| Topic: |
Science > Abortion |
| User: |
"Mothers 4 Murder" |
| Date: |
29 Sep 2003 05:40:31 PM |
| Object: |
Re: Abortion Numbers Decline Again |
Spartakus wrote:
papajack@stic.net (Papa Jack) wrote...
September 28, 2003
South Carolina Abortion Numbers Decline Again
by Steven Ertelt, LifeNews.com Editor
http://www.lifenews.com/state161.html
See what can happen when a state passes the very laws
which the abortion industry has spent millions of dollars
fighting in various courts?
Sure. Women who don't want to be yanked around by "right to know"
laws or waiting periods will simply go someplace else.
And at least won't be killing their babies in as many numbers in South
Carolina.
.
|
|
| User: "Spartakus" |
|
| Title: Re: Abortion Numbers Decline Again |
30 Sep 2003 08:50:12 AM |
|
|
Mothers 4 Murder <killing@the.clinic> wrote...
Spartakus wrote:
papajack@stic.net (Papa Jack) wrote...
September 28, 2003
South Carolina Abortion Numbers Decline Again
by Steven Ertelt, LifeNews.com Editor
http://www.lifenews.com/state161.html
See what can happen when a state passes the very laws
which the abortion industry has spent millions of dollars
fighting in various courts?
Sure. Women who don't want to be yanked around by "right to know"
laws or waiting periods will simply go someplace else.
And at least won't be killing their babies in as many numbers in South
Carolina.
So, besides being the home of Bob-don't-date-people-of-color-Jones
University and one of a handful of states that is still fighting the
Civil War (they still fly the Confederate battle flag at the capitol),
South Carolina's newest claim to fame is that they are a net exporter
of abortions. You must be so proud.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mothers 4 Murder" |
|
| Title: Re: Abortion Numbers Decline Again |
30 Sep 2003 09:34:12 AM |
|
|
Spartakus wrote:
Mothers 4 Murder <killing@the.clinic> wrote...
Spartakus wrote:
papajack@stic.net (Papa Jack) wrote...
September 28, 2003
South Carolina Abortion Numbers Decline Again
by Steven Ertelt, LifeNews.com Editor
http://www.lifenews.com/state161.html
See what can happen when a state passes the very laws
which the abortion industry has spent millions of dollars
fighting in various courts?
Sure. Women who don't want to be yanked around by "right to know"
laws or waiting periods will simply go someplace else.
And at least won't be killing their babies in as many numbers in South
Carolina.
So, besides being the home of Bob-don't-date-people-of-color-Jones
University and one of a handful of states that is still fighting the
Civil War (they still fly the Confederate battle flag at the capitol),
South Carolina's newest claim to fame is that they are a net exporter
of abortions. You must be so proud.
Um, how can you export abortions, you dumbass?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Spartakus" |
|
| Title: Re: Abortion Numbers Decline Again |
30 Sep 2003 02:57:38 PM |
|
|
Mothers 4 Murder <killing@the.clinic> wrote...
Spartakus wrote:
Mothers 4 Murder <killing@the.clinic> wrote...
Spartakus wrote:
papajack@stic.net (Papa Jack) wrote...
September 28, 2003
South Carolina Abortion Numbers Decline Again
by Steven Ertelt, LifeNews.com Editor
http://www.lifenews.com/state161.html
See what can happen when a state passes the very laws
which the abortion industry has spent millions of dollars
fighting in various courts?
Sure. Women who don't want to be yanked around by "right to
know" laws or waiting periods will simply go someplace else.
And at least won't be killing their babies in as many numbers in South
Carolina.
So, besides being the home of Bob-don't-date-people-of-color-Jones
University and one of a handful of states that is still fighting the
Civil War (they still fly the Confederate battle flag at the capitol),
South Carolina's newest claim to fame is that they are a net exporter
of abortions. You must be so proud.
Um, how can you export abortions, you dumbass?
