| Topic: |
Science > Abortion |
| User: |
"james g. keegan jr." |
| Date: |
20 Dec 2003 12:43:08 PM |
| Object: |
'The Constitution wins' |
The Constitution wins
Separate courts rightfully object to justice that is both delayed
and denied in the war on terror
First published: Saturday, December 20, 2003
Two court rulings on Thursday that found the Bush administration
had exceeded all constitutional authority by denying terrorism
suspects their essential rights ought to have brought some
clarity to where the war on terror must concede to civil
liberties. Instead, they revealed a defiant White House itching
for a further legal showdown on spurious grounds.
"The president's most solemn obligation is protecting the
American people," thundered White House spokesman Scott
McClellan. No one would, or should, dispute that. The point is
that such protection must be exercised under the Constitution the
president is sworn to protect. Otherwise it's not protection at
all.
The Constitution guarantees all citizens the right to lawyers and
to a speedy trial. They also must be advised of the evidence and
witnesses against them. In the case of Jose Padilla, who now must
be either freed or formally charged within 30 days under the
order of an federal appellate court in Manhattan, the Bush
administration hasn't been willing to accord him any of those
rights.
The administration argues that Mr. Padilla is an "enemy
combatant" on the basis on his arrest last year at O'Hare Airport
in Chicago in an alleged plot to detonate a radioactive "dirty
bomb" in the United States. "Enemy combatant," is a powerful, if
loaded, term no doubt intended to win sympathy for an
administration loath to surrender to the Constitution.
Only it in no way applies to Mr. Padilla. Saddam Hussein is an
enemy combatant. So is Osama bin Laden. Mr. Padilla is an
American citizen arrested on American soil on charges that should
be considered in the American criminal court system.
Congress might have the power to authorize 18 months of
incommunicado detention, the court said in a 2-1 ruling, but
President Bush alone does not. Congress hastily gave the
President too much unrestricted authority in the post-Sept. 11
war on terror, but it didn't go that far.
If Mr. Bush did have such power, he'd be able to declare any
American citizen, anywhere in the country, an "enemy combatant,"
and lock up that person under the same circumstances as Mr.
Padilla. A truly frightening thought.
The administration is appealing the court's ruling, not
surprisingly. But the sooner it complies with the Constitution
and brings criminal charges against Mr. Padilla, and the rights
that come with them, the better. It's maddening how difficult Mr.
Bush makes it for the country he's supposed to lead to support
him in fighting terrorism.
A similar injustice has been addressed by an appellate court in
San Francisco. Another 2-1 majority says the 660 suspected
terrorists and war criminals in detention at the Guantanamo Bay
naval base in Cuba also must be extended the protections of the
U.S. legal system, even as noncitizens. The base is clearly part
of American, not Cuban, jurisdiction, after all. To deny the
people detained there the rights that exist under the
Constitution and other laws, as another federal appellate court
was all too willing to do, is to deny them any rights at all.
Holding the prisoners at Guantanamo without allowing them to
speak to lawyers and seek their release through the U.S. courts
can't be allowed to stand any more than the practice of
designating American citizens as "enemy combatants" for the
convenience of a government that couldn't be bothered with civil
liberties.
http://www.timesunion.com/AspStories/story.asp?storyID=201082
&category=OPINION&BCCode=&newsdate=12/20/2003
.
|
|
| User: "Mizzyandrea" |
|
| Title: Re: 'The Constitution wins' |
20 Dec 2003 01:11:53 PM |
|
|
I don't know what the hell this is about but I know that it would be
unconstitutional to criminalize abortion.............
I have the right to govern my own womb
THANK YOU US CONSTITUTION!
.
|
|
|
| User: "John Wentzky" |
|
| Title: Re: 'The Constitution wins' |
21 Dec 2003 04:08:46 AM |
|
|
"Mizzyandrea" <mizzyandrea@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20031220141153.19067.00001260@mb-m13.aol.com...
I don't know what the hell this is about but I know that it would be
unconstitutional to criminalize abortion.............
I have the right to govern my own womb
THANK YOU US CONSTITUTION!
Where does the Constitution mention that?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Krisblake" |
|
| Title: Re: 'The Constitution wins' |
21 Dec 2003 07:50:44 AM |
|
|
On Sun, 21 Dec 2003 10:08:46 GMT, "John Wentzky"
<ciojohn@incomeasap.com> wrote:
"Mizzyandrea" <mizzyandrea@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20031220141153.19067.00001260@mb-m13.aol.com...
