"David W. Barnes" <dbarnes@aol.com> wrote in message
news:140320050809009777%dbarnes@aol.com...

You aren't listening.

I really don't care what you have to say

"David W. Barnes" <dbarnes@aol.com> wrote in message
news:140320050809009777%dbarnes@aol.com...

In article <-9-dnYC0Ks-EB6jfRVn-jg@comcast.com>, Osprey
<noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:

"David W. Barnes" <dbarnes@aol.com> wrote in message
news:130320052153213454%dbarnes@aol.com...

In article <BJqdnZTSDZIQJ6nfRVn-iQ@comcast.com>, Osprey
<noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:

"Tamagotchi" <tamagotchi56@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:JJmdnbA8tIxwKKnfRVn-ug@adelphia.com...

"David W. Barnes" <dbarnes@aol.com> wrote in message
news:120320051828354666%dbarnes@aol.com...

In article <l9qdnZ_zlIIIOa7fRVn-2Q@adelphia.com>, Tamagotchi
<tamagotchi56@yahoo.com> wrote:

"David W. Barnes" <dbarnes@aol.com> wrote in message
news:120320051813141953%dbarnes@aol.com...

In article <SoOdnaxXItS5Pa7fRVn-vA@adelphia.com>, Tamagotchi
<tamagotchi56@yahoo.com> wrote:

"David W. Barnes" <dbarnes@aol.com> wrote in message
news:120320051755318193%dbarnes@aol.com...

In article <hvudndR4heOpBq7fRVn-rg@adelphia.com>, Tamagotchi
<tamagotchi56@yahoo.com> wrote:

"David W. Barnes" <dbarnes@aol.com> wrote in message
news:120320051725290068%dbarnes@aol.com...

In article <5b6dnQZdJI22C67fRVn-oQ@adelphia.com>,
Tamagotchi
<tamagotchi56@yahoo.com> wrote:

"David W. Barnes" <dbarnes@aol.com> wrote in message
news:120320051638441754%dbarnes@aol.com...

In article <42338a2b$0$32621$db0fefd9@news.zen.co.uk>,
Michael
Calwell
<michael.calwell@btopenworld.com> wrote:

Bill Gamelson wrote:

I can. If they do have sex and the woman get's
pregnant,
then
she
should
suffer the burden of her actions and carry the baby
to
full
term
and
at
least put it up for adoption. By the way, I was
adopted
and I
am
very
glad
that my mother carried me to full term. There is my
choice in
the
matter.

There are people on this group who consider your very
existence
a
form
of penury, and who would rather have seen you killed
before
birth.

Tell me Bill, are you "unwanted"? Would it have been
better
for
you
that
you had not been born? Because that is what these
psychopaths
want
us
to
believe. That there is ever such a thing as an
"unwanted
child".

Maybe you need to look around at all the unwanted
children
in
the
world. Have you adopted?

Actually, yes...have you?

No. But then, I don't claim adoption is the answer, so I
don't
have
to.

Does the fact that there are more orphans than
adoptive families mean that it would be better had these
children
never
been
born at all?

Absolutely!

Is it possible that one of these children will one day
cure
AIDS...or bring about world peace?

Or kill millions?

Well, you're entitled to an opinion. I think it is a pretty
disturbed
one
at that. I guess I tend to be more optimistic about people,
and
look
for
the goodness in them.

I disagree. I am the one who is optimistic. You seem to
feel
we
need
to force people to do "the right thing." I say, let women
choose
for
themselves. I trust them.

If you're worried that they may kill millions, and if
you feel that the world would be a better place without
them,
then
why
don't
you begin a movement whose ultimate goal is to legalize the
killing of
these
children....for the betterment of society, of course.

I'm not worried. I was just pointing out that your position
made
no
sense. (Which it doesn't.) Saying perhaps an unborn will
cure
AIDS is
no different than saying perhaps an unborn will kill. In
fact,
the
ration of those who kill in our society to those who cure
terrible
illnesses is very lopsided toward those who kill.

You are certainly not the optimistic one if you are trying to
make a
comparison of the number of killers to the number of top
research
scientists. This is hardly a valid comparison.

LOL! Look. I think the whole analogy is a bad one. It is like
saying, lets let Saddam Hussein go - maybe he will cure AIDS if
we
do.

Try something a bit more
valid, like asking yourself what is the ratio of productive
members
of
society to unproductive members. I believe that the vast
moajority
of
these
orphans will become productive members of society.

It is still a poor (and silly) analogy.

Ok, if you say so. But then I'd guess you'd have to say that the
analogy of
productive vs. unproductive is silly...after saying that the world
would
be
better had they never been born, and then being confronted with
the
reality
that for the most part they will be productive members of society.

What I meant was, clearly the world is better off without unwanted
children being brought into it.

To finish your statement:
"...even though I agree that they will be, for the most part,
productive
members of society. "

With their logic, with all the people who are homeless, in prison, and
so
forth that are probably "unwanted" by most of society...I guess they
think
we should kill them all off too...because according to their logic the
world
would be better off.

I told you to shut up.

Is this what you call acting like an adult?

You aren't listening.

I really don't care what you have to say, I Just want to know if this is
what you consider acting like an adult?

What I meant was, clearly the world is better off without unwanted
children being brought into it.

To finish your statement:
"...even though I agree that they will be, for the most part, productive
members of society. "

With their logic, with all the people who are homeless, in prison, and so
forth that are probably "unwanted" by most of society...I guess they think
we should kill them all off too...because according to their logic the world
would be better off.

"David W. Barnes" <dbarnes@aol.com> wrote in message
news:120320051828354666%dbarnes@aol.com...