Did the impact of your knee-jerking give you a concussion,
lint-weasel? What part of "Women who don't want to be yanked around
by "right to know" laws or waiting periods will simply go someplace
else" didn't you understand?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Spartakus" |
|
| Title: Re: Abortion Numbers Decline Again |
01 Oct 2003 08:41:32 AM |
|
|
Mothers 4 Murder <killing@the.clinic> wrote...
Spartakus wrote:
Did the impact of your knee-jerking give you a concussion,
lint-weasel? What part of "Women who don't want to be yanked around
by "right to know" laws or waiting periods will simply go someplace
else" didn't you understand?
Fine. Then let them.
So you *did* understand the statement.
What part of "how do you export abortions, you
dumbass" didn't you understand?
Oh, wait... you *didn't* understand the statement. Really, if you
can't follow a logical progression, you'd be a lot happier staying on
the sidelines.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Robert T. Simpson" |
|
| Title: Re: Abortion Numbers Decline Again |
01 Oct 2003 08:56:17 AM |
|
|
Spartakus wrote:
Mothers 4 Murder <killing@the.clinic> wrote...
Spartakus wrote:
Did the impact of your knee-jerking give you a concussion,
lint-weasel? What part of "Women who don't want to be yanked around
by "right to know" laws or waiting periods will simply go someplace
else" didn't you understand?
Fine. Then let them.
So you *did* understand the statement.
What part of "how do you export abortions, you
dumbass" didn't you understand?
Oh, wait... you *didn't* understand the statement. Really, if you
can't follow a logical progression, you'd be a lot happier staying on
the sidelines.
Now what would be the purpose of that? All you losers are already there
still holding up your Gore-Lieberman 2000 signs.
--
Want to know what abortion looks like?
http://www.geocities.com/sassme.geo/truthis.html
http://www.holylamb.com/abortion2.htm
http://womensissues.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?site=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.mttu.com%2Fabort-pics%2F
http://womensissues.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?site=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.abortiontruth.com%2Fpictures.html
http://womensissues.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?site=http%3A%2F%2Ffacelife.org%2Fcontent%2Fvideoscontent.htm
http://womensissues.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?site=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.abortiontv.com%2Fsilentscream.htm
.
|
|
|
| User: "Patrick Humphrey" |
|
| Title: Re: Abortion Numbers Decline Again |
01 Oct 2003 01:31:18 PM |
|
|
"Robert T. Simpson" <rtsimpson2003@excite.com> writes:
Spartakus wrote:
Mothers 4 Murder <killing@the.clinic> wrote...
Spartakus wrote:
Did the impact of your knee-jerking give you a concussion,
lint-weasel? What part of "Women who don't want to be yanked around
by "right to know" laws or waiting periods will simply go someplace
else" didn't you understand?
Fine. Then let them.
So you *did* understand the statement.
What part of "how do you export abortions, you
dumbass" didn't you understand?
Oh, wait... you *didn't* understand the statement. Really, if you
can't follow a logical progression, you'd be a lot happier staying on
the sidelines.
Now what would be the purpose of that? All you losers are already there
still holding up your Gore-Lieberman 2000 signs.
Another Simpson chimp? Must be a genetic thing...so tell me, arrogant little
twit that you are, how do you know who your opponents voted for in 2000? I
voted Democratic in a Presidential election -- once. That was in 1976. I
learned from that mistake.
--
Patrick "The Chief Instigator" Humphrey (patrick@io.com) Houston, Texas
www.io.com/~patrick/aeros.php (TCI's 2003-04 Houston Aeros)
.
|
|
|
| User: "Robert T. Simpson" |
|
| Title: Re: Abortion Numbers Decline Again |
01 Oct 2003 04:48:58 PM |
|
|
Patrick Humphrey wrote:
"Robert T. Simpson" <rtsimpson2003@excite.com> writes:
Spartakus wrote:
Mothers 4 Murder <killing@the.clinic> wrote...
Spartakus wrote:
Did the impact of your knee-jerking give you a concussion,
lint-weasel? What part of "Women who don't want to be yanked around
by "right to know" laws or waiting periods will simply go someplace
else" didn't you understand?
