Religions > Atheism > 1973 Abortion Decision Stands as US Supreme Court Rejects Roe v Wade Challenge
| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"J Young" |
| Date: |
23 Feb 2005 11:33:54 AM |
| Object: |
1973 Abortion Decision Stands as US Supreme Court Rejects Roe v Wade Challenge |
Considering it was the devil herself who brought the suit, there is
little suprise that the appeal was not heard.
http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2005/feb/05022208.html
1973 Abortion Decision Stands as US Supreme Court Rejects Roe v Wade
Challenge
WASHINGTON, February 22, 2005 (LifeSiteNews.com) - The US Supreme Court
refused today to hear an appeal of the court's 1973 Roe v Wade
decision which permitted abortion in the United States. The appeal was
launched by Norma McCorvey, the same woman who, over thirty years ago,
was used by pro-abortion forces as the "Jane Roe" which led to
abortion's legalization.
In response to the Supreme Court's refusal to hear the case,
McCorvey's attorney, Allan Parker, president of The Justice
Foundation, said "It is tragic and disappointing that the Court is
not willing to consider the aftermath of 32 years of abortion and its
devastating affect to women, their families, and our culture."
McCorvey's attempted appeal brought a thousand more witnesses than
did the original Roe case in 1973. They submitted over 5,000 pages of
evidence, including expert testimony of which the Court had none in
1973.
"This year alone, 100,000 women will be in abortion recovery programs
across the nation. We find it sad and tragic that their voices have
been rejected," said Parker. "It is also disturbing that the
highest court in the land is not willing to consider the compelling and
significant scientific and medical evidence and at least formally
re-evaluate its far-reaching decision."
Parker noted that the Supreme Court's denial does not reflect its
views on the merits of the case. "The denial order merely expresses
the Court's discretionary refusal to give appellate review to a lower
court decision," he said. "A denial is not a reaffirmation of Roe
v. Wade. We believe this decision sends an important message that the
High Court needs compassionate judges who care about the pain and
suffering of women hurt by abortion."
The case is McCorvey v. Hill, 04-967.
jhw
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(c) Copyright: LifeSiteNews.com is a production of Interim Publishing.
Permission to republish is granted (with limitation*) but
acknowledgement of source is *REQUIRED* (use LifeSiteNews.com).
.
|
|
| User: "Lazarus" |
|
| Title: Re: 1973 Abortion Decision Stands as US Supreme Court Rejects Roe v Wade Challenge |
23 Feb 2005 12:04:32 PM |
|
|
"J Young" <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote...
Considering it was the devil herself who brought the suit, there is
little suprise that the appeal was not heard.
Norma McCorvey is not evil, but she may have a borderline personality
disorder (so called because in past years such people were considered "on
the borderline" between neurosis and psychosis). She is a very troubled,
unstable, dishonest, self-destructive and abusive person. It's possible
that her conversion to Christianity and participation in a structured
religious program has helped her learn to control her behavior and patterns
of thought.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Susan Cohen" |
|
| Title: Re: 1973 Abortion Decision Stands as US Supreme Court Rejects Roe v Wade Challenge |
23 Feb 2005 12:11:25 PM |
|
|
"Lazarus" <no.spam@this.address> wrote in message
news:1109181797.8514cb11bc40c0148cef4721bda53350@teranews...
"J Young" <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote...
Considering it was the devil herself who brought the suit, there is
little suprise that the appeal was not heard.
Norma McCorvey is not evil, but she may have a borderline personality
disorder (so called because in past years such people were considered "on
the borderline" between neurosis and psychosis). She is a very troubled,
unstable, dishonest, self-destructive and abusive person. It's possible
that her conversion to Christianity and participation in a structured
religious program has helped her learn to control her behavior and
patterns
of thought.
More like the opposite.
She has been made to feel guilty about something she had no need to feel
guilty about & her hyper Xianity is actually a manifestation rather than the
"cure".
Susan
.
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: 1973 Abortion Decision Stands as US Supreme Court Rejects Roe v Wade Challenge |
23 Feb 2005 07:53:04 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 18:11:25 GMT, "Susan Cohen" <flavia13@verizon.net>
said in alt.atheism:
She has been made to feel guilty about something she had no need to feel
guilty about & her hyper Xianity is actually a manifestation rather than the
"cure".
Well, we do know one thing:
It takes a certain amount of mental instability to make an adult
convert TO religion.
--
rukbat at verizon dot net
"The study of geology is ok-But not when it contradicts what is laid
out in the Bible that the earth is more than 10,000 years old."
- Doug Lee, Creationist
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
.
|
|
|
| User: "Susan Cohen" |
|
| Title: Re: 1973 Abortion Decision Stands as US Supreme Court Rejects Roe v Wade Challenge |
23 Feb 2005 08:39:41 PM |
|
|
"Al Klein" <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote in message
news:hqcq11l8mjga57ei2dq2klu9m8hbi60uej@4ax.com...