I don't know what the hell this is about but I know that it would be
unconstitutional to criminalize abortion.............
I have the right to govern my own womb
THANK YOU US CONSTITUTION!
Where does the Constitution mention that?
Where does the Constitution mention that John Wentsky gets to govern
women's wombs?
.
|
|
|
| User: "John Wentzky" |
|
| Title: Re: 'The Constitution wins' |
21 Dec 2003 08:11:42 AM |
|
|
we hold these truths to be self-evident....that all men are created equal.
Notice created, not born.
Where does the Constitution mention that you have the right o govern your
own womb when another life is involved?
"Krisblake" <Krisblakemy2luvs@aol.com> wrote in message
news:h39buvomnn6gnth1u55v0afas0k2uqf61u@4ax.com...
On Sun, 21 Dec 2003 10:08:46 GMT, "John Wentzky"
<ciojohn@incomeasap.com> wrote:
"Mizzyandrea" <mizzyandrea@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20031220141153.19067.00001260@mb-m13.aol.com...
I don't know what the hell this is about but I know that it would be
unconstitutional to criminalize abortion.............
I have the right to govern my own womb
THANK YOU US CONSTITUTION!
Where does the Constitution mention that?
Where does the Constitution mention that John Wentsky gets to govern
women's wombs?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ray Fischer" |
|
| Title: Re: 'The Constitution wins' |
21 Dec 2003 05:50:14 PM |
|
|
John Wentzky <ciojohn@incomeasap.com> wrote:
we hold these truths to be self-evident....that all men are created equal.
Notice created, not born.
Notice created, not fertilized.
Where does the Constitution mention that you have the right o govern your
own womb when another life is involved?
4th, 5th, and 13th amendments for a start.
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "Robert B. Winn" |
|
| Title: Re: 'The Constitution wins' |
21 Dec 2003 09:33:12 PM |
|
|
(Ray Fischer) wrote in message news:<bs5bjm$4oi$1@bolt.sonic.net>...
John Wentzky <ciojohn@incomeasap.com> wrote:
we hold these truths to be self-evident....that all men are created equal.
Notice created, not born.
Notice created, not fertilized.
Where does the Constitution mention that you have the right o govern your
own womb when another life is involved?
4th, 5th, and 13th amendments for a start.
The Constitution was written for people who were observing the
rudimentary elements of morality. It is entirely inadequate for any
other purpose. It will not sustain mass homicides over an extended
period of time.
Robert B. Winn
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ray Fischer" |
|
| Title: Re: 'The Constitution wins' |
22 Dec 2003 11:57:25 PM |
|
|
Robert B. Winn <rbwinn47@mybluelight.com> wrote:
rfischer@bolt.sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote in message news:<bs5bjm$4oi$1@bolt.sonic.net>...
John Wentzky <ciojohn@incomeasap.com> wrote:
we hold these truths to be self-evident....that all men are created equal.
Notice created, not born.
Notice created, not fertilized.
Where does the Constitution mention that you have the right o govern your
own womb when another life is involved?
4th, 5th, and 13th amendments for a start.
The Constitution was written for people who were observing the
rudimentary elements of morality.
Were you alive then?
It is entirely inadequate for any
other purpose.
It is the primary legal document of the United States. It has
nothing to do with "morality".
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "Robert B. Winn" |
|
| Title: Re: 'The Constitution wins' |
23 Dec 2003 09:56:17 AM |
|
|
(Ray Fischer) wrote in message news:<bs8lg4$ccv$1@bolt.sonic.net>...
Robert B. Winn <rbwinn47@mybluelight.com> wrote:
(Ray Fischer) wrote in message news:<bs5bjm$4oi$1@bolt.sonic.net>...
John Wentzky <ciojohn@incomeasap.com> wrote:
we hold these truths to be self-evident....that all men are created equal.
Notice created, not born.
Notice created, not fertilized.
Where does the Constitution mention that you have the right o govern your
own womb when another life is involved?
4th, 5th, and 13th amendments for a start.
The Constitution was written for people who were observing the
rudimentary elements of morality.
Were you alive then?
It is entirely inadequate for any
other purpose.
It is the primary legal document of the United States. It has
nothing to do with "morality".
It has everything to do with morality. At the time the Constitution
was written the citizens of the United States even believed that a
person charged with a criminal offense had the right to trial by jury.
