Religions > Atheism > Women Want to Know of Abortion Risks Beforehand, New Survey Shows
| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Mr. Young" |
| Date: |
31 Aug 2006 12:45:15 AM |
| Object: |
Women Want to Know of Abortion Risks Beforehand, New Survey Shows |
Just one more example proving beyond doubt; pro-life is pro-woman.
http://www.lifenews.com/nat2552.html
Springfield, IL (LifeNews.com) -- A new survey shows women considering an
abortion want to know information about the risks and dangers associated
with it beforehand. The survey stands in stark contrast to the position
abortion advocates take in opposition to legislation allowing women to know
the potential medical problems abortion presents.
The Journal of Medical Ethics published the results of the survey of 187
women in July.
The survey polled women seeking obstetric and gynecological services at a
Wisconsin women's health clinic and they were asked to give their opinions
about receiving information for elective medical procedures.
In the survey they ranked the kind of information they would want beforehand
and ranked the severity of different kinds of complications form a medical
procedure ranging from a headache to death.
The results showed 95 percent of patients wished to be informed of all the
risks of a procedure and 65 percent would want to know all of the possible
alternatives beforehand -- not just those alternatives a doctor presents.
In the ranking of risks, women placed mental and emotional health
consequences very high on the list -- only slightly below the risk of death
or heart disease.
Dr. David Reardon, director of the Elliot Institute and one of co-authors of
the study, said the finding may be especially important vis-a-vis abortion
decisions since recent peer-reviewed studies have linked abortion to
increased rates of mental health problems.
Some problems coming from an abortion, according to various studies, include
suicidal behavior, clinical depression, anxiety disorders, substance abuse,
and sleep disorders.
"Doctors should anticipate that most women desire information on every
potential risk, even risks that doctors may judge to be less serious or
inconsequentially rare, and they will generally consider this information to
be relevant to their decisions regarding elective procedures," the authors
wrote in the study.
Reardon, in a statement sent to LifeNews.com, said the survey "demonstrates
that women have a high level of interest in being informed of any risk that
is statistically associated with the procedure, including psychological
risks."
While abortion businesses may regard some abortion risks as relatively
minor, Dr. Reardon said women don't regard them that way.
"It also reveals that while some experts may consider some associations,
such as a 10 percent higher risk of breast cancer, as relatively
unimportant, most women would consider it to be very important to their
decision making process," he said.
Reardon also said the study refutes the claim that abortion practitioners
should withhold information about studies identifying abortion risks simply
because he believes that future studies may someday disprove the earlier
findings.
"Our survey shows that most women don't want doctors to screen which
information they are told about risks," he said. "They want to judge the
evidence for themselves."
Reardon concluded that the study showed women "clearly prefer to be fully
informed about all possible complications, even if abortion providers insist
that the causal links between abortion and these statistically linked
complications have yet to be fully proven to the abortionist's
satisfaction."
Dr. Priscilla Coleman, a professor at Bowling Green State University, was
another one of the authors of the new study.
--
----------
Mr. J Yöung
youngopinions@aol.com
.
|
|
| User: "Emmanual Kann" |
|
| Title: Re: Women Want to Know of Abortion Risks Beforehand, New Survey Shows |
03 Sep 2006 04:41:19 PM |
|
|
An Sat, 02 Sep 2006 02:49:11 -0500, Day Brown hat geschreibt:
Be that as it may, herbal abortions are now available. There aint a damn
thing you or the government can do about it. The debate is over. It dont
matter what you think any more.
Other herbal remedies have been outlawed. This is just another
opportunity for the fascists to start another war on their fellow citizens.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Curt" |
|
| Title: Re: Women Want to Know of Abortion Risks Beforehand, New Survey Shows |
04 Sep 2006 12:40:37 AM |
|
|
"Emmanual Kann" <kann@keinspam.de> wrote in message
news:pan.2006.09.03.21.42.18.561140@keinspam.de...
An Sat, 02 Sep 2006 02:49:11 -0500, Day Brown hat geschreibt:
Be that as it may, herbal abortions are now available. There aint a damn
thing you or the government can do about it. The debate is over. It dont
matter what you think any more.
Other herbal remedies have been outlawed. This is just another
opportunity for the fascists to start another war on their fellow
citizens.
I think herbal abortions have been around for a really, really long time.
I know a lady that was almost killed by one, oh, twenty years ago.
Curt
.
|
|
|
| User: "Day Brown" |
|
| Title: Re: Women Want to Know of Abortion Risks Beforehand, New Survey Shows |
04 Sep 2006 11:39:03 PM |
|
|
Curt wrote:
"Emmanual Kann" <kann@keinspam.de> wrote in message
news:pan.2006.09.03.21.42.18.561140@keinspam.de...
An Sat, 02 Sep 2006 02:49:11 -0500, Day Brown hat geschreibt:
Be that as it may, herbal abortions are now available. There aint a damn
thing you or the government can do about it. The debate is over. It dont
matter what you think any more.
Other herbal remedies have been outlawed. This is just another
opportunity for the fascists to start another war on their fellow
citizens.
I think herbal abortions have been around for a really, really long time.
I know a lady that was almost killed by one, oh, twenty years ago.
Over 7000 thousand years in Europe. Some of which have been found when
they brought modern forensic gear into obscure East European museums and
began to identify pot residues and pollens that witches once had.
The health risk depends on which trimester. The first trimester is no
worse than a period. In fact that is what an *emmenegogue* does; bring
on a period, regardless of fertilization.
They can outlaw whatever the ***** they want; these plants are small and
obscure; it aint like trying to find 8-12 foot pot plants.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "osprey" |
|
| Title: Re: Women Want to Know of Abortion Risks Beforehand, New Survey Shows |
01 Sep 2006 09:38:41 AM |
|
|
Mike wrote:
Larry (Scratch) wrote:
Mike wrote:
David W. Barnes wrote:
"We" shouldn't TELL women anything, you control freak! They can take
care of themselves!
After all, you care so much for women right? You wouldn't want them to
do something that is FAR more dangerous, right?
Who gives a ***** what you or anyone else WANTS women to do?