On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 18:11:25 GMT, "Susan Cohen" <flavia13@verizon.net>
said in alt.atheism:
She has been made to feel guilty about something she had no need to feel
guilty about & her hyper Xianity is actually a manifestation rather than
the
"cure".
Well, we do know one thing:
It takes a certain amount of mental instability to make an adult
convert TO religion.
Which "we" knows this?
Susan
--
rukbat at verizon dot net
"The study of geology is ok-But not when it contradicts what is laid
out in the Bible that the earth is more than 10,000 years old."
- Doug Lee, Creationist
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
.
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: 1973 Abortion Decision Stands as US Supreme Court Rejects Roe v Wade Challenge |
23 Feb 2005 10:36:25 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 24 Feb 2005 02:39:41 GMT, "Susan Cohen" <flavia13@verizon.net>
said in alt.atheism:
"Al Klein" <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote in message
news:hqcq11l8mjga57ei2dq2klu9m8hbi60uej@4ax.com...
On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 18:11:25 GMT, "Susan Cohen" <flavia13@verizon.net>
said in alt.atheism:
She has been made to feel guilty about something she had no need to feel
guilty about & her hyper Xianity is actually a manifestation rather than
the
"cure".
Well, we do know one thing:
It takes a certain amount of mental instability to make an adult
convert TO religion.
Which "we" knows this?
Anyone who hasn't, Susan.
--
rukbat at verizon dot net
If you are open to the point of gullibility and have not an
ounce of skeptical sense in you, then you cannot distinguish
the useful ideas from the worthless ones
- Carl Sagan, 1987.
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
.
|
|
|
| User: "Susan Cohen" |
|
| Title: Re: 1973 Abortion Decision Stands as US Supreme Court Rejects Roe v Wade Challenge |
24 Feb 2005 02:40:02 PM |
|
|
"Al Klein" <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote in message
news:odmq115uro133pq2d0mbqkctaa5gde1ddn@4ax.com...
On Thu, 24 Feb 2005 02:39:41 GMT, "Susan Cohen" <flavia13@verizon.net>
said in alt.atheism:
"Al Klein" <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote in message
news:hqcq11l8mjga57ei2dq2klu9m8hbi60uej@4ax.com...
On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 18:11:25 GMT, "Susan Cohen" <flavia13@verizon.net>
said in alt.atheism:
She has been made to feel guilty about something she had no need to feel
guilty about & her hyper Xianity is actually a manifestation rather than
the
"cure".
Well, we do know one thing:
It takes a certain amount of mental instability to make an adult
convert TO religion.
Which "we" knows this?
Anyone who hasn't, Susan.
IOW, it is your opinion.
Susan
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Sangfroid" |
|
| Title: Re: 1973 Abortion Decision Stands as US Supreme Court Rejects Roe v Wade Challenge |
23 Feb 2005 07:59:05 PM |
|
|
"Al Klein" <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote in message
news:hqcq11l8mjga57ei2dq2klu9m8hbi60uej@4ax.com...
On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 18:11:25 GMT, "Susan Cohen" <flavia13@verizon.net>
said in alt.atheism:
She has been made to feel guilty about something she had no need to feel
guilty about & her hyper Xianity is actually a manifestation rather than
the
"cure".
Well, we do know one thing:
It takes a certain amount of mental instability to make an adult
convert TO religion.
bigotry (and absurdity) noted
whit
--
rukbat at verizon dot net
"The study of geology is ok-But not when it contradicts what is laid
out in the Bible that the earth is more than 10,000 years old."
- Doug Lee, Creationist
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
.
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: 1973 Abortion Decision Stands as US Supreme Court Rejects Roe v Wade Challenge |
23 Feb 2005 10:35:14 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 17:59:05 -0800, "Sangfroid" <cold@comcast.net>
said in alt.atheism:
"Al Klein" <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote in message
news:hqcq11l8mjga57ei2dq2klu9m8hbi60uej@4ax.com...
It takes a certain amount of mental instability to make an adult
convert TO religion.
bigotry (and absurdity) noted
An uncomfortable truth is still true. Religion is a mental disease.
--
rukbat at verizon dot net
There are three kinds of men:
The ones that learn by reading. The few who learn by observation. The rest of them have to pee on the electric fence.
- (Will Rogers)
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
.
|
|
|
| User: "Sangfroid" |
|
| Title: Re: 1973 Abortion Decision Stands as US Supreme Court Rejects Roe v Wade Challenge |
23 Feb 2005 10:48:55 PM |
|
|
"Al Klein" <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote in message
news:pamq11tecdmqnko4fv1jiinaf0mvkr35de@4ax.com...
