Science > Abortion > Moronic and Bigoted ANTI-Choice LOSER, Boatsunk, **again** makes a total FOOL of himself.
| Topic: |
Science > Abortion |
| User: |
"Craig Chilton" |
| Date: |
18 Feb 2006 02:13:33 AM |
| Object: |
Moronic and Bigoted ANTI-Choice LOSER, Boatsunk, **again** makes a total FOOL of himself. |
He's **so** DUMB, he can't tell the OBVIOUS difference
between mere (and worthless, when UNwanted) reproductive-
process entities, and PEOPLE.
What an ignorant tool.
HERE in this sig, are the FACTS that he and his sociopathic ilk
live in *denial* of:
-- 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.
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 it's 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 21st century to date,
in the USA, has been the most economically-dynamic
period of time for 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.
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
.
|
|
| User: "Dutch" |
|
| Title: Re: Moronic and Bigoted ANTI-LIFE LOSER, LIES **again** |
18 Feb 2006 02:48:22 AM |
|
|
"Craig Chilton" <xanadu222@mchsi.com> wrote
He's **so** DUMB, he can't tell the OBVIOUS difference
between mere (and worthless, when UNwanted) reproductive-
process entities, and PEOPLE.
I find you worthless, shouldn't you go kill yourself then?
HERE in this sig, are the FACTS that he and his sociopathic ilk
live in *denial* of:
LIES you mean Craig, BIG FAT LIES.
-- 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.
WRONG. None of those cell groupings have the entire human potential held
within their cells, or a unique DNA.
And the Bible, which is the primary moral authority for the
majority of Americans:
Idiots
-- 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 it's 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
The BIGGEST lie of all.
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
Murder and robbery can be very beneficial to some people, lets make them
legal.
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
Thus killing that many human lives.
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 21st century to date,
in the USA, has been the most economically-dynamic
period of time for 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.
Arguments of convenience, not morality. I submit that society would be much
stronger and safer if we killed all criminals and/or used them as guinea
pigs in medical research, but we don't do it, because we hold even their
lives to be sacrosanct. Yet we dismiss and destroy by the millions the most
innocent and vulnerable members of the human community by degrading,
self-serving, inhuman rhetorical logic.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Craig Chilton" |
|
| Title: Re: Moronic and Bigoted ANTI-LIFE LOSER, LIES **again** |
18 Feb 2006 03:40:45 AM |
|
|
On Sat, 18 Feb 2006 00:00:12 -0800,
Bigoted LOSER, "Dutch" <Anonymous@COWARD> spewed...
[[[ READERS: "Dutch" does nothing BUT spew **lies**
and mindless & hateful bigotry. Thus, an HONEST
replacement for the above **moronic** subject
header of his is THIS:
Moronic and Bigoted ANTI-Choice LOSER,
LIES **again** ]]]
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
...nothing but MINDLESS, lying, and bigoted *garbage*
again. As usual.
Starting with the copying of that INANE subject header,
above, that someone EQUALLY idiotic -- Boatsunk -- wrote.
Since abortion has NEVER had anything at all whatsoever to
do with kids. Never has. Never will. Since ALL kids have been
BORN.
<Hate-SWILL and LIES flushed>
<The FACTS about abortion follow> ---
-- 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.
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 it's 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 21st century to date,
in the USA, has been the most economically-dynamic
period of time for 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.
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dutch" |
|
| Title: Re: Moronic and Bigoted ANTI-LIFE LOSER, LIES **again** |
18 Feb 2006 04:43:24 AM |
|
|
"Craig Chilton" <xanadu222@mchsi.com> snipped and ran like a whipped dog
from this valuable information
Yours are:
Arguments of convenience, not morality. I submit that society would be much
stronger and safer if we killed all criminals and/or used them as guinea
pigs in medical research, but we don't do it, because we hold even their
lives to be sacrosanct. Yet we dismiss and destroy by the millions the most
innocent and vulnerable members of the human community by degrading,
self-serving, inhuman rhetorical logic.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Craig Chilton" |
|
| Title: Re: Moronic and Bigoted ANTI-LIFE LOSER, LIES **again** |
18 Feb 2006 10:16:05 AM |
|
|
On Sat, 18 Feb 2006 02:43:24 -0800,
"Dutch" <Anonymous@COWARD> wrote:
Craig Chilton <xanadu222_@mchsi.com> wrote:
Yours are:
Arguments of convenience,...
There is NOTHING wrong with convenience, as long as one does no
overt harm to his/her neighbors in the course of availing him/herself of
it.
... not morality.
YOU are the one who's been LAMELY pretending that abortion is a
"moral" issue. It's not. It's merely a harmless an beneficial REMEDY,
and nothing more. The moral equivalent of having a broken arm set.
I submit that society would be much stronger and safer if we killed
all criminals and/or used them as guinea pigs in medical research, but
we don't do it, ...
Because they are PEOPLE. And *you* are SO bone-**dumb**, you
can't even distinguish between people (which exist only from BIRTH on,
as the Bible makes quite clear) and mere reproductive-process entities,
which are WORTHLESS when unwanted.
You'd probably confuse acorns with oak trees.
(LOL!!! What a tool.)
<idiocy-flush>
-- Craig Chilton <xanadu222_@mchsi.com>
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
The Bible Leaves Anti-Choice out in the Cold!
"Chris" said ---
"Sperm OR ova will never be anything more than sperm or ova
until they perish."
To which I (Craig Chilton) pointed out ---
"That's one if the BIGGEST *lies* of the Anti-Choicers, in their
sheer desperation to squirm out of seeing sperm and ova as EQUAL
in "defensibility" (or LACK thereof) to the z/e/f stages. The PROOF
that your statement just now is 100% bullcrap is all around us. More
than 6,000,000,000 times over. Every person alive today, and every
person who EVER lived, was once in the form of a sperm and ovum
that had not yet met, that simply carried out THEIR specific role of the
reproductive process. If ANY person's sperm OR ovum were to have
been killed while IN that stage -- Stage ONE of the reproductive
process... then THAT particular person would NEVER have been
born. As I pointed out before, EVERY sperm and ovum is a POTEN-
TIAL person... JUST as every zygote, embryo, or fetus is only a
POTENTIAL person.
"It's a VERY good thing that the Bible...
-- says NOT ONE WORD against abortion.
-- NEVER *defends* human entities prior to birth (except for the
single passage in which a fetus is regarded as PROPERTY,
and which includes the CONDONING of slavery).
-- reserves ALL of its defenses of human life for entities that
have been BORN (i.e., ACTUAL people).
-- makes it quite clear in its passages dealing with *birthrights*
that PERSONHOOD begins at BIRTH.
"Because if it DIDN'T, that would not only have denied an
enormously-valuable REMEDY to tens of millions of women, thus
wrecking their well-being, relegating them to second-class-citizen
status, and depriving them of countless of their future opportunities --
should society's laws in the USA have aligned with Biblical precepts,
as it usually does -- but it ALSO would constrain us to be EQUALLY
respectful of sperm and ova as we would have to be of the z/e/f
stages. Because ALL of those stages of the reproductive process
are comprised of HUMAN LIFE, each entity of which is a POTENTIAL
person. ALL of them: sperm, ova, zygotes, embryoes, and fetuses.
And since DOING that would be utterly *impossible*, it would just
have to be one of those Biblically-ordained things that almost NO
one attempts to do. Such as "keeping the Sabbath day holy."
