| Topic: |
Science > Abortion |
| User: |
"Craig Chilton" |
| Date: |
16 Jul 2003 10:05:34 AM |
| Object: |
ANTI-Choicer "Renêï" PROVES Her Abject Ignorance. |
On Wed, 16 Jul 2003 13:39:48 GMT,
"Renêï" <Anti-Choice_Ignorance_Unabated@hotmail.com> wrote:
Craig Chilton < > wrote:
If you were actually "pro-choice" (and clearly you are not)...
...then you would respect that CHOICE.
Opting to impose HARDSHIP upon people is NOT a valid choice.
Too bad you're too short of neurons to be able to comprehend that.
But guess what? MOST people have NO trouble understanding that.
And you think deciding to TERMINATE a person's life (as you
[Pro-Choicers] approve of) DOESN'T impose any hardship upon them??
(1) The ONLY person present is the woman whose life is put
BACK on track -- her well-being and full range of future
opportunities fully and immediately RESTORED to PRE-
ill-rimed-pregnancy levels -- by the beneficial REMEDY
of abortion.
(2) The ONLY thing that gets "terminated" is an entitiy that is
the EQIVALENT, in all significant ways, to the QUADRILLION
gametes (Stage One of the reproductive process) which are
willfully aborted DAILY, worldwide, via male masturbation.
Which ALSO... *just* like the z/e/f stages, are human, unique,
**alive** (SO MUCH for the Anti-Choicer's *stupid* claim that
life begins at fertilization!), and POTENTIAL people.
(3) Since z/e/fs that normally get aborted are terminated 'WAY
before conscious awareness becomes possible, they most
ASSUREDLY don't give a rat's ***** about that, much LESS
undergo any (LOL!!!) "hardship."
However, YOU and your hateful and ignorant ilk support a truly
LOATHESOME agenda that seeks to impose IMMENSE hardship
upon no fewer than tens of MILLIONS of **real** people --women --
by FORCING childbirth upon them. AGAINST their will.
Resulting in the DENIAL of their rights... their RELEGATION to
second-class-citizen status... their INVOLUNTARY SERVITUDE to
mere, NON-sentient developing entities which are, in all important
ways, equivalent to sperm and ova (human, unique, NON-sentient,
a stage of development without which NO births would occur --
and alive); entities which the WOMEN would very properly, under
the circumstances, regard to be parasitic. Further manifestations of
that hardship would be the DISRUPTION of their well-being, both
short-term and long-term (as in, for decades or a lifetime)... and
the DESTRUCTION of countless of their opportunities.
Thus, you are UTTERLY without excuse, in your support of such
a scum-of-the-earth agenda.
One cannot help but be AMAZED that anyone ignorant enough
to be oblivious to ALL these facts (below) could even function in
modern society. Or could be so very HATEFUL.
-- Craig Chilton
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
ANALYZING ABORTION-ON-REQUEST* in the USA
*(Abortion Rights as they have existed since 1-22-73)
Abortion terminates entities (z/e/fs: zygotes, embryoes &
fetuses, up until the 7th month of gestation*) which have ALL
of these characteristics in common with sperm and ova:
-- Human
-- Unique
-- As a stage of development, indispensable to future birth
-- Have NEVER experienced conscious awareness
-- Alive
...which makes it hypocritical when abortion opponents
try to defend z/e/fs but NOT sperm and ova.
*(AFTER the 7th month of gestation, rudimentary conscious
awareness is regarded possible, by medical science. But
that's a moot point since, per a report by JAMA, 99.99996%
of U.S. abortions already have been performed by that
point.)
And the Bible, which is the primary moral authority for the
majority of Americans:
-- In NO way condemns abortion
-- Doesn't even MENTION abortion
-- By Jesus' day, abortion had been around for 1,000 yrs.
-- Contains NO defenses of s/o/z/e/fs
-- Reserves ALL of its protection for already-BORN people
-- That the Bible regards personhood to begin at BIRTH is
made clear by its immense emphasis on the importance
of BIRTH order, and BIRTHrights.
-- In certain cases, condemned BABIES to horrible deaths
-- Never indicates that there is anything "special" about
fertilization
-- Thus making z/e/f and sperm & ova of EQUAL worth
Abortion-on-request enables women to:
-- Put their lives back on track immediately
-- Restore their well-being to pre-unplanned pregnancy levels
-- Vast majority of women are happy with this decision
-- Most women have no regrets
-- Restore their full range of future opportunities
-- Avoid physical difficulties of a 9-month pregnancy
-- Especially important for young girls, ~12-16
-- Statistically 6-10 times safer than carrying-to-term
-- Avoid the trauma of adopting-out, and wondering later
-- Avoid possibility of changing mind about adopting-out
-- Reduce likelihood of long-term economic deprivation
-- Avoid bringing child into less-loving home
-- Avoid bringing child into unstable environment
-- Wait until timing is better before having children
-- Who then are MORE likely to be loved
-- Who then are MORE likely to be in stable home
-- And thus are LESS like to have troubled childhoods
-- And therefore more likely NOT to become criminals
-- And thus are MORE likely to become successful
Legal abortion-on-request:
-- Is exponentially safer than illegal abortions
-- Thus saving the lives of hundreds or thousands of women/yr.
-- Has been available throughout the USA since early 1973
-- Between 1973 and 2000, 30 million women have had them
-- Between 1973 and 2000, 40 million abortions have been done
Other related facts include:
-- MOST women who have abortions go on to HAVE kids later,
when the timing is better
-- Those children would NOT have been born if the abortions
had not taken place earlier, because the same sperm and
ova would not have matched up.
-- Those "2nd-round" kids STARTED reaching age 13 in
significant numbers by 1988. By the early 1990s, millions
of those "2nd-round" kids were in their mid-teens by the
early 1990s.
-- Mid-teens is the highest risk age for crime, and this
continues into the early 20s.
-- As pointed out above, wanted and loved children are
LESS prone to criminal behavior.
-- By 1995, millions of "2nd-round kids" were entering the
workforce. Perhaps a million-plus MORE have entered it
every year SINCE. By 2000, the oldest ones had reached
the age where they could be getting quite successful.
-- Since the early 1990s, the rate of violent crime in the USA
has declined dramatically, and by 2000 was at 40-year
lows in many categories.
-- The decade of the 1990s, and the year 2002 to date, in
the USA, has been the most economically-dynamic of
any nation in the entire history of the world.
Although the exact figures may be impossible to derive, the
probability that abortion-on-request has SIGNIFICANTLY benefitted
all of America's society in terms of the crime rate and the economy
is QUITE strong, despite the temporary anomaly caused by the attack
on Sept. 11, 2001. And a strong U.S. economy benefits the entire
world.
-- Originally posted to alt.abortion & talk.abortion
on Aug. 13, 2000, and updated since.
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
.
|
|
| User: "Mike Flannigan" |
|
| Title: Re: ANTI-Choicer "Renêï" PROVES Her Abject Ignorance. |
16 Jul 2003 08:20:24 PM |
|
|
"Craig Chilton" <> wrote in message
news:3f18695a.9873898@netnews.mchsi.com...
On Wed, 16 Jul 2003 13:39:48 GMT,
"Renêï" <Anti-Choice_Ignorance_Unabated@hotmail.com> wrote:
Craig Chilton < > wrote:
If you were actually "pro-choice" (and clearly you are
not)...
...then you would respect that CHOICE.
Opting to impose HARDSHIP upon people is NOT a valid choice.
Too bad you're too short of neurons to be able to comprehend that.
But guess what? MOST people have NO trouble understanding that.
And you think deciding to TERMINATE a person's life (as you
[Pro-Choicers] approve of) DOESN'T impose any hardship upon them??
(1) The ONLY person present is the woman whose life is put
BACK on track -- her well-being and full range of future
opportunities fully and immediately RESTORED to PRE-
ill-rimed-pregnancy levels -- by the beneficial REMEDY
of abortion.
(2) The ONLY thing that gets "terminated" is an entitiy that is
the EQIVALENT, in all significant ways, to the QUADRILLION
gametes (Stage One of the reproductive process) which are
willfully aborted DAILY, worldwide, via male masturbation.