I hate to sound like one of them horrible liberals here, but my
position is simply this: If I woman is pregnant and trying to decide
whether or not to abort, if she explains her circumstances to me and
asks my opinion I would try to give her good counsel. If she doesn't
ask my opinion I will simply wish her well and hope that she makes a
wise decision. That is what you call atheist charity, something many
Christians are badly lacking.
Because we don't believe in the taking of an un-born life atheist. Must
be sweet for (so called) men to knock a woman up then convince them to
abort so their responsibility ends when they slip their pants back on
and some women are so stupid they buy into it. If it wasn't so sad it
would be a hoot.
It all gets back to a very arbitrary religious idea that a fertilized
ovum has all the rights due a human being. I don't consider the bible
authoritative, but I have read it carefully and I never found a line
that said: Life beginneth when the sperm cell hath halfway penetrated
the nuclear membrane of the ovum. Perhaps you could direct me to the
scriptural passages I have missed. The Pope thinks so, Pat Robertson
thinks so, but others do not think so. There is an old Jewish
tradition (which works off the same Old Testament texts that the fundie
Prots are so fond of) that says human life begins when the baby first
kicks (roughly end of 1st trimester or early 2nd trimester).
I do have a problem with late term abortion (unless absolutely
necessary to save the mother's life). At that stage the unborn baby is
clearly a complicated creature. But in an early stage when the fetus
has a nervous system barely as complicated as an earthworm's, why
should we consider it a human life? In any case, for the health of the
mother, if she is to have an abortion it should be as early as
possible.
To the best of my knowledge I have never knocked up a girl. If I did,
I would hope to have the decency to fulfill all obligations to her and
the child if she chose to have the baby.
I guess I might be one of those you would consider a "fundie". That is
if you refer to a fundie meaning someone who simply believes in God.
I too, do not support late term abortions, unless the mothers life is
truly in danger and it's the only way to save her life.
I also do not support the "choice" of abortion; however, I do support a
woman's right to choose. That just simply means I don't support
abortion, I think it's wrong; however, I don't believe in stopping
people from making a legal choice.
I like your last paragraph, I think all men should feel that way.
Let me ask you this though,
We allow a woman the right to choose to relieve herself from the
obligations and responsibilities of motherhood, by giving her the
choice to carry to term or to abort.
Do you think a man should have the choice to relieve himself from the
responsibilities for fatherhood, by allowing him to choose to support
her and the child or to walk away?
Lets say that we have a couple. The man has clearly expressed he has no
desire to have children. The woman agrees, and tells him she doesn't
either. So they have a wild night of passionate sex, and oooops...the
birth control fails.
A few weeks later she misses her period. She takes a pregnancy test
and she sees that it is positive.
She goes to the doctor and finds out that she is indeed, pregnant. She
tells her boyfried, and she assures him she is going to get an
abortion. But she waits a few weeks and she decides she just can't go
through with it. She is going to keep the baby. She tells him about
it, and he is upset.
Now, as it stands now, he has two choices.
a) pay support
or
b) go to jail if he doesn't.
Shouldn't he have the right to choose, "I want out of this relationship
and I don't want to pay support, so I am going to leave" or "I will do
the right thing and voluntarily take care of our child together".
.
|
|
|
| User: "David W. Barnes" |
|
| Title: Re: Women Want to Know of Abortion Risks Beforehand, New Survey Shows |
01 Sep 2006 06:27:20 PM |
|
|
In article <1157121521.765508.308800@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
osprey <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
Mike wrote:
Larry (Scratch) wrote:
Mike wrote:
David W. Barnes wrote:
"We" shouldn't TELL women anything, you control freak! They can take
care of themselves!
After all, you care so much for women right? You wouldn't want them to
do something that is FAR more dangerous, right?
Who gives a ***** what you or anyone else WANTS women to do?
I hate to sound like one of them horrible liberals here, but my
position is simply this: If I woman is pregnant and trying to decide
whether or not to abort, if she explains her circumstances to me and
asks my opinion I would try to give her good counsel. If she doesn't
ask my opinion I will simply wish her well and hope that she makes a
wise decision. That is what you call atheist charity, something many
Christians are badly lacking.
Because we don't believe in the taking of an un-born life atheist. Must
be sweet for (so called) men to knock a woman up then convince them to
abort so their responsibility ends when they slip their pants back on
and some women are so stupid they buy into it. If it wasn't so sad it
would be a hoot.
It all gets back to a very arbitrary religious idea that a fertilized
ovum has all the rights due a human being. I don't consider the bible
authoritative, but I have read it carefully and I never found a line
that said: Life beginneth when the sperm cell hath halfway penetrated
the nuclear membrane of the ovum. Perhaps you could direct me to the
scriptural passages I have missed. The Pope thinks so, Pat Robertson
thinks so, but others do not think so. There is an old Jewish
tradition (which works off the same Old Testament texts that the fundie
Prots are so fond of) that says human life begins when the baby first
kicks (roughly end of 1st trimester or early 2nd trimester).
I do have a problem with late term abortion (unless absolutely
necessary to save the mother's life). At that stage the unborn baby is
clearly a complicated creature. But in an early stage when the fetus
has a nervous system barely as complicated as an earthworm's, why
should we consider it a human life? In any case, for the health of the
mother, if she is to have an abortion it should be as early as
possible.
To the best of my knowledge I have never knocked up a girl. If I did,
I would hope to have the decency to fulfill all obligations to her and
the child if she chose to have the baby.
I guess I might be one of those you would consider a "fundie". That is
if you refer to a fundie meaning someone who simply believes in God.
I too, do not support late term abortions, unless the mothers life is
truly in danger and it's the only way to save her life.
But he "claims" to support current abortion laws. And the Osprey lies
just keep coming...
I also do not support the "choice" of abortion; however, I do support a
woman's right to choose.
Just as long as the choice is what he thinks is "right."
That just simply means I don't support
abortion, I think it's wrong; however, I don't believe in stopping
people from making a legal choice.
"Legal" choice.
I like your last paragraph, I think all men should feel that way.
Typical Osprey. "I think all men should think as I do."
Let me ask you this though,
We allow a woman the right to choose to relieve herself from the
obligations and responsibilities of motherhood, by giving her the
choice to carry to term or to abort.