Fine. Then let them.
So you *did* understand the statement.
What part of "how do you export abortions, you
dumbass" didn't you understand?
Oh, wait... you *didn't* understand the statement. Really, if you
can't follow a logical progression, you'd be a lot happier staying on
the sidelines.
Now what would be the purpose of that? All you losers are already there
still holding up your Gore-Lieberman 2000 signs.
Another Simpson chimp? Must be a genetic thing...so tell me, arrogant little
twit that you are, how do you know who your opponents voted for in 2000? I
voted Democratic in a Presidential election -- once. That was in 1976. I
learned from that mistake.
--
Patrick "The Chief Instigator" Humphrey (patrick@io.com) Houston, Texas
www.io.com/~patrick/aeros.php (TCI's 2003-04 Houston Aeros)
Well let's see. Bush claims that if given the chance he will appoint
people to the Supreme Court who are just like his favorite justices,
Scalia and Thomas. Now if you are pro-abortion and yet voted for Bush,
then that makes you a hipocrite. I would gladly vote for a Democrat if
only the party would back someone who was pro-life. I do not vote for
pro-choice candidates, and were I living in California I would vote for
McClintock. And you have to know, that if you did vote for Bush and he
somehow gets one or two pro-life judges on the court who join the others
to form a majority opinion reversing Roe V Wade, you will take quite a
bit of heat from your pro-abortion pals here.
--
Want to know what abortion looks like?
http://www.geocities.com/sassme.geo/truthis.html
http://www.holylamb.com/abortion2.htm
http://womensissues.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?site=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.mttu.com%2Fabort-pics%2F
http://womensissues.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?site=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.abortiontruth.com%2Fpictures.html
http://womensissues.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?site=http%3A%2F%2Ffacelife.org%2Fcontent%2Fvideoscontent.htm
http://womensissues.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?site=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.abortiontv.com%2Fsilentscream.htm
.
|
|
|
| User: "Patrick Humphrey" |
|
| Title: Re: Abortion Numbers Decline Again |
01 Oct 2003 05:55:22 PM |
|
|
"Robert T. Simpson" <rtsimpson2003@excite.com> writes:
Patrick Humphrey wrote:
"Robert T. Simpson" <rtsimpson2003@excite.com> writes:
Spartakus wrote:
Mothers 4 Murder <killing@the.clinic> wrote...
Spartakus wrote:
Did the impact of your knee-jerking give you a concussion,
lint-weasel? What part of "Women who don't want to be yanked around
by "right to know" laws or waiting periods will simply go someplace
else" didn't you understand?
Fine. Then let them.
So you *did* understand the statement.
What part of "how do you export abortions, you
dumbass" didn't you understand?
Oh, wait... you *didn't* understand the statement. Really, if you
can't follow a logical progression, you'd be a lot happier staying on
the sidelines.
Now what would be the purpose of that? All you losers are already there
still holding up your Gore-Lieberman 2000 signs.
Another Simpson chimp? Must be a genetic thing...so tell me, arrogant
little twit that you are, how do you know who your opponents voted for in
2000? I voted Democratic in a Presidential election -- once. That was in
1976. I learned from that mistake.
Well let's see. Bush claims that if given the chance he will appoint
people to the Supreme Court who are just like his favorite justices,
Scalia and Thomas. Now if you are pro-abortion and yet voted for Bush,
then that makes you a hipocrite. I would gladly vote for a Democrat if
only the party would back someone who was pro-life. I do not vote for
pro-choice candidates, and were I living in California I would vote for
McClintock. And you have to know, that if you did vote for Bush and he
somehow gets one or two pro-life judges on the court who join the others
to form a majority opinion reversing Roe V Wade, you will take quite a
bit of heat from your pro-abortion pals here.
You're just another anti-abort idiot, Robert. You're too stupid to see
anything but what you allow yourself to see. Where did I say I voted for Bush
Junior? The guy makes you look almost intelligent. (Remember, we had the
Chimp here as governor -- for two years, never mind that he launched his 2000
campaign as soon as the gubernatorial inauguration was done the first day of
199...after promising the voters of Texas that he wouldn't use the office to
run for President.)