Which ALSO... *just* like the z/e/f stages, are human, unique,
**alive** (SO MUCH for the Anti-Choicer's *stupid* claim that
life begins at fertilization!), and POTENTIAL people.
(3) Since z/e/fs that normally get aborted are terminated 'WAY
before conscious awareness becomes possible, they most
ASSUREDLY don't give a rat's ***** about that, much LESS
undergo any (LOL!!!) "hardship."
However, YOU and your hateful and ignorant ilk support a truly
LOATHESOME agenda that seeks to impose IMMENSE hardship
upon no fewer than tens of MILLIONS of **real** people --women --
by FORCING childbirth upon them. AGAINST their will.
Resulting in the DENIAL of their rights... their RELEGATION to
second-class-citizen status... their INVOLUNTARY SERVITUDE to
mere, NON-sentient developing entities which are, in all important
ways, equivalent to sperm and ova (human, unique, NON-sentient,
a stage of development without which NO births would occur --
and alive); entities which the WOMEN would very properly, under
the circumstances, regard to be parasitic. Further manifestations of
that hardship would be the DISRUPTION of their well-being, both
short-term and long-term (as in, for decades or a lifetime)... and
the DESTRUCTION of countless of their opportunities.
Thus, you are UTTERLY without excuse, in your support of such
a scum-of-the-earth agenda.
One cannot help but be AMAZED that anyone ignorant enough
to be oblivious to ALL these facts (below) could even function in
modern society. Or could be so very HATEFUL.
-- Craig Chilton
Tell us something Craig. Since the terminology we use to describe the unborn
is different from the terminology we use to describe the born, and that
somehow makes the unborn non-persons. Tell us all how you see an abortion
preformed in ninth month, even minutes before birth, as something perfectly
moral.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Barbara Walker" |
|
| Title: Re: ANTI-Choicer "Renêï" PROVES Her Abject Ignorance. |
17 Jul 2003 06:56:12 AM |
|
|
"Jeff North" <jnorth@yourpantsbigpond.net.au> wrote in message
news:42lchv88k1es4q1ch66jog08drqde5l2g1@4ax.com...
On Thu, 17 Jul 2003 01:20:24 GMT, in alt.politics.homosexuality "Mike
Flannigan" <mflannigan@jam.rr.com> wrote:
[snip]
| Tell us something Craig. Since the terminology we use to describe the
unborn
| is different from the terminology we use to describe the born, and that
| somehow makes the unborn non-persons.
Well I'll answer your question with another question.
Why is it that a woman who has a miscarriage is not charged with
murder but a woman who kills her 1 day old baby is charged with
murder?
Hint: the LAW sees one 'person' as a legal entity but not the other.
Yes, that was certainly the case concerning black people for many, many
years.
Barbara Walker
Irving, Tx..
.
|
|
|
| User: "The other Donald" |
|
| Title: Re: ANTI-Choicer "Renêï" PROVES Her Abject Ignorance. |
17 Jul 2003 11:28:30 AM |
|
|
"Barbara Walker" <barbara.walker4@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:w9wRa.72347$GL4.19118@rwcrnsc53...
"Jeff North" <jnorth@yourpantsbigpond.net.au> wrote in message
news:42lchv88k1es4q1ch66jog08drqde5l2g1@4ax.com...
On Thu, 17 Jul 2003 01:20:24 GMT, in alt.politics.homosexuality "Mike
Flannigan" <mflannigan@jam.rr.com> wrote:
[snip]
| Tell us something Craig. Since the terminology we use to describe the
unborn
| is different from the terminology we use to describe the born, and
that
| somehow makes the unborn non-persons.
Well I'll answer your question with another question.
Why is it that a woman who has a miscarriage is not charged with
murder but a woman who kills her 1 day old baby is charged with
murder?
Hint: the LAW sees one 'person' as a legal entity but not the other.
Yes, that was certainly the case concerning black people for many, many
years.
You're worse than a parrot....
.....or a two-year-old.
Barbara Walker
Irving, Tx..
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Ray Fischer" |
|
| Title: Re: ANTI-Choicer "Renêï" PROVES Her Abject Ignorance. |
18 Jul 2003 02:15:29 AM |
|
|
Barbara Walker <barbara.walker4@verizon.net> wrote:
"Jeff North" <jnorth@yourpantsbigpond.net.au> wrote in message
Well I'll answer your question with another question.
Why is it that a woman who has a miscarriage is not charged with
murder but a woman who kills her 1 day old baby is charged with
murder?
Hint: the LAW sees one 'person' as a legal entity but not the other.
Yes, that was certainly the case concerning black people for many, many
years.
When? The US Constitution was written in 1787 and it refers to slaves
as being persons.
You may be trying to make a point, but you're being pretty stupid
about it. The laws does not consider cattle, chickens, goats, cats.,
or dogs to be persons either. So what?
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Jeff North" |
|
| Title: Re: ANTI-Choicer "Renêï" PROVES Her Abject Ignorance. |
18 Jul 2003 12:35:39 AM |
|
|
On Thu, 17 Jul 2003 11:56:12 GMT, in alt.politics.homosexuality
"Barbara Walker" <barbara.walker4@verizon.net> wrote:
|
| "Jeff North" <jnorth@yourpantsbigpond.net.au> wrote in message
| news:42lchv88k1es4q1ch66jog08drqde5l2g1@4ax.com...
| > On Thu, 17 Jul 2003 01:20:24 GMT, in alt.politics.homosexuality "Mike
| > Flannigan" <mflannigan@jam.rr.com> wrote:
| >
| > [snip]
| >
| > >| Tell us something Craig. Since the terminology we use to describe the
| unborn
| > >| is different from the terminology we use to describe the born, and that
| > >| somehow makes the unborn non-persons.
| >
| > Well I'll answer your question with another question.
| >
| > Why is it that a woman who has a miscarriage is not charged with
| > murder but a woman who kills her 1 day old baby is charged with
| > murder?
| >
| > Hint: the LAW sees one 'person' as a legal entity but not the other.
|
| Yes, that was certainly the case concerning black people for many, many
| years.
What has *that* got to do with the subject at hand?
---------------------------------------------------------------
jnorth@yourpantsbigpond.net.au : Remove your pants to reply
---------------------------------------------------------------
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "The other Donald" |
|
| Title: Re: ANTI-Choicer "Renêï" PROVES Her Abject Ignorance. |
16 Jul 2003 08:33:47 PM |
|
|
"Mike Flannigan" <mflannigan@jam.rr.com> wrote in message
news:sRmRa.66750$XV.4640827@twister.austin.rr.com...
"Craig Chilton" < > wrote in message
news:3f18695a.9873898@netnews.mchsi.com...
On Wed, 16 Jul 2003 13:39:48 GMT,
"Renêï" <Anti-Choice_Ignorance_Unabated@hotmail.com> wrote:
Craig Chilton < > wrote:
If you were actually "pro-choice" (and clearly you are
not)...
...then you would respect that CHOICE.
Opting to impose HARDSHIP upon people is NOT a valid choice.
Too bad you're too short of neurons to be able to comprehend
that.
But guess what? MOST people have NO trouble understanding that.
And you think deciding to TERMINATE a person's life (as you
[Pro-Choicers] approve of) DOESN'T impose any hardship upon them??
(1) The ONLY person present is the woman whose life is put
BACK on track -- her well-being and full range of future
opportunities fully and immediately RESTORED to PRE-
ill-rimed-pregnancy levels -- by the beneficial REMEDY
of abortion.
(2) The ONLY thing that gets "terminated" is an entitiy that is
the EQIVALENT, in all significant ways, to the QUADRILLION
gametes (Stage One of the reproductive process) which are
willfully aborted DAILY, worldwide, via male masturbation.
Which ALSO... *just* like the z/e/f stages, are human,
unique,
**alive** (SO MUCH for the Anti-Choicer's *stupid* claim that
life begins at fertilization!), and POTENTIAL people.