"As it stands -- *as* the Bible was *written* -- IF such hardship
ever again WERE to be forced upon women, it would be SOLELY
the doing of callous, hateful, frequently-ignorant, and often-deluded
PEOPLE -- acting on their OWN with absolutely NO Biblical backing
or authorization whatsoever. IF abortion EVER again were to be
denied to women, the Bible would be BLAMELESS for that social
upheaval, injustice, and cataclysm. The hatefulness and bigotry
would be of entirely HUMAN origin.
"Anti-Choicers -- you're out in the cold on this one!
"And FORTUNATELY for millions of American women, MOST
Americans want *nothing* to do with the Anti-Choice agenda, and
when put in a position where they could actively support it, they
REJECT it out of hand. As Washington State and Colorado proved
in the 1998 general election, when they *both* soundly DEFEATED
the proposed 'partial-birth' abortion bans that Anti-Choice had
wangled onto the ballot as referenda."
-- August 25, 2002
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dutch" |
|
| Title: Re: Moronic and Bigoted ANTI-LIFE LOSER, LIES **again** |
19 Feb 2006 04:44:03 AM |
|
|
"Craig Chilton" <xanadu222@mchsi.com> wrote
On Sat, 18 Feb 2006 02:43:24 -0800,
"Dutch" <Anonymous@COWARD> wrote:
Craig Chilton <xanadu222_@mchsi.com> wrote:
Yours are:
Arguments of convenience,...
There is NOTHING wrong with convenience, as long as one does no
overt harm to his/her neighbors in the course of availing him/herself of
it.
... not morality.
YOU are the one who's been LAMELY pretending that abortion is a
"moral" issue. It's not. It's merely a harmless an beneficial REMEDY,
and nothing more. The moral equivalent of having a broken arm set.
WRONG, you amoral puss-ball. Choosing to have an abortion is choosing to
deliberately destroy a_human_life, a child of one's own, therefore it
deserves moral consideration. Having a broken arm set destroys nothing.
I submit that society would be much stronger and safer if we killed
all criminals and/or used them as guinea pigs in medical research, but
we don't do it, ...
Because they are PEOPLE.
So what, just leave a fetus alone for a while and it will become a person
too, I GUARANTEE it. Plus the fetus is totally innocent, deserving of a
chance to develop, totally undeserving of a violent death. Criminals are
less than worthless people, guilty of heinous crimes against others. They
don't deserve to be kept alive. Where is your consistency? If we are
supposed to follow what is most "beneficial" for society, why not kill all
criminals, or at least use them to test AIDS or cancer drugs? At least that
way their lives could be made to save innocent lives of others. How come
your utilitarian reckoning is so limited? The truth is that as a society we
pretend to hold human life sacred, except in this one case, abortion, where
we freely refer to human lives as nothing more than "warts". People like you
have lost your moral compasses.
.
|
|
|
| User: "The Chief Instigator" |
|
| Title: Re: Moronic and Bigoted ANTI-LIFE LOSER, LIES **again** |
19 Feb 2006 07:29:05 AM |
|
|
"Dutch" <no@email.com> writes:
"Craig Chilton" <xanadu222@mchsi.com> wrote
On Sat, 18 Feb 2006 02:43:24 -0800,
"Dutch" <Anonymous@COWARD> wrote:
Craig Chilton <xanadu222_@mchsi.com> wrote:
Yours are:
Arguments of convenience,...
There is NOTHING wrong with convenience, as long as one does no
overt harm to his/her neighbors in the course of availing him/herself of
it.
... not morality.
YOU are the one who's been LAMELY pretending that abortion is a
"moral" issue. It's not. It's merely a harmless an beneficial REMEDY,
and nothing more. The moral equivalent of having a broken arm set.
WRONG, you amoral puss-ball. Choosing to have an abortion is choosing to
deliberately destroy a_human_life, a child of one's own, therefore it
deserves moral consideration. Having a broken arm set destroys nothing.
Craig's not amoral - he just doesn't possess *your* morals. If you don't like
abortion, don't have one - and do the rest of us the courtesy of letting the
rest of us make up our own minds about it.
I submit that society would be much stronger and safer if we killed
all criminals and/or used them as guinea pigs in medical research, but
we don't do it, ...
Because they are PEOPLE.
So what, just leave a fetus alone for a while and it will become a person
too, I GUARANTEE it.
Obstetricians would laugh at your "guarantee". The majority of them will, if
left alone, but there's a person whose right to make her own choices trumps a
fetus (which can't think, anyway, until the third trimester) and its "right"
to be protected. I have no problem with leaving that up to the woman in
question.
Plus the fetus is totally innocent, deserving of a
chance to develop, totally undeserving of a violent death. Criminals are
less than worthless people, guilty of heinous crimes against others. They
don't deserve to be kept alive. Where is your consistency? If we are
supposed to follow what is most "beneficial" for society, why not kill all
criminals, or at least use them to test AIDS or cancer drugs? At least that
way their lives could be made to save innocent lives of others. How come
your utilitarian reckoning is so limited? The truth is that as a society we
pretend to hold human life sacred, except in this one case, abortion, where
we freely refer to human lives as nothing more than "warts". People like you
have lost your moral compasses.
Claiming a monopoly on morals is as old as the human race. Be more accurate
and tell people they don't have YOUR morals, and you'll get along a bit
better.
--
Patrick "The Chief Instigator" Humphrey (patrick@io.com) Houston, Texas
chiefinstigator.us.tt/aeros.php (TCI's 2005-06 Houston Aeros)
LAST GAME: Houston 4, Iowa 3 (February 18)
NEXT GAME: Thursday, February 23 vs. Iowa, 1:05
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dutch" |
|
| Title: Re: Moronic and Bigoted ANTI-LIFE LOSER, LIES **again** |
19 Feb 2006 04:43:57 PM |
|
|
"The Chief Instigator" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szk8xs7v5ni.fsf@fnord.io.com...
"Dutch" <no@email.com> writes:
"Craig Chilton" <xanadu222@mchsi.com> wrote
On Sat, 18 Feb 2006 02:43:24 -0800,
"Dutch" <Anonymous@COWARD> wrote:
Craig Chilton <xanadu222_@mchsi.com> wrote:
Yours are:
Arguments of convenience,...
There is NOTHING wrong with convenience, as long as one does no
overt harm to his/her neighbors in the course of availing him/herself of
it.
... not morality.
YOU are the one who's been LAMELY pretending that abortion is a
"moral" issue. It's not. It's merely a harmless an beneficial REMEDY,
and nothing more. The moral equivalent of having a broken arm set.
WRONG, you amoral puss-ball. Choosing to have an abortion is choosing to
deliberately destroy a_human_life, a child of one's own, therefore it
deserves moral consideration. Having a broken arm set destroys nothing.
Craig's not amoral - he just doesn't possess *your* morals.
No, actually he's immoral, because he lies and spins the truth to suit his
agenda.
If you don't like
abortion, don't have one - and do the rest of us the courtesy of letting
the
rest of us make up our own minds about it.
What is that comment supposed to mean, because I disagree with pro-choice
rhetoric I am supposed to shut up? Why do pro-choice advocates constantly
come up with inane comments like this? According to that logic we should
just shut up and not argue in principle against child sex slavery in Asia,
we should be "courteous" and allow the Asians to make up their own minds
about it. You just strengthen my belief that there is something deeply wrong
with the pro-choice agenda when you come up with such crap.
