.net>, Richard <nospam@nospam.none>
wrote:

"Attila" <prochoice@here.now> wrote in message
news:29hms0l1qt66gscqqdt6bsjvcmm79qjm5i@4ax.com...

On Thu, 23 Dec 2004 19:51:35 -0000, "Richard" <nospam@nospam.none> in
alt.abortion with message-id <cqf8b1$gsc$1@kermit.esat.net> wrote:

"Attila" <prochoice@here.now> wrote in message
news:iv5ls05oues5tbuisosd9668jkoj6rm459@4ax.com...

On Wed, 22 Dec 2004 22:55:09 -0000, "Richard" <nospam@nospam.none>

in

alt.abortion with message-id <cqcun6$rqk$1@kermit.esat.net> wrote:

I often wonder why people consider ok to destroy human life at one

stage

and

not another?


You never wash your hands?


Excuse me?


Washing your hands destroys human life.


Evidence please as to what individual looses its life.

Why do people consider it ok to kill a child in the womb but not a

serial

killer who has murdered many?


Personally I have no problem with the death penalty, and I have

not

seen it as an issue here.


Ok, so why should innocent human life die for convenience?


Since use of the word 'innocent ' in this context almost always
indicates a religious factor why should anyone else according to or
pay any attention to your religion?


Why do you avoid the question? Why is it ok to destroy human life at one
stage and not another?


What ever happened to "independent morality?" And why is it NOT OK?

Just answer the question. I am wondering why the people who draw the line at
killing a baby in the womb believe it is ok to do so, but not after its out
of the womb. Simple as that.

In my experience most people don't need religion to stop them from

killing.


In my experience most people need religion to justify killing.

Whatever. Answer the question, if you can.

So what is different about abortion? Out of sight out of mind?


Their choice. Independent morality, remember?

So you would respect my choice to want to do whatever I like? Yeah right.

Why is it necessary for every possible person to exist? Are humans an
endangered species?


I never said it was. What I asked is:

Why is it ok to destroy human life at one stage and not another?


Why is it OK to do anything? Independent morality. Why is it OK to
offer your opinion on a newsgroup? What problem do you have with
abortion?

I'm still waiting...

Only a very cruel or extremely ignorant person could do this.


That sounds like an opinion to me.


Absolutely.

And my opinion is that the freedom of choice is proper and should
stand.


Lots of people choose to do all sorts of things. Doesn't make it

acceptable.


What does then?

Not interfering with other life.

Why is it ok to destroy human life at one stage and not another?


Same reason it is OK to do anything. Our choice. Freedom. Civil
Liberties. No law against it.

Well its illegal where I live. Do you have no opinions of your own or do you
always just accept what people tell you?
Richard
.
User: "David W. Barnes"

Title: Re: Abortion hypocracy 24 Dec 2004 09:55:17 AM
In article <cqhctb$4op$1@kermit.esat.net>, Richard <nospam@nospam.none>
wrote:

"David W. Barnes" <spam@aol.com> wrote in message
news:241220040712555517%spam@aol.com...

In article <cqh3o7$236$1@kermit.esat.net>, Richard <nospam@nospam.none>
wrote:

"Attila" <prochoice@here.now> wrote in message
news:29hms0l1qt66gscqqdt6bsjvcmm79qjm5i@4ax.com...

On Thu, 23 Dec 2004 19:51:35 -0000, "Richard" <nospam@nospam.none> in
alt.abortion with message-id <cqf8b1$gsc$1@kermit.esat.net> wrote:

"Attila" <prochoice@here.now> wrote in message
news:iv5ls05oues5tbuisosd9668jkoj6rm459@4ax.com...

On Wed, 22 Dec 2004 22:55:09 -0000, "Richard" <nospam@nospam.none>

in

alt.abortion with message-id <cqcun6$rqk$1@kermit.esat.net> wrote:

I often wonder why people consider ok to destroy human life at one

stage

and

not another?


You never wash your hands?


Excuse me?


Washing your hands destroys human life.


Evidence please as to what individual looses its life.

Why do people consider it ok to kill a child in the womb but not a

serial

killer who has murdered many?


Personally I have no problem with the death penalty, and I have

not

seen it as an issue here.


Ok, so why should innocent human life die for convenience?


Since use of the word 'innocent ' in this context almost always
indicates a religious factor why should anyone else according to or
pay any attention to your religion?


Why do you avoid the question? Why is it ok to destroy human life at one
stage and not another?


What ever happened to "independent morality?" And why is it NOT OK?


Just answer the question.

Are you just another hypocrite? YOU answer the question. What ever
happened to "independent morality?" You stated we all have one, now
you ignore it because it is inconvenient.

I am wondering why the people who draw the line at
killing a baby in the womb believe it is ok to do so, but not after its out
of the womb. Simple as that.

Same reason we allow an 18 year to vote but not one that is 1 day short
of 18. Societies choice.


In my experience most people don't need religion to stop them from

killing.


In my experience most people need religion to justify killing.


Whatever. Answer the question, if you can.

Whatever. I did. You aren't real good at this are you? My guess is
you will be short lived out here.


So what is different about abortion? Out of sight out of mind?


Their choice. Independent morality, remember?


So you would respect my choice to want to do whatever I like? Yeah right.

As long as it is LEGAL. Yeah - right.


Why is it necessary for every possible person to exist? Are humans an
endangered species?


I never said it was. What I asked is:

Why is it ok to destroy human life at one stage and not another?


Why is it OK to do anything? Independent morality. Why is it OK to
offer your opinion on a newsgroup? What problem do you have with
abortion?


I'm still waiting...

That is pretty much all you do, isn't it? You are big on having
questions and small with the answers. Republican, right?


Only a very cruel or extremely ignorant person could do this.


That sounds like an opinion to me.


Absolutely.