(3) Since z/e/fs that normally get aborted are terminated 'WAY
before conscious awareness becomes possible, they most
ASSUREDLY don't give a rat's ***** about that, much LESS
undergo any (LOL!!!) "hardship."
However, YOU and your hateful and ignorant ilk support a truly
LOATHESOME agenda that seeks to impose IMMENSE hardship
upon no fewer than tens of MILLIONS of **real** people --women --
by FORCING childbirth upon them. AGAINST their will.
Resulting in the DENIAL of their rights... their RELEGATION to
second-class-citizen status... their INVOLUNTARY SERVITUDE to
mere, NON-sentient developing entities which are, in all important
ways, equivalent to sperm and ova (human, unique, NON-sentient,
a stage of development without which NO births would occur --
and alive); entities which the WOMEN would very properly, under
the circumstances, regard to be parasitic. Further manifestations of
that hardship would be the DISRUPTION of their well-being, both
short-term and long-term (as in, for decades or a lifetime)... and
the DESTRUCTION of countless of their opportunities.
Thus, you are UTTERLY without excuse, in your support of such
a scum-of-the-earth agenda.
One cannot help but be AMAZED that anyone ignorant enough
to be oblivious to ALL these facts (below) could even function in
modern society. Or could be so very HATEFUL.
-- Craig Chilton
Tell us something Craig. Since the terminology we use to describe the
unborn
is different from the terminology we use to describe the born, and that
somehow makes the unborn non-persons. Tell us all how you see an abortion
preformed in ninth month, even minutes before birth, as something
perfectly
moral.
Who's the fucking new guy?
We've rehashed the propaganda procedure known as PBA into oblivion. As
presented by the anti-choicers, it is a myth; a non-procedure.
The actual procedure known as ID&E (Intact Dilation & Extraction) is a
rarity and performed on fetuses that are either dead tissue or so horribly
deformed that survival outside the womb is likely impossible.
This is a VERY brief synopsis of months of discussion. In a nutshell,
though, your outburst is duly noted as that of an ignorant fool.
-Donald in Austin
AA #2104
.
|
|
|
| User: "The other Donald" |
|
| Title: Re: ANTI-Choicer "Renêï" PROVES Her Abject Ignorance. |
16 Jul 2003 09:08:12 PM |
|
|
"Barbara Walker" <barbara.walker4@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:ZnnRa.68100$sY2.31478@rwcrnsc51.ops.asp.att.net...
"The other Donald" <the_donald_13@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:%1nRa.80028$xg5.40858@twister.austin.rr.com...
"Mike Flannigan" <mflannigan@jam.rr.com> wrote in message
news:sRmRa.66750$XV.4640827@twister.austin.rr.com...
"Craig Chilton" < > wrote in message
news:3f18695a.9873898@netnews.mchsi.com...
On Wed, 16 Jul 2003 13:39:48 GMT,
"Renêï" <Anti-Choice_Ignorance_Unabated@hotmail.com> wrote:
Craig Chilton < > wrote:
If you were actually "pro-choice" (and clearly you are
not)...
...then you would respect that CHOICE.
Opting to impose HARDSHIP upon people is NOT a valid choice.
Too bad you're too short of neurons to be able to comprehend
that.
But guess what? MOST people have NO trouble understanding that.
And you think deciding to TERMINATE a person's life (as you
[Pro-Choicers] approve of) DOESN'T impose any hardship upon them??
(1) The ONLY person present is the woman whose life is put
BACK on track -- her well-being and full range of future
opportunities fully and immediately RESTORED to PRE-
ill-rimed-pregnancy levels -- by the beneficial REMEDY
of abortion.
(2) The ONLY thing that gets "terminated" is an entitiy that
is
the EQIVALENT, in all significant ways, to the
QUADRILLION
gametes (Stage One of the reproductive process) which are
willfully aborted DAILY, worldwide, via male
masturbation.
Which ALSO... *just* like the z/e/f stages, are human,
unique,
**alive** (SO MUCH for the Anti-Choicer's *stupid* claim
that
life begins at fertilization!), and POTENTIAL people.
(3) Since z/e/fs that normally get aborted are terminated 'WAY
before conscious awareness becomes possible, they most
ASSUREDLY don't give a rat's ***** about that, much LESS
undergo any (LOL!!!) "hardship."
However, YOU and your hateful and ignorant ilk support a truly
LOATHESOME agenda that seeks to impose IMMENSE hardship
upon no fewer than tens of MILLIONS of **real** people --women --
by FORCING childbirth upon them. AGAINST their will.
Resulting in the DENIAL of their rights... their RELEGATION to
second-class-citizen status... their INVOLUNTARY SERVITUDE to
mere, NON-sentient developing entities which are, in all important
ways, equivalent to sperm and ova (human, unique, NON-sentient,
a stage of development without which NO births would occur --
and alive); entities which the WOMEN would very properly, under
the circumstances, regard to be parasitic. Further manifestations
of
that hardship would be the DISRUPTION of their well-being, both
short-term and long-term (as in, for decades or a lifetime)... and
the DESTRUCTION of countless of their opportunities.
Thus, you are UTTERLY without excuse, in your support of such
a scum-of-the-earth agenda.
One cannot help but be AMAZED that anyone ignorant enough
to be oblivious to ALL these facts (below) could even function in
modern society. Or could be so very HATEFUL.
-- Craig Chilton
Tell us something Craig. Since the terminology we use to describe the
unborn
is different from the terminology we use to describe the born, and
that
somehow makes the unborn non-persons. Tell us all how you see an
abortion
preformed in ninth month, even minutes before birth, as something
perfectly
moral.
Who's the fucking new guy?
We've rehashed the propaganda procedure known as PBA into oblivion. As
presented by the anti-choicers, it is a myth; a non-procedure.
The actual procedure known as ID&E (Intact Dilation & Extraction) is a
rarity and performed on fetuses that are either dead tissue or so
horribly
deformed that survival outside the womb is likely impossible.
This is a VERY brief synopsis of months of discussion. In a nutshell,
though, your outburst is duly noted as that of an ignorant fool.
-Donald in Austin
AA #2104
Looks like Donald isn't able to answer your question either, Mike.
Barbara Walker
Irving, Tx..
*****, *****. The question has been answered, ad nauseum. I'm not going to
rehash weeks of posts for some Johnny-come-lately and his fat cow of a "yes
man."
The procedure is *****. You're an idiot. Flannigan needs to do a bit of
research before asking invalid questions.
-Donald in Austin
AA #2104
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mizzyandrea" |
|
| Title: =?ISO-8859-1?B?UmU6IEFOVEktQ2hvaWNlciAiUmVu6u8iIFBST1ZFUyBIZXIgQWJqZWN0IElnbm9yYW5jZS4=?= |
17 Jul 2003 12:18:58 AM |
|
|
Tell us all how you see an abortion
preformed in ninth month, even minutes before birth, as something
perfectly moral.
********************************************************
Boy you really do have ***** for brains, don't you? LOL!
Abortion means the termination of pregnancy by the removal of the uterine
contents.
IF the pregnancy has progressed to the point of viability, then the "removal"
is called "birth" and the live & viable products of concepti exit the womb.
Can you honestly be this stupid as to believe that there are women who wait
'til they are on the delivery table to say "well doc, I changed my
mind.......don't want this one"........AND that the doctors are magically able
to turn this fetus in the breech position so that they can do the ole brain
sucking routine?........ please. I've been a nurse for a lot of years and I
know of NO doctor would would risk his or her license ("abortion" on a viable
fetus is illegal), to make LESS money (abortion is cheaper than live birth)
because of the whim of a woman?........
Please tell me....... where's your proof?
You have none?
Well, I'm not surprised......... you sound like the kind of dumb ***** tuna twat
that would blow ***** like this out your ***** and pretend it's fact!
Are you married to "Stephen"?......... The two of you could be soul
mates........hard to believe TWO people are that stupid in this world!