Your Organization: line tells me all I need to know about you -- too bad the
laws give you the finger, and will continue to do so for a long time.
Meanwhile, after a third of a century and change of being pro-choice, I'm a
parent and a grandparent. Don't rupture too much trying to figure it out,
son. You obviously don't have the brains to do it.
--
Patrick "The Chief Instigator" Humphrey (patrick@io.com) Houston, Texas
www.io.com/~patrick/aeros.php (TCI's 2003-04 Houston Aeros)
.
|
|
|
| User: "Robert T. Simpson" |
|
| Title: Re: Abortion Numbers Decline Again |
01 Oct 2003 06:43:50 PM |
|
|
Patrick Humphrey wrote:
"Robert T. Simpson" <rtsimpson2003@excite.com> writes:
Patrick Humphrey wrote:
"Robert T. Simpson" <rtsimpson2003@excite.com> writes:
Spartakus wrote:
Mothers 4 Murder <killing@the.clinic> wrote...
Spartakus wrote:
Did the impact of your knee-jerking give you a concussion,
lint-weasel? What part of "Women who don't want to be yanked around
by "right to know" laws or waiting periods will simply go someplace
else" didn't you understand?
Fine. Then let them.
So you *did* understand the statement.
What part of "how do you export abortions, you
dumbass" didn't you understand?
Oh, wait... you *didn't* understand the statement. Really, if you
can't follow a logical progression, you'd be a lot happier staying on
the sidelines.
Now what would be the purpose of that? All you losers are already there
still holding up your Gore-Lieberman 2000 signs.
Another Simpson chimp? Must be a genetic thing...so tell me, arrogant
little twit that you are, how do you know who your opponents voted for in
2000? I voted Democratic in a Presidential election -- once. That was in
1976. I learned from that mistake.
Well let's see. Bush claims that if given the chance he will appoint
people to the Supreme Court who are just like his favorite justices,
Scalia and Thomas. Now if you are pro-abortion and yet voted for Bush,
then that makes you a hipocrite. I would gladly vote for a Democrat if
only the party would back someone who was pro-life. I do not vote for
pro-choice candidates, and were I living in California I would vote for
McClintock. And you have to know, that if you did vote for Bush and he
somehow gets one or two pro-life judges on the court who join the others
to form a majority opinion reversing Roe V Wade, you will take quite a
bit of heat from your pro-abortion pals here.
You're just another anti-abort idiot, Robert. You're too stupid to see
anything but what you allow yourself to see. Where did I say I voted for Bush
Junior?
Fine. Then you voted for Nader or some other third party candidate, but
since you didn't vote for Gore, you can be accused of costing Mr.
Pro-Abortion the presidency. No matter who you voted for, I support
your decision. Thanks!
Your Organization: line tells me all I need to know about you -- too bad the
laws give you the finger, and will continue to do so for a long time.
Meanwhile, after a third of a century and change of being pro-choice, I'm a
parent and a grandparent. Don't rupture too much trying to figure it out,
son. You obviously don't have the brains to do it.
Maybe you're afraid your wife will throw you out on your ***** if you told
her you were really pro-life?
--
Patrick "The Chief Instigator" Humphrey (patrick@io.com) Houston, Texas
www.io.com/~patrick/aeros.php (TCI's 2003-04 Houston Aeros)
--
Want to know what abortion looks like?
http://www.geocities.com/sassme.geo/truthis.html
http://www.holylamb.com/abortion2.htm
http://womensissues.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?site=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.mttu.com%2Fabort-pics%2F
http://womensissues.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?site=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.abortiontruth.com%2Fpictures.html
http://womensissues.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?site=http%3A%2F%2Ffacelife.org%2Fcontent%2Fvideoscontent.htm
http://womensissues.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?site=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.abortiontv.com%2Fsilentscream.htm
.
|
|
|
| User: "Patrick Humphrey" |
|
| Title: Re: Abortion Numbers Decline Again |
01 Oct 2003 06:59:27 PM |
|
|
"Robert T. Simpson" <rtsimpson2003@excite.com> writes:
Patrick Humphrey wrote:
"Robert T. Simpson" <rtsimpson2003@excite.com> writes:
Patrick Humphrey wrote:
"Robert T. Simpson" <rtsimpson2003@excite.com> writes:
Spartakus wrote:
Mothers 4 Murder <killing@the.clinic> wrote...