And my opinion is that the freedom of choice is proper and should
stand.


Lots of people choose to do all sorts of things. Doesn't make it

acceptable.


What does then?


Not interfering with other life.

You do that everyday.


Why is it ok to destroy human life at one stage and not another?


Same reason it is OK to do anything. Our choice. Freedom. Civil
Liberties. No law against it.


Well its illegal where I live.

Were is that?

Do you have no opinions of your own or do you
always just accept what people tell you?

All my opinions are my own. What could possibly make you think
otherwise?
.
User: "Richard"

Title: Re: Abortion hypocracy 24 Dec 2004 10:33:42 AM
"David W. Barnes" <spam@aol.com> wrote in message
news:241220040755178022%spam@aol.com...

In article <cqhctb$4op$1@kermit.esat.net>, Richard <nospam@nospam.none>
wrote:

"David W. Barnes" <spam@aol.com> wrote in message
news:241220040712555517%spam@aol.com...

In article <cqh3o7$236$1@kermit.esat.net>, Richard

<nospam@nospam.none>

wrote:

"Attila" <prochoice@here.now> wrote in message
news:29hms0l1qt66gscqqdt6bsjvcmm79qjm5i@4ax.com...

On Thu, 23 Dec 2004 19:51:35 -0000, "Richard" <nospam@nospam.none>

in

alt.abortion with message-id <cqf8b1$gsc$1@kermit.esat.net> wrote:

"Attila" <prochoice@here.now> wrote in message
news:iv5ls05oues5tbuisosd9668jkoj6rm459@4ax.com...

On Wed, 22 Dec 2004 22:55:09 -0000, "Richard"

<nospam@nospam.none>

in

alt.abortion with message-id <cqcun6$rqk$1@kermit.esat.net>

wrote:


I often wonder why people consider ok to destroy human life at

one

stage

and

not another?


You never wash your hands?


Excuse me?


Washing your hands destroys human life.


Evidence please as to what individual looses its life.

Why do people consider it ok to kill a child in the womb but

not a

serial

killer who has murdered many?


Personally I have no problem with the death penalty, and I

have

not

seen it as an issue here.


Ok, so why should innocent human life die for convenience?


Since use of the word 'innocent ' in this context almost always
indicates a religious factor why should anyone else according to

or

pay any attention to your religion?


Why do you avoid the question? Why is it ok to destroy human life at

one

stage and not another?


What ever happened to "independent morality?" And why is it NOT OK?


Just answer the question.


Are you just another hypocrite? YOU answer the question. What ever
happened to "independent morality?" You stated we all have one, now
you ignore it because it is inconvenient.

I won't respond to your illogical question evasion until you tell me why it
is ok to take life at one stage but not another. Prove you have something to
back up your rambling. Or did you just here them all on some pro-choice
discussion program?

I am wondering why the people who draw the line at
killing a baby in the womb believe it is ok to do so, but not after its

out

of the womb. Simple as that.


Same reason we allow an 18 year to vote but not one that is 1 day short
of 18. Societies choice.

Thats a liberty, not the right for them to be killed.

In my experience most people don't need religion to stop them from

killing.


In my experience most people need religion to justify killing.


Whatever. Answer the question, if you can.


Whatever. I did. You aren't real good at this are you? My guess is
you will be short lived out here.

I won't respond to your illogical question evasion until you tell me why it
is ok to take life at one stage but not another. Prove you have something to
back up your rambling. Or did you just here them all on some pro-choice
discussion program?

So what is different about abortion? Out of sight out of mind?


Their choice. Independent morality, remember?


So you would respect my choice to want to do whatever I like? Yeah

right.


As long as it is LEGAL. Yeah - right.

So if we both went abroad to a place where advocating abortion was
punishable by death, you would respect that? Is your mind actually so fickle
that geography changes your opinion? You have no substance.

Why is it necessary for every possible person to exist? Are

humans an

endangered species?


I never said it was. What I asked is:

Why is it ok to destroy human life at one stage and not another?


Why is it OK to do anything? Independent morality. Why is it OK to
offer your opinion on a newsgroup? What problem do you have with
abortion?


I'm still waiting...


That is pretty much all you do, isn't it? You are big on having
questions and small with the answers. Republican, right?

No. I'm not from the States.

Only a very cruel or extremely ignorant person could do this.


That sounds like an opinion to me.


Absolutely.

And my opinion is that the freedom of choice is proper and should
stand.


Lots of people choose to do all sorts of things. Doesn't make it

acceptable.


What does then?


Not interfering with other life.


You do that everyday.

I won't respond to your illogical question evasion until you tell me why it
is ok to take life at one stage but not another. Prove you have something to
back up your rambling. Or did you just here them all on some pro-choice
discussion program?

Why is it ok to destroy human life at one stage and not another?


Same reason it is OK to do anything. Our choice. Freedom. Civil
Liberties. No law against it.


Well its illegal where I live.


Were is that?

Ireland.

Do you have no opinions of your own or do you
always just accept what people tell you?


All my opinions are my own. What could possibly make you think
otherwise?

I won't respond to your illogical question evasion until you tell me why it
is ok to take life at one stage but not another. Prove you have something to
back up your rambling. Or did you just here them all on some pro-choice
discussion program?
Richard
.
User: "David W. Barnes"

Title: Re: Abortion hypocracy 24 Dec 2004 10:50:09 AM
In article <cqhh48$66r$1@kermit.esat.net>, Richard <nospam@nospam.none>
wrote:

"David W. Barnes" <spam@aol.com> wrote in message
news:241220040755178022%spam@aol.com...

In article <cqhctb$4op$1@kermit.esat.net>, Richard <nospam@nospam.none>
wrote:

"David W. Barnes" <spam@aol.com> wrote in message
news:241220040712555517%spam@aol.com...