I submit that society would be much stronger and safer if we killed
all criminals and/or used them as guinea pigs in medical research, but
we don't do it, ...
Because they are PEOPLE.
So what, just leave a fetus alone for a while and it will become a person
too, I GUARANTEE it.
Obstetricians would laugh at your "guarantee". The majority of them will,
if
left alone, but there's a person whose right to make her own choices
trumps a
fetus (which can't think, anyway, until the third trimester) and its
"right"
to be protected. I have no problem with leaving that up to the woman in
question.
I am also, reluctantly, but clearly on the side of a woman having this
choice. But none of you pro-choice advocates with all the lying ***** ARE
this woman, so you and I, all of us having this discussion are just third
parties, talking about what it is, making opinions about what a fetus is,
what morality means, what the moral issues are, who has the right to speak
and who doesn't.. That's what is going on here, for me anyway. Stop trying
to abort all discussion. If a pregnant woman came to this forum and repeated
lying pro-choice rhetoric I would attempt to arm her with the truth, then
bless her (figuratively) and wish her the best with HER decision, I would
not spin and deceive in order to make her difficult decision appear easy.
That is wrong, a dehumanizing thing to do.
Plus the fetus is totally innocent, deserving of a
chance to develop, totally undeserving of a violent death. Criminals are
less than worthless people, guilty of heinous crimes against others. They
don't deserve to be kept alive. Where is your consistency? If we are
supposed to follow what is most "beneficial" for society, why not kill all
criminals, or at least use them to test AIDS or cancer drugs? At least
that
way their lives could be made to save innocent lives of others. How come
your utilitarian reckoning is so limited? The truth is that as a society
we
pretend to hold human life sacred, except in this one case, abortion,
where
we freely refer to human lives as nothing more than "warts". People like
you
have lost your moral compasses.
Claiming a monopoly on morals is as old as the human race. Be more
accurate
and tell people they don't have YOUR morals, and you'll get along a bit
better.
That's a non-sequitor, I didn't claim a monopoly on morals there. You are
still just trying to shut down the discussion. I took one of his basic
arguments, the notion that abortion can be justified by arguing that it is
"benefical" from a socio-economic perspective, and extrapolated that
reasoning in a wholly logical fashion. I am saying that if that kind of
reasoning is permissible, then why don't we use it in other situations? Why
don't we save millions of lives of innocent people by subjecting violent
criminals to cancer research? That fact is, where human lives are concerned
we don't use utilitarian logic, we (usually) assume that human life is
sacred.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Ray Fischer" |
|
| Title: Re: Moronic and Bigoted ANTI-LIFE LOSER, LIES **again** |
19 Feb 2006 12:12:47 PM |
|
|
Dutch <no@email.com> wrote:
"Craig Chilton" <xanadu222@mchsi.com> wrote
On Sat, 18 Feb 2006 02:43:24 -0800,
"Dutch" <Anonymous@COWARD> wrote:
Craig Chilton <xanadu222_@mchsi.com> wrote:
Yours are:
Arguments of convenience,...
There is NOTHING wrong with convenience, as long as one does no
overt harm to his/her neighbors in the course of availing him/herself of
it.
... not morality.
YOU are the one who's been LAMELY pretending that abortion is a
"moral" issue. It's not. It's merely a harmless an beneficial REMEDY,
and nothing more. The moral equivalent of having a broken arm set.
WRONG, you amoral puss-ball. Choosing to have an abortion is choosing to
deliberately destroy a_human_life,
The hatred of the anti-abortion zealots leads them to assume that
others are as corrupt and evil as they are.
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Craig Chilton" |
|
| Title: Anti-Choice Disinformation, Ignorance... and HYPOCRISIES. |
19 Feb 2006 09:32:49 AM |
|
|
On Sun, 19 Feb 2006 10:44:03 GMT,
"Dutch" <Anonymous@COWARD> wrote:
Craig Chilton <xanadu222@mchsi.com> wrote:
"Dutch" <Anonymous@COWARD> wrote:
Craig Chilton < > wrote:
Yours are:
Arguments of convenience,...
There is NOTHING wrong with convenience, as long as one does no
overt harm to his/her neighbors in the course of availing him/herself of
it.
... not morality.
YOU are the one who's been LAMELY pretending that abortion is a
"moral" issue. It's not. It's merely a harmless an beneficial REMEDY,
and nothing more. The moral equivalent of having a broken arm set.
WRONG.
No. Right. Absolutely and unequivocally right.
Choosing to have an abortion is choosing to deliberately...
...and harmlessly terminate an UNwanted pregnancy. The equivalent
of that which is done to human reproductive-process entities/*potential*
people a **quadrillion** times over, DAILY, worldwide... by men.
The ONLY difference is significant ONLY to the *people* who are
involved. For the men, it's merely for the harmless pleasure derived.
And for the woman, it is FAR more important, valuable, and beneficial.
For girls and women, it is a VITALLY-important form of **self-defense**
that has been made available and easily-accessible to them by a hugely-
benevolent U.S. Supreme Court 33 years ago. In a manner that can
be regarded just as important and significant to tens of millions of people
as the one over 100 years earlier, "Roe vs. Wade" was a modern-day
and vital Emancipation Proclamation. It released all girls and women
from second-class-citizenship status at the hands of that which had been,
in its own way, a repressive and tyrannical system of government.
SINCE January of 1973, women face with unwanted pregnancies
have been able to DEFEND their PRE-ill-timed range of future opportun-
ities and well-being in their perfect right to determine how their own
bodily resources are to be expended.
... destroy a_human_life,...
Male masturbation destroys equally-significant (as in, "totally
INsignificant") human life more than a **quintillion** times over,
worldwide, annually. That's 1,000,000,000,000,000,000. That's
trillions of times the number of entities that you seek to "defend,"
while hypocritically *ignoring* the VAST number of potential people
that *men* electively abort.
ALL of those are living human entities ("human lives," but NOT
"human beings"/people). But when UNwanted by hosts unwilling to
perpetuate/gestate them, they have NO intrinsic value whatsoever.
As even the Bible makes VERY clear.
... therefore it deserves moral consideration.
Yes, but to THIS extent ONLY: It would be hatefully and
unconscionably IMmoral to seek to deprive or deny this *enormously*
valuable, beneficial, and totally-harmless REMEDY to *any* girl or
woman who CHOOSES to access it. OR -- to attempt to FORCE
any girl or woman to either *have* an abortion against her will,
or to gestate-to-term against her will.
And that is the full EXTENT of anything having to do with morality
in regard to abortion.
Having a broken arm set destroys nothing.
And having an abortion destroys nothing of value. But PROVIDES
**much** of value, as described above.
I submit that society would be much stronger and safer if we killed
all criminals and/or used them as guinea pigs in medical research, but
we don't do it, ...
Because they are PEOPLE. And *you* can't even distinguish
between people (which exist only from BIRTH on, as the Bible makes
quite clear) and mere reproductive-process entities, which are
WORTHLESS when unwanted.
You'd probably confuse acorns with oak trees.
So what, just leave a fetus alone for a while and it will become a
person too, I GUARANTEE it.
Any woman who's ever had a miscarriage during that stage of gesta-
tion probably would love to know how you could have guaranteed that.