.
|
|
|
| User: "Krisblake" |
|
| Title: Re: ANTI-Choicer "Renêï" PROVES Her Abject Ignorance. |
17 Jul 2003 05:08:18 AM |
|
|
On 17 Jul 2003 05:18:58 GMT, (Mizzyandrea) wrote:
Tell us all how you see an abortion
preformed in ninth month, even minutes before birth, as something
perfectly moral.
********************************************************
Boy you really do have ***** for brains, don't you? LOL!
Abortion means the termination of pregnancy by the removal of the uterine
contents.
IF the pregnancy has progressed to the point of viability, then the "removal"
is called "birth" and the live & viable products of concepti exit the womb.
Can you honestly be this stupid as to believe that there are women who wait
'til they are on the delivery table to say "well doc, I changed my
mind.......don't want this one"........AND that the doctors are magically able
to turn this fetus in the breech position so that they can do the ole brain
sucking routine?........ please. I've been a nurse for a lot of years and I
know of NO doctor would would risk his or her license ("abortion" on a viable
fetus is illegal), to make LESS money (abortion is cheaper than live birth)
because of the whim of a woman?........
Please tell me....... where's your proof?
You have none?
Well, I'm not surprised......... you sound like the kind of dumb ***** tuna twat
that would blow ***** like this out your ***** and pretend it's fact!
Are you married to "Stephen"?......... The two of you could be soul
mates........hard to believe TWO people are that stupid in this world!
YOU GO GIRL~ !
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Barbara Walker" |
|
| Title: Re: ANTI-Choicer "Renêï" PROVES Her Abject Ignorance. |
16 Jul 2003 09:19:58 PM |
|
|
"The other Donald" <the_donald_13@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:gynRa.80171$xg5.61128@twister.austin.rr.com...
"Barbara Walker" <barbara.walker4@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:ZnnRa.68100$sY2.31478@rwcrnsc51.ops.asp.att.net...
"The other Donald" <the_donald_13@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:%1nRa.80028$xg5.40858@twister.austin.rr.com...
"Mike Flannigan" <mflannigan@jam.rr.com> wrote in message
news:sRmRa.66750$XV.4640827@twister.austin.rr.com...
Tell us something Craig. Since the terminology we use to describe
the
unborn
is different from the terminology we use to describe the born, and
that
somehow makes the unborn non-persons. Tell us all how you see an
abortion
preformed in ninth month, even minutes before birth, as something
perfectly
moral.
Who's the fucking new guy?
We've rehashed the propaganda procedure known as PBA into oblivion. As
presented by the anti-choicers, it is a myth; a non-procedure.
The actual procedure known as ID&E (Intact Dilation & Extraction) is a
rarity and performed on fetuses that are either dead tissue or so
horribly
deformed that survival outside the womb is likely impossible.
This is a VERY brief synopsis of months of discussion. In a nutshell,
though, your outburst is duly noted as that of an ignorant fool.
-Donald in Austin
AA #2104
Looks like Donald isn't able to answer your question either, Mike.
Barbara Walker
Irving, Tx..
*****, *****.
Looks like we hit a nerve on that one! Donald apparently didn't LIKE IT
that it was pointed out that neither he nor Craig could answer your
question, Mike.
Barbara Walker
Irving, Tx..
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jake Nichols" |
|
| Title: Re: ANTI-Choicer =?ISO-8859-1?Q?=22Ren=EA=EF=22_PROVES_Her_?==?ISO-8859-1?Q?Abject_Ignorance=2E?= |
16 Jul 2003 10:43:06 PM |
|
|
Barbara Walker wrote:
Looks like we hit a nerve on that one! Donald apparently didn't LIKE IT
that it was pointed out that neither he nor Craig could answer your
question, Mike.
Barbara Walker
Irving, Tx..
Why dont you go back and READ the archived messages on this board.. or
would that cause too much of a mental drain on your pea brained,
multiple posting, bandwith wasting night?
He has been asked that before.. AND he answered it.. both in hbis
current reply AND in other arguements on the subject, it is not his
fault that you are either too stupid or too lazy to bother reading the
history of the thread before you jump in with both feet and look like a
complete moron who brought a postage stamp to a drag race.
Jake
.
|
|
|
| User: "The other Donald" |
|
| Title: Re: ANTI-Choicer "Renêï" PROVES Her Abject Ignorance. |
17 Jul 2003 11:22:47 AM |
|
|
"Barbara Walker" <barbara.walker4@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:I%vRa.71738$OZ2.13405@rwcrnsc54...
"Jake Nichols" <Jake_Nichols@toughguy.net> wrote in message
news:3f161ba1_2@news.wcc.net...
Barbara Walker wrote:
Looks like we hit a nerve on that one! Donald apparently didn't LIKE
IT
that it was pointed out that neither he nor Craig could answer your
question, Mike.
Barbara Walker
Irving, Tx..
Why dont you go back and READ the archived messages on this board.. or
would that cause too much of a mental drain on your pea brained,
multiple posting, bandwith wasting night?
He has been asked that before.. AND he answered it.. both in hbis
current reply AND in other arguements on the subject, it is not his
I'm sorry, but what you claim to have seen is not what I have observed.
You have your head in your *****, which probably explains this. Case in point:
it is necessary to repeat every-fucking-thing to you.
Perhaps you can settle the issue by reposting the "answer" you think Craig
gave to Mike's question? All I recall
Then you recall WRONG!
Craig doing was pour forth a stream
of personal attacks against Mike and acting like he was very upset that
Mike
asked him the question.
No. When you idiots ask legitimate questions, we'll give legitimate answers.
Asking a "loaded" question and projecting your punches the way you do, you
only raise the ire of those that don't appreciate being insulted.
Barbara Walker
Irving, Tx..
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "osprey" |
|
| Title: Re: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?ANTI-Choicer_"Ren=EA=EF"_PROVES_Her?= |
17 Jul 2003 05:38:08 AM |
|
|
(Mizzyandrea) wrote in message news:<20030717012724.02307.00000071@mb-m21.aol.com>...
He has been asked that before.. AND he answered it.. both in hbis
current reply AND in other arguements on the subject, it is not his
fault that you are either too stupid or too lazy to bother reading the
history of the thread before you jump in with both feet and look like a
complete moron who brought a postage stamp to a drag race.
Jake
********************************************
To me it's just common sense. What kind of woman waits til the third trimester
to terminate a pregnancy she didn't want in the first place.........WHEN a
first trimester abortion is safer, less painful, and cheaper.......
If such silly women exist (they don't), then it's best they do NOT become
mothers.......
They don't?
Oh yea, thats right, no they just wait to give birth and toss their
child into a trash can, or drown them, or place them in a car and
allow the car to run into a lake and make up a car jacking story.
Actually it is best hopefully if Mizzy never becomes a mother. We got
enough whores running on the streets now, don't need her breeding
more.
.
|
|
|
| User: "MyTwoAngels" |
|
| Title: Re: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?ANTI-Choicer_"Ren=EA=EF"_PROVES_Her?= |
18 Jul 2003 07:54:20 AM |
|
|
"Osprey" <noneedstoknow@mail.com> wrote in message news:<i_idnRbI2ffh84qiXTWJig@comcast.com>...
"Mizzyandrea" <mizzyandrea@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20030717233440.24310.00000066@mb-m16.aol.com...
They don't?
Oh yea, thats right, no they just wait to give birth and toss their
child into a trash can, or drown them, or place them in a car and
allow the car to run into a lake and make up a car jacking story.
Actually it is best hopefully if Mizzy never becomes a mother. We got
enough whores running on the streets now, don't need her breeding
more.
**************************************************************************
If Susan Smith had had abortions, you'd never know it..........and two
innocent kids would not have suffered..... BUT since you bring it up, you
*****
encrusted *****, women who kill babies go to JAIL........ Abortion is
legal because there are no babies involved.
Oh wait, men go to jail for killing fetus....OOOPS...don't want to let that
leak out. Might screw up your agenda..ROFL
What agenda would that be, osprey? I don't see her advocating that
any man kill a fetus.
AND this fucking piece of tripe does NOT respond to my original statement
that
women do NOT wait 9 months to pay more and experience more physical pain
aborting a pregnancy they didn't want in the first place......... you
don't
have an answer for that,
What answer do you want me to give you?