In article <cqh3o7$236$1@kermit.esat.net>, Richard

<nospam@nospam.none>

wrote:

"Attila" <prochoice@here.now> wrote in message
news:29hms0l1qt66gscqqdt6bsjvcmm79qjm5i@4ax.com...

On Thu, 23 Dec 2004 19:51:35 -0000, "Richard" <nospam@nospam.none>

in

alt.abortion with message-id <cqf8b1$gsc$1@kermit.esat.net> wrote:

"Attila" <prochoice@here.now> wrote in message
news:iv5ls05oues5tbuisosd9668jkoj6rm459@4ax.com...

On Wed, 22 Dec 2004 22:55:09 -0000, "Richard"

<nospam@nospam.none>

in

alt.abortion with message-id <cqcun6$rqk$1@kermit.esat.net>

wrote:


I often wonder why people consider ok to destroy human life at

one

stage

and

not another?


You never wash your hands?


Excuse me?


Washing your hands destroys human life.


Evidence please as to what individual looses its life.

Why do people consider it ok to kill a child in the womb but

not a

serial

killer who has murdered many?


Personally I have no problem with the death penalty, and I

have

not

seen it as an issue here.


Ok, so why should innocent human life die for convenience?


Since use of the word 'innocent ' in this context almost always
indicates a religious factor why should anyone else according to

or

pay any attention to your religion?


Why do you avoid the question? Why is it ok to destroy human life at

one

stage and not another?


What ever happened to "independent morality?" And why is it NOT OK?


Just answer the question.


Are you just another hypocrite? YOU answer the question. What ever
happened to "independent morality?" You stated we all have one, now
you ignore it because it is inconvenient.


I won't respond to your illogical question evasion until you tell me why it
is ok to take life at one stage but not another.

I just did.

Prove you have something to
back up your rambling. Or did you just here them all on some pro-choice
discussion program?

You are out here trying to tell people how to think but you are
criticizing others who tell people how to think?


I am wondering why the people who draw the line at
killing a baby in the womb believe it is ok to do so, but not after its

out

of the womb. Simple as that.


Same reason we allow an 18 year to vote but not one that is 1 day short
of 18. Societies choice.


Thats a liberty, not the right for them to be killed.

No - that is the law. THE LAW.


In my experience most people don't need religion to stop them from

killing.


In my experience most people need religion to justify killing.


Whatever. Answer the question, if you can.


Whatever. I did. You aren't real good at this are you? My guess is
you will be short lived out here.


I won't respond to your illogical question evasion until you tell me why it
is ok to take life at one stage but not another.

I did. Are you asking me to use simpler language?

Prove you have something to
back up your rambling. Or did you just here them all on some pro-choice
discussion program?

Prove you can do more than cut and paste.


So what is different about abortion? Out of sight out of mind?


Their choice. Independent morality, remember?


So you would respect my choice to want to do whatever I like? Yeah

right.


As long as it is LEGAL. Yeah - right.


So if we both went abroad to a place where advocating abortion was
punishable by death, you would respect that?

Of course.

Is your mind actually so fickle
that geography changes your opinion? You have no substance.

Is THAT what we are talking about? Opinion? Great! You have your
opinion, I have mine. We have choice in this country.


Why is it necessary for every possible person to exist? Are

humans an

endangered species?


I never said it was. What I asked is:

Why is it ok to destroy human life at one stage and not another?


Why is it OK to do anything? Independent morality. Why is it OK to
offer your opinion on a newsgroup? What problem do you have with
abortion?


I'm still waiting...


That is pretty much all you do, isn't it? You are big on having
questions and small with the answers. Republican, right?


No. I'm not from the States.

Apparently not.


Only a very cruel or extremely ignorant person could do this.


That sounds like an opinion to me.


Absolutely.

And my opinion is that the freedom of choice is proper and should
stand.


Lots of people choose to do all sorts of things. Doesn't make it

acceptable.


What does then?


Not interfering with other life.


You do that everyday.


I won't respond to your illogical question evasion until you tell me why it
is ok to take life at one stage but not another. Prove you have something to
back up your rambling. Or did you just here them all on some pro-choice
discussion program?

Prove you can do more than cut and paste


Why is it ok to destroy human life at one stage and not another?


Same reason it is OK to do anything. Our choice. Freedom. Civil
Liberties. No law against it.


Well its illegal where I live.


Were is that?


Ireland.

The country that kills people every day for "religious reasons?"


Do you have no opinions of your own or do you
always just accept what people tell you?


All my opinions are my own. What could possibly make you think
otherwise?


I won't respond to your illogical question evasion until you tell me why it
is ok to take life at one stage but not another. Prove you have something to
back up your rambling. Or did you just here them all on some pro-choice
discussion program?

ROFL! Pro-lifers! You are all brain dead! Are there no pro-lifers
out there who can have an intelligent conversation on this issue?
.
User: "Richard"

Title: Re: Abortion hypocracy 24 Dec 2004 11:00:06 AM
"David W. Barnes" <spam@aol.com> wrote in message
news:241220040850095559%spam@aol.com...

In article <cqhh48$66r$1@kermit.esat.net>, Richard <nospam@nospam.none>
wrote:

"David W. Barnes" <spam@aol.com> wrote in message
news:241220040755178022%spam@aol.com...

In article <cqhctb$4op$1@kermit.esat.net>, Richard

<nospam@nospam.none>

wrote:

"David W. Barnes" <spam@aol.com> wrote in message
news:241220040712555517%spam@aol.com...

In article <cqh3o7$236$1@kermit.esat.net>, Richard

<nospam@nospam.none>

wrote:

"Attila" <prochoice@here.now> wrote in message
news:29hms0l1qt66gscqqdt6bsjvcmm79qjm5i@4ax.com...