However, *I* can guarantee that every person who's ever live (with
but three possible exceptions) was once a pair of gametes that had not
met. Who would never have been born had either or both of them died
at that stage.
Plus the fetus is totally innocent, deserving of a chance to develop...
Yeah. Right. To the SAME extent that a cockroach at that stage
would be. NON-sentient, and "deserving" of *nothing*.
CLUE: Any entity that has never experienced conscious awareness
is EITHER "innocent" OR "guilty." No more than is the average BRICK.
(But keep it up! I *love* to watch Anti-Choice/RRR Cult losers
making such ludicrous fools of themselves.)
Criminals are less than worthless people, guilty of heinous crimes
against others.
With brainless and compassionless/hateful people like you in our
society, it's no wonder the recidivism rate is so high.
What JESUS have to say about criminals?
They don't deserve to be kept alive.
CLUE: He sure as heck didn't say **that**!
[ ... ]
The truth is that as a society we pretend to hold human life
sacred except in this one case, abortion...
...because MOST of society is intelligent enough to realize that
only PEOPLE have *intrinsic* value. (Even in the case of the value
of embryoes/fetuses that are WANTED by women who are gestating
to term purposely, the only value that those entities have is that
which is being ASCRIBED to them by her or other people. *Intrinsic**
value BEGINS at the moment of BIRTH. The start of *personhood*.
(See the passages in the Bible that cover BIRTH order,
first-BORNS, and BIRTHrights.)
-- Craig Chilton
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
GOD'S "WIN-WIN-WIN" SITUATION
God is omniscient and omnipotent. That means that He has
always KNOWN everything *about* everything, past present
and future. And that He may freely INTERACT, uniquely, with
any person, group, or all humanity, however and whenever He
chooses.
Trillions (indeed, even octillions) of years ago, God KNEW
just *which* human entities (from sperm and ova on, inclusive)
would be born, and which ones would NOT, for whatever
reason. In the case of Jeremiah, He interacted BEFORE
Jeremiah reached the womb -- while Jeremiah was STILL at
the sperm-and-ovum stage! (Jer. 1:5). In THAT case, at least,
the soul had been instilled at the sperm-and-egg stage -- the
stage at which God communicated with Jeremiah.
So it's VERY possible that God instills ALL souls at that
stage... since God ALREADY knows which of them will later
become people, and which ones will not. And if He chooses
to instill souls in ALL of those, then heaven must be a VERY
populated place. And any potential people that happened to
have been aborted then got a FREE pass to heaven. And
missed the RISK that is faced by all of us here on earth.
And then, there also is the very REAL possibility that God
chooses to instill souls ONLY in the entities that He KNOWS,
beforehand, *will* be BORN. Then there are NO free passes
to heaven. But that's no loss to the QUINTILLION human
entities, daily, that never knew the difference.
Any way you look at it, it's a "win-win" situation for God.
Which makes it no great surprise that He never said so much
as ONE SINGLE WORD against abortion. Since abortion is a
highly-valuable REMEDY that enables millions of women to put
their lives BACK on track, and gives them another chance to
pursue their full ranges of future opportunities, the availability of
it is FAR more in line with God's COMPASSION (and the
compassion that Jesus commanded us to show to others), than
it would be for women to be FORCED to carry-to-term against
their will, and see many of their opportunities and their well-being
destroyed. (Particularly since God ALSO was/is well-aware that
MOST women who DO obtain abortions go on later to HAVE
children, by choice, when the timing is better, and the circum-
stances and prospects for long-term stable family environments
are far more favorable.)
For God, the status quo is "win-win-win" -- all the way!
-- Posted to several relevant Usenet Groups on 10-21-2001.
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
.
|
|
|
| User: "Craig Chilton" |
|
| Title: Re: Does she like me? |
19 Feb 2006 09:33:33 AM |
|
|
Craig Chilton <xanadu222@mchsi.com> wrote in message=0D=0A<573hv1tvjsuebmc2q515emkt0fvsghqt7j@4ax.com>...=
=0D=0A=0D=0A> A few weeks ago my boyfriend put his penis inside me, but=
only about=0D=0A> an inch or two, and it really hurt. My friend's say I'm=
not a virgin=0D=0A> any more, but I thought I would be a virgin until it=
went all the way=0D=0A> in? Please help!
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Craig Chilton" |
|
| Title: Re: Moronic and Bigoted ANTI-LIFE LOSER, LIES **again** |
19 Feb 2006 09:34:26 AM |
|
|
On Sun, 19 Feb 2006 10:44:03 GMT,
"Dutch" <no@email.com> wrote:
My response to this post is in an APPROPRIATELY-
named thread entitled:
Anti-Choice Disinformation, Ignorance...
and HYPOCRISIES.
-- Craig Chilton <xanadu222_@mchsi.com>
.
|
|
|
| User: "Craig Chilton" |
|
| Title: Re: How often can I take Viagara |
19 Feb 2006 09:36:39 AM |
|
|
Craig Chilton <xanadu222@mchsi.com> wrote in message=0D=0A<gv3hv154oit70osk2l1v7otribapviv5kl@4ax.com>...=
=0D=0A=0D=0A> firstly do other blokes out there shave their backsides=
and, well you=0D=0A> know, completely shave their arses (presuming replies=
are coming from=0D=0A> straight guys) secondly when you have sex are you=
meant to pull your=0D=0A> foreskin back before entering the guy? thanks=
you so much!
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Reasoned Insanity" |
|
| Title: Re: Moronic and Bigoted ANTI-LIFE LOSER, LIES **again** |
18 Feb 2006 10:22:39 AM |
|
|
"Craig Chilton" <xanadu222@mchsi.com> wrote in message
news:fjhev1h0ruue21c1aodutm70k78doo6mbp@4ax.com...
On Sat, 18 Feb 2006 02:43:24 -0800,
"Dutch" <Anonymous@COWARD> wrote:
Craig Chilton <xanadu222_@mchsi.com> wrote:
Yours are:
Arguments of convenience,...
There is NOTHING wrong with convenience, as long as one does no
overt harm to his/her neighbors in the course of availing him/herself of
it.
... not morality.
YOU are the one who's been LAMELY pretending that abortion is a
"moral" issue. It's not. It's merely a harmless an beneficial REMEDY,
and nothing more. The moral equivalent of having a broken arm set.
I submit that society would be much stronger and safer if we killed
all criminals and/or used them as guinea pigs in medical research, but
we don't do it, ...
Because they are PEOPLE. And *you* are SO bone-**dumb**, you
can't even distinguish between people (which exist only from BIRTH on,
as the Bible makes quite clear) and mere reproductive-process entities,
which are WORTHLESS when unwanted.
You'd probably confuse acorns with oak trees.
(LOL!!! What a tool.)
<idiocy-flush>
-- Craig Chilton <xanadu222_@mchsi.com>
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
The Bible Leaves Anti-Choice out in the Cold!
"Chris" said ---
"Sperm OR ova will never be anything more than sperm or ova
until they perish."
To which I (Craig Chilton) pointed out ---
"That's one if the BIGGEST *lies* of the Anti-Choicers, in their
sheer desperation to squirm out of seeing sperm and ova as EQUAL
in "defensibility" (or LACK thereof) to the z/e/f stages. The PROOF
that your statement just now is 100% bullcrap is all around us. More
than 6,000,000,000 times over. Every person alive today, and every
person who EVER lived, was once in the form of a sperm and ovum
that had not yet met, that simply carried out THEIR specific role of the
reproductive process. If ANY person's sperm OR ovum were to have
been killed while IN that stage -- Stage ONE of the reproductive
process... then THAT particular person would NEVER have been
born. As I pointed out before, EVERY sperm and ovum is a POTEN-
TIAL person... JUST as every zygote, embryo, or fetus is only a
POTENTIAL person.