Spartakus wrote:
Did the impact of your knee-jerking give you a concussion,
lint-weasel? What part of "Women who don't want to be yanked
around by "right to know" laws or waiting periods will simply go
someplace else" didn't you understand?
Fine. Then let them.
So you *did* understand the statement.
What part of "how do you export abortions, you
dumbass" didn't you understand?
Oh, wait... you *didn't* understand the statement. Really, if you
can't follow a logical progression, you'd be a lot happier staying on
the sidelines.
Now what would be the purpose of that? All you losers are already there
still holding up your Gore-Lieberman 2000 signs.
Another Simpson chimp? Must be a genetic thing...so tell me, arrogant
little twit that you are, how do you know who your opponents voted for
in 2000? I voted Democratic in a Presidential election -- once. That
was in 1976. I learned from that mistake.
Well let's see. Bush claims that if given the chance he will appoint
people to the Supreme Court who are just like his favorite justices,
Scalia and Thomas. Now if you are pro-abortion and yet voted for Bush,
then that makes you a hipocrite. I would gladly vote for a Democrat if
only the party would back someone who was pro-life. I do not vote for
pro-choice candidates, and were I living in California I would vote for
McClintock. And you have to know, that if you did vote for Bush and he
somehow gets one or two pro-life judges on the court who join the others
to form a majority opinion reversing Roe V Wade, you will take quite a
bit of heat from your pro-abortion pals here.
You're just another anti-abort idiot, Robert. You're too stupid to see
anything but what you allow yourself to see. Where did I say I voted for
Bush Junior?
Fine. Then you voted for Nader or some other third party candidate, but
since you didn't vote for Gore, you can be accused of costing Mr.
Pro-Abortion the presidency. No matter who you voted for, I support
your decision. Thanks!
Unlike you, I don't brown-nose the party in power. You can accuse me of
anything, but you'll never gave any proof, which might give you an idea of
what your opinions are worth.
Your Organization: line tells me all I need to know about you -- too bad the
laws give you the finger, and will continue to do so for a long time.
Meanwhile, after a third of a century and change of being pro-choice, I'm a
parent and a grandparent. Don't rupture too much trying to figure it out,
son. You obviously don't have the brains to do it.
Maybe you're afraid your wife will throw you out on your ***** if you told
her you were really pro-life?
Unlike you, I don't lie. Why would I tell my wife something that is so
obvious a lie? She knows me a lot better than you do, after all. I've been
pro-choice since the tail end of the 1960s, and I'm not planning to change
that any time in this lifetime. You'll have to make up something else to
justify your whining at me.
--
Patrick "The Chief Instigator" Humphrey (patrick@io.com) Houston, Texas
www.io.com/~patrick/aeros.php (TCI's 2003-04 Houston Aeros)
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Osprey" |
|
| Title: Re: Abortion Numbers Decline Again |
01 Oct 2003 09:06:17 AM |
|
|
"Robert T. Simpson" <rtsimpson2003@excite.com> wrote in message
news:3F7ADD3E.1784@excite.com...
Spartakus wrote:
Mothers 4 Murder <killing@the.clinic> wrote...
Spartakus wrote:
Did the impact of your knee-jerking give you a concussion,
lint-weasel? What part of "Women who don't want to be yanked around
by "right to know" laws or waiting periods will simply go someplace
else" didn't you understand?
Fine. Then let them.
So you *did* understand the statement.
What part of "how do you export abortions, you
dumbass" didn't you understand?
Oh, wait... you *didn't* understand the statement. Really, if you
can't follow a logical progression, you'd be a lot happier staying on
the sidelines.