On Thu, 23 Dec 2004 19:51:35 -0000, "Richard"

<nospam@nospam.none>

in

alt.abortion with message-id <cqf8b1$gsc$1@kermit.esat.net>

wrote:


"Attila" <prochoice@here.now> wrote in message
news:iv5ls05oues5tbuisosd9668jkoj6rm459@4ax.com...

On Wed, 22 Dec 2004 22:55:09 -0000, "Richard"

<nospam@nospam.none>

in

alt.abortion with message-id <cqcun6$rqk$1@kermit.esat.net>

wrote:


I often wonder why people consider ok to destroy human

life at

one

stage

and

not another?


You never wash your hands?


Excuse me?


Washing your hands destroys human life.


Evidence please as to what individual looses its life.

Why do people consider it ok to kill a child in the womb

but

not a

serial

killer who has murdered many?


Personally I have no problem with the death penalty, and I

have

not

seen it as an issue here.


Ok, so why should innocent human life die for convenience?


Since use of the word 'innocent ' in this context almost

always

indicates a religious factor why should anyone else according

to

or

pay any attention to your religion?


Why do you avoid the question? Why is it ok to destroy human

life at

one

stage and not another?


What ever happened to "independent morality?" And why is it NOT

OK?


Just answer the question.


Are you just another hypocrite? YOU answer the question. What ever
happened to "independent morality?" You stated we all have one, now
you ignore it because it is inconvenient.


I won't respond to your illogical question evasion until you tell me why

it

is ok to take life at one stage but not another.


I just did.

What about the choices of the one you kill?

Prove you have something to
back up your rambling. Or did you just here them all on some pro-choice
discussion program?


You are out here trying to tell people how to think but you are
criticizing others who tell people how to think?

I say let everyone think, so therfore dont kill babies.

I am wondering why the people who draw the line at
killing a baby in the womb believe it is ok to do so, but not after

its

out

of the womb. Simple as that.


Same reason we allow an 18 year to vote but not one that is 1 day

short

of 18. Societies choice.


Thats a liberty, not the right for them to be killed.


No - that is the law. THE LAW.

What about the choices of the one you kill?

In my experience most people don't need religion to stop them

from

killing.


In my experience most people need religion to justify killing.


Whatever. Answer the question, if you can.


Whatever. I did. You aren't real good at this are you? My guess is
you will be short lived out here.


I won't respond to your illogical question evasion until you tell me why

it

is ok to take life at one stage but not another.


I did. Are you asking me to use simpler language?

Prove you have something to
back up your rambling. Or did you just here them all on some pro-choice
discussion program?


Prove you can do more than cut and paste.

What about the choices of the one you kill?

So what is different about abortion? Out of sight out of mind?


Their choice. Independent morality, remember?


So you would respect my choice to want to do whatever I like? Yeah

right.


As long as it is LEGAL. Yeah - right.


So if we both went abroad to a place where advocating abortion was
punishable by death, you would respect that?


Of course.

So you have no opinion, other than the law is always right? Sad.
Its sheep like who caused slavery and human rights abuse.

Is your mind actually so fickle
that geography changes your opinion? You have no substance.


Is THAT what we are talking about? Opinion? Great! You have your
opinion, I have mine. We have choice in this country.

What about the choices of the one you kill?

Why is it necessary for every possible person to exist? Are

humans an

endangered species?


I never said it was. What I asked is:

Why is it ok to destroy human life at one stage and not another?


Why is it OK to do anything? Independent morality. Why is it OK

to

offer your opinion on a newsgroup? What problem do you have with
abortion?


I'm still waiting...


That is pretty much all you do, isn't it? You are big on having
questions and small with the answers. Republican, right?


No. I'm not from the States.


Apparently not.


Only a very cruel or extremely ignorant person could do

this.


That sounds like an opinion to me.


Absolutely.

And my opinion is that the freedom of choice is proper and

should

stand.


Lots of people choose to do all sorts of things. Doesn't make it

acceptable.


What does then?


Not interfering with other life.


You do that everyday.


I won't respond to your illogical question evasion until you tell me why

it

is ok to take life at one stage but not another. Prove you have

something to

back up your rambling. Or did you just here them all on some pro-choice
discussion program?


Prove you can do more than cut and paste

What about the choices of the one you kill?

Why is it ok to destroy human life at one stage and not another?


Same reason it is OK to do anything. Our choice. Freedom. Civil
Liberties. No law against it.


Well its illegal where I live.


Were is that?


Ireland.


The country that kills people every day for "religious reasons?"

Oh there's no crime or terrorism in the states?

Do you have no opinions of your own or do you
always just accept what people tell you?


All my opinions are my own. What could possibly make you think
otherwise?


I won't respond to your illogical question evasion until you tell me why

it

is ok to take life at one stage but not another. Prove you have

something to

back up your rambling. Or did you just here them all on some pro-choice
discussion program?


ROFL! Pro-lifers! You are all brain dead! Are there no pro-lifers
out there who can have an intelligent conversation on this issue?

Think about what it is to kill a baby.
Richard
.
User: "David W. Barnes"

Title: Re: Abortion hypocracy 24 Dec 2004 11:18:19 AM
In article <cqhilo$6ml$1@kermit.esat.net>, Richard <nospam@nospam.none>
wrote:

"David W. Barnes" <spam@aol.com> wrote in message
news:241220040850095559%spam@aol.com...

In article <cqhh48$66r$1@kermit.esat.net>, Richard <nospam@nospam.none>
wrote:

"David W. Barnes" <spam@aol.com> wrote in message
news:241220040755178022%spam@aol.com...

In article <cqhctb$4op$1@kermit.esat.net>, Richard

<nospam@nospam.none>

wrote:

"David W. Barnes" <spam@aol.com> wrote in message
news:241220040712555517%spam@aol.com...

In article <cqh3o7$236$1@kermit.esat.net>, Richard

<nospam@nospam.none>

wrote:

"Attila" <prochoice@here.now> wrote in message
news:29hms0l1qt66gscqqdt6bsjvcmm79qjm5i@4ax.com...