"It's a VERY good thing that the Bible...
-- says NOT ONE WORD against abortion.
-- NEVER *defends* human entities prior to birth (except for the
single passage in which a fetus is regarded as PROPERTY,
and which includes the CONDONING of slavery).
-- reserves ALL of its defenses of human life for entities that
have been BORN (i.e., ACTUAL people).
-- makes it quite clear in its passages dealing with *birthrights*
that PERSONHOOD begins at BIRTH.
"Because if it DIDN'T, that would not only have denied an
enormously-valuable REMEDY to tens of millions of women, thus
wrecking their well-being, relegating them to second-class-citizen
status, and depriving them of countless of their future opportunities --
should society's laws in the USA have aligned with Biblical precepts,
as it usually does -- but it ALSO would constrain us to be EQUALLY
respectful of sperm and ova as we would have to be of the z/e/f
stages. Because ALL of those stages of the reproductive process
are comprised of HUMAN LIFE, each entity of which is a POTENTIAL
person. ALL of them: sperm, ova, zygotes, embryoes, and fetuses.
And since DOING that would be utterly *impossible*, it would just
have to be one of those Biblically-ordained things that almost NO
one attempts to do. Such as "keeping the Sabbath day holy."
"As it stands -- *as* the Bible was *written* -- IF such hardship
ever again WERE to be forced upon women, it would be SOLELY
the doing of callous, hateful, frequently-ignorant, and often-deluded
PEOPLE -- acting on their OWN with absolutely NO Biblical backing
or authorization whatsoever. IF abortion EVER again were to be
denied to women, the Bible would be BLAMELESS for that social
upheaval, injustice, and cataclysm. The hatefulness and bigotry
would be of entirely HUMAN origin.
"Anti-Choicers -- you're out in the cold on this one!
"And FORTUNATELY for millions of American women, MOST
Americans want *nothing* to do with the Anti-Choice agenda, and
when put in a position where they could actively support it, they
REJECT it out of hand. As Washington State and Colorado proved
in the 1998 general election, when they *both* soundly DEFEATED
the proposed 'partial-birth' abortion bans that Anti-Choice had
wangled onto the ballot as referenda."
-- August 25, 2002
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*.
..
Keep dehumanizing the unborn Craig. Hotler did the same thing. The natural
laws of science and biology continue to be against you. You continue to
argue against logic and scientific proof. Who is the living in ancient
times? It's not me.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dutch" |
|
| Title: Re: Moronic and Bigoted ANTI-LIFE LOSER, LIES **again** |
19 Feb 2006 04:55:38 AM |
|
|
"Reasoned Insanity" <mintclovers@yahoo.com> wrote
"Craig Chilton" <xanadu222@mchsi.com> wrote
Because ALL of those stages of the reproductive process
are comprised of HUMAN LIFE, each entity of which is a POTENTIAL
person. ALL of them: sperm, ova, zygotes, embryoes, and fetuses.
And since DOING that would be utterly *impossible.
This is one his favorite lies. Sperm and ova are not potential persons any
more than the air, water and food people consume and manufacture into
reproductive cells. Potentiality of humaness, and a VERY HIGH potential it
is, begins when a fertilized egg implants into a woman's uterine wall. From
this stage on, potential to become a human is SO HIGH that to violently
destroy a fetus is considered homicide in most jurisidictions. Legal
abortions are nothing more than exemptions for the mother to allow her to
withdraw her body from supporting the pregnancy. This exemption does not
change that this implicit recogntion of humaness in the law and which we
know to be true. Even the judges who were on the affirmative side in Roe v
Wade were very explicit in their recognition of these facts. The kind of
sophistry woven by cretins like Chilton is more demeaning to humankind than
most abortions themselves.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ray Fischer" |
|
| Title: Re: Moronic and Bigoted ANTI-LIFE LOSER, LIES **again** |
19 Feb 2006 12:11:50 PM |
|
|
Dutch <no@email.com> wrote:
"Reasoned Insanity" <mintclovers@yahoo.com> wrote
"Craig Chilton" <xanadu222@mchsi.com> wrote
Because ALL of those stages of the reproductive process
are comprised of HUMAN LIFE, each entity of which is a POTENTIAL
person. ALL of them: sperm, ova, zygotes, embryoes, and fetuses.
And since DOING that would be utterly *impossible.
This is one his favorite lies. Sperm and ova are not potential persons any
more than the air, water and food people consume and manufacture into
reproductive cells.
And yet millions of sperm and eggs manage to join, grow, and become
born as people.
Potentiality of humaness,
The moron demonstrates that he still cannot distinguish between
"human" used as a noun and "human" used as an adjective.
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Moronic and Bigoted ANTI-LIFE LOSER, LIES **again** |
20 Feb 2006 11:42:24 PM |
|
|
Ray Fischer wrote:
Dutch <no@email.com> wrote:
"Reasoned Insanity" <mintclovers@yahoo.com> wrote
"Craig Chilton" <xanadu222@mchsi.com> wrote
Because ALL of those stages of the reproductive process
are comprised of HUMAN LIFE, each entity of which is a POTENTIAL
person. ALL of them: sperm, ova, zygotes, embryoes, and fetuses.
And since DOING that would be utterly *impossible.
This is one his favorite lies. Sperm and ova are not potential persons any
more than the air, water and food people consume and manufacture into
reproductive cells.
And yet millions of sperm and eggs manage to join, grow, and become
born as people.
And trillions of cells of air, water and food are manufactured by the
human body into sperm and eggs cells, that does not make any of the
above unique, self-contained human lives, like a fetus.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ray Fischer" |
|
| Title: Re: Moronic and Bigoted ANTI-LIFE LOSER, LIES **again** |
21 Feb 2006 12:43:32 AM |
|
|
<leechap@gmail.com> wrote:
Ray Fischer wrote:
Dutch <no@email.com> wrote:
"Reasoned Insanity" <mintclovers@yahoo.com> wrote
"Craig Chilton" <xanadu222@mchsi.com> wrote
Because ALL of those stages of the reproductive process
are comprised of HUMAN LIFE, each entity of which is a POTENTIAL
person. ALL of them: sperm, ova, zygotes, embryoes, and fetuses.
And since DOING that would be utterly *impossible.
This is one his favorite lies. Sperm and ova are not potential persons any
more than the air, water and food people consume and manufacture into
reproductive cells.
And yet millions of sperm and eggs manage to join, grow, and become
born as people.
And trillions of cells of air, water and food are manufactured by the
human body into sperm and eggs cells, that does not make any of the
above unique, self-contained human lives, like a fetus.
If it's "self-contained" then obviously it doesn't need a woman's body
and she's free to remove it from within her body.
Nice of you to destroy the anti-choice position.