Now what would be the purpose of that? All you losers are already there
still holding up your Gore-Lieberman 2000 signs.
ROFL
--
Want to know what abortion looks like?
http://www.geocities.com/sassme.geo/truthis.html
http://www.holylamb.com/abortion2.htm
http://womensissues.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?site=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.mttu.com%2Fabort-pics%2F
http://womensissues.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?site=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.abortiontruth.com%2Fpictures.html
http://womensissues.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?site=http%3A%2F%2Ffacelife.org%2Fcontent%2Fvideoscontent.htm
http://womensissues.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?site=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.abortiontv.com%2Fsilentscream.htm
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Spartakus" |
|
| Title: Re: Abortion Numbers Decline Again |
02 Oct 2003 08:52:57 AM |
|
|
"Robert T. Simpson" <rtsimpson2003@excite.com> wrote...
Spartakus wrote:
Mothers 4 Murder <killing@the.clinic> wrote...
Spartakus wrote:
Did the impact of your knee-jerking give you a concussion,
lint-weasel? What part of "Women who don't want to be yanked
around by "right to know" laws or waiting periods will simply
go someplace else" didn't you understand?
Fine. Then let them.
So you *did* understand the statement.
What part of "how do you export abortions, you
dumbass" didn't you understand?
Oh, wait... you *didn't* understand the statement. Really,
if you can't follow a logical progression, you'd be a lot
happier staying on the sidelines.
Now what would be the purpose of that?
Well, for "Mothers", the purpose is to be a lot happier. For the rest
of us, the purpose is to see a marked improvement in the
signal-to-noise ratio.
[--Simpson's inability to let go of the past deleted--]
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Craig Chilton" |
|
| Title: Re: Abortion Numbers Decline Again |
29 Sep 2003 08:44:55 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 29 Sep 2003 22:40:31 GMT,
"Mothers 4 Murder" wrote:
Spartakus wrote:
"Papa jack" <papajack@stic.net> wrote...
[ ... ]
See what can happen when a state passes the very laws
which the abortion industry has spent millions of dollars
fighting in various courts?
Sure. Women who don't want to be yanked around by "right to
know" laws or waiting periods will simply go someplace else.
And at least won't be killing their babies in as many numbers in South
Carolina.
Your ignorance is showing again, since ALL babies have been BORN,
and abortion has no effect whatsoever upon them. Abortion affects
NOTHING but mere entities of the reproductive process. INCLUDING
the QUADRILLION Stage One entities (gametes) that are willfully aborted
DAILY, worldwide, via male masturbation. About which Anti-Choicers
***hypocritically*** don't give a flying rat's *****. EVEN THOUGH each one
of those is a unique, human, living POTENTIAL person... JUST as is the
case with Stages 2, 3, and 4 (zygotes, embryoes, and fetuses).
-- Craig Chilton
.
|
|
|
| User: "Papa Jack" |
|
| Title: Re: Abortion Numbers Decline Again |
30 Sep 2003 10:59:23 AM |
|
|
(Craig Chilton) wrote in message news:<3f7fde7b.31821724@netnews.mchsi.com>...
============================================================================
September 28, 2003
South Carolina Abortion Numbers Decline Again
by Steven Ertelt, LifeNews.com Editor
http://www.lifenews.com/state161.html
___________________________________________________________________________
The number of abortions continued their 15-year decline in South
Carolina as new figures from the state show abortions going down
during 2002. Since 1988, abortions have dropped a whopping 53 percent.
Mary Glover, statistician for the SC Department of Health and
Environmental Control, said the number of reported abortions in
2002 was 6,574. That is 440 fewer abortions than occurred in 2001 --
a 6 percent decrease.
Pro-life groups were elated by the news.
"We attribute this success to the faithful work of the pro-life
grassroots network, to pro-life legislators, to the wonderful crisis
pregnancy centers, and to the untiring message of our state's moral
educators," said Holly Gatling, Executive Director of South Carolina
Citizens for Life.
The abortion number peaked at 14,333 in South Carolina in 1988.