On Thu, 23 Dec 2004 19:51:35 -0000, "Richard"

<nospam@nospam.none>

in

alt.abortion with message-id <cqf8b1$gsc$1@kermit.esat.net>

wrote:


"Attila" <prochoice@here.now> wrote in message
news:iv5ls05oues5tbuisosd9668jkoj6rm459@4ax.com...

On Wed, 22 Dec 2004 22:55:09 -0000, "Richard"

<nospam@nospam.none>

in

alt.abortion with message-id <cqcun6$rqk$1@kermit.esat.net>

wrote:


I often wonder why people consider ok to destroy human

life at

one

stage

and

not another?


You never wash your hands?


Excuse me?


Washing your hands destroys human life.


Evidence please as to what individual looses its life.

Why do people consider it ok to kill a child in the womb

but

not a

serial

killer who has murdered many?


Personally I have no problem with the death penalty, and I

have

not

seen it as an issue here.


Ok, so why should innocent human life die for convenience?


Since use of the word 'innocent ' in this context almost

always

indicates a religious factor why should anyone else according

to

or

pay any attention to your religion?


Why do you avoid the question? Why is it ok to destroy human

life at

one

stage and not another?


What ever happened to "independent morality?" And why is it NOT

OK?


Just answer the question.


Are you just another hypocrite? YOU answer the question. What ever
happened to "independent morality?" You stated we all have one, now
you ignore it because it is inconvenient.


I won't respond to your illogical question evasion until you tell me why

it

is ok to take life at one stage but not another.


I just did.


What about the choices of the one you kill?

<Yawn> What makes yo think a fetus "chooses" anything different?


Prove you have something to
back up your rambling. Or did you just here them all on some pro-choice
discussion program?


You are out here trying to tell people how to think but you are
criticizing others who tell people how to think?


I say let everyone think, so therfore dont kill babies.

No one is killing babies.


I am wondering why the people who draw the line at
killing a baby in the womb believe it is ok to do so, but not after

its

out

of the womb. Simple as that.


Same reason we allow an 18 year to vote but not one that is 1 day

short

of 18. Societies choice.


Thats a liberty, not the right for them to be killed.


No - that is the law. THE LAW.


What about the choices of the one you kill?

What makes yo think a fetus "chooses" anything different?


In my experience most people don't need religion to stop them

from

killing.


In my experience most people need religion to justify killing.


Whatever. Answer the question, if you can.


Whatever. I did. You aren't real good at this are you? My guess is
you will be short lived out here.


I won't respond to your illogical question evasion until you tell me why

it

is ok to take life at one stage but not another.


I did. Are you asking me to use simpler language?

Prove you have something to
back up your rambling. Or did you just here them all on some pro-choice
discussion program?


Prove you can do more than cut and paste.


What about the choices of the one you kill?

What makes yo think a fetus "chooses" anything different?


So what is different about abortion? Out of sight out of mind?


Their choice. Independent morality, remember?


So you would respect my choice to want to do whatever I like? Yeah

right.


As long as it is LEGAL. Yeah - right.


So if we both went abroad to a place where advocating abortion was
punishable by death, you would respect that?


Of course.


So you have no opinion, other than the law is always right? Sad.

Not at all. I have my OPINION, but that is only that. OPINION. I
respect the law (even in Ireland).


Its sheep like who caused slavery and human rights abuse.

OPINION


Is your mind actually so fickle
that geography changes your opinion? You have no substance.


Is THAT what we are talking about? Opinion? Great! You have your
opinion, I have mine. We have choice in this country.


What about the choices of the one you kill?

What makes yo think a fetus "chooses" anything different?


Why is it necessary for every possible person to exist? Are

humans an

endangered species?


I never said it was. What I asked is:

Why is it ok to destroy human life at one stage and not another?


Why is it OK to do anything? Independent morality. Why is it OK

to

offer your opinion on a newsgroup? What problem do you have with
abortion?


I'm still waiting...


That is pretty much all you do, isn't it? You are big on having
questions and small with the answers. Republican, right?


No. I'm not from the States.


Apparently not.


Only a very cruel or extremely ignorant person could do

this.


That sounds like an opinion to me.


Absolutely.

And my opinion is that the freedom of choice is proper and

should

stand.


Lots of people choose to do all sorts of things. Doesn't make it

acceptable.


What does then?


Not interfering with other life.


You do that everyday.


I won't respond to your illogical question evasion until you tell me why

it

is ok to take life at one stage but not another. Prove you have

something to

back up your rambling. Or did you just here them all on some pro-choice
discussion program?


Prove you can do more than cut and paste


What about the choices of the one you kill?

What makes yo think a fetus "chooses" anything different?


Why is it ok to destroy human life at one stage and not another?


Same reason it is OK to do anything. Our choice. Freedom. Civil
Liberties. No law against it.


Well its illegal where I live.


Were is that?


Ireland.


The country that kills people every day for "religious reasons?"


Oh there's no crime or terrorism in the states?

I'm not the one claiming my countries laws should be your countries
laws. YOU ARE.


Do you have no opinions of your own or do you
always just accept what people tell you?


All my opinions are my own. What could possibly make you think
otherwise?


I won't respond to your illogical question evasion until you tell me why

it

is ok to take life at one stage but not another. Prove you have

something to

back up your rambling. Or did you just here them all on some pro-choice
discussion program?


ROFL! Pro-lifers! You are all brain dead! Are there no pro-lifers
out there who can have an intelligent conversation on this issue?


Think about what it is to kill a baby.

Why? I don't think I will ever do so.
.