Robert B. winn
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: 'The Constitution wins' |
23 Dec 2003 11:05:42 AM |
|
|
On 23 Dec 2003 07:56:17 -0800, (Robert B. Winn) in
alt.abortion with message-id
<7943568.0312230756.5948d0fe@posting.google.com> wrote:
It is the primary legal document of the United States. It has
nothing to do with "morality".
It has everything to do with morality. At the time the Constitution
was written the citizens of the United States even believed that a
person charged with a criminal offense had the right to trial by jury.
Which has nothing at all to do with morality.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Ray Fischer" |
|
| Title: Re: 'The Constitution wins' |
25 Dec 2003 01:01:40 AM |
|
|
Robert B. Winn <rbwinn47@mybluelight.com> wrote:
rfischer@bolt.sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote in message news:<bs8lg4$ccv$1@bolt.sonic.net>...
Robert B. Winn <rbwinn47@mybluelight.com> wrote:
rfischer@bolt.sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote in message news:<bs5bjm$4oi$1@bolt.sonic.net>...
John Wentzky <ciojohn@incomeasap.com> wrote:
we hold these truths to be self-evident....that all men are created equal.
Notice created, not born.
Notice created, not fertilized.
Where does the Constitution mention that you have the right o govern your
own womb when another life is involved?
4th, 5th, and 13th amendments for a start.
The Constitution was written for people who were observing the
rudimentary elements of morality.
Were you alive then?
It is entirely inadequate for any
other purpose.
It is the primary legal document of the United States. It has
nothing to do with "morality".
It has everything to do with morality.
Then why does it not make murder and theft illegal? Why does almost
none of it make any mention of any crimes?
At the time the Constitution
was written the citizens of the United States even believed that a
You don't know what you're blathering about, fruitcake.
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "Robert B. Winn" |
|
| Title: Re: 'The Constitution wins' |
26 Dec 2003 12:13:47 PM |
|
|
(Ray Fischer) wrote in message news:<bse20k$sdv$1@bolt.sonic.net>...
Robert B. Winn <rbwinn47@mybluelight.com> wrote:
(Ray Fischer) wrote in message news:<bs8lg4$ccv$1@bolt.sonic.net>...
Robert B. Winn <rbwinn47@mybluelight.com> wrote:
(Ray Fischer) wrote in message news:<bs5bjm$4oi$1@bolt.sonic.net>...
John Wentzky <ciojohn@incomeasap.com> wrote:
we hold these truths to be self-evident....that all men are created equal.
Notice created, not born.
Notice created, not fertilized.
Where does the Constitution mention that you have the right o govern your
own womb when another life is involved?
4th, 5th, and 13th amendments for a start.
The Constitution was written for people who were observing the
rudimentary elements of morality.
Were you alive then?
It is entirely inadequate for any
other purpose.
It is the primary legal document of the United States. It has
nothing to do with "morality".
It has everything to do with morality.
Then why does it not make murder and theft illegal? Why does almost
none of it make any mention of any crimes?
At the time the Constitution
was written the citizens of the United States even believed that a
You don't know what you're blathering about, fruitcake.
Enumeration in the Constitution of certain rights shall not be
construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor
prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States
respectively, or to the people.
Robert B. Winn
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Krisblake" |
|
| Title: Re: 'The Constitution wins' |
21 Dec 2003 08:13:10 AM |
|
|
On Sun, 21 Dec 2003 14:11:42 GMT, "John Wentzky"
<ciojohn@incomeasap.com> wrote:
"Krisblake" <Krisblakemy2luvs@aol.com> wrote in message
news:h39buvomnn6gnth1u55v0afas0k2uqf61u@4ax.com...
On Sun, 21 Dec 2003 10:08:46 GMT, "John Wentzky"
<ciojohn@incomeasap.com> wrote:
"Mizzyandrea" <mizzyandrea@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20031220141153.19067.00001260@mb-m13.aol.com...
I don't know what the hell this is about but I know that it would be
unconstitutional to criminalize abortion.............
I have the right to govern my own womb
THANK YOU US CONSTITUTION!
Where does the Constitution mention that?
Where does the Constitution mention that John Wentsky gets to govern
women's wombs?
we hold these truths to be self-evident....that all men are created equal.
(Except for pregnant women, according to you.)
Notice created...
Where does the Constitution mention that John Wentsky gets to govern
women's wombs?