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "John P. Boatwright" |
|
| Title: Your abirthdayist can kill your baby in your womb, no problem, just pay a few dollars and he won't make you look at your dismembered baby on the table top either... 'cuz you're a coward and can't stomach looking at your own kids after you paid to hav |
12 Mar 2006 05:09:07 AM |
|
|
Ray Fischer wrote:
<leechap@gmail.com> wrote:
Ray Fischer wrote:
Dutch <no@email.com> wrote:
"Reasoned Insanity" <mintclovers@yahoo.com> wrote
"Craig Chilton" <xanadu222@mchsi.com> wrote
Because ALL of those stages of the reproductive process
are comprised of HUMAN LIFE, each entity of which is a POTENTIAL
person. ALL of them: sperm, ova, zygotes, embryoes, and fetuses.
And since DOING that would be utterly *impossible.
This is one his favorite lies. Sperm and ova are not potential persons any
more than the air, water and food people consume and manufacture into
reproductive cells.
And yet millions of sperm and eggs manage to join, grow, and become
born as people.
And trillions of cells of air, water and food are manufactured by the
human body into sperm and eggs cells, that does not make any of the
above unique, self-contained human lives, like a fetus.
If it's "self-contained" then obviously it doesn't need a woman's body
and she's free to remove it from within her body.
Nice of you to destroy the anti-choice position.
Why is this SICK CRAP being posted in a bible newsgroup?
Sure, you can kill your own kids in the womb. Yes it's SICK
and DISGUSTING, yes you guy's do it every day, killing your
own offspring, your own relatives, your own kids in the womb.
Absolutely, you guys do that... which is why there's the
killing your kids newsgroups for you to sit around talking
about all the innocent helpless relatives you put to death
that you should have loved and cared for.
It's classic, I can talk to, see, care for, and LOVE who
you would have killed, and in your mind, they should have
been killed, as worthless people, not even people, in fact
you'd claim they were a disgusting cancer, less than garbage.
Whatever... that's why you have the killing your kids
newsgroups, so you guys can talk about all the people
that were killed and how worthless they were, you being
so powerful, standing over them, paying the few dollars
to have them executed.
Make sure you have all your excuses in order when you
explain it to God.
God made it all, Jesus died for our sins.
Proof God described the planet density profile
BEFORE science did:
http://home.teleport.com/~salad/4god/density.htm
(see the 2 graphs, obviously God was right in Genesis)
Mirror site at: http://For-God.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bill" |
|
| Title: Re: Your abirthdayist can kill your baby in your womb, no problem, just pay a few dollars and he won't make you look at your dismembered baby on the table top either... 'cuz you're a coward and can't stomach looking at your own kids after you paid to |
12 Mar 2006 01:54:23 PM |
|
|
"John P. Boatwright" <name@For-God.net> wrote in message
news:4413FF39.2ED@For-God.net...
Ray Fischer wrote:
<leechap@gmail.com> wrote:
Ray Fischer wrote:
Dutch <no@email.com> wrote:
"Reasoned Insanity" <mintclovers@yahoo.com> wrote
"Craig Chilton" <xanadu222@mchsi.com> wrote
Because ALL of those stages of the reproductive process
are comprised of HUMAN LIFE, each entity of which is a POTENTIAL
person. ALL of them: sperm, ova, zygotes, embryoes, and fetuses.
And since DOING that would be utterly *impossible.
This is one his favorite lies. Sperm and ova are not potential
persons any
more than the air, water and food people consume and manufacture into
reproductive cells.
And yet millions of sperm and eggs manage to join, grow, and become
born as people.
And trillions of cells of air, water and food are manufactured by the
human body into sperm and eggs cells, that does not make any of the
above unique, self-contained human lives, like a fetus.
If it's "self-contained" then obviously it doesn't need a woman's body
and she's free to remove it from within her body.
Nice of you to destroy the anti-choice position.
Why is this SICK CRAP being posted in a bible newsgroup?
Sure, you can kill your own kids in the womb. Yes it's SICK
and DISGUSTING, yes you guy's do it every day, killing your
own offspring, your own relatives, your own kids in the womb.
Absolutely, you guys do that... which is why there's the
killing your kids newsgroups for you to sit around talking
about all the innocent helpless relatives you put to death
that you should have loved and cared for.
It's classic, I can talk to, see, care for, and LOVE who
you would have killed, and in your mind, they should have
been killed, as worthless people, not even people, in fact
you'd claim they were a disgusting cancer, less than garbage.
Whatever... that's why you have the killing your kids
newsgroups, so you guys can talk about all the people
that were killed and how worthless they were, you being
so powerful, standing over them, paying the few dollars
to have them executed.
Make sure you have all your excuses in order when you
explain it to God.
God made it all, Jesus died for our sins.
All in your personal unfounded religious 'OPINION' with no basis in fact.
Billions of living ovum and sperm every day because they were not
fertilized.
In fact it is physically IMPOSSIBLE to fertilize more than a miniscule
fraction
of the ovum and sperm that is produced by man.
Further there is NO objective verifiable evidence that ANY of thousands of
gods actually exist.
Why would this all powerful creator, all loving and caring intelligent
designer, create Plagues, Tsunamis, Tornadoes, Volcanic Eruptions, Wars,
Cancers and hundreds of debilitating diseases, serious body malfunctions and
starvation? There are 12,000 known ailments and diseases that torture and
kill man. Why would this omnificent all loving god, all powerful god create
all these diseases to torture and kill his followers with??? These
catastrophes affect people of ALL religious beliefs including TOTALLY
INNOCENT CHILDREN!
Just one example of ridiculous ailments is a parasitic worm in West Africa
that bores through the eyes of innocent children and causes total blindness
for the rest of their lives. This is the work of an all caring and loving
god creator???
Why does this all powerful and caring god permit totally innocent children
to die at birth? Or worse, be born lacking eyesight, a fully developed
brain, deaf and dumb, missing limbs etc.? Why are some born idiots and
others with super intelligence? Why are some born into wealth and others
pauper poor? Why does he permit 2,000,000 totally innocent children to
suffer and die of starvation each year? Why are his human creations designed
to deteriorate into a miserable and devastating old age?
Why did this all powerful and loving creator create things like sharks,
jelly fish, octopus, lions, tigers, rhinoceros, poisonous snakes, stinging
and poisonous insects, poisonous plants etc.? Why did this caring benevolent
god create animals (including man) that need to kill and eat other animals
to survive?
Why does this all powerful, all caring and all loving god NOT permit those
in his heaven to communicate the wonders of his heaven to their living
children, relatives and friends?
Why does he permit thousands of claims of different gods? If there is a real
god, why does he not announce clearly and unquestionably from his heaven
that he is the 'real' god and all the others are fakes? Why does he not
smite the fake gods?
Why all the secrecy and confusion? Unproven claims by the mentally deranged
and persons with selfish motives are not objective verifiable evidence -
they are just unsubstantiated silly claims.
The real objective evidence is that no god created man but quite the
contrary; that man created gods!
.
|
|
|
| User: "John P. Boatwright" |
|
| Title: Re: Your abirthdayist can kill your baby in your womb, no problem, just pay a few dollars and he won't make you look at your dismembered baby on the table top either... 'cuz you're a coward and can't stomach looking at your own kids after you paid to |
18 Mar 2006 02:33:12 AM |
|
|
Bill wrote:
"John P. Boatwright" <name@For-God.net> wrote in message
news:4413FF39.2ED@For-God.net...