User: "Attila"

Title: Re: Abortion hypocracy 24 Dec 2004 08:21:21 AM
On Fri, 24 Dec 2004 12:45:27 -0000, "Richard" <nospam@nospam.none> in
alt.abortion with message-id <cqh3o7$236$1@kermit.esat.net> wrote:

"Attila" <prochoice@here.now> wrote in message
news:29hms0l1qt66gscqqdt6bsjvcmm79qjm5i@4ax.com...

On Thu, 23 Dec 2004 19:51:35 -0000, "Richard" <nospam@nospam.none> in
alt.abortion with message-id <cqf8b1$gsc$1@kermit.esat.net> wrote:

"Attila" <prochoice@here.now> wrote in message
news:iv5ls05oues5tbuisosd9668jkoj6rm459@4ax.com...

On Wed, 22 Dec 2004 22:55:09 -0000, "Richard" <nospam@nospam.none> in
alt.abortion with message-id <cqcun6$rqk$1@kermit.esat.net> wrote:

I often wonder why people consider ok to destroy human life at one

stage

and

not another?


You never wash your hands?


Excuse me?


Washing your hands destroys human life.


Evidence please as to what individual looses its life.

I believe the term used was 'human life'. which of course would
include all sorts of human live including skin cells.


Why do people consider it ok to kill a child in the womb but not a

serial

killer who has murdered many?


Personally I have no problem with the death penalty, and I have not
seen it as an issue here.


Ok, so why should innocent human life die for convenience?


Since use of the word 'innocent ' in this context almost always
indicates a religious factor why should anyone else according to or
pay any attention to your religion?


Why do you avoid the question? Why is it ok to destroy human life at one
stage and not another?

See above. Please make your question more specific.


In my experience most people don't need religion to stop them from killing.
So what is different about abortion? Out of sight out of mind?

Not at all. An abortion is simply a medical procedure not unlike any
other.


Why is it necessary for every possible person to exist? Are humans an
endangered species?


I never said it was. What I asked is:

Why is it ok to destroy human life at one stage and not another?

Too vague a question.


Only a very cruel or extremely ignorant person could do this.


That sounds like an opinion to me.


Absolutely.

And my opinion is that the freedom of choice is proper and should
stand.


Lots of people choose to do all sorts of things. Doesn't make it acceptable.

Acceptable is irrelevant. Abortion is legal.
If you don't find it acceptable don't have one, but you have no right
to force what you find acceptable on others.


Why is it ok to destroy human life at one stage and not another?

Too vague a question.


Richard

.
User: "Richard"

Title: Re: Abortion hypocracy 24 Dec 2004 09:18:06 AM
"Attila" <prochoice@here.now> wrote in message
news:an8os0586r74t1fge4k1lqhsjo0fmlu2n2@4ax.com...

On Fri, 24 Dec 2004 12:45:27 -0000, "Richard" <nospam@nospam.none> in
alt.abortion with message-id <cqh3o7$236$1@kermit.esat.net> wrote:

"Attila" <prochoice@here.now> wrote in message
news:29hms0l1qt66gscqqdt6bsjvcmm79qjm5i@4ax.com...

On Thu, 23 Dec 2004 19:51:35 -0000, "Richard" <nospam@nospam.none> in
alt.abortion with message-id <cqf8b1$gsc$1@kermit.esat.net> wrote:

"Attila" <prochoice@here.now> wrote in message
news:iv5ls05oues5tbuisosd9668jkoj6rm459@4ax.com...

On Wed, 22 Dec 2004 22:55:09 -0000, "Richard" <nospam@nospam.none>

in

alt.abortion with message-id <cqcun6$rqk$1@kermit.esat.net> wrote:

I often wonder why people consider ok to destroy human life at one

stage

and

not another?


You never wash your hands?


Excuse me?


Washing your hands destroys human life.


Evidence please as to what individual looses its life.


I believe the term used was 'human life'. which of course would
include all sorts of human live including skin cells.

I am referring to a conscious individual person.

Why do people consider it ok to kill a child in the womb but not a

serial

killer who has murdered many?


Personally I have no problem with the death penalty, and I have not
seen it as an issue here.


Ok, so why should innocent human life die for convenience?


Since use of the word 'innocent ' in this context almost always
indicates a religious factor why should anyone else according to or
pay any attention to your religion?


Why do you avoid the question? Why is it ok to destroy human life at one
stage and not another?


See above. Please make your question more specific.

Why is it ok to terminate the life of a conscious individual person at one
stage of development but not another?

In my experience most people don't need religion to stop them from

killing.

So what is different about abortion? Out of sight out of mind?


Not at all. An abortion is simply a medical procedure not unlike any
other.

It involves taking the life of a child. You still haven't told me why this
is ok.

Why is it necessary for every possible person to exist? Are humans an
endangered species?


I never said it was. What I asked is:

Why is it ok to destroy human life at one stage and not another?


Too vague a question.

See above.

Only a very cruel or extremely ignorant person could do this.


That sounds like an opinion to me.


Absolutely.

And my opinion is that the freedom of choice is proper and should
stand.


Lots of people choose to do all sorts of things. Doesn't make it

acceptable.


Acceptable is irrelevant. Abortion is legal.

In some countries, not in others. Slavery was legal very recently. Have you
no mind of your own?

If you don't find it acceptable don't have one, but you have no right
to force what you find acceptable on others.

The same could be said about killing or rape. Why not?

Why is it ok to destroy human life at one stage and not another?


Too vague a question.

I'm still waiting.
Richard
.
User: "David W. Barnes"

Title: Re: Abortion hypocracy 24 Dec 2004 09:55:17 AM
In article <cqhcme$4oe$1@kermit.esat.net>, Richard <nospam@nospam.none>
wrote:

"Attila" <prochoice@here.now> wrote in message
news:an8os0586r74t1fge4k1lqhsjo0fmlu2n2@4ax.com...