Since then, the state legislature has passed a number of pro-life
laws that, combined with the educational efforts that took place to
pass them, are credited with cutting the number in half.
The legislation includes: a law requiring abortion facilities to
obtain parental consent for teens' abortions, a Right to Know law
mandating that abortion businesses provide women considering abortions
with information about its risks and alternatives, a partial-birth
abortion ban, a law protecting newborns who are born alive following
a botched abortion, and a law allowing the sale of Choose Life license
plates benefiting the work of abortion alternatives.
This year, the South Carolina state House passed a law banning all
forms of human cloning and a bill punishing criminals who attack
pregnant women and kill or injure their unborn children.
Gatling says her group hopes the state Senate will pass those laws next
year.
___________________________________________________________________________
Papa Jack comments:
See what can happen when a state passes the very laws
which the abortion industry has spent millions of dollars
fighting in various courts?
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Papa Jack" |
|
| Title: Re: Abortion Numbers Decline Again |
30 Sep 2003 04:04:12 PM |
|
|
xanadu222@mchsi.com (Craig Chilton) wrote in message
news:<3f7fde7b.31821724@netnews.mchsi.com>...
"Papa jack" <papajack@stic.net> wrote...
===========================================================================
September 28, 2003
South Carolina Abortion Numbers Decline Again
by Steven Ertelt, LifeNews.com Editor
http://www.lifenews.com/state161.html
___________________________________________________________________________
The number of abortions continued their 15-year decline in South
Carolina as new figures from the state show abortions going down
during 2002. Since 1988, abortions have dropped a whopping 53 percent.
Mary Glover, statistician for the SC Department of Health and
Environmental Control, said the number of reported abortions in
2002 was 6,574. That is 440 fewer abortions than occurred in 2001 --
a 6 percent decrease.
Pro-life groups were elated by the news.
"We attribute this success to the faithful work of the pro-life
grassroots network, to pro-life legislators, to the wonderful crisis
pregnancy centers, and to the untiring message of our state's moral
educators," said Holly Gatling, Executive Director of South Carolina
Citizens for Life.
The abortion number peaked at 14,333 in South Carolina in 1988.
Since then, the state legislature has passed a number of pro-life
laws that, combined with the educational efforts that took place to
pass them, are credited with cutting the number in half.
The legislation includes: a law requiring abortion facilities to
obtain parental consent for teens' abortions, a Right to Know law
mandating that abortion businesses provide women considering abortions
with information about its risks and alternatives, a partial-birth
abortion ban, a law protecting newborns who are born alive following
a botched abortion, and a law allowing the sale of Choose Life license
plates benefiting the work of abortion alternatives.
This year, the South Carolina state House passed a law banning all
forms of human cloning and a bill punishing criminals who attack
pregnant women and kill or injure their unborn children.
Gatling says her group hopes the state Senate will pass those laws next
year.
___________________________________________________________________________
Papa Jack comments:
See what can happen when a state passes the very laws
which the abortion industry has spent millions of dollars
fighting in various courts?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Craig Chilton" |
|
| Title: Re: Abortion Numbers Decline Again |
30 Sep 2003 07:13:28 PM |
|
|
On 30 Sep 2003 14:04:12 -0700,
"Papa Jack" <papajack@stic.net>
-- COWARD OF THE WEEK! -- wrote:
Craig Chilton < > wrote:
"Papa Jack" <papajack@stic.net> wrote:
=== READERS TAKE NOTE === :
This is a direct response by PJ to my post below.
HOWEVER... *instead* of responding, he OMITTED
**everything** I had said, without so much as a "<snip>" notation,
and proceeded to re-post his ORIGINAL post of this thread in its
place. AGAIN!!!! For the SIXTH time.
Way to go, PJ -- you yellow-bellied coward!
Haven't even got the guts to respond to me, do you?
Because -- as usual -- I made a total fool of you.
(No big trick; *anyone* can do that in a hearbeat.)
You should have KNOWN that I wouldn't let you get away
with that. And you never will.