Whatever concaucted ***** you can muster -- after all, that is all
we've come to expect from you, Heishman.
do you *****?
You probably are
Are what, *****?
Why am I not surprised?......
I am not surprised at all with your responses
You don't bother to read and fully comprehend the lessons in them -
that's why they have not had any positive affect on you.
When there's nothing but moldy dog turds between the ears, there's not
much
chance of anything worthwhile going on in the skull.......
I am a mother,
God help us
Why should God help you paedophiliacs?
you oozing carbunkle-on-the-*****! I have two wonderful children
that I would DIE for......in a heartbeat. They are human beings.......not
embryos.
It is a shame they have to deal with you,
Yes, god forbid her children are growing up feeling wanted and loved,
and taught not to hate. What a bloody fucking shame for your cause,
eh?
I feel bad for the kids.
Unfortunately I see the end product of kids raised by people like you,
Yes, worldy, intelligent, loving, tolerant, and cultured children are
not childen you'd want to raise.
they
usually end up seeing me sooner or later
If they are raised by Mizzyandrea, you can rest assured that they will
not be coming to you, FOR ANYTHING.
As for whores....... I'm not responsible for how your mother
behaves......
I will save a cell for those kids,
The ones your mother prioduced? Not to worry, you're one that's
already there.
[...]
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Osprey" |
|
| Title: Donald loses |
18 Jul 2003 08:20:00 AM |
|
|
"The other Donald" <the_donald_13@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:5kLRa.84825$hV.5743477@twister.austin.rr.com...
"Osprey" <noneedstoknow@mail.com> wrote in message
news:kt6dnUUreOwr6oqiXTWJhQ@comcast.com...
"The other Donald" <the_donald_13@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:HqKRa.84808$hV.5722263@twister.austin.rr.com...
"Osprey" <noneedstoknow@mail.com> wrote in message
news:i_idnRbI2ffh84qiXTWJig@comcast.com...
"Mizzyandrea" <mizzyandrea@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20030717233440.24310.00000066@mb-m16.aol.com...
They don't?
Oh yea, thats right, no they just wait to give birth and toss
their
child into a trash can, or drown them, or place them in a car and
allow the car to run into a lake and make up a car jacking story.
Actually it is best hopefully if Mizzy never becomes a mother. We
got
enough whores running on the streets now, don't need her breeding
more.
**************************************************************************
If Susan Smith had had abortions, you'd never know
it..........and
two
innocent kids would not have suffered..... BUT since you bring it
up,
you
*****
encrusted *****, women who kill babies go to JAIL........
Abortion
is
legal because there are no babies involved.
Oh wait, men go to jail for killing fetus....OOOPS...don't want to
let
that
leak out. Might screw up your agenda..ROFL
AND this fucking piece of tripe does NOT respond to my original
statement
that
women do NOT wait 9 months to pay more and experience more
physical
pain
aborting a pregnancy they didn't want in the first place.........
you
don't
have an answer for that,
What answer do you want me to give you?
do you *****?
You probably are
Why am I not surprised?......
I am not surprised at all with your responses
When there's nothing but moldy dog turds between the ears,
there's
not
much
chance of anything worthwhile going on in the skull.......
I am a mother,
God help us
you oozing carbunkle-on-the-*****! I have two wonderful children
that I would DIE for......in a heartbeat. They are human
beings.......not
embryos.
It is a shame they have to deal with you, I feel bad for the kids.
Unfortunately I see the end product of kids raised by people like
you,
they
usually end up seeing me sooner or later
As for whores....... I'm not responsible for how your mother
behaves......
I will save a cell for those kids, they will most likely end up
there.
You,
well you got your powder and your street corner
Really, Cockbreath? Ask your "Bunk Daddy" if he's a good christer.
-Donald
AA #2104
Donald, you still failed to prove your claim.
Invalid. To say "I still haven't..." implies that you have already
responded
to my post. Since it hasn't been posted yet, your statement is nothing but
boisterous *****.
You failed
I've had other ***** to do, like....my life!
Yea, right, probably dealing heroine
Oh wait, your not even intelligent enough to do that.
Come on, show the post,
message source
See below....
See what? I saw it, and it doesn't prove what you claimed it would.
Come on loser, provide a quote
and it better say what you claim.
It *better*? Or what, *****?
Oh Donald, hiding behind your puter...thats ok, I understand
Are you going to talk more ***** while hiding behing your anonymous email
address? You are such a *****.
LOL
Why are you running?
I'm running from nothing, *****. It is a post that will not be very
flattering. I've posted the information before, but you conveniently
overlooked it.
Not at all, you never posted anything that proves I EVER said I was
pro-murder. You, like Ray, made that up.
Because of your ineptitude, and your pissly-assed
"challenge," I'm recompiling the post and shortening all of the URL's so
that your syupid ***** can find this stuff.
You are not so important that I feel compelled to spend every waking hour
devoted to compiling the proof of your pro-murder *****. There were
other
things to do like have dinner with my wife, work at my job, etc.
Call the post "a work in progress." Make sure to wake up bright and early
tomorrow and get straight to your computer.....
By the way, just for a little taste of what you're going to find, go
here....: (Google groups)
http://www.google.com/grphp?hl=en&tab=wg&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=
...and search for this:
alt.abortion news:wrGOa.59788$hV.3477322
There's only one post that will show up. Pick it....no stupid, not your
nose! Pick the link!
-Donald in Austin
AA #2104
And you lose loser,
NO WHERE in your claim of proof do I EVER say I am pro-murder
You claimed that you proved it with my words, and you failed.
I am happy once again to show the entire community you are a liar, loser,
and pathetic waste of human tissue.
.
|
|
|
| User: "The other Donald" |
|
| Title: Bobbi learns to tie shoes -claims shallow victory |
18 Jul 2003 05:40:31 PM |
|
|
"Osprey" <noneedstoknow@mail.com> wrote in message
news:MfScnTyirOZmboqiXTWJkw@comcast.com...
"The other Donald" <the_donald_13@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:5kLRa.84825$hV.5743477@twister.austin.rr.com...
Really, Cockbreath? Ask your "Bunk Daddy" if he's a good christer.
-Donald
AA #2104
Donald, you still failed to prove your claim.
Invalid. To say "I still haven't..." implies that you have already
responded
to my post. Since it hasn't been posted yet, your statement is nothing
but
boisterous *****.
You failed
Hardly. Your ***** spanking hasn't even begun, yet.
I've had other ***** to do, like....my life!
Yea, right, probably dealing heroine
Oh wait, your not even intelligent enough to do that.
Junior High idiot response. Noted for it's lack of originality.
Come on, show the post,
message source
See below....
See what? I saw it, and it doesn't prove what you claimed it would.
Come on loser, provide a quote
Whatever, *****.
You would deny gravity just to argue with someone.
and it better say what you claim.
It *better*? Or what, *****?
Oh Donald, hiding behind your puter...thats ok, I understand
You're implying a threat, *****. It is YOU that is hiding.
Are you going to talk more ***** while hiding behing your anonymous email
address? You are such a *****.
LOL
It is rather funny that you are a liar AND a *****.
Why are you running?
I'm running from nothing, *****. It is a post that will not be very
flattering. I've posted the information before, but you conveniently
overlooked it.
Not at all, you never posted anything that proves I EVER said I was
pro-murder. You, like Ray, made that up.
*****, *****. I noticed that the only response you had to it was "I
looked at it, and it doesn't prove..."
Address it line by line, no snips. If not, you have been proven a liar, and
I haven't even posted the good *****, yet.
Because of your ineptitude, and your pissly-assed
"challenge," I'm recompiling the post and shortening all of the URL's so
that your syupid ***** can find this stuff.
You are not so important that I feel compelled to spend every waking
hour
devoted to compiling the proof of your pro-murder *****. There were
other
things to do like have dinner with my wife, work at my job, etc.
Call the post "a work in progress." Make sure to wake up bright and
early
tomorrow and get straight to your computer.....