On Fri, 24 Dec 2004 12:45:27 -0000, "Richard" <nospam@nospam.none> in
alt.abortion with message-id <cqh3o7$236$1@kermit.esat.net> wrote:

"Attila" <prochoice@here.now> wrote in message
news:29hms0l1qt66gscqqdt6bsjvcmm79qjm5i@4ax.com...

On Thu, 23 Dec 2004 19:51:35 -0000, "Richard" <nospam@nospam.none> in
alt.abortion with message-id <cqf8b1$gsc$1@kermit.esat.net> wrote:

"Attila" <prochoice@here.now> wrote in message
news:iv5ls05oues5tbuisosd9668jkoj6rm459@4ax.com...

On Wed, 22 Dec 2004 22:55:09 -0000, "Richard" <nospam@nospam.none>

in

alt.abortion with message-id <cqcun6$rqk$1@kermit.esat.net> wrote:

I often wonder why people consider ok to destroy human life at one

stage

and

not another?


You never wash your hands?


Excuse me?


Washing your hands destroys human life.


Evidence please as to what individual looses its life.


I believe the term used was 'human life'. which of course would
include all sorts of human live including skin cells.


I am referring to a conscious individual person.

Then you were not speaking of a fetus.


Why do people consider it ok to kill a child in the womb but not a

serial

killer who has murdered many?


Personally I have no problem with the death penalty, and I have not
seen it as an issue here.


Ok, so why should innocent human life die for convenience?


Since use of the word 'innocent ' in this context almost always
indicates a religious factor why should anyone else according to or
pay any attention to your religion?


Why do you avoid the question? Why is it ok to destroy human life at one
stage and not another?


See above. Please make your question more specific.


Why is it ok to terminate the life of a conscious individual person at one
stage of development but not another?

Societies morality. We CHOOSE to make it "OK." A better question, and
one which you repeating ignore, is why is it NOT OK?


In my experience most people don't need religion to stop them from

killing.

So what is different about abortion? Out of sight out of mind?


Not at all. An abortion is simply a medical procedure not unlike any
other.


It involves taking the life of a child.

No it doesn't. You mean a fetus.

You still haven't told me why this
is ok.

Only about a dozen times. But you have NEVER told us why it is not OK.
You really ARE someone who can't back up his beliefs, aren't you?
Maybe you need to rethink your position.


Why is it necessary for every possible person to exist? Are humans an
endangered species?


I never said it was. What I asked is:

Why is it ok to destroy human life at one stage and not another?


Too vague a question.


See above.

Nice job!


Only a very cruel or extremely ignorant person could do this.


That sounds like an opinion to me.


Absolutely.

And my opinion is that the freedom of choice is proper and should
stand.


Lots of people choose to do all sorts of things. Doesn't make it

acceptable.


Acceptable is irrelevant. Abortion is legal.


In some countries, not in others. Slavery was legal very recently. Have you
no mind of your own?

Pro-choice MEANS "having a mind of your own." What you want is for
others to do what YOU want. That isn't having a mind of your own. Get
It?


If you don't find it acceptable don't have one, but you have no right
to force what you find acceptable on others.


The same could be said about killing or rape. Why not?

That is ILLEGAL. You are really having a tough time with this, aren't
you?


Why is it ok to destroy human life at one stage and not another?


Too vague a question.


I'm still waiting.

Is your face blue yet?
.
User: "Richard"

Title: Re: Abortion hypocracy 24 Dec 2004 10:29:03 AM
"David W. Barnes" <spam@aol.com> wrote in message
news:241220040755178055%spam@aol.com...

In article <cqhcme$4oe$1@kermit.esat.net>, Richard <nospam@nospam.none>
wrote:

"Attila" <prochoice@here.now> wrote in message
news:an8os0586r74t1fge4k1lqhsjo0fmlu2n2@4ax.com...

On Fri, 24 Dec 2004 12:45:27 -0000, "Richard" <nospam@nospam.none> in
alt.abortion with message-id <cqh3o7$236$1@kermit.esat.net> wrote:

"Attila" <prochoice@here.now> wrote in message
news:29hms0l1qt66gscqqdt6bsjvcmm79qjm5i@4ax.com...

On Thu, 23 Dec 2004 19:51:35 -0000, "Richard" <nospam@nospam.none>

in

alt.abortion with message-id <cqf8b1$gsc$1@kermit.esat.net> wrote:

"Attila" <prochoice@here.now> wrote in message
news:iv5ls05oues5tbuisosd9668jkoj6rm459@4ax.com...

On Wed, 22 Dec 2004 22:55:09 -0000, "Richard"

<nospam@nospam.none>

in

alt.abortion with message-id <cqcun6$rqk$1@kermit.esat.net>

wrote:


I often wonder why people consider ok to destroy human life at

one

stage

and

not another?


You never wash your hands?


Excuse me?


Washing your hands destroys human life.


Evidence please as to what individual looses its life.


I believe the term used was 'human life'. which of course would
include all sorts of human live including skin cells.


I am referring to a conscious individual person.


Then you were not speaking of a fetus.

Yes I am. Wordplay won't help you.

Why do people consider it ok to kill a child in the womb but

not a

serial

killer who has murdered many?


Personally I have no problem with the death penalty, and I have

not

seen it as an issue here.


Ok, so why should innocent human life die for convenience?


Since use of the word 'innocent ' in this context almost always
indicates a religious factor why should anyone else according to or
pay any attention to your religion?


Why do you avoid the question? Why is it ok to destroy human life at

one

stage and not another?


See above. Please make your question more specific.


Why is it ok to terminate the life of a conscious individual person at

one

stage of development but not another?


Societies morality. We CHOOSE to make it "OK." A better question, and
one which you repeating ignore, is why is it NOT OK?

For the same reason it is not ok for you to kill anyone else you wish, or do
you think it is? Why not, if you wish?

In my experience most people don't need religion to stop them from

killing.