In article <l9qdnZ_zlIIIOa7fRVn-2Q@adelphia.com>, Tamagotchi
<tamagotchi56@yahoo.com> wrote:

"David W. Barnes" <dbarnes@aol.com> wrote in message
news:120320051813141953%dbarnes@aol.com...

In article <SoOdnaxXItS5Pa7fRVn-vA@adelphia.com>, Tamagotchi
<tamagotchi56@yahoo.com> wrote:

"David W. Barnes" <dbarnes@aol.com> wrote in message
news:120320051755318193%dbarnes@aol.com...

In article <hvudndR4heOpBq7fRVn-rg@adelphia.com>, Tamagotchi
<tamagotchi56@yahoo.com> wrote:

"David W. Barnes" <dbarnes@aol.com> wrote in message
news:120320051725290068%dbarnes@aol.com...

In article <5b6dnQZdJI22C67fRVn-oQ@adelphia.com>, Tamagotchi
<tamagotchi56@yahoo.com> wrote:

"David W. Barnes" <dbarnes@aol.com> wrote in message
news:120320051638441754%dbarnes@aol.com...

In article <42338a2b$0$32621$db0fefd9@news.zen.co.uk>, Michael
Calwell
<michael.calwell@btopenworld.com> wrote:

Bill Gamelson wrote:

I can. If they do have sex and the woman get's pregnant,
then
she
should
suffer the burden of her actions and carry the baby to full
term
and
at
least put it up for adoption. By the way, I was adopted
and I
am
very
glad
that my mother carried me to full term. There is my choice
in
the
matter.

There are people on this group who consider your very
existence
a
form
of penury, and who would rather have seen you killed before
birth.

Tell me Bill, are you "unwanted"? Would it have been better
for
you
that
you had not been born? Because that is what these psychopaths
want
us
to
believe. That there is ever such a thing as an "unwanted
child".

Maybe you need to look around at all the unwanted children in
the
world. Have you adopted?

Actually, yes...have you?

No. But then, I don't claim adoption is the answer, so I don't
have
to.

Does the fact that there are more orphans than
adoptive families mean that it would be better had these
children
never
been
born at all?

Absolutely!

Is it possible that one of these children will one day cure
AIDS...or bring about world peace?

Or kill millions?

Well, you're entitled to an opinion. I think it is a pretty
disturbed
one
at that. I guess I tend to be more optimistic about people, and
look
for
the goodness in them.

I disagree. I am the one who is optimistic. You seem to feel we
need
to force people to do "the right thing." I say, let women choose
for
themselves. I trust them.

If you're worried that they may kill millions, and if
you feel that the world would be a better place without them, then
why
don't
you begin a movement whose ultimate goal is to legalize the killing
of
these
children....for the betterment of society, of course.

I'm not worried. I was just pointing out that your position made no
sense. (Which it doesn't.) Saying perhaps an unborn will cure AIDS
is
no different than saying perhaps an unborn will kill. In fact, the
ration of those who kill in our society to those who cure terrible
illnesses is very lopsided toward those who kill.

You are certainly not the optimistic one if you are trying to make a
comparison of the number of killers to the number of top research
scientists. This is hardly a valid comparison.

LOL! Look. I think the whole analogy is a bad one. It is like
saying, lets let Saddam Hussein go - maybe he will cure AIDS if we do.

Try something a bit more
valid, like asking yourself what is the ratio of productive members of
society to unproductive members. I believe that the vast moajority of
these
orphans will become productive members of society.

It is still a poor (and silly) analogy.

Ok, if you say so. But then I'd guess you'd have to say that the analogy
of
productive vs. unproductive is silly...after saying that the world would
be
better had they never been born, and then being confronted with the
reality
that for the most part they will be productive members of society.

What I meant was, clearly the world is better off without unwanted
children being brought into it.

To finish your statement:
"...even though I agree that they will be, for the most part, productive
members of society. "

Ok, if you say so. But then I'd guess you'd have to say that the analogy
of
productive vs. unproductive is silly...after saying that the world would
be
better had they never been born, and then being confronted with the
reality
that for the most part they will be productive members of society.

What I meant was, clearly the world is better off without unwanted
children being brought into it.

To finish your statement:
"...even though I agree that they will be, for the most part, productive
members of society. "

In article <42338a2b$0$32621$db0fefd9@news.zen.co.uk>, Michael Calwell
<michael.calwell@btopenworld.com> wrote:

Bill Gamelson wrote:

I can. If they do have sex and the woman get's pregnant, then she
should
suffer the burden of her actions and carry the baby to full term and at
least put it up for adoption. By the way, I was adopted and I am very
glad
that my mother carried me to full term. There is my choice in the
matter.

There are people on this group who consider your very existence a form
of penury, and who would rather have seen you killed before birth.

Tell me Bill, are you "unwanted"? Would it have been better for you that
you had not been born? Because that is what these psychopaths want us to
believe. That there is ever such a thing as an "unwanted child".

Maybe you need to look around at all the unwanted children in the
world. Have you adopted?

In article <42338a2b$0$32621$db0fefd9@news.zen.co.uk>, Michael Calwell
<michael.calwell@btopenworld.com> wrote:

Bill Gamelson wrote:

I can. If they do have sex and the woman get's pregnant, then she should
suffer the burden of her actions and carry the baby to full term and at
least put it up for adoption. By the way, I was adopted and I am very glad
that my mother carried me to full term. There is my choice in the matter.

There are people on this group who consider your very existence a form
of penury, and who would rather have seen you killed before birth.

Tell me Bill, are you "unwanted"? Would it have been better for you that
you had not been born? Because that is what these psychopaths want us to
believe. That there is ever such a thing as an "unwanted child".

Maybe you need to look around at all the unwanted children in the
world. Have you adopted?