Note Osprey's statement. We "ALLOW" a woman... Osprey feels he is in
charge of women.
Do you think a man should have the choice to relieve himself from the
responsibilities for fatherhood, by allowing him to choose to support
her and the child or to walk away?
So now it is a money thing. Osprey's illegitimate children are a pain
in his side.
Lets say that we have a couple. The man has clearly expressed he has no
desire to have children. The woman agrees, and tells him she doesn't
either. So they have a wild night of passionate sex, and oooops...the
birth control fails.
Speaking from experience? (Osprey says his children were "unplanned.")
A few weeks later she misses her period. She takes a pregnancy test
and she sees that it is positive.
She goes to the doctor and finds out that she is indeed, pregnant. She
tells her boyfried, and she assures him she is going to get an
abortion. But she waits a few weeks and she decides she just can't go
through with it. She is going to keep the baby. She tells him about
it, and he is upset.
Now, as it stands now, he has two choices.
a) pay support
or
b) go to jail if he doesn't.
Shouldn't he have the right to choose, "I want out of this relationship
and I don't want to pay support, so I am going to leave" or "I will do
the right thing and voluntarily take care of our child together".
That isn't pro-choice, dummy.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Attila" |
|
| Title: Re: Women Want to Know of Abortion Risks Beforehand, New Survey Shows |
01 Sep 2006 04:38:58 PM |
|
|
On 1 Sep 2006 07:38:41 -0700, "osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> in
alt.abortion with message-id
<1157121521.765508.308800@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> wrote:
I guess I might be one of those you would consider a "fundie". That is
if you refer to a fundie meaning someone who simply believes in God.
So? What gives you the right to force others to live according to
your unproven religious beliefs?
I too, do not support late term abortions, unless the mothers life is
truly in danger and it's the only way to save her life.
I also do not support the "choice" of abortion; however, I do support a
woman's right to choose. That just simply means I don't support
abortion, I think it's wrong; however, I don't believe in stopping
people from making a legal choice.
I like your last paragraph, I think all men should feel that way.
Let me ask you this though,
We allow a woman the right to choose to relieve herself from the
obligations and responsibilities of motherhood, by giving her the
choice to carry to term or to abort.
Life is full of both acceptance and rejection of "obligations" and
"responsibilities". What is wrong with that?
Do you think a man should have the choice to relieve himself from the
responsibilities for fatherhood, by allowing him to choose to support
her and the child or to walk away?
Totally different issue.
Lets say that we have a couple. The man has clearly expressed he has no
desire to have children. The woman agrees, and tells him she doesn't
either. So they have a wild night of passionate sex, and oooops...the
birth control fails.
A few weeks later she misses her period. She takes a pregnancy test
and she sees that it is positive.
She goes to the doctor and finds out that she is indeed, pregnant. She
tells her boyfried, and she assures him she is going to get an
abortion. But she waits a few weeks and she decides she just can't go
through with it. She is going to keep the baby. She tells him about
it, and he is upset.
Now, as it stands now, he has two choices.
a) pay support
or
b) go to jail if he doesn't.
Shouldn't he have the right to choose, "I want out of this relationship
and I don't want to pay support, so I am going to leave" or "I will do
the right thing and voluntarily take care of our child together".
No.
--
Pro-Choice is Pro-Freedom
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Women Want to Know of Abortion Risks Beforehand, New Survey Shows |
02 Sep 2006 12:11:47 PM |
|
|
Attila wrote:
On 1 Sep 2006 07:38:41 -0700, "osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> in
alt.abortion with message-id
<1157121521.765508.308800@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> wrote:
I guess I might be one of those you would consider a "fundie". That is
if you refer to a fundie meaning someone who simply believes in God.
So? What gives you the right to force others to live according to
your unproven religious beliefs?
Judging from his arguments in the past, you're basically asking him for
a recipe for lasagna, because that is as good of a guess at where his
logic is taking him as you'll get. I implore you: don't make the
lasagna.
I too, do not support late term abortions, unless the mothers life is
truly in danger and it's the only way to save her life.
I also do not support the "choice" of abortion; however, I do support a
woman's right to choose. That just simply means I don't support
abortion, I think it's wrong; however, I don't believe in stopping
people from making a legal choice.
Osprey called me a liar for thinking he wasn't pro-choice, which was a
misinterpretation on my part but his fault because of his lack of
making sense. It's fucked up to put the obligation on other people to
understand you when you're speaking in gibberish. "I don't believe in
stopping people from making a legal choice"? So all legal choices are
immediately okay? But wait, you're against some of them? So they're not
okay? Oh, you're saying you're against a choice but it should be okay?
Is that an admission of guilt? And you say legal choices should not be
stopped? Like, for example, for revising and inventing laws? Is the law
omniscient? Was it omniscient before someone invented it? If the
pro-choice laws are completely cool with you, what are you arguing for?
Do you even know? What if they did change the law, making late-term
abortions fine, would those be fine then? If you say ***** like "I also
do not support the choice of abortion" and someone doesn't think you're
pro-choice, does that really make that person a liar? GET HELP. GET
SOME FUCKING HELP. YOU'RE HURTING EVERYONE YOU COME INTO CONTACT WITH,
OSPREY. THEY ARE LAUGHING UNTIL THEIR ASSES FALL OFF LIKE IN THOSE
COMMERCIALS ABOUT WEIGHT LOSS WHERE THEY FIND ASSES AND THIGHS AND
STUFF.
I like your last paragraph, I think all men should feel that way.
Let me ask you this though,
We allow a woman the right to choose to relieve herself from the
obligations and responsibilities of motherhood, by giving her the
choice to carry to term or to abort.
Life is full of both acceptance and rejection of "obligations" and
"responsibilities". What is wrong with that?
What's wrong with it is people like osprey are incapable of dealing
with it.
Do you think a man should have the choice to relieve himself from the
responsibilities for fatherhood, by allowing him to choose to support
her and the child or to walk away?
Totally different issue.
Lasagna, it's the lasagna. Please don't make the lasagna.