By the way, just for a little taste of what you're going to find, go
here....: (Google groups)
http://www.google.com/grphp?hl=en&tab=wg&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=
...and search for this:
alt.abortion news:wrGOa.59788$hV.3477322
There's only one post that will show up. Pick it....no stupid, not your
nose! Pick the link!
-Donald in Austin
AA #2104
And you lose loser,
NO WHERE in your claim of proof do I EVER say I am pro-murder
You claimed that you proved it with my words, and you failed.
I am happy once again to show the entire community you are a liar, loser,
and pathetic waste of human tissue.
You are an idiot Heishman. Your idea of a victory is the same as a "social
promotion."
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "The other Donald" |
|
| Title: Just for Barbara the Dumbass, and Flannigan |
16 Jul 2003 09:48:22 PM |
|
|
First, the procedure is known as ID&E (Intact Dilation & Extraction) but I
guess your stupid, illiterate ***** didn't read that part from the other post.
This will be a lot of cut & paste. It is done to show you the dumb fucking
***** that you are.
Flannigan's question was as invalid as asking about a "flying, pink
unicorn."
In a manner of speaking, it *has* been answered:
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=alt.abortion+ID%26E+Intact+Dilation+Extrac
tion&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&selm=55bfebbe.0303141507.29a77f32%40posting
..google.com&rnum=1
(From: " "Partial Birth' Baloney," Pro-Life E-News Canada, 5/11/97)
The horrifying descriptions of these extremely rare procedures don't give
you the full picture. ID&E (Intact Dilation and Extraction), also known as
"PBA" was a procedure developed to keep fetuses intact (hence the "Intact"
part.) The fetus, typically severely deformed (or dead), is intact after the
procedure, causing the least amount of damage to the woman, and if
appropriate, allowing grief-stricken parents to say goodbye.
How does it cause less damage to a woman? The head is the largest part of a
fetus. The ID&E procedure only partially dilates the cervix, allowing the
fetus's body to be delivered, but the small cervical dilation prevents the
head from emerging from the uterus. It is then that a trocar is inserted
into the back of the fetal skull and the "brains are suctioned" (or as they
say in the hospital "the skull is evacuated"), which collapses the skull
like a balloon, allowing the fetus to emerge intact from a much smaller
cervical opening.
....and here:
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=alt.abortion+ID%26E+Intact+Dilation+Extrac
tion&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&selm=3a155188.99272177%40news.wtrlo1.ia.hom
e.com&rnum=5
According to JAMA, abortions performed in the THIRD trimester number 500-600
a year. But the so-called "partial-birth" procedure which is actually ID&E
(Intact Dilation & Extraction) is a SECOND-trimester procedure.
Apparently, NCAP went too much on the defensive. All they needed to do was
point out that calling a mid-SECOND-trimester procedure
"partial-birth" was a LIE, since almost all of them are performed MANY
MONTHS before normal births could have taken place. (IOW, they should have
properly gone on the OFfense against the lies of Anti-Choice, rather than
becoming DEfensive.)
....and here:
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=alt.abortion+ID%26E+Intact+Dilation+Extrac
tion&start=20&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&selm=3b3b9b6b.314960140%40news.wtr
lo1.ia.home.com&rnum=29
Or more CORRECTLY, the ID&E procedure: Intact dilation and extraction. A
MID-SECOND-trimester procedure. "Partial birth," a LYING and DECEPTIVE term
coined by Anti-Choice leaders, is designed to fool people into thinking
that it is a procedure done near the time of birth. When, IN FACT, it is as
far away from full-term, time-wise, as FERTILIZATION. It is normally done
in the FIFTH month.
CORRECTION again. There is nothing "extreme" about the ID&E procedure.
Even though NO women is compelled to provide her REASON for seeking an
abortion, the FACT is that by that time, over 97% of all abortions have been
DONE. And that this procedure is done BECAUSE it is the safest one for the
woman at that stage. (And most women having them done are doing so for
MEDICAL reasons. Typically, women won't wait that long to have an ELECTIVE
abortion.)
....and here:
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=alt.abortion+ID%26E+Intact+Dilation+Extrac
tion&start=40&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&selm=691b1n%246e3%241%40news2.cais
..com&rnum=47
Conditionally yes. The most common reasons for an ID&E are that the fetus
is already dead or the fetus is so malformed that it would not survive even
if born alive and the medical condition of the woman is such that she would
probably not survive labor or major surgery.
During a normal delivery, a woman's cervix dilates to at least 10
centimeters. This is just large enough for the head to compress and be
pushed through without tearing the cervix. During an ID&E, the cervix is
mechanically partially dilated. It cannot be fully dilated nor can it be
sufficiently dilated to allow the head to pass through without causing major
(possibly irreparable) damage to the cervix.
An episiotomy is an external incision to the perineum, which is done to
prevent tearing to the vagina during childbirth.
<end quotes>
Can your incompetent ***** cut and paste into a browser, or was your mouse
finger disabled when they neutralized your brain? Good! Now go find yourself
a big, rubber ***** or a fence post. Just figure out some way to *****.
You've been PROVEN to be an idiot, and I've proven that I'm right.
-Donald in Austin
AA #2104
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mizzyandrea" |
|
| Title: Re: Just for Barbara the Dumbass, and Flannigan |
17 Jul 2003 12:24:47 AM |
|
|
According to JAMA, abortions performed in the THIRD trimester number 500-600
a year. But the so-called "partial-birth" procedure which is actually ID&E
(Intact Dilation & Extraction) is a SECOND-trimester procedure.
*************************************************
What kind of idiot believes that women wait til the ninth month to abort
healthy fetuses........for the HELL OF IT? Makes ya wonder what kind of
crowds they hang in.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mizzyandrea" |
|
| Title: =?ISO-8859-1?B?UmU6IEFOVEktQ2hvaWNlciAiUmVu6u8iIFBST1ZFUyBIZXIgQWJqZWN0IElnbm9yYW5jZS4=?= |
17 Jul 2003 12:22:06 AM |
|
|
Looks like we hit a nerve on that one! Donald apparently didn't LIKE IT
that it was pointed out that neither he nor Craig could answer your
question, Mike.
***************************
No, there's no nerve to hit. The "PBA" ***** is but one more lie you
idiots promote.......
These questions have been addressed a thousand times before.....that you choose
to ignore them only indicates that ignorance is a 'choice', too.......
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Light Templar" |
|
| Title: Re: ANTI-Choicer "Renêï" PROVES Her Abject Ignorance. |
17 Jul 2003 05:31:09 AM |
|
|
"Barbara Walker" <barbara.walker4@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:ZnnRa.68100$sY2.31478@rwcrnsc51.ops.asp.att.net...
"The other Donald" <the_donald_13@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:%1nRa.80028$xg5.40858@twister.austin.rr.com...
"Mike Flannigan" <mflannigan@jam.rr.com> wrote in message
news:sRmRa.66750$XV.4640827@twister.austin.rr.com...
"Craig Chilton" < > wrote in message
news:3f18695a.9873898@netnews.mchsi.com...
On Wed, 16 Jul 2003 13:39:48 GMT,
"Renêï" <Anti-Choice_Ignorance_Unabated@hotmail.com> wrote:
Craig Chilton < > wrote:
If you were actually "pro-choice" (and clearly you are
not)...
...then you would respect that CHOICE.
Opting to impose HARDSHIP upon people is NOT a valid choice.
Too bad you're too short of neurons to be able to comprehend
that.
But guess what? MOST people have NO trouble understanding that.
And you think deciding to TERMINATE a person's life (as you
[Pro-Choicers] approve of) DOESN'T impose any hardship upon them??
(1) The ONLY person present is the woman whose life is put
BACK on track -- her well-being and full range of future
opportunities fully and immediately RESTORED to PRE-
ill-rimed-pregnancy levels -- by the beneficial REMEDY
of abortion.
(2) The ONLY thing that gets "terminated" is an entitiy that
is
the EQIVALENT, in all significant ways, to the
QUADRILLION
gametes (Stage One of the reproductive process) which are
willfully aborted DAILY, worldwide, via male
masturbation.