Ray Fischer wrote:
<leechap@gmail.com> wrote:
Ray Fischer wrote:
Dutch <no@email.com> wrote:
"Reasoned Insanity" <mintclovers@yahoo.com> wrote
"Craig Chilton" <xanadu222@mchsi.com> wrote
Because ALL of those stages of the reproductive process
are comprised of HUMAN LIFE, each entity of which is a POTENTIAL
person. ALL of them: sperm, ova, zygotes, embryoes, and fetuses.
And since DOING that would be utterly *impossible.
This is one his favorite lies. Sperm and ova are not potential
persons any
more than the air, water and food people consume and manufacture into
reproductive cells.
And yet millions of sperm and eggs manage to join, grow, and become
born as people.
And trillions of cells of air, water and food are manufactured by the
human body into sperm and eggs cells, that does not make any of the
above unique, self-contained human lives, like a fetus.
If it's "self-contained" then obviously it doesn't need a woman's body
and she's free to remove it from within her body.
Nice of you to destroy the anti-choice position.
Why is this SICK CRAP being posted in a bible newsgroup?
Sure, you can kill your own kids in the womb. Yes it's SICK
and DISGUSTING, yes you guy's do it every day, killing your
own offspring, your own relatives, your own kids in the womb.
Absolutely, you guys do that... which is why there's the
killing your kids newsgroups for you to sit around talking
about all the innocent helpless relatives you put to death
that you should have loved and cared for.
It's classic, I can talk to, see, care for, and LOVE who
you would have killed, and in your mind, they should have
been killed, as worthless people, not even people, in fact
you'd claim they were a disgusting cancer, less than garbage.
Whatever... that's why you have the killing your kids
newsgroups, so you guys can talk about all the people
that were killed and how worthless they were, you being
so powerful, standing over them, paying the few dollars
to have them executed.
Make sure you have all your excuses in order when you
explain it to God.
God made it all, Jesus died for our sins.
All in your personal unfounded religious 'OPINION' with no basis in fact.
The fact is, God said what he did when he made our solar system,
and they're finding out that he was right all along... well...
they're finding the evidence, but they don't yet ADMIT who did
it.
The shot out crystal...
Billions of living ovum and sperm every day because they were not
fertilized.
In fact it is physically IMPOSSIBLE to fertilize more than a miniscule
fraction
of the ovum and sperm that is produced by man.
1/2 of what it takes to build a person, is not a person.
It takes BOTH halves, two united as one, for that purpose...
But you go off fornicating and MURDERING, what good is that?
That's not the purpose, is it?
Further there is NO objective verifiable evidence that ANY of thousands of
gods actually exist.
There is only ONE God, the God of Abraham, Issac, and Jacob.
Why would this all powerful creator, all loving and caring intelligent
designer, create Plagues, Tsunamis, Tornadoes, Volcanic Eruptions, Wars,
Cancers and hundreds of debilitating diseases, serious body malfunctions and
starvation?
You do NOT live forever physically.
Physical stuff is not SPIRIT.
God is a SPIRIT, not flesh.
Flesh is temporary.
The stuff here in the physical world, is all temporary, it
breaks, it dies, it falls apart, sometimes catastrophically.
If everyone died at a predictable time, in one manner, what
would that be like?
What would you be saying then?
There are 12,000 known ailments and diseases that torture and
kill man. Why would this omnificent all loving god, all powerful god create
all these diseases to torture and kill his followers with??? These
catastrophes affect people of ALL religious beliefs including TOTALLY
INNOCENT CHILDREN!
Everyone dies, no exceptions.
Why all the secrecy and confusion? Unproven claims by the mentally deranged
and persons with selfish motives are not objective verifiable evidence -
they are just unsubstantiated silly claims.
The shot out crystal...
What do you think they just found comets to be made of?
What did God say about our solar system formation?
What did God say about the shot out crystal?
How did God know what it looks like?
How did God know how to describe it, in detail, yet in
such a manner that if you really wanted to, you could
think it's insanity to believe him... yet him being
right all along?
It's right there, God being right, saying the right stuff,
and some people think it's insanity for anyone to believe him.
The real objective evidence is that no god created man but quite the
contrary; that man created gods!
Sure, men have made up false gods, for example, the god
of NOTHING, the one science keeps trying to dredge up.
But there is only ONE God, the God of Abraham, Issac
and Jacob, he's the ONLY God there is.
God made it all, Jesus died for our sins.
Proof God described the planet density profile
BEFORE science did:
http://home.teleport.com/~salad/4god/density.htm
(see the 2 graphs, obviously God was right in Genesis)
Mirror site at: http://For-God.net
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Ray Fischer" |
|
| Title: Re: Moronic and Bigoted ANTI-LIFE LOSER, LIES **again** |
12 Mar 2006 12:28:14 PM |
|
|
John P. Boatwright <name@For-God.net> wrote:
Ray Fischer wrote:
<leechap@gmail.com> wrote:
Ray Fischer wrote:
Dutch <no@email.com> wrote:
"Reasoned Insanity" <mintclovers@yahoo.com> wrote
"Craig Chilton" <xanadu222@mchsi.com> wrote
Because ALL of those stages of the reproductive process
are comprised of HUMAN LIFE, each entity of which is a POTENTIAL
person. ALL of them: sperm, ova, zygotes, embryoes, and fetuses.
And since DOING that would be utterly *impossible.
This is one his favorite lies. Sperm and ova are not potential persons any
more than the air, water and food people consume and manufacture into
reproductive cells.
And yet millions of sperm and eggs manage to join, grow, and become
born as people.
And trillions of cells of air, water and food are manufactured by the
human body into sperm and eggs cells, that does not make any of the
above unique, self-contained human lives, like a fetus.
If it's "self-contained" then obviously it doesn't need a woman's body
and she's free to remove it from within her body.
Nice of you to destroy the anti-choice position.
Why is this SICK CRAP being posted in a bible newsgroup?
Sure, you can kill your own kids in the womb. Yes it's SICK
Why is this evil crap being posting to an abortion newsgroup?
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Lefty" |
|
| Title: Re: Moronic and Bigoted ANTI-LIFE LOSER, LIES **again** |
18 Mar 2006 04:07:21 AM |
|
|
wrote:
Ray Fischer wrote:
Dutch <no@email.com> wrote:
"Reasoned Insanity" <mintclovers@yahoo.com> wrote
"Craig Chilton" <xanadu222@mchsi.com> wrote
Because ALL of those stages of the reproductive process
are comprised of HUMAN LIFE, each entity of which is a POTENTIAL
person. ALL of them: sperm, ova, zygotes, embryoes, and fetuses.
And since DOING that would be utterly *impossible.
This is one his favorite lies. Sperm and ova are not potential persons any
more than the air, water and food people consume and manufacture into
reproductive cells.
And yet millions of sperm and eggs manage to join, grow, and become
born as people.
And trillions of cells of air, water and food are manufactured by the
human body into sperm and eggs cells, that does not make any of the
above unique, self-contained human lives, like a fetus.
Who cares? It isn't a sentient life. Non-sentient life forms can't be
harmed.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Craig Chilton" |
|
| Title: Re: Moronic and Bigoted ANTI-LIFE LOSER, LIES **again** |
19 Feb 2006 08:29:17 AM |
|
|
On Sun, 19 Feb 2006 02:55:38 -0800,
"Dutch" <no@email.com> wrote:
My response to this post is in an APPROPRIATELY-
named thread entitled:
Anti-Choice Disinformation, Ignorance...
and HYPOCRISIES.