Lets say that we have a couple. The man has clearly expressed he has no
desire to have children. The woman agrees, and tells him she doesn't
either. So they have a wild night of passionate sex, and oooops...the
birth control fails.
A few weeks later she misses her period. She takes a pregnancy test
and she sees that it is positive.
She goes to the doctor and finds out that she is indeed, pregnant. She
tells her boyfried, and she assures him she is going to get an
abortion. But she waits a few weeks and she decides she just can't go
through with it. She is going to keep the baby. She tells him about
it, and he is upset.
Now, as it stands now, he has two choices.
a) pay support
or
b) go to jail if he doesn't.
Shouldn't he have the right to choose, "I want out of this relationship
and I don't want to pay support, so I am going to leave" or "I will do
the right thing and voluntarily take care of our child together".
No.
He goes off on these lasagna tangents that have to do with the choice
in some completely different issue because he can't stay on topic.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Emmanual Kann" |
|
| Title: Re: Women Want to Know of Abortion Risks Beforehand, New Survey Shows |
03 Sep 2006 05:14:45 PM |
|
|
An Sat, 02 Sep 2006 10:11:47 -0700, hat
geschreibt:
He goes off on these lasagna tangents that have to do with the choice
in some completely different issue because he can't stay on topic.
He goes off on the lasagna tangents because if he stayed on point, he'd be
forced to buy his own lunch.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "osprey" |
|
| Title: Re: Women Want to Know of Abortion Risks Beforehand, New Survey Shows |
01 Sep 2006 11:33:25 PM |
|
|
Attila wrote:
On 1 Sep 2006 07:38:41 -0700, "osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> in
alt.abortion with message-id
<1157121521.765508.308800@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> wrote:
I guess I might be one of those you would consider a "fundie". That is
if you refer to a fundie meaning someone who simply believes in God.
So? What gives you the right to force others to live according to
your unproven religious beliefs?
Nothing gives me the right to force it on others and I DON'T force it
on others.
You were the one who said once you believe that parents teaching their
children about God, should be considered child abuse and it should be
outlawed. Now what were you saying about forcing your beliefs???
I too, do not support late term abortions, unless the mothers life is
truly in danger and it's the only way to save her life.
I also do not support the "choice" of abortion; however, I do support a
woman's right to choose. That just simply means I don't support
abortion, I think it's wrong; however, I don't believe in stopping
people from making a legal choice.
I like your last paragraph, I think all men should feel that way.
Let me ask you this though,
We allow a woman the right to choose to relieve herself from the
obligations and responsibilities of motherhood, by giving her the
choice to carry to term or to abort.
Life is full of both acceptance and rejection of "obligations" and
"responsibilities". What is wrong with that?
Do you think a man should have the choice to relieve himself from the
responsibilities for fatherhood, by allowing him to choose to support
her and the child or to walk away?
Totally different issue.
No it's not. It's just an issue you are not prepared to deal with.
Lets say that we have a couple. The man has clearly expressed he has no
desire to have children. The woman agrees, and tells him she doesn't
either. So they have a wild night of passionate sex, and oooops...the
birth control fails.
A few weeks later she misses her period. She takes a pregnancy test
and she sees that it is positive.
She goes to the doctor and finds out that she is indeed, pregnant. She
tells her boyfried, and she assures him she is going to get an
abortion. But she waits a few weeks and she decides she just can't go
through with it. She is going to keep the baby. She tells him about
it, and he is upset.
Now, as it stands now, he has two choices.
a) pay support
or
b) go to jail if he doesn't.
Shouldn't he have the right to choose, "I want out of this relationship
and I don't want to pay support, so I am going to leave" or "I will do
the right thing and voluntarily take care of our child together".
No.
so you support discrimination.
--
Pro-Choice is Pro-Freedom
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Women Want to Know of Abortion Risks Beforehand, New Survey Shows |
02 Sep 2006 12:17:46 PM |
|
|
If you don't like discrimination, take it up with God because he sends
certain people to Hell, according to your dumb *****. It's always wacky
when those with no belief-related standards criticize others.
osprey wrote:
Attila wrote:
On 1 Sep 2006 07:38:41 -0700, "osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> in
alt.abortion with message-id
<1157121521.765508.308800@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> wrote:
I guess I might be one of those you would consider a "fundie". That is
if you refer to a fundie meaning someone who simply believes in God.
So? What gives you the right to force others to live according to
your unproven religious beliefs?
Nothing gives me the right to force it on others and I DON'T force it
on others.
You were the one who said once you believe that parents teaching their
children about God, should be considered child abuse and it should be
outlawed. Now what were you saying about forcing your beliefs???
I too, do not support late term abortions, unless the mothers life is
truly in danger and it's the only way to save her life.
I also do not support the "choice" of abortion; however, I do support a
woman's right to choose. That just simply means I don't support
abortion, I think it's wrong; however, I don't believe in stopping
people from making a legal choice.
I like your last paragraph, I think all men should feel that way.
Let me ask you this though,
We allow a woman the right to choose to relieve herself from the
obligations and responsibilities of motherhood, by giving her the
choice to carry to term or to abort.
Life is full of both acceptance and rejection of "obligations" and
"responsibilities". What is wrong with that?
Do you think a man should have the choice to relieve himself from the
responsibilities for fatherhood, by allowing him to choose to support
her and the child or to walk away?
Totally different issue.
No it's not. It's just an issue you are not prepared to deal with.
Lets say that we have a couple. The man has clearly expressed he has no
desire to have children. The woman agrees, and tells him she doesn't
either. So they have a wild night of passionate sex, and oooops...the
birth control fails.
A few weeks later she misses her period. She takes a pregnancy test
and she sees that it is positive.
She goes to the doctor and finds out that she is indeed, pregnant. She
tells her boyfried, and she assures him she is going to get an
abortion. But she waits a few weeks and she decides she just can't go
through with it. She is going to keep the baby. She tells him about
it, and he is upset.
Now, as it stands now, he has two choices.
a) pay support
or
b) go to jail if he doesn't.
Shouldn't he have the right to choose, "I want out of this relationship
and I don't want to pay support, so I am going to leave" or "I will do
the right thing and voluntarily take care of our child together".