On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 17:59:05 -0800, "Sangfroid" <cold@comcast.net>
said in alt.atheism:
"Al Klein" <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote in message
news:hqcq11l8mjga57ei2dq2klu9m8hbi60uej@4ax.com...
It takes a certain amount of mental instability to make an adult
convert TO religion.
bigotry (and absurdity) noted
An uncomfortable truth is still true.
correct. but that has nothing to do with your comment
Religion is a mental disease.
--
spare me the sophomoric attempts at profundity
you sound like a funhouse michael savage, without the wit
whit
rukbat at verizon dot net
There are three kinds of men:
The ones that learn by reading. The few who learn by observation. The rest
of them have to pee on the electric fence.
- (Will Rogers)
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Susan Cohen" |
|
| Title: Re: 1973 Abortion Decision Stands as US Supreme Court Rejects Roe v Wade Challenge |
24 Feb 2005 02:36:32 PM |
|
|
"Al Klein" <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote in message
news:pamq11tecdmqnko4fv1jiinaf0mvkr35de@4ax.com...
On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 17:59:05 -0800, "Sangfroid" <cold@comcast.net>
said in alt.atheism:
"Al Klein" <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote in message
news:hqcq11l8mjga57ei2dq2klu9m8hbi60uej@4ax.com...
It takes a certain amount of mental instability to make an adult
convert TO religion.
bigotry (and absurdity) noted
An uncomfortable truth is still true. Religion is a mental disease.
& how have you proven this?
Susan
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Christopher A. Lee" |
|
| Title: Re: 1973 Abortion Decision Stands as US Supreme Court Rejects Roe v Wade Challenge |
23 Feb 2005 07:57:30 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 24 Feb 2005 01:53:04 GMT, Al Klein <rukbat@pern.invalid>
wrote:
On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 18:11:25 GMT, "Susan Cohen" <flavia13@verizon.net>
said in alt.atheism:
She has been made to feel guilty about something she had no need to feel
guilty about & her hyper Xianity is actually a manifestation rather than the
"cure".
Well, we do know one thing:
It takes a certain amount of mental instability to make an adult
convert TO religion.
A lot of old people do.
My late father didn't. My mother seems to be turning deit in her
mid-80s.
Both are nth generation atheists.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: 1973 Abortion Decision Stands as US Supreme Court Rejects Roe v Wade Challenge |
23 Feb 2005 10:34:25 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 20:57:30 -0500, Christopher A. Lee
<calee@optonline.net> said in alt.atheism:
On Thu, 24 Feb 2005 01:53:04 GMT, Al Klein <rukbat@pern.invalid>
wrote:
On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 18:11:25 GMT, "Susan Cohen" <flavia13@verizon.net>
said in alt.atheism:
She has been made to feel guilty about something she had no need to feel
guilty about & her hyper Xianity is actually a manifestation rather than the
"cure".
Well, we do know one thing:
It takes a certain amount of mental instability to make an adult
convert TO religion.
A lot of old people do.
My late father didn't. My mother seems to be turning deit in her
mid-80s.
Both are nth generation atheists.
I've become a "daydream theist" in my "old age". You know, "wouldn't
it be nice if ...?" But I know the difference between Analog and The
Times.
--
rukbat at verizon dot net
"Atheism is the world of reality, it is reason, it is freedom. Atheism is
human concern, and intellectual honesty to a degree that the religious mind
cannot begin to understand. And yet it is more than this. Atheism is not an
old religion, it is not a new and coming religion, in fact it is not, and
never has been, a religion at all. The definition of Atheism is magnificent in
its simplicity: Atheism is merely the bed-rock of sanity in a world of
madness."
[Atheism: An Affirmative View, by Emmett F. Fields]
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Ray Fischer" |
|
| Title: Re: 1973 Abortion Decision Stands as US Supreme Court Rejects Roe v Wade Challenge |
23 Feb 2005 09:54:14 PM |
|
|
J Young <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote:
Considering it was the devil herself who brought the suit, there is
little suprise that the appeal was not heard.
The usual fanatical hatred typical of the right-ing ideologue.
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: 1973 Abortion Decision Stands as US Supreme Court Rejects Roe v Wade Challenge |
23 Feb 2005 07:51:14 PM |
|
|
On 23 Feb 2005 09:33:54 -0800, "J Young" <youngopinions@aol.com> said
in alt.atheism:
"This year alone, 100,000 women will be in abortion recovery programs
across the nation.
Haven't they ever heard of "free will"? They want the court to
prevent these women from doing something that they regret later? Even
the Christian god wouldn't do that.
--
rukbat at verizon dot net
"The study of geology is ok-But not when it contradicts what is laid
out in the Bible that the earth is more than 10,000 years old."