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: 'The Constitution wins' |
21 Dec 2003 08:18:57 AM |
|
|
On Sun, 21 Dec 2003 14:11:42 GMT, "John Wentzky" <ciojohn@incomeasap.com>
in alt.abortion with message-id
<yShFb.3239$IM3.2399@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net> wrote:
we hold these truths to be self-evident....that all men are created equal.
Notice created, not born.
I suggest you study your history a little closer. That is from the
Declaration of Independence, not the Constitution.
Laws are not based on the D of I.
Where does the Constitution mention that you have the right o govern your
own womb when another life is involved?
The same place where it says you cannot kill blood cells by having them
removed for a blood test.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Galen Hekhuis" |
|
| Title: Re: 'The Constitution wins' |
21 Dec 2003 08:43:56 AM |
|
|
On Sun, 21 Dec 2003 14:11:42 GMT, "John Wentzky" <ciojohn@incomeasap.com>
wrote:
we hold these truths to be self-evident....that all men are created equal.
Notice created, not born.
Notice that your opinion has no more weight than any other. You may think
that it is wrong to have an abortion, however, an equally valid opinion is
that abortion is a morally neutral option. Of course, the only person who
has any right to decide what is in their own body is that person, not you,
not any government.
Where does the Constitution mention that you have the right o govern your
own womb when another life is involved?
I'm not a Constitutional scholar, but I don't see anything restricting the
right to be secure in your own body, regardless of who may think what is in
there.
Galen Hekhuis NpD, JFR, GWA
Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups
.
|
|
|
| User: "John Wentzky" |
|
| Title: Re: 'The Constitution wins' |
21 Dec 2003 09:09:39 AM |
|
|
So why was Robert Downey and Nick Nolte Arrested?
Why are there DUI DWI laws?
What has anything withint he bdy got to with with why we arrest people
sometimes and others we don;t efven when the act they commit causes ACTUAL
AND PERMANENT harm to another individual.
Abortion is teh worst least corectly governed industry in the naiton.
It is an illegal act in many cases and it causes harm and it is allowed to
prosper while we hypocritically prosecute and punish other peole who caused
no perosn any harm whaytsoever. We punsh people based on potential harm and
not on actual harm while we let those who cause actual harm go unpunished.
It sucks as a society and it is not better yet.
1973 started much of this lack of justice.
The law has been neglected and ignored for so long now we are being governed
not by law but by opinion and by unlawful means.
"Galen Hekhuis" <> wrote in message
news:8lbbuv8hlfbnkl0c7lkrcb3971rd4i56s4@4ax.com...
On Sun, 21 Dec 2003 14:11:42 GMT, "John Wentzky" <ciojohn@incomeasap.com>
wrote:
we hold these truths to be self-evident....that all men are created
equal.
Notice created, not born.
Notice that your opinion has no more weight than any other. You may think
that it is wrong to have an abortion, however, an equally valid opinion is
that abortion is a morally neutral option. Of course, the only person who
has any right to decide what is in their own body is that person, not you,
not any government.
Where does the Constitution mention that you have the right o govern your
own womb when another life is involved?
I'm not a Constitutional scholar, but I don't see anything restricting the
right to be secure in your own body, regardless of who may think what is
in
there.
Galen Hekhuis NpD, JFR, GWA
Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups
.
|
|
|
| User: "Galen Hekhuis" |
|
| Title: Re: 'The Constitution wins' |
21 Dec 2003 09:20:42 AM |
|
|
On Sun, 21 Dec 2003 15:09:39 GMT, "John Wentzky" <ciojohn@incomeasap.com>
wrote:
So why was Robert Downey and Nick Nolte Arrested?
I have no idea.
Why are there DUI DWI laws?
Too keep people from DRIVING under the influence, DRIVING while
intoxicated, DRIVING while impaired, whatever. They say nothing about what
is in your body if you are not DRIVING, and on a public road, to boot.
What has anything withint he bdy got to with with why we arrest people
I don't think it does.
sometimes and others we don;t efven when the act they commit causes ACTUAL
AND PERMANENT harm to another individual.
I didn't quite understand that part.
Abortion is teh worst least corectly governed industry in the naiton.
If that is true, so what?
[I snipped the rest, as I have no comment on rantings that have little to
do with legality much less the Constitution.]
Galen Hekhuis NpD, JFR, GWA
Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mizzyandrea" |
|
| Title: Re: 'The Constitution wins' |
21 Dec 2003 07:39:06 PM |
|
|
Where does the Constitution mention that you have the right o govern your
own womb when another life is involved?