No.
so you support discrimination.
--
Pro-Choice is Pro-Freedom
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "David W. Barnes" |
|
| Title: Re: Women Want to Know of Abortion Risks Beforehand, New Survey Shows |
02 Sep 2006 11:27:22 AM |
|
|
In article <1157171605.170644.225210@74g2000cwt.googlegroups.com>,
osprey <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
Attila wrote:
On 1 Sep 2006 07:38:41 -0700, "osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> in
alt.abortion with message-id
<1157121521.765508.308800@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> wrote:
I guess I might be one of those you would consider a "fundie". That is
if you refer to a fundie meaning someone who simply believes in God.
So? What gives you the right to force others to live according to
your unproven religious beliefs?
Nothing gives me the right to force it on others and I DON'T force it
on others.
You were the one who said once you believe that parents teaching their
children about God, should be considered child abuse and it should be
outlawed. Now what were you saying about forcing your beliefs???
I too, do not support late term abortions, unless the mothers life is
truly in danger and it's the only way to save her life.
I also do not support the "choice" of abortion; however, I do support a
woman's right to choose. That just simply means I don't support
abortion, I think it's wrong; however, I don't believe in stopping
people from making a legal choice.
I like your last paragraph, I think all men should feel that way.
Let me ask you this though,
We allow a woman the right to choose to relieve herself from the
obligations and responsibilities of motherhood, by giving her the
choice to carry to term or to abort.
Life is full of both acceptance and rejection of "obligations" and
"responsibilities". What is wrong with that?
Do you think a man should have the choice to relieve himself from the
responsibilities for fatherhood, by allowing him to choose to support
her and the child or to walk away?
Totally different issue.
No it's not. It's just an issue you are not prepared to deal with.
Lets say that we have a couple. The man has clearly expressed he has no
desire to have children. The woman agrees, and tells him she doesn't
either. So they have a wild night of passionate sex, and oooops...the
birth control fails.
A few weeks later she misses her period. She takes a pregnancy test
and she sees that it is positive.
She goes to the doctor and finds out that she is indeed, pregnant. She
tells her boyfried, and she assures him she is going to get an
abortion. But she waits a few weeks and she decides she just can't go
through with it. She is going to keep the baby. She tells him about
it, and he is upset.
Now, as it stands now, he has two choices.
a) pay support
or
b) go to jail if he doesn't.
Shouldn't he have the right to choose, "I want out of this relationship
and I don't want to pay support, so I am going to leave" or "I will do
the right thing and voluntarily take care of our child together".
No.
so you support discrimination.
Idiot. You discriminate dozens of times every hour. You discriminate
when you come out on this newsgroup. You discriminate when you respond
to this post and not another. Stop being such a sheep. Try
"thinking" for once.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Attila" |
|
| Title: Re: Women Want to Know of Abortion Risks Beforehand, New Survey Shows |
02 Sep 2006 04:34:26 AM |
|
|
On 1 Sep 2006 21:33:25 -0700, "osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> in
alt.abortion with message-id
<1157171605.170644.225210@74g2000cwt.googlegroups.com> wrote:
Attila wrote:
On 1 Sep 2006 07:38:41 -0700, "osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> in
alt.abortion with message-id
<1157121521.765508.308800@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> wrote:
I guess I might be one of those you would consider a "fundie". That is
if you refer to a fundie meaning someone who simply believes in God.
So? What gives you the right to force others to live according to
your unproven religious beliefs?
Nothing gives me the right to force it on others and I DON'T force it
on others.
You were the one who said once you believe that parents teaching their
children about God, should be considered child abuse and it should be
outlawed. Now what were you saying about forcing your beliefs???
That is stopping others from forcing their beliefs. Especially on
those unable to defend themselves.
There is a difference.
Did you forget you are supposed to have me killfiltered? I would hate
for you to unknowingly waste time in responding.
I too, do not support late term abortions, unless the mothers life is
truly in danger and it's the only way to save her life.
I also do not support the "choice" of abortion; however, I do support a
woman's right to choose. That just simply means I don't support
abortion, I think it's wrong; however, I don't believe in stopping
people from making a legal choice.
I like your last paragraph, I think all men should feel that way.
Let me ask you this though,
We allow a woman the right to choose to relieve herself from the
obligations and responsibilities of motherhood, by giving her the
choice to carry to term or to abort.
Life is full of both acceptance and rejection of "obligations" and
"responsibilities". What is wrong with that?
Do you think a man should have the choice to relieve himself from the
responsibilities for fatherhood, by allowing him to choose to support
her and the child or to walk away?
Totally different issue.
No it's not. It's just an issue you are not prepared to deal with.
Of course I am, but that issue goes to the costs of raising a child,
which someone must pay for. Society says the parents have this
responsibility and I have no intention of voluntarily paying to raise
children through the payment of public money. If the parents do not
pay who does?
Lets say that we have a couple. The man has clearly expressed he has no
desire to have children. The woman agrees, and tells him she doesn't
either. So they have a wild night of passionate sex, and oooops...the
birth control fails.
A few weeks later she misses her period. She takes a pregnancy test
and she sees that it is positive.
She goes to the doctor and finds out that she is indeed, pregnant. She
tells her boyfried, and she assures him she is going to get an
abortion. But she waits a few weeks and she decides she just can't go
through with it. She is going to keep the baby. She tells him about
it, and he is upset.
Now, as it stands now, he has two choices.
a) pay support
or
b) go to jail if he doesn't.
Shouldn't he have the right to choose, "I want out of this relationship
and I don't want to pay support, so I am going to leave" or "I will do
the right thing and voluntarily take care of our child together".
No.
so you support discrimination.
This is not discrimination. It is simply reality.
If the parents do not pay the costs of raising a child who does pay
those costs?
--
Pro-Choice is Pro-Freedom
.
|
|
|
| User: "osprey" |
|
| Title: Re: Women Want to Know of Abortion Risks Beforehand, New Survey Shows |
02 Sep 2006 04:59:58 AM |
|
|
Attila wrote:
On 1 Sep 2006 21:33:25 -0700, "osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> in
alt.abortion with message-id
<1157171605.170644.225210@74g2000cwt.googlegroups.com> wrote:
Attila wrote:
On 1 Sep 2006 07:38:41 -0700, "osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> in
alt.abortion with message-id
<1157121521.765508.308800@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> wrote:
I guess I might be one of those you would consider a "fundie". That is
if you refer to a fundie meaning someone who simply believes in God.