- Doug Lee, Creationist
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
.
|
|
|
| User: "Clave" |
|
| Title: Re: 1973 Abortion Decision Stands as US Supreme Court Rejects Roe v Wade Challenge |
23 Feb 2005 08:46:57 PM |
|
|
"Al Klein" <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote in message
news:elcq11d7r95vu4fqa58ibm9rfgq4s66umn@4ax.com...
On 23 Feb 2005 09:33:54 -0800, "J Young" <youngopinions@aol.com> said
in alt.atheism:
"This year alone, 100,000 women will be in abortion recovery programs
across the nation.
Haven't they ever heard of "free will"? They want the court to
prevent these women from doing something that they regret later? Even
the Christian god wouldn't do that.
I think the first fricking chapter of their book even says that.
Jim
.
|
|
|
| User: "Who Cares!" |
|
| Title: Re: 1973 Abortion Decision Stands as US Supreme Court Rejects Roe v Wade Challenge |
23 Feb 2005 11:50:42 PM |
|
|
"Clave" <ClaviusNoSpamDammit@CableSpeed.com> wrote in message
news:TYGdnVfs0JBho4DfRVn-jA@cablespeedwa.com...
| "Al Klein" <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote in message
| news:elcq11d7r95vu4fqa58ibm9rfgq4s66umn@4ax.com...
| > On 23 Feb 2005 09:33:54 -0800, "J Young" <youngopinions@aol.com>
said
| > in alt.atheism:
| >
| >>"This year alone, 100,000 women will be in abortion recovery
programs
| >>across the nation.
| >
| > Haven't they ever heard of "free will"? They want the court to
| > prevent these women from doing something that they regret later?
Even
| > the Christian god wouldn't do that.
|
| I think the first fricking chapter of their book even says that.
|
| Jim
As it does murder and stealing - but we have laws against those
actions, don't we? (be careful, the trap is set)
But then again,
Who Cares!
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: 1973 Abortion Decision Stands as US Supreme Court Rejects Roe v Wade Challenge |
23 Feb 2005 10:37:00 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 18:46:57 -0800, "Clave"
<ClaviusNoSpamDammit@CableSpeed.com> said in alt.atheism:
"Al Klein" <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote in message
news:elcq11d7r95vu4fqa58ibm9rfgq4s66umn@4ax.com...
Haven't they ever heard of "free will"? They want the court to
prevent these women from doing something that they regret later? Even
the Christian god wouldn't do that.
I think the first fricking chapter of their book even says that.
And if it doesn't they'll claim it does.
--
rukbat at verizon dot net
"A truly unselfish act would be a Christian volunteering to have his soul take your
soul's place in hell, so yours could go to Heaven. Don't hold your breath."
- John Popelish
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
.
|
|
|
| User: "Who Cares!" |
|
| Title: Re: 1973 Abortion Decision Stands as US Supreme Court Rejects Roe v Wade Challenge |
23 Feb 2005 11:51:52 PM |
|
|
"Al Klein" <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote in message
news:qemq115tpbfqhbvnfr8dj0akkggvo312rt@4ax.com...
| On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 18:46:57 -0800, "Clave"
| <ClaviusNoSpamDammit@CableSpeed.com> said in alt.atheism:
|
| >"Al Klein" <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote in message
| >news:elcq11d7r95vu4fqa58ibm9rfgq4s66umn@4ax.com...
|
| >> Haven't they ever heard of "free will"? They want the court to
| >> prevent these women from doing something that they regret later?
Even
| >> the Christian god wouldn't do that.
|
| >I think the first fricking chapter of their book even says that.
|
| And if it doesn't they'll claim it does.
You are really well read, aren't you? it's in the first book of all
three major religions.
But then again,
Who Cares!
.
|
|
|
| User: "Sangfroid" |
|
| Title: Re: 1973 Abortion Decision Stands as US Supreme Court Rejects Roe v Wade Challenge |
23 Feb 2005 11:55:35 PM |
|
|
"Who Cares!" <whocares@freetidet.org> wrote in message
news:YXdTd.4275$MY6.4085@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
"Al Klein" <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote in message
news:qemq115tpbfqhbvnfr8dj0akkggvo312rt@4ax.com...
| On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 18:46:57 -0800, "Clave"
| <ClaviusNoSpamDammit@CableSpeed.com> said in alt.atheism:
|
| >"Al Klein" <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote in message
| >news:elcq11d7r95vu4fqa58ibm9rfgq4s66umn@4ax.com...
|
| >> Haven't they ever heard of "free will"? They want the court to
| >> prevent these women from doing something that they regret later?
Even
| >> the Christian god wouldn't do that.
|
| >I think the first fricking chapter of their book even says that.
|
| And if it doesn't they'll claim it does.
You are really well read, aren't you? it's in the first book of all
three major religions.