************************************
It doesn't have to..........it only recognizes the BORN as citizens worthy of
RIGHTS.......
a fetus has no rights and it certainly does not have the right to use my body
against my will
.
|
|
|
| User: "John Wentzky" |
|
| Title: Re: 'The Constitution wins' |
21 Dec 2003 08:29:26 PM |
|
|
"Mizzyandrea" <mizzyandrea@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20031221203906.09478.00001106@mb-m17.aol.com...
Where does the Constitution mention that you have the right o govern your
own womb when another life is involved?
************************************
It doesn't have to..........it only recognizes the BORN as citizens worthy
of
RIGHTS.......
a fetus has no rights and it certainly does not have the right to use my
body
against my will
Obviously, you lose again.
Your logic, reasoning is faulty.
How did the fetus come into being then if it was agaist your will?
Obviously, the fetus USED YOUR BODY already if you are assuming the stance
that the fetus has no right to use your body against your will.
Obviously, it IN FACT does have a right to do such since it is actually
doing so.
And, that for soem reason pisses you off to the point of killing it?
Sheesh.
You are going to be hated amongst women, men and children with that
low-range less than intellectual line of reasonng.
LOL!!!!!!!!
You are really losing, again.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mizzyandrea" |
|
| Title: Re: 'The Constitution wins' |
23 Dec 2003 10:33:41 PM |
|
|
Obviously, you lose again.
Your logic, reasoning is faulty.
How did the fetus come into being then if it was agaist your will?
***********************
Oh well, I guess that means that abortion has suddenly become illegal, right?
LOL!
When I spread my legs, to have the throbbing ***** shoved up there.........I
did so for an ORGASM........not a damn fetus. The fetus is an unwelcome
intruder that will be removed.
OH......and guess what........
I'm right.
Abortion is legal
nah na na na nahhhhhhhhhhh
.
|
|
|
| User: "Robert B. Winn" |
|
| Title: Re: 'The Constitution wins' |
24 Dec 2003 09:00:19 AM |
|
|
(Mizzyandrea) wrote in message news:<20031223233341.15826.00000887@mb-m21.aol.com>...
Obviously, you lose again.
Your logic, reasoning is faulty.
How did the fetus come into being then if it was agaist your will?
***********************
Oh well, I guess that means that abortion has suddenly become illegal, right?
LOL!
When I spread my legs, to have the throbbing ***** shoved up there.........I
did so for an ORGASM........not a damn fetus. The fetus is an unwelcome
intruder that will be removed.
OH......and guess what........
I'm right.
Abortion is legal
nah na na na nahhhhhhhhhhh
There are state laws against fornication and adultery. You seem to
have wandered into these transgressions. My suggestion would be to
repent of your sins and then you will not be getting involved in
abortion so often.
Robert B. Winn
.
|
|
|
| User: "Krisblake" |
|
| Title: Re: 'The Constitution wins' |
24 Dec 2003 09:47:50 AM |
|
|
On 24 Dec 2003 07:00:19 -0800, (Robert B.
Winn) wrote:
mizzyandrea@aol.com (Mizzyandrea) wrote in message news:<20031223233341.15826.00000887@mb-m21.aol.com>...
Obviously, you lose again.
Your logic, reasoning is faulty.
How did the fetus come into being then if it was agaist your will?
***********************
Oh well, I guess that means that abortion has suddenly become illegal, right?
LOL!
When I spread my legs, to have the throbbing ***** shoved up there.........I
did so for an ORGASM........not a damn fetus. The fetus is an unwelcome
intruder that will be removed.
OH......and guess what........
I'm right.
Abortion is legal
nah na na na nahhhhhhhhhhh
There are state laws against fornication...
She's married, you idiot.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Robert B. Winn" |
|
| Title: Re: 'The Constitution wins' |
24 Dec 2003 01:00:26 PM |
|
|
Krisblake <Krisblakemy2luvs@aol.com> wrote in message news:<g4djuv0917dg4k43ascvtvuv8vr2g7o1pe@4ax.com>...
On 24 Dec 2003 07:00:19 -0800, (Robert B.
Winn) wrote:
mizzyandrea@aol.com (Mizzyandrea) wrote in message news:<20031223233341.15826.00000887@mb-m21.aol.com>...
Obviously, you lose again.
Your logic, reasoning is faulty.
How did the fetus come into being then if it was agaist your will?