So? What gives you the right to force others to live according to
your unproven religious beliefs?
Nothing gives me the right to force it on others and I DON'T force it
on others.
You were the one who said once you believe that parents teaching their
children about God, should be considered child abuse and it should be
outlawed. Now what were you saying about forcing your beliefs???
That is stopping others from forcing their beliefs. Especially on
those unable to defend themselves.
There is a difference.
Yea, you wish to have a dictatorship and I wish to allow parents the
right to raise their families how they wish.
Did you forget you are supposed to have me killfiltered?
I understand, you got embarrassed because I killed your little
pro-freedom concept and how you are actually NOT pro-freedom. Of course
now you wish for me to ignore you.
I would hate
for you to unknowingly waste time in responding.
I too, do not support late term abortions, unless the mothers life is
truly in danger and it's the only way to save her life.
I also do not support the "choice" of abortion; however, I do support a
woman's right to choose. That just simply means I don't support
abortion, I think it's wrong; however, I don't believe in stopping
people from making a legal choice.
I like your last paragraph, I think all men should feel that way.
Let me ask you this though,
We allow a woman the right to choose to relieve herself from the
obligations and responsibilities of motherhood, by giving her the
choice to carry to term or to abort.
Life is full of both acceptance and rejection of "obligations" and
"responsibilities". What is wrong with that?
Do you think a man should have the choice to relieve himself from the
responsibilities for fatherhood, by allowing him to choose to support
her and the child or to walk away?
Totally different issue.
No it's not. It's just an issue you are not prepared to deal with.
Of course I am,
No, you're not.
but that issue goes to the costs of raising a child,
which someone must pay for.
Hmm, haven't women been saying for years now they don't need men? So
you basically agree with many others who view men as nothing more than
a sperm bank and a walking pay check.
Society says the parents have this
responsibility and I have no intention of voluntarily paying to raise
children through the payment of public money. If the parents do not
pay who does?
Lets say that we have a couple. The man has clearly expressed he has no
desire to have children. The woman agrees, and tells him she doesn't
either. So they have a wild night of passionate sex, and oooops...the
birth control fails.
A few weeks later she misses her period. She takes a pregnancy test
and she sees that it is positive.
She goes to the doctor and finds out that she is indeed, pregnant. She
tells her boyfried, and she assures him she is going to get an
abortion. But she waits a few weeks and she decides she just can't go
through with it. She is going to keep the baby. She tells him about
it, and he is upset.
Now, as it stands now, he has two choices.
a) pay support
or
b) go to jail if he doesn't.
Shouldn't he have the right to choose, "I want out of this relationship
and I don't want to pay support, so I am going to leave" or "I will do
the right thing and voluntarily take care of our child together".
No.
so you support discrimination.
This is not discrimination.
No, it's DISCRIMINATION.
Our society allows a woman a choice to walk away from parental
responsibility by allowing her to kill the fetus and doesn't allow a
man any choice other than to pay or go ot jail.
It's discrimination...all the way through. And YOU support it.
It is simply reality.
If the parents do not pay the costs of raising a child who does pay
those costs?
The one who wanted the child!
--
Pro-Choice is Pro-Freedom
.
|
|
|
| User: "David W. Barnes" |
|
| Title: Re: Women Want to Know of Abortion Risks Beforehand, New Survey Shows |
02 Sep 2006 10:42:23 AM |
|
|
In article <1157191198.664906.307610@e3g2000cwe.googlegroups.com>,
osprey <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
Lets say that we have a couple. The man has clearly expressed he has no
desire to have children. The woman agrees, and tells him she doesn't
either. So they have a wild night of passionate sex, and oooops...the
birth control fails.
A few weeks later she misses her period. She takes a pregnancy test
and she sees that it is positive.
She goes to the doctor and finds out that she is indeed, pregnant. She
tells her boyfried, and she assures him she is going to get an
abortion. But she waits a few weeks and she decides she just can't go
through with it. She is going to keep the baby. She tells him about
it, and he is upset.
Now, as it stands now, he has two choices.
a) pay support
or
b) go to jail if he doesn't.
Shouldn't he have the right to choose, "I want out of this relationship
and I don't want to pay support, so I am going to leave" or "I will do
the right thing and voluntarily take care of our child together".
No.
so you support discrimination.
This is not discrimination.
No, it's DISCRIMINATION.
Our society allows a woman a choice to walk away from parental
responsibility by allowing her to kill the fetus and doesn't allow a
man any choice other than to pay or go ot jail.
The man can have an abortion, too.
It's discrimination...all the way through. And YOU support it.
When a woman has an abortion, the father "walks away from parental
responsibility" too. You are just trying to rationalize the reason you
had a child that you stated was "unplanned."
.
|
|
|
| User: "David W. Barnes" |
|
| Title: Re: Women Want to Know of Abortion Risks Beforehand, New Survey Shows |
07 Sep 2006 09:53:05 PM |
|
|
In article <1157451404.480869.14480@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
osprey <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
Anamika wrote:
David W. Barnes wrote:
In article <1157191198.664906.307610@e3g2000cwe.googlegroups.com>,
osprey <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
Lets say that we have a couple. The man has clearly expressed he
has no
desire to have children. The woman agrees, and tells him she
doesn't
either. So they have a wild night of passionate sex, and
oooops...the
birth control fails.
A few weeks later she misses her period. She takes a pregnancy
test
and she sees that it is positive.
She goes to the doctor and finds out that she is indeed,
pregnant. She
tells her boyfried, and she assures him she is going to get an
abortion. But she waits a few weeks and she decides she just
can't go
through with it. She is going to keep the baby. She tells him
about
it, and he is upset.
Now, as it stands now, he has two choices.
a) pay support
or
b) go to jail if he doesn't.
Shouldn't he have the right to choose, "I want out of this
relationship
and I don't want to pay support, so I am going to leave" or "I
will do
the right thing and voluntarily take care of our child together".