September 28, 2003
South Carolina Abortion Numbers Decline Again
(The post of mine that PJ deleted, and didn't respond to, with not
so much as a mention of that, and which devastates his obvious,
woman-hating intention of his post, follows.) ----
Wonderful !!! I hope that the SAME can be said for the number of
heart bypass surgeries that were needed there, and the number of broken
arms that were set. And let's not forget headches. With any luck, there
were a lot fewer of THOSE too, thus necessitating much less need to
access the remedy of aspirin.
Since that's what ALL of the above are: aspirin, abortion, the
setting of broken arms, and bypass surgeries -- REMEDIES. Very
VALUABLE remedies, for their repective unwanted medical conditions.
And it is always best to avoid the pathology in the first place, than
to need to treat it. ANY unwanted medical condition can be regarded
as a pathology by the person suffering from it.
BOTTOM LINE: Watch your cholesterol, practice good contraception,
ski with care, and don't eat ice cream rapidly on a hot summer day.
Thus, you are far less likely to have to access the REMEDIES for the
unwanted conditions that otherwise might ensue.
Right, PJ?
Or will you be the sort of horse's ***** that would disagree with that?
And as we saw, he did WORSE than that. He tried to make it
look as though I hadn't responded!
And that makes you a yellow-striped horse's *****, PJ.
SIX times over, now... the SAME way!
ROTFLMAO. What a JOKE you are!
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
BTW, folks, THIS time PJ did something even DUMBER!
THIS time his response was directly to THIS *later* post of mine,
in the thread, which he again omitted completely:
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
Craig Chilton <> wrote:
"Mothers 4 Murder" wrote:
Spartakus wrote:
"Papa jack" <papajack@stic.net> wrote...
[ ... ]
See what can happen when a state passes the very laws
which the abortion industry has spent millions of dollars
fighting in various courts?
Sure. Women who don't want to be yanked around by "right to
know" laws or waiting periods will simply go someplace else.
And at least won't be killing their babies in as many numbers in South
Carolina.
Your ignorance is showing again, since ALL babies have been BORN,
and abortion has no effect whatsoever upon them. Abortion affects
NOTHING but mere entities of the reproductive process. INCLUDING
the QUADRILLION Stage One entities (gametes) that are willfully aborted
DAILY, worldwide, via male masturbation. About which Anti-Choicers
***hypocritically*** don't give a flying rat's *****. EVEN THOUGH each one
of those is a unique, human, living POTENTIAL person... JUST as is the
case with Stages 2, 3, and 4 (zygotes, embryoes, and fetuses).
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
PJ -- you TRULY are dumber than a dead rock.
Keep it up... and I'll just keep right on REMINDING people
of what idiots you and your repressive ilk are.
-- Craig Chilton
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mothers 4 Murder" |
|
| Title: Re: Abortion Numbers Decline Again |
29 Sep 2003 08:45:56 PM |
|
|
Craig Chilton wrote:
On Mon, 29 Sep 2003 22:40:31 GMT,
"Mothers 4 Murder" wrote:
Spartakus wrote:
"Papa jack" <papajack@stic.net> wrote...
[ ... ]
See what can happen when a state passes the very laws
which the abortion industry has spent millions of dollars
fighting in various courts?
Sure. Women who don't want to be yanked around by "right to
know" laws or waiting periods will simply go someplace else.
And at least won't be killing their babies in as many numbers in South
Carolina.
Your ignorance is showing again, since ALL babies have been BORN,
and abortion has no effect whatsoever upon them. Abortion affects
NOTHING but mere entities of the reproductive process. INCLUDING
the QUADRILLION Stage One entities (gametes) that are willfully aborted
DAILY, worldwide, via male masturbation. About which Anti-Choicers
***hypocritically*** don't give a flying rat's *****. EVEN THOUGH each one
of those is a unique, human, living POTENTIAL person... JUST as is the
case with Stages 2, 3, and 4 (zygotes, embryoes, and fetuses).
Ah, Craig? You forgot to include the words "fair-minded" and "sensible"
in your post here.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