***********************
Oh well, I guess that means that abortion has suddenly become illegal, right?
LOL!
When I spread my legs, to have the throbbing ***** shoved up there.........I
did so for an ORGASM........not a damn fetus. The fetus is an unwelcome
intruder that will be removed.
OH......and guess what........
I'm right.
Abortion is legal
nah na na na nahhhhhhhhhhh
There are state laws against fornication...
She's married, you idiot.
Married people commit adultery all the time.
Robert B. Winn
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mizzyandrea" |
|
| Title: Re: 'The Constitution wins' |
25 Dec 2003 01:32:47 AM |
|
|
Married people commit adultery all the time.
***********************
Well, I don't.
So now what?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Robert B. Winn" |
|
| Title: Re: 'The Constitution wins' |
25 Dec 2003 10:06:59 AM |
|
|
(Mizzyandrea) wrote in message news:<20031225023247.15174.00001612@mb-m04.aol.com>...
Married people commit adultery all the time.
***********************
Well, I don't.
So now what?
You are such a believable person. Why don't you just go ahead and
live your life, and I will live mine.
Robert B. Winn
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mizzyandrea" |
|
| Title: Re: 'The Constitution wins' |
25 Dec 2003 02:51:12 PM |
|
|
You are such a believable person. Why don't you just go ahead and
live your life, and I will live mine
*********************
Actually, I have been living my life and I do not recall ever feeling like I
needed your permission to do so.
You really are NOT that important
.
|
|
|
| User: "Robert B. Winn" |
|
| Title: Re: 'The Constitution wins' |
25 Dec 2003 09:50:10 PM |
|
|
(Mizzyandrea) wrote in message news:<20031225155112.21698.00001060@mb-m26.aol.com>...
You are such a believable person. Why don't you just go ahead and
live your life, and I will live mine
*********************
Actually, I have been living my life and I do not recall ever feeling like I
needed your permission to do so.
You really are NOT that important
Well, just how important do you think I am? As important as a child
scheduled to be killed by abortion?
Robert B. winn
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: 'The Constitution wins' |
26 Dec 2003 05:24:57 AM |
|
|
On 25 Dec 2003 19:50:10 -0800, (Robert B. Winn) in
alt.abortion with message-id
<7943568.0312251950.2133e320@posting.google.com> wrote:
mizzyandrea@aol.com (Mizzyandrea) wrote in message news:<20031225155112.21698.00001060@mb-m26.aol.com>...
You are such a believable person. Why don't you just go ahead and
live your life, and I will live mine
*********************
Actually, I have been living my life and I do not recall ever feeling like I
needed your permission to do so.
You really are NOT that important
Well, just how important do you think I am? As important as a child
scheduled to be killed by abortion?
A child cannot be killed by abortion.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mizzyandrea" |
|
| Title: Re: 'The Constitution wins' |
26 Dec 2003 07:17:51 PM |
|
|
Well, just how important do you think I am? As important as a child
scheduled to be killed by abortion?
Robert B. winn
*************************
Children aren't killed by abortion.
It's illegal to kill children.
You are not the least bit important to the pregnant woman who does not want to
be pregnant.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Robert B. Winn" |
|
| Title: Re: 'The Constitution wins' |
27 Dec 2003 01:14:22 PM |
|
|
(Mizzyandrea) wrote in message news:<20031226201751.16038.00001100@mb-m22.aol.com>...
Well, just how important do you think I am? As important as a child
scheduled to be killed by abortion?
Robert B. winn
*************************
Children aren't killed by abortion.
It's illegal to kill children.
You are not the least bit important to the pregnant woman who does not want to
be pregnant.
Well, you were half right. It is illegal to kill children.
Robert B. winn
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: 'The Constitution wins' |
27 Dec 2003 01:28:02 PM |
|
|
On 27 Dec 2003 11:14:22 -0800, (Robert B. Winn) in
alt.abortion with message-id
<7943568.0312271114.2802bbde@posting.google.com> wrote:
mizzyandrea@aol.com (Mizzyandrea) wrote in message news:<20031226201751.16038.00001100@mb-m22.aol.com>...
Well, just how important do you think I am? As important as a child
scheduled to be killed by abortion?
Robert B. winn
*************************
Children aren't killed by abortion.
It's illegal to kill children.
You are not the least bit important to the pregnant woman who does not want to
be pregnant.
Well, you were half right. It is illegal to kill children.
Where did anyone say it is not?
Robert B. winn
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