No.
so you support discrimination.
This is not discrimination.
No, it's DISCRIMINATION.
Our society allows a woman a choice to walk away from parental
responsibility by allowing her to kill the fetus and doesn't allow a
man any choice other than to pay or go ot jail.
The man can have an abortion, too.
It's discrimination...all the way through. And YOU support it.
When a woman has an abortion, the father "walks away from parental
responsibility" too. You are just trying to rationalize the reason you
had a child that you stated was "unplanned."
His first born or the last baby? Both were unplanned--the first was an
unwanted child for whom he resents supporting.
Another fine example of liberal behavior. When they can't get to the
person they hate, they go for attacking the family.
Idiot - the comment was about YOU, not your family.
And furthermore,
they just make ***** up. It must really bother the liberals in here
that I have children whom are loved and taken care of. Children who
have a mother and a father who didn't reject them, who didn't abort
them, who spends time with their children, takes an active interest in
their interest.
What a pity, people like the above liberals, have the hatred and
contempt for others like they do. They even get ***** of you
vote, and don't vote for the people THEY want you to vote for.
Sad...very very sad...
Oh well, the bright thing is...I am not like them!!!!
Are you now claiming you didn't say the child was "unplanned?" Must I
prove that to be a lie too?
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "David W. Barnes" |
|
| Title: Re: Women Want to Know of Abortion Risks Beforehand, New Survey Shows |
05 Sep 2006 08:30:27 AM |
|
|
In article <1157451404.480869.14480@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
osprey <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
Anamika wrote:
David W. Barnes wrote:
In article <1157191198.664906.307610@e3g2000cwe.googlegroups.com>,
osprey <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
Lets say that we have a couple. The man has clearly expressed he
has no
desire to have children. The woman agrees, and tells him she
doesn't
either. So they have a wild night of passionate sex, and
oooops...the
birth control fails.
A few weeks later she misses her period. She takes a pregnancy
test
and she sees that it is positive.
She goes to the doctor and finds out that she is indeed,
pregnant. She
tells her boyfried, and she assures him she is going to get an
abortion. But she waits a few weeks and she decides she just
can't go
through with it. She is going to keep the baby. She tells him
about
it, and he is upset.
Now, as it stands now, he has two choices.
a) pay support
or
b) go to jail if he doesn't.
Shouldn't he have the right to choose, "I want out of this
relationship
and I don't want to pay support, so I am going to leave" or "I
will do
the right thing and voluntarily take care of our child together".
No.
so you support discrimination.
This is not discrimination.
No, it's DISCRIMINATION.
Our society allows a woman a choice to walk away from parental
responsibility by allowing her to kill the fetus and doesn't allow a
man any choice other than to pay or go ot jail.
The man can have an abortion, too.
It's discrimination...all the way through. And YOU support it.
When a woman has an abortion, the father "walks away from parental
responsibility" too. You are just trying to rationalize the reason you
had a child that you stated was "unplanned."
His first born or the last baby? Both were unplanned--the first was an
unwanted child for whom he resents supporting.
Another fine example of liberal behavior. When they can't get to the
person they hate, they go for attacking the family. And furthermore,
they just make ***** up.
Nothing was "made up." You said your child was "unplanned." And as I
have pointed out it the past, "unplanned" is a euphemism for
"unwanted." (If you had "wanted" it you would have "planned" it.)
It must really bother the liberals in here
that I have children whom are loved and taken care of. Children who
have a mother and a father who didn't reject them, who didn't abort
them, who spends time with their children, takes an active interest in
their interest.
What a pity, people like the above liberals, have the hatred and
contempt for others like they do. They even get ***** of you
vote, and don't vote for the people THEY want you to vote for.
Sad...very very sad...
Oh well, the bright thing is...I am not like them!!!!
Yeah - you really sound "loving."
.
|
|
|
| User: "osprey" |
|
| Title: Re: Women Want to Know of Abortion Risks Beforehand, New Survey Shows |
05 Sep 2006 08:46:18 AM |
|
|
David W. Barnes wrote:
In article <1157451404.480869.14480@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
osprey <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
Anamika wrote:
David W. Barnes wrote:
In article <1157191198.664906.307610@e3g2000cwe.googlegroups.com>,
osprey <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
Lets say that we have a couple. The man has clearly expressed he
has no
desire to have children. The woman agrees, and tells him she
doesn't
either. So they have a wild night of passionate sex, and
oooops...the
birth control fails.
A few weeks later she misses her period. She takes a pregnancy
test
and she sees that it is positive.
She goes to the doctor and finds out that she is indeed,
pregnant. She
tells her boyfried, and she assures him she is going to get an
abortion. But she waits a few weeks and she decides she just
can't go
through with it. She is going to keep the baby. She tells him
about
it, and he is upset.
Now, as it stands now, he has two choices.
a) pay support
or
b) go to jail if he doesn't.
Shouldn't he have the right to choose, "I want out of this
relationship
and I don't want to pay support, so I am going to leave" or "I
will do
the right thing and voluntarily take care of our child together".
No.
so you support discrimination.
This is not discrimination.
No, it's DISCRIMINATION.
Our society allows a woman a choice to walk away from parental
responsibility by allowing her to kill the fetus and doesn't allow a
man any choice other than to pay or go ot jail.
The man can have an abortion, too.
It's discrimination...all the way through. And YOU support it.
When a woman has an abortion, the father "walks away from parental
responsibility" too. You are just trying to rationalize the reason you
had a child that you stated was "unplanned."
His first born or the last baby? Both were unplanned--the first was an
unwanted child for whom he resents supporting.
Another fine example of liberal behavior. When they can't get to the
person they hate, they go for attacking the family. And furthermore,
they just make ***** up.
Nothing was "made up." You said your child was "unplanned."
So? Are you pissed because my wife didn't abort? That seems to really
bother you that someone can have a child they didn't plan to have at
that time and love that child. Or are you saying a child that wasn't
exactly planned to arrive at the exact time desired can't be loved???
And as I
have pointed out it the past, "unplanned" is a euphemism for
"unwanted."
which is absolute *****, totally. And I would challenge ANYONE to
support that absurd and rediculous statement.