-- Craig Chilton <xanadu222_@mchsi.com>
.
|
|
|
| User: "Craig Chilton" |
|
| Title: Re: No interest to be popular.....is it normal? |
19 Feb 2006 08:31:47 AM |
|
|
Craig Chilton <xanadu222@mchsi.com> wrote in message=0D=0A<830hv1pt22af529d8bgei3siuohujcvukv@4ax.com>...=
=0D=0A=0D=0A> I have a life. C:=08NIMANIACS\CARTOON\FAKE\STUFF\LIFE.EXE=
.....See?
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Craig Chilton" |
|
| Title: Anti-Choice Disinformation, Ignorance... and HYPOCRISIES. |
19 Feb 2006 08:29:47 AM |
|
|
On Sun, 19 Feb 2006 02:55:38 -0800,
"Dutch" <no@email.com> wrote:
"Reasoned Insanity" <mintclovers@yahoo.com> wrote:
"Craig Chilton" <xanadu222@mchsi.com> wrote:
Because ALL of those stages of the reproductive process
are comprised of HUMAN LIFE, each entity of which is a POTENTIAL
person. ALL of them: sperm, ova, zygotes, embryoes, and fetuses.
And since DOING that would be utterly *impossible.
This is one his favorite lies.
I never lie in my posts. Thus, any arguments put forth by Anti-Choice
LOUTS like you are rapidly converted into dog meat. That's because I
marshall the FACTS well, and it is probable that NO relevant fact even
*exists* that you could draw upon to support your loathsome agenda
against human rights, personal liberties, and women.
Sperm and ova are not potential persons any more than the air,
water and food people consume and manufacture into reproductive
cells. Potentiality of humaness, and a VERY HIGH potential it is, begins
when a fertilized egg implants into a woman's uterine wall.
Wrong on ALL counts.
(1) What kind of DNA is contained in gametes? Cat? Dog?
Elephant? Amoeba? No -- the gametes that are the
**start** of every person alive contain *human* DNA.
(2) Since human gametes ARE human, they don't merely
contain a *potentiality* of humanness. Every gamete
IS human... and just like the other three stages of the
human reproductive process, it is a *potential* human
BEING. (I.e., a *potential* PERSON.)
(3) Gametes comprise Stage ONE of the human reproductive
process. Whenever one is killed (as happens more than
a *quadrillion* times a day, worldwide, as elective
abortions of them performed by men), the unique person
that MIGHT have been born, stemming from it, will instead
never exist. Male masturbation is LITERALLY nothing less
than the elective abortion, every single time, of millions
of *potential* people that were unique, human, and
alive. It is abortion JUST as much as abortion at Stages
2,3,and 4 (zygotes, embryo, and fetus) is abortion. The
*only* difference, as far as the ultimate outcome is
concerned (termination of a potential person) is the
methodology employed. And the lack of expense, in this
case.
From this stage on, potential to become a human is SO HIGH ...
Yeah. Really "high." 70% spontaneously abort (miscarry)
during Stages 2, 3, and 4.
So you're saying that if one or the other of the gametes that
could have become John Smith dies, and thus, John Smith is never
born... that's OKAY! Because the odds of any given gametes
having become John Smith were lower than were the *odds* of
a zygote leading to him would have been?
That's the SAME sort of hypocrisy that we see in the rational-
izing done by Anti-Choice loons when they allow for accepting the
abortion option in situations where the woman has been the
victim of rape or incest. Would those same Anti-Choicers accept
the termination of an INFANT that had been *born* which
resulted from an act of rape or incest? You KNOW that the answer
to that is "No." Thus -- all of those Anti-Choicers are ADMITTING
that fetuses are **not** people. And thus are hypocritical as
hell.
...that to violently destroy a fetus is considered homicide in
most jurisidictions.
This reference obviously being to a fetus that dies as a result
of a malicious attack on a woman. The answer is *some* juris-
dictions, not "most." And where that is the case -- as I've already
told you before -- it's a case of the law assuming that the woman
in question had desired to gestate to term, and thus, at that point,
the odds are favorable that birth would have occurred. But those
laws do NOT confer personhood on fetuses. They can't -- because
it is legal for a woman to choose the remedy of abortion in the case
of unwanted pregnancy. At bottom, HER bodily autonomy is
paramount.
<redundant crap and lies flushed>
-- Craig Chilton <xanadu222_@mchsi.com>
---
RRR Cult lemmings.
Dumber than dirt. America's own version of the Taliban.
Selfishly, hatefully, and mindlessly supporting sociopathic
agendas that seek to destroy vital personal liberties of
millions of people. (That's as dumb as it GETS!!!)
And constantly proving that to everyone.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dutch" |
|
| Title: Re: Anti-Choice Disinformation, Ignorance... and HYPOCRISIES. |
19 Feb 2006 05:34:09 PM |
|
|
"Craig Chilton" <xanadu222@mchsi.com> wrote
On Sun, 19 Feb 2006 02:55:38 -0800,
"Dutch" <no@email.com> wrote:
Because ALL of those stages of the reproductive process
are comprised of HUMAN LIFE, each entity of which is a POTENTIAL
person. ALL of them: sperm, ova, zygotes, embryoes, and fetuses.
And since DOING that would be utterly *impossible.
This is one his favorite lies.
I never lie in my posts.
You never stop.
Sperm and ova are not potential persons any more than the air,
water and food people consume and manufacture into reproductive
cells. Potentiality of humaness, and a VERY HIGH potential it is, begins
when a fertilized egg implants into a woman's uterine wall.
Wrong on ALL counts.
Right on all counts
(1) What kind of DNA is contained in gametes? Cat? Dog?
Elephant? Amoeba? No -- the gametes that are the
**start** of every person alive contain *human* DNA.
The same DNA found in the saliva or hair follicles of the adult parent, NOT
the DNA of a new, unique human being, as is found in a fetus.
(2) Since human gametes ARE human,
They are cells of the parent human, NOT of a new, unique human being, as is
found in a fetus.
they don't merely
contain a *potentiality* of humanness.
That's right, they do not.
Every gamete
IS human...
So is a toenail.
and just like the other three stages of the
human reproductive process, it is a *potential* human
BEING. (I.e., a *potential* PERSON.)
LIE. Sperm has NO potential to be a human in and of itself, any more than a
hair follicle.
<snippage of similiar lies>
That's the SAME sort of hypocrisy that we see in the rational-
izing done by Anti-Choice loons when they allow for accepting the
abortion option in situations where the woman has been the
victim of rape or incest. Would those same Anti-Choicers accept
the termination of an INFANT that had been *born* which
resulted from an act of rape or incest? You KNOW that the answer
to that is "No." Thus -- all of those Anti-Choicers are ADMITTING
that fetuses are **not** people. And thus are hypocritical as
hell.
That is the first intelligent comment you have made. Yes, there are
troubling moral compromises to be made, that does not support the view that
there is no moral component of the issue.
...that to violently destroy a fetus is considered homicide in
most jurisidictions.
This reference obviously being to a fetus that dies as a result
of a malicious attack on a woman.
I'm glad you can comprehend the obvious.
The answer is *some* juris-
dictions, not "most."
Prove it. In any case the law tells a conclusive story.
And where that is the case -- as I've already
told you before -- it's a case of the law assuming that the woman
in question had desired to gestate to term
The laws make no such provision. The statute is based on the *real* status
of the fetus, which is an early-stage human being.
and thus, at that point,
the od | | | | | | | | |