Which ALSO... *just* like the z/e/f stages, are human,
unique,
**alive** (SO MUCH for the Anti-Choicer's *stupid* claim
that
life begins at fertilization!), and POTENTIAL people.
(3) Since z/e/fs that normally get aborted are terminated 'WAY
before conscious awareness becomes possible, they most
ASSUREDLY don't give a rat's ***** about that, much LESS
undergo any (LOL!!!) "hardship."
However, YOU and your hateful and ignorant ilk support a truly
LOATHESOME agenda that seeks to impose IMMENSE hardship
upon no fewer than tens of MILLIONS of **real** people --women --
by FORCING childbirth upon them. AGAINST their will.
Resulting in the DENIAL of their rights... their RELEGATION to
second-class-citizen status... their INVOLUNTARY SERVITUDE to
mere, NON-sentient developing entities which are, in all important
ways, equivalent to sperm and ova (human, unique, NON-sentient,
a stage of development without which NO births would occur --
and alive); entities which the WOMEN would very properly, under
the circumstances, regard to be parasitic. Further manifestations
of
that hardship would be the DISRUPTION of their well-being, both
short-term and long-term (as in, for decades or a lifetime)... and
the DESTRUCTION of countless of their opportunities.
Thus, you are UTTERLY without excuse, in your support of such
a scum-of-the-earth agenda.
One cannot help but be AMAZED that anyone ignorant enough
to be oblivious to ALL these facts (below) could even function in
modern society. Or could be so very HATEFUL.
-- Craig Chilton
Tell us something Craig. Since the terminology we use to describe the
unborn
is different from the terminology we use to describe the born, and
that
somehow makes the unborn non-persons. Tell us all how you see an
abortion
preformed in ninth month, even minutes before birth, as something
perfectly
moral.
Who's the fucking new guy?
We've rehashed the propaganda procedure known as PBA into oblivion. As
presented by the anti-choicers, it is a myth; a non-procedure.
The actual procedure known as ID&E (Intact Dilation & Extraction) is a
rarity and performed on fetuses that are either dead tissue or so
horribly
deformed that survival outside the womb is likely impossible.
This is a VERY brief synopsis of months of discussion. In a nutshell,
though, your outburst is duly noted as that of an ignorant fool.
-Donald in Austin
AA #2104
Looks like Donald isn't able to answer your question either, Mike.
The answer to the question is that most ID&E's are performed due to diseases
such as hydrocephalus. Around 3/4 of the ID&E's are due to an unnatural
enlargement of the fetuses head which prevents natural birth, and would make
cesarean a vastly more intrusive surgery, and in most cases, out of the
question. Most of these cases are, with today's technology, are discovered
long before the 8th or 9th month, but many cases where pre-natal care was
lax or ignored, still make it to full term. Most of these cases, when
actually born, badly injure or kill the mother, and rarely survive past the
first two weeks. The other 1/4 of the cases, most of them well documented,
are for a variety of reasons. One is undiagnosed gestational diabetes.
Fetus carried to term where the mother is unknowingly suffering from
diabetes have been known to reach 20 lbs, making vaginal birth impossible,
and surgical birth extremely dangerous for the mother.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Barbara Walker" |
|
| Title: Re: ANTI-Choicer "Renêï" PROVES Her Abject Ignorance. |
17 Jul 2003 06:59:14 AM |
|
|
"Light Templar" <I@DONTACCEPTEMAIL.FAM> wrote in message
news:NVuRa.105810$Io.9054549@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
"Barbara Walker" <barbara.walker4@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:ZnnRa.68100$sY2.31478@rwcrnsc51.ops.asp.att.net...
"The other Donald" <the_donald_13@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:%1nRa.80028$xg5.40858@twister.austin.rr.com...
"Mike Flannigan" <mflannigan@jam.rr.com> wrote in message
news:sRmRa.66750$XV.4640827@twister.austin.rr.com...
"Craig Chilton" < > wrote in message
news:3f18695a.9873898@netnews.mchsi.com...
On Wed, 16 Jul 2003 13:39:48 GMT,
"Renêï" <Anti-Choice_Ignorance_Unabated@hotmail.com> wrote:
Craig Chilton < > wrote:
If you were actually "pro-choice" (and clearly you
are
not)...
...then you would respect that CHOICE.
Opting to impose HARDSHIP upon people is NOT a valid
choice.
Too bad you're too short of neurons to be able to
comprehend
that.
But guess what? MOST people have NO trouble understanding
that.
And you think deciding to TERMINATE a person's life (as you
[Pro-Choicers] approve of) DOESN'T impose any hardship upon
them??
(1) The ONLY person present is the woman whose life is put
BACK on track -- her well-being and full range of
future
opportunities fully and immediately RESTORED to PRE-
ill-rimed-pregnancy levels -- by the beneficial REMEDY
of abortion.
(2) The ONLY thing that gets "terminated" is an entitiy that
is
the EQIVALENT, in all significant ways, to the
QUADRILLION
gametes (Stage One of the reproductive process) which
are
willfully aborted DAILY, worldwide, via male
masturbation.
Which ALSO... *just* like the z/e/f stages, are human,
unique,
**alive** (SO MUCH for the Anti-Choicer's *stupid*
claim
that
life begins at fertilization!), and POTENTIAL people.
(3) Since z/e/fs that normally get aborted are terminated
'WAY
before conscious awareness becomes possible, they most
ASSUREDLY don't give a rat's ***** about that, much LESS
undergo any (LOL!!!) "hardship."
However, YOU and your hateful and ignorant ilk support a
truly
LOATHESOME agenda that seeks to impose IMMENSE hardship
upon no fewer than tens of MILLIONS of **real** people --women --
by FORCING childbirth upon them. AGAINST their will.
Resulting in the DENIAL of their rights... their RELEGATION to
second-class-citizen status... their INVOLUNTARY SERVITUDE to
mere, NON-sentient developing entities which are, in all important
ways, equivalent to sperm and ova (human, unique, NON-sentient,
a stage of development without which NO births would occur --
and alive); entities which the WOMEN would very properly, under
the circumstances, regard to be parasitic. Further manifestations
of
that hardship would be the DISRUPTION of their well-being, both
short-term and long-term (as in, for decades or a lifetime)... and
the DESTRUCTION of countless of their opportunities.
Thus, you are UTTERLY without excuse, in your support of such
a scum-of-the-earth agenda.
One cannot help but be AMAZED that anyone ignorant enough
to be oblivious to ALL these facts (below) could even function in
modern society. Or could be so very HATEFUL.
-- Craig Chilton
Tell us something Craig. Since the terminology we use to describe
the
unborn
is different from the terminology we use to describe the born, and
that
somehow makes the unborn non-persons. Tell us all how you see an
abortion
preformed in ninth month, even minutes before birth, as something
perfectly
moral.
Who's the fucking new guy?
We've rehashed the propaganda procedure known as PBA into oblivion. As
presented by the anti-choicers, it is a myth; a non-procedure.
The actual procedure known as ID&E (Intact Dilation & Extraction) is a
rarity and performed on fetuses that are either dead tissue or so
horribly
deformed that survival outside the womb is likely impossible.
This is a VERY brief synopsis of months of discussion. In a nutshell,
though, your outburst is duly noted as that of an ignorant fool.
-Donald in Austin
AA #2104
Looks like Donald isn't able to answer your question either, Mike.
The answer to the question is that most ID&E's are performed due to
diseases
such as hydrocephalus.
Well, I have no problem limiting our discussion to those partial birth
abortions which are NOT performed due to those cases then. Are you
comfortable with that? Let's limit the discussion then to those instances
where perfectly healthy, normal human babies are slaughtered in the womb via
partial birth abortion, shall we?
Barbara Walker
Irving, Tx..
.
|
|
|
| User: "Patrick Humphrey" |
|
| Title: Re: ANTI-Choicer "=?iso-8859-1?q?Ren=EA=EF?=" PROVES Her AbjectIgnorance. |
17 Jul 2003 09:58:00 AM |
|
|
"Barbara Walker" <barbara.walker4@verizon.net> writes:
[...]