(If you had "wanted" it you would have "planned" it.)
Did you tell that to Mimi, with her unplanned children? Naa, of course
not...she is a liberal ***** like yourself.
Do you even have a clue as to how rediculous you are coming across???
It must really bother the liberals in here
that I have children whom are loved and taken care of. Children who
have a mother and a father who didn't reject them, who didn't abort
them, who spends time with their children, takes an active interest in
their interest.
What a pity, people like the above liberals, have the hatred and
contempt for others like they do. They even get ***** of you
vote, and don't vote for the people THEY want you to vote for.
Sad...very very sad...
Oh well, the bright thing is...I am not like them!!!!
Yeah - you really sound "loving."
I'm not the one going around telling people they don't want their
children.
.
|
|
|
| User: "David W. Barnes" |
|
| Title: Re: Women Want to Know of Abortion Risks Beforehand, New Survey Shows |
07 Sep 2006 09:53:05 PM |
|
|
In article <1157463978.170957.8240@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
osprey <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
David W. Barnes wrote:
In article <1157451404.480869.14480@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
osprey <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
Anamika wrote:
David W. Barnes wrote:
In article <1157191198.664906.307610@e3g2000cwe.googlegroups.com>,
osprey <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
Lets say that we have a couple. The man has clearly expressed
he
has no
desire to have children. The woman agrees, and tells him she
doesn't
either. So they have a wild night of passionate sex, and
oooops...the
birth control fails.
A few weeks later she misses her period. She takes a
pregnancy
test
and she sees that it is positive.
She goes to the doctor and finds out that she is indeed,
pregnant. She
tells her boyfried, and she assures him she is going to get an
abortion. But she waits a few weeks and she decides she just
can't go
through with it. She is going to keep the baby. She tells him
about
it, and he is upset.
Now, as it stands now, he has two choices.
a) pay support
or
b) go to jail if he doesn't.
Shouldn't he have the right to choose, "I want out of this
relationship
and I don't want to pay support, so I am going to leave" or "I
will do
the right thing and voluntarily take care of our child
together".
No.
so you support discrimination.
This is not discrimination.
No, it's DISCRIMINATION.
Our society allows a woman a choice to walk away from parental
responsibility by allowing her to kill the fetus and doesn't allow a
man any choice other than to pay or go ot jail.
The man can have an abortion, too.
It's discrimination...all the way through. And YOU support it.
When a woman has an abortion, the father "walks away from parental
responsibility" too. You are just trying to rationalize the reason
you
had a child that you stated was "unplanned."
His first born or the last baby? Both were unplanned--the first was an
unwanted child for whom he resents supporting.
Another fine example of liberal behavior. When they can't get to the
person they hate, they go for attacking the family. And furthermore,
they just make ***** up.
Nothing was "made up." You said your child was "unplanned."
So?
So you said I made it up. Another lie of yours.
Are you pissed because my wife didn't abort?
I'm not pissed at all. Is that the way you think? PISSED?
That seems to really
bother you
Pissed, no - bored, yes.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "David W. Barnes" |
|
| Title: Re: Women Want to Know of Abortion Risks Beforehand, New Survey Shows |
05 Sep 2006 08:30:27 AM |
|
|
In article <1157453593.073202.103760@d34g2000cwd.googlegroups.com>,
Anamika <starchaser@inorbit.com> wrote:
osprey wrote:
Another fine example of liberal behavior.
It isn't anything you haven't disclosed already.
When they can't get to the
person they hate,
I don't hate you. And yes, I have gotten to you. That it is why you
can't directly deal with me directly and indirectly curse me in
third-party flames.
He does the same with me. He is a coward.
they go for attacking the family.
I attacked YOU as a person, a father--not your family.
He needs to lie. The truth won't support his *****.
And furthermore,
they just make ***** up.
The truth really hurts you, doesn't it?
And you can tell he knows it is the truth.
It must really bother the liberals in here
that I have children
I have two.
whom are loved and taken care of.
You're children whom you claim to love and support are "taken care of"
by somebody else, namely Tanya, perhaps Mother Heishman.
Children who
have a mother and a father who didn't reject them, who didn't abort
them, who spends time with their children, takes an active interest in
their interest.
You've spent most of your wife's, mother's, and children's time in
here.
Some kind of family man you are.
Furthermore, he supports the constant borrowing of money by the
government, which means that he is putting his children in debt.
What a pity, people like the above liberals,
I am only one liberal.
have the hatred and
contempt for others like they do.
I do not have the health, emotionality, or energy to hate you or
anybody else.
They even get ***** of you
vote,
I have only calmly and meticulously pointed out your irresponsible
voting habits.
and don't vote for the people THEY want you to vote for.
Sad...very very sad...
Where have I suggest as such?
Oh well, the bright thing is...I am not like them!!!!
Actually it's a dim reality that there's not just one like you who's
running rampantly posting retarded retorts.
You got it.
.
|
|
|
| User: "osprey" |
|
| Title: Re: Women Want to Know of Abortion Risks Beforehand, New Survey Shows |
05 Sep 2006 08:47:58 AM |
|
|
David W. Barnes wrote:
In article <1157453593.073202.103760@d34g2000cwd.googlegroups.com>,
Anamika <starchaser@inorbit.com> wrote:
osprey wrote:
Another fine example of liberal behavior.
It isn't anything you haven't disclosed already.
When they can't get to the
person they hate,
I don't hate you. And yes, I have gotten to you. That it is why you
can't directly deal with me directly and indirectly curse me in
third-party flames.
He does the same with me. He is a coward.
What did you say about suing me? Come on Barnes, tell us why you said
you would sue me but suddenly changed your mind.
they go for attacking the family.
I attacked YOU as a person, a father--not your family.
He needs to lie. The truth won't support his *****.
Show all this alledged proof to support your claims about me.
And furthermore,
they just make ***** up.
The truth really hurts you, doesn't it?
And you can tell he knows it is the truth.
It must really bother the liberals in here
that I have children
I have two.
whom are loved and taken care of.
You're children whom you claim to love and support are "taken care of"
by somebody