So what is different about abortion? Out of sight out of mind?


Not at all. An abortion is simply a medical procedure not unlike any
other.


It involves taking the life of a child.


No it doesn't. You mean a fetus.

A fetus is a child, however one who is not yet born.

You still haven't told me why this
is ok.


Only about a dozen times. But you have NEVER told us why it is not OK.
You really ARE someone who can't back up his beliefs, aren't you?
Maybe you need to rethink your position.

Why? Because I believe people deserve the right to live, no matter what
their stage of development.
Now why do you think its ok to kill a person at a certain age but not
another?

Why is it necessary for every possible person to exist? Are humans

an

endangered species?


I never said it was. What I asked is:

Why is it ok to destroy human life at one stage and not another?


Too vague a question.


See above.


Nice job!

See above.

Only a very cruel or extremely ignorant person could do this.


That sounds like an opinion to me.


Absolutely.

And my opinion is that the freedom of choice is proper and should
stand.


Lots of people choose to do all sorts of things. Doesn't make it

acceptable.


Acceptable is irrelevant. Abortion is legal.


In some countries, not in others. Slavery was legal very recently. Have

you

no mind of your own?


Pro-choice MEANS "having a mind of your own." What you want is for
others to do what YOU want. That isn't having a mind of your own. Get
It?

What I want is people to leave others alone - ie not kill them!
What if I make up my mind to kill you? You respect my being pro-choice?

If you don't find it acceptable don't have one, but you have no right
to force what you find acceptable on others.


The same could be said about killing or rape. Why not?


That is ILLEGAL. You are really having a tough time with this, aren't
you?

And slavery is cool? What about stoning people to death in countries where
its legal?
So in other words parking on a kirb is morely worse than stoning someone to
death cause one is legal oneplace and not another?
You have no mind, you just believe what you're told. That's fine, but go and
pick on someone who can defend themselves, if you must.

Why is it ok to destroy human life at one stage and not another?


Too vague a question.


I'm still waiting.


Is your face blue yet?

No. I see you have no answer though.
Richard
.
User: "David W. Barnes"

Title: Re: Abortion hypocracy 24 Dec 2004 10:40:40 AM
In article <cqhgrh$66b$1@kermit.esat.net>, Richard <nospam@nospam.none>
wrote:

"David W. Barnes" <spam@aol.com> wrote in message
news:241220040755178055%spam@aol.com...

In article <cqhcme$4oe$1@kermit.esat.net>, Richard <nospam@nospam.none>
wrote:

"Attila" <prochoice@here.now> wrote in message
news:an8os0586r74t1fge4k1lqhsjo0fmlu2n2@4ax.com...

On Fri, 24 Dec 2004 12:45:27 -0000, "Richard" <nospam@nospam.none> in
alt.abortion with message-id <cqh3o7$236$1@kermit.esat.net> wrote:

"Attila" <prochoice@here.now> wrote in message
news:29hms0l1qt66gscqqdt6bsjvcmm79qjm5i@4ax.com...

On Thu, 23 Dec 2004 19:51:35 -0000, "Richard" <nospam@nospam.none>

in

alt.abortion with message-id <cqf8b1$gsc$1@kermit.esat.net> wrote:

"Attila" <prochoice@here.now> wrote in message
news:iv5ls05oues5tbuisosd9668jkoj6rm459@4ax.com...

On Wed, 22 Dec 2004 22:55:09 -0000, "Richard"

<nospam@nospam.none>

in

alt.abortion with message-id <cqcun6$rqk$1@kermit.esat.net>

wrote:


I often wonder why people consider ok to destroy human life at

one

stage

and

not another?


You never wash your hands?


Excuse me?


Washing your hands destroys human life.


Evidence please as to what individual looses its life.


I believe the term used was 'human life'. which of course would
include all sorts of human live including skin cells.


I am referring to a conscious individual person.


Then you were not speaking of a fetus.


Yes I am. Wordplay won't help you.

The wordplay seems to be yours.


Why do people consider it ok to kill a child in the womb but

not a

serial

killer who has murdered many?


Personally I have no problem with the death penalty, and I have

not

seen it as an issue here.


Ok, so why should innocent human life die for convenience?


Since use of the word 'innocent ' in this context almost always
indicates a religious factor why should anyone else according to or
pay any attention to your religion?


Why do you avoid the question? Why is it ok to destroy human life at

one

stage and not another?


See above. Please make your question more specific.


Why is it ok to terminate the life of a conscious individual person at

one

stage of development but not another?


Societies morality. We CHOOSE to make it "OK." A better question, and
one which you repeating ignore, is why is it NOT OK?


For the same reason it is not ok for you to kill anyone else you wish, or do
you think it is? Why not, if you wish?

And what reason is that? Why do you avoid questions?


In my experience most people don't need religion to stop them from

killing.

So what is different about abortion? Out of sight out of mind?


Not at all. An abortion is simply a medical procedure not unlike any
other.


It involves taking the life of a child.


No it doesn't. You mean a fetus.


A fetus is a child, however one who is not yet born.

And a child is an adult, just one that is not yet an adult.


You still haven't told me why this
is ok.


Only about a dozen times. But you have NEVER told us why it is not OK.
You really ARE someone who can't back up his beliefs, aren't you?
Maybe you need to rethink your position.


Why? Because I believe people deserve the right to live, no matter what
their stage of development.

Believe whatever you like. Your CHOICE.


Now why do you think its ok to kill a person at a certain age but not
another?

I don't.


Why is it necessary for every possible person to exist? Are humans

an

endangered species?


I never said it was. What I asked is:

Why is it ok to destroy human life at one stage and not another?


Too vague a question.


See above.


Nice job!


See above.

Simple minded, aren't you?


Only a very cruel or extremely ignorant person could do this.


That sounds like an opinion to me.