Well, I have no problem limiting our discussion to those partial birth
abortions which are NOT performed due to those cases then. Are you
comfortable with that? Let's limit the discussion then to those instances
where perfectly healthy, normal human babies are slaughtered in the womb via
partial birth abortion, shall we?
Please do...considering that there doesn't seem to be reliable evidence of any
such thing happening, partly because what anti-abort idiots call "partial
birth abortion" is a *second*-trimester procedure which isn't done on healthy
fetuses. Maybe you should venture into discussing things that actually happen
in *this* world, for starters.
-PLH, pro-choice parent and grandparent
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Light Templar" |
|
| Title: Re: ANTI-Choicer "Renêï" PROVES Her Abject Ignorance. |
17 Jul 2003 04:03:24 PM |
|
|
"Barbara Walker" <barbara.walker4@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:mcwRa.72882$sY2.33946@rwcrnsc51.ops.asp.att.net...
"Light Templar" <I@DONTACCEPTEMAIL.FAM> wrote in message
news:NVuRa.105810$Io.9054549@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
"Barbara Walker" <barbara.walker4@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:ZnnRa.68100$sY2.31478@rwcrnsc51.ops.asp.att.net...
"The other Donald" <the_donald_13@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:%1nRa.80028$xg5.40858@twister.austin.rr.com...
"Mike Flannigan" <mflannigan@jam.rr.com> wrote in message
news:sRmRa.66750$XV.4640827@twister.austin.rr.com...
"Craig Chilton" < > wrote in message
news:3f18695a.9873898@netnews.mchsi.com...
On Wed, 16 Jul 2003 13:39:48 GMT,
"Renêï" <Anti-Choice_Ignorance_Unabated@hotmail.com> wrote:
Craig Chilton < > wrote:
If you were actually "pro-choice" (and clearly you
are
not)...
...then you would respect that CHOICE.
Opting to impose HARDSHIP upon people is NOT a valid
choice.
Too bad you're too short of neurons to be able to
comprehend
that.
But guess what? MOST people have NO trouble understanding
that.
And you think deciding to TERMINATE a person's life (as you
[Pro-Choicers] approve of) DOESN'T impose any hardship upon
them??
(1) The ONLY person present is the woman whose life is put
BACK on track -- her well-being and full range of
future
opportunities fully and immediately RESTORED to PRE-
ill-rimed-pregnancy levels -- by the beneficial
REMEDY
of abortion.
(2) The ONLY thing that gets "terminated" is an entitiy
that
is
the EQIVALENT, in all significant ways, to the
QUADRILLION
gametes (Stage One of the reproductive process) which
are
willfully aborted DAILY, worldwide, via male
masturbation.
Which ALSO... *just* like the z/e/f stages, are
human,
unique,
**alive** (SO MUCH for the Anti-Choicer's *stupid*
claim
that
life begins at fertilization!), and POTENTIAL people.
(3) Since z/e/fs that normally get aborted are terminated
'WAY
before conscious awareness becomes possible, they
most
ASSUREDLY don't give a rat's ***** about that, much
LESS
undergo any (LOL!!!) "hardship."
However, YOU and your hateful and ignorant ilk support a
truly
LOATHESOME agenda that seeks to impose IMMENSE hardship
upon no fewer than tens of MILLIONS of **real**
people --women --
by FORCING childbirth upon them. AGAINST their will.
Resulting in the DENIAL of their rights... their RELEGATION to
second-class-citizen status... their INVOLUNTARY SERVITUDE to
mere, NON-sentient developing entities which are, in all
important
ways, equivalent to sperm and ova (human, unique, NON-sentient,
a stage of development without which NO births would occur --
and alive); entities which the WOMEN would very properly, under
the circumstances, regard to be parasitic. Further
manifestations
of
that hardship would be the DISRUPTION of their well-being, both
short-term and long-term (as in, for decades or a lifetime)...
and
the DESTRUCTION of countless of their opportunities.
Thus, you are UTTERLY without excuse, in your support of
such
a scum-of-the-earth agenda.
One cannot help but be AMAZED that anyone ignorant enough
to be oblivious to ALL these facts (below) could even function
in
modern society. Or could be so very HATEFUL.
-- Craig Chilton
Tell us something Craig. Since the terminology we use to describe
the
unborn
is different from the terminology we use to describe the born, and
that
somehow makes the unborn non-persons. Tell us all how you see an
abortion
preformed in ninth month, even minutes before birth, as something
perfectly
moral.
Who's the fucking new guy?
We've rehashed the propaganda procedure known as PBA into oblivion.
As
presented by the anti-choicers, it is a myth; a non-procedure.
The actual procedure known as ID&E (Intact Dilation & Extraction) is
a
rarity and performed on fetuses that are either dead tissue or so
horribly
deformed that survival outside the womb is likely impossible.
This is a VERY brief synopsis of months of discussion. In a
nutshell,
though, your outburst is duly noted as that of an ignorant fool.
-Donald in Austin
AA #2104
Looks like Donald isn't able to answer your question either, Mike.
The answer to the question is that most ID&E's are performed due to
diseases
such as hydrocephalus.
Well, I have no problem limiting our discussion to those partial birth
abortions which are NOT performed due to those cases then.
They are nonexistant. If you can find a single documented case where it
was performed soley as an elective proceedure. Please post that case here.
In case you haven't noticed, many states aready ban said procedure except
where the long term health or life of the mother is a concern.
Are you
comfortable with that?
Comfortable with what? Nonexistant events? Sure, I suppose.
Let's limit the discussion then to those instances
where perfectly healthy, normal human babies are slaughtered in the womb
via
partial birth abortion, shall we?
Be specific. Post documentation for such a case, then we can discuss
something concrete.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "David Sanders-" |
|
| Title: Re: ANTI-Choicer "Renêï" PROVES Her Abject Ignorance. |
17 Jul 2003 12:49:08 PM |
|
|
Barbara Walker wrote:
"Light Templar" <I@DONTACCEPTEMAIL.FAM> wrote in message
The answer to the question is that most ID&E's are performed due to
diseases
such as hydrocephalus.
Well, I have no problem limiting our discussion to those partial birth
abortions which are NOT performed due to those cases then. Are you
comfortable with that? Let's limit the discussion then to those instances
where perfectly healthy, normal human babies are slaughtered in the womb via
partial birth abortion, shall we?
You want it Babs, you carry it or you raise it.
Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973) (USSC+)
"There has always been strong support for the view that life does not
begin until live' birth.
In view of all this, we do not agree that, by adopting one theory of life,
Texas may override the rights of the pregnant woman that are at stake.
We repeat, however, that the State does have an important and
legitimate interest in preserving and protecting the health of the
pregnant woman, whether she be a resident of the State or a
nonresident who seeks medical consultation and treatment there, and
that it has still another important and legitimate interest in protecting
the potentiality of human life. These interests are separate and distinct.
Each grows in substantiality as the woman approaches [p*163] term
and, at a point during pregnancy, each becomes "compelling."
Substantial problems for precise definition of this view are posed,
however, by new embryological data that purport to indicate that
conception is a "process" over time, rather than an event, and by
new medical techniques such as menstrual extraction, the "morning-after"
pill, implantation of embryos, artificial insemination, and even artificial
wombs."
---
Exo 21:
22 If men strive, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit
depart from her, and yet no mischief follow: he shall be surely
punished, according as the woman's husband will lay upon him;
and he shall pay as the judges determine.
23 And if any mischief follow, then thou shalt give life for life,
Note who is life and what is property.
Hosean 13
16 Samaria shall become desolate; for she hath rebelled against
her God: they shall fall by the sword: their infants shall be dashed
in pieces, and their women with child shall be ripped up.
Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973) (USSC+)
In areas other than criminal abortion, the law has been reluctant to
endorse any theory that life, as we recognize it, begins before live
birth, or to accord legal rights to the unborn except in narrowly
defined situations and except when the rights are contingent upon
live birth. For example, the traditional rule of tort law denied
recovery for prenatal injuries even though the child was born alive.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| | |