But then again,
Who Cares!
that's a classic anti-christian bigot tactic.
it's always about "the christian bible" or the "christian god" or whatever
that they rail against.
because that's PC
the abrahamic religions share the same god and the old
testament/torah/whatever you want to call it
whit
.
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: 1973 Abortion Decision Stands as US Supreme Court Rejects Roe v Wade Challenge |
24 Feb 2005 01:28:32 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 21:55:35 -0800, "Sangfroid" <cold@comcast.net>
said in alt.atheism:
that's a classic anti-christian bigot tactic.
it's always about "the christian bible" or the "christian god" or whatever
that they rail against.
Because only Christians proselytize in alt.atheism.
the abrahamic religions share the same god and the old
testament
But not the imperative to convert the rest of the world, or the
arrogance to shove their religion in our faces and assume that's going
to convince us.
--
rukbat at verizon dot net
"...I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do.
When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand
why I dismiss yours."
- Stephen F. Roberts
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
.
|
|
|
| User: "Sangfroid" |
|
| Title: Re: 1973 Abortion Decision Stands as US Supreme Court Rejects Roe v Wade Challenge |
25 Feb 2005 11:31:15 AM |
|
|
"Al Klein" <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote in message
news:mr9s11tk8bc28g8285fvm3i0uui6dk7g3m@4ax.com...
On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 21:55:35 -0800, "Sangfroid" <cold@comcast.net>
said in alt.atheism:
that's a classic anti-christian bigot tactic.
it's always about "the christian bible" or the "christian god" or whatever
that they rail against.
Because only Christians proselytize in alt.atheism.
i'm not IN alt.atheism (primarily. it's x-posted) but you didn't say "in
alt.atheism" so i naturally assumed you were talking about thew world at
large (tm)
the abrahamic religions share the same god and the old
testament
But not the imperative to convert the rest of the world,
wrong
see: islam
or the
arrogance to shove their religion in our faces and assume that's going
to convince us.
your contention that only christians do this is false
hth
whit
--
rukbat at verizon dot net
"...I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god
than you do.
When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will
understand
why I dismiss yours."
- Stephen F. Roberts
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
.
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: 1973 Abortion Decision Stands as US Supreme Court Rejects Roe v Wade Challenge |
25 Feb 2005 01:10:04 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 25 Feb 2005 09:31:15 -0800, "Sangfroid" <cold@comcast.net>
said in alt.atheism:
"Al Klein" <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote in message
news:mr9s11tk8bc28g8285fvm3i0uui6dk7g3m@4ax.com...
On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 21:55:35 -0800, "Sangfroid" <cold@comcast.net>
said in alt.atheism:
that's a classic anti-christian bigot tactic.
it's always about "the christian bible" or the "christian god" or whatever
that they rail against.
Because only Christians proselytize in alt.atheism.
i'm not IN alt.atheism
You're not, but you're not part of "it's always about 'the christian
bible' or the 'christian god' or whatever that they rail against", are
you? Those of us who ARE subscribed to alt.atheism ARE always
inundated with Christian proselytizing, so that's the group we're
always addressing.
but you didn't say "in alt.atheism" so i naturally assumed you were talking about thew world at
large (tm)
When I said "On Fri, 25 Feb 2005 09:31:15 -0800, "Sangfroid"
<cold@comcast.net> said in alt.atheism:
that's a classic anti-christian bigot tactic."?
Or when I said "Because only Christians proselytize in alt.atheism"?
the abrahamic religions share the same god and the old
testament
But not the imperative to convert the rest of the world,
wrong
see: islam
They don't post much in alt.atheism at all - proselytizing or not.
They've been more visible in the last few years, but that's a recent
phenomenon.
or the
arrogance to shove their religion in our faces and assume that's going
to convince us.
your contention that only christians do this is false
It's almost only Christians who do this in alt.atheism. Jews post.
Moslems post. Pagans post. Wiccans post. But almost none of them
try to convince us that their particular fantasy is Truth(tm). (No
Pagans and no Wiccans - maybe just a little bit, once in a great while
from an individual Jew or an individual Moslem.)
--
rukbat at verizon dot net
"A casual stroll through the lunatic asylum shows that faith does not prove anything."
- Friedrich Nietzsche
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
.
|
|
|
| User: "Sangfroid" |
|
| Title: Re: 1973 Abortion Decision Stands as US Supreme Court Rejects Roe v Wade Challenge |
25 Feb 2005 01:25:56 PM |
|
|
"Al Klein" <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote in message
news:3htu11prtn2dmheif9mi50og1ho6miukb6@4ax.com...
On Fri, 25 Feb 2005 09:31:15 -0800, "Sangfroid" <cold@comcast.net>
said in alt.atheism:
"Al Klein" <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote in message
news:mr9s11tk8bc28g8285fvm3i0uui6dk7g3m@4ax.com...
On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 21:55:35 -0800, "Sangfroid" <cold@comcast.net>
said in alt.atheism:
that's a classic anti-christian bigot tactic.
it's always about "the christian bible" or the "christian god" or
whatever
that they rail against.
Because only Christians proselytize in alt.atheism.
i'm not IN alt.atheism
You're not, but you're not part of "it's always about 'the christian
bible' or the 'christian god' or whatever that they rail against", are
you? Those of us who ARE subscribed to alt.atheism ARE always
inundated with Christian proselytizing, so that's the group we're
always addressing.
that;'s fine, but how am i supposed to know that since this is x-posted to
seattle.politics
but you didn't say "in alt.atheism" so i naturally assumed you were
talking about thew world at
large (tm)
When I said "On Fri, 25 Feb 2005 09:31:15 -0800, "Sangfroid"
<cold@comcast.net> said in alt.atheism:
that's a classic anti-christian bigot tactic."?
Or when I said "Because only Christians proselytize in alt.atheism"?
if oyu said "in alt.atheism" as noted, then i stand corrected. i did not
parse that it was in reference to alt.atheism
my bad
the abrahamic religions share the same god and the old
testament
But not the imperative to convert the rest of the world,
wrong
see: islam
They don't post much in alt.atheism at all - proselytizing or not.
They've been more visible in the last few years, but that's a recent
phenomenon.
again, my bad. i did not parse the reference was to alt.atheism
i have no idea what christians, muslims or atheists do IN that ng
whit
or the
arrogance to shove their religion in our faces and assume that's going
to convince us.
your contention that only christians do this is false
It's almost only Christians who do this in alt.atheism. Jews post.
Moslems post. Pagans post. Wiccans post. But almost none of them
try to convince us that their particular fantasy is Truth(tm). (No
Pagans and no Wiccans - maybe just a little bit, once in a great while
from an individual Jew or an individual Moslem.)
--
rukbat at verizon dot net
"A casual stroll through the lunatic asylum shows that faith does not
prove anything."
- Friedrich Nietzsche
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
.
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: 1973 Abortion Decision Stands as US Supreme Court Rejects Roe v Wade Challenge |
25 Feb 2005 02:03:56 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 25 Feb 2005 11:25:56 -0800, "Sangfroid" <cold@comcast.net>
said in alt.atheism:
"Al Klein" <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote in message
news:3htu11prtn2dmheif9mi50og1ho6miukb6@4ax.com...
On Fri, 25 Feb 2005 09:31:15 -0800, "Sangfroid" <cold@comcast.net>
said in alt.atheism:
"Al Klein" <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote in message
news:mr9s11tk8bc28g8285fvm3i0uui6dk7g3m@4ax.com...
On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 21:55:35 -0800, "Sangfroid" <cold@comcast.net>
said in alt.atheism:
that's a classic anti-christian bigot tactic.
it's always about "the christian bible" or the "christian god" or
whatever
that they rail against.
Because only Christians proselytize in alt.atheism.
i'm not IN alt.atheism
You're not, but you're not part of "it's always about 'the christian
bible' or the 'christian god' or whatever that they rail against", are
you? Those of us who ARE subscribed to alt.atheism ARE always
inundated with Christian proselytizing, so that's the group we're
always addressing.
that;'s fine, but how am i supposed to know that since this is x-posted to
seattle.politics
"On Fri, 25 Feb 2005 11:25:56 -0800, "Sangfroid" <cold@comcast.net>
said in alt.atheism:" kind of gives it away.
but you didn't say "in alt.atheism" so i naturally assumed you were
talking about thew world at
large (tm)
When I said "On Fri, 25 Feb 2005 09:31:15 -0800, "Sangfroid"
<cold@comcast.net> said in alt.atheism:
that's a classic anti-christian bigot tactic."?
Or when I said "Because only Christians proselytize in alt.atheism"?
if oyu said "in alt.atheism" as noted, then i stand corrected. i did not
parse that it was in reference to alt.atheism
Both the above were copied from the post to which I was responding.
(It's still up there ^ now.)
i have no idea what christians, muslims or atheists do IN that ng
But you were commenting on how atheists reading them in alt.atheism
respond to them.
--
rukbat at verizon dot net
"My position concerning God is that of an agnostic. I am convinced that a vivid
consciousness of the primary importance of moral principles for the betterment and
ennoblement of life does not need the idea of a law-giver, especially a law-giver who
works on the basis of reward and punishment. "
- Letter to M. Berkowitz, October 25, 1950; Einstein Archive 59-215
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
.
|
|
|
| User: "Sangfroid" |
|
| Title: Re: 1973 Abortion Decision Stands as US Supreme Court Rejects Roe v Wade Challenge |
25 Feb 2005 02:08:55 PM |
|
|
"Al Klein" <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote in message
news:n01v11t8476h9ldebmcvbf0rq0p37hpc78@4ax.com...
On Fri, 25 Feb 2005 11:25:56 -0800, "Sangfroid" <cold@comcast.net>
said in alt.atheism:
"Al Klein" <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote in message
news:3htu11prtn2dmheif9mi50og1ho6miukb6@4ax.com...
On Fri, 25 Feb 2005 09:31:15 -0800, "Sangfroid" <cold@comcast.net>
said in alt.atheism:
"Al Klein" <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote in message
news:mr9s11tk8bc28g8285fvm3i0uui6dk7g3m@4ax.com...
On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 21:55:35 -0800, "Sangfroid" <cold@comcast.net>
said in alt.atheism:
that's a classic anti-christian bigot tactic.
it's always about "the christian bible" or the "christian god" or
whatever
that they rail against.
Because only Christians proselytize in alt.atheism.
i'm not IN alt.atheism
You're not, but you're not part of "it's always about 'the christian
bible' or the 'christian god' or whatever that they rail against", are
you? Those of us who ARE subscribed to alt.atheism ARE always
inundated with Christian proselytizing, so that's the group we're
always addressing.
that;'s fine, but how am i supposed to know that since this is x-posted to
seattle.politics
"On Fri, 25 Feb 2005 11:25:56 -0800, "Sangfroid" <cold@comcast.net>
said in alt.atheism:" kind of gives it away.
but you didn't say "in alt.atheism" so i naturally assumed you were
talking about thew world at
large (tm)
When I said "On Fri, 25 Feb 2005 09:31:15 -0800, "Sangfroid"
<cold@comcast.net> said in alt.atheism:
that's a classic anti-christian bigot tactic."?
Or when I said "Because only Christians proselytize in alt.atheism"?
if oyu said "in alt.atheism" as noted, then i stand corrected. i did not
parse that it was in reference to alt.atheism
Both the above were copied from the post to which I was responding.
(It's still up there ^ now.)
i have no idea what christians, muslims or atheists do IN that ng
But you were commenting on how atheists reading them in alt.atheism
respond to them.
and that's why i admitted (which you snipped) MY BAD
for the 2nd time
whit
--
rukbat at verizon dot net
"My position concerning God is that of an agnostic. I am convinced that a
vivid
consciousness of the primary importance of moral principles for the
betterment and
ennoblement of life does not need the idea of a law-giver, especially a
law-giver who
works on the basis of reward and punishment. "
- Letter to M. Berkowitz, October 25, 1950; Einstein Archive 59-215
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: 1973 Abortion Decision Stands as US Supreme Court Rejects Roe v Wade Challenge |
24 Feb 2005 01:13:44 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 24 Feb 2005 05:51:52 GMT, "Who Cares!"
<whocares@freetidet.org> said in alt.atheism:
"Al Klein" <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote in message
news:qemq115tpbfqhbvnfr8dj0akkggvo312rt@4ax.com...
| On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 18:46:57 -0800, "Clave"
| <ClaviusNoSpamDammit@CableSpeed.com> said in alt.atheism:
|
| >"Al Klein" <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote in message
| >news:elcq11d7r95vu4fqa58ibm9rfgq4s66umn@4ax.com...
|
| >> Haven't they ever heard of "free will"? They want the court to
| >> prevent these women from doing something that they regret later?
Even
| >> the Christian god wouldn't do that.
|
| >I think the first fricking chapter of their book even says that.
|
| And if it doesn't they'll claim it does.
You are really well read, aren't you? it's in the first book of all
three major religions.
It was meant as a general comment,. not specifically about Clave's
claim. You're really well educated, aren't you?
--
rukbat at verizon dot net
If you are open to the point of gullibility and have not an
ounce of skeptical sense in you, then you cannot distinguish
the useful ideas from the worthless ones
- Carl Sagan, 1987.
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Jim Lovejoy" |
|
| Title: Re: 1973 Abortion Decision Stands as US Supreme Court Rejects Roe v Wade Challenge |
23 Feb 2005 08:37:23 PM |
|
|
Al Klein <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote in
news:elcq11d7r95vu4fqa58ibm9rfgq4s66umn@4ax.com:
On 23 Feb 2005 09:33:54 -0800, "J Young" <youngopinions@aol.com> said
in alt.atheism:
"This year alone, 100,000 women will be in abortion recovery programs
across the nation.
Haven't they ever heard of "free will"? They want the court to
prevent these women from doing something that they regret later? Even
the Christian god wouldn't do that.
Don't you understand?
There are 'Christians' who would do as God would do, if He were as wise as
they are.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: 1973 Abortion Decision Stands as US Supreme Court Rejects Roe v Wade Challenge |
23 Feb 2005 10:35:58 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 20:37:23 -0600, Jim Lovejoy <nospam@devnull.spam>
said in alt.atheism:
Al Klein <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote in
news:elcq11d7r95vu4fqa58ibm9rfgq4s66umn@4ax.com:
On 23 Feb 2005 09:33:54 -0800, "J Young" <youngopinions@aol.com> said
in alt.atheism:
"This year alone, 100,000 women will be in abortion recovery programs
across the nation.
Haven't they ever heard of "free will"? They want the court to
prevent these women from doing something that they regret later? Even
the Christian god wouldn't do that.
Don't you understand?
There are 'Christians' who would do as God would do, if He were as wise as
they are.
He *is* as wise as they are - exactly as wise. :)
--
rukbat at verizon dot net
"I have never imputed to Nature a purpose or a goal, or anything that could be under-
stood as anthropomorphic. What I see in Nature is a magnificent structure that we can
comprehend only very imperfectly, and that must fill a thinking person with a feeling of
humility. This is a genuinely religious feeling that has nothing to do with mysticism."
- 1954 or 1955; quoted in Dukas and Hoffman _Albert Einstein the Human Side_, p. 39
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Bill" |
|
| Title: Re: 1973 Abortion Decision Stands as US Supreme Court Rejects Roe v Wade Challenge |
23 Feb 2005 01:44:08 PM |
|
|
The anti abortion religious fanatics completely neglect to consider the
conditions when abortion was "illegal".
Babies were born that were unwanted and punishingly neglected.
Women lived lives of misery trying to provide for children never
wanted.
Thousands of women were killed and maimed by unskilled back
alley abortionists.
Thousands of unwanted pregnancies occur do to the Catholic
churches prohibition of the use of contraceptives. Additional unwanted
pregnancies occurred do to the failure of birth control methods.
Why should we condemn women to unwanted children and condemn children to
mothers that did not want them?
A fetus in the womb is part of and dependent on the women. She should
have the right to make decisions about her own body without the interference
of a religiously/politically motivated government.
Every active opponent of the freedom of women to make the abortion
decision should be required by law to adopt and raise at least one unwanted
or unintended child. If this were the law, the opposition to abortion
would quickly disappear
--
Bill
"J Young" <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1109180034.476856.49020@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
Considering it was the devil herself who brought the suit, there is
little suprise that the appeal was not heard.
http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2005/feb/05022208.html
1973 Abortion Decision Stands as US Supreme Court Rejects Roe v Wade
Challenge
WASHINGTON, February 22, 2005 (LifeSiteNews.com) - The US Supreme Court
refused today to hear an appeal of the court's 1973 Roe v Wade
decision which permitted abortion in the United States. The appeal was
launched by Norma McCorvey, the same woman who, over thirty years ago,
was used by pro-abortion forces as the "Jane Roe" which led to
abortion's legalization.
In response to the Supreme Court's refusal to hear the case,
McCorvey's attorney, Allan Parker, president of The Justice
Foundation, said "It is tragic and disappointing that the Court is
not willing to consider the aftermath of 32 years of abortion and its
devastating affect to women, their families, and our culture."
McCorvey's attempted appeal brought a thousand more witnesses than
did the original Roe case in 1973. They submitted over 5,000 pages of
evidence, including expert testimony of which the Court had none in
1973.
"This year alone, 100,000 women will be in abortion recovery programs
across the nation. We find it sad and tragic that their voices have
been rejected," said Parker. "It is also disturbing that the
highest court in the land is not willing to consider the compelling and
significant scientific and medical evidence and at least formally
re-evaluate its far-reaching decision."
Parker noted that the Supreme Court's denial does not reflect its
views on the merits of the case. "The denial order merely expresses
the Court's discretionary refusal to give appellate review to a lower
court decision," he said. "A denial is not a reaffirmation of Roe
v. Wade. We believe this decision sends an important message that the
High Court needs compassionate judges who care about the pain and
suffering of women hurt by abortion."
The case is McCorvey v. Hill, 04-967.
jhw
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
------
(c) Copyright: LifeSiteNews.com is a production of Interim Publishing.
Permission to republish is granted (with limitation*) but
acknowledgement of source is *REQUIRED* (use LifeSiteNews.com).
.
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: 1973 Abortion Decision Stands as US Supreme Court Rejects Roe v Wade Challenge |
23 Feb 2005 07:55:13 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 19:44:08 GMT, "Bill" <wmech@worldnet.att.net> said
in alt.atheism:
Why should we condemn women to unwanted children and condemn children to
mothers that did not want them?
So that we can punish her for Eve's original sin, the way gawd wants
us to.
</Christian>
--
rukbat at verizon dot net
"So much blood has been shed by the Church because of an omission from the Gospel: "Ye
shall be indifferent as to what your neighbor's religion is." Not merely tolerant of it,
but indifferent to it. Divinity is claimed for many religions; but no religion is great
enough or divine enough to add that new law to its code."
- Mark Twain, a Biography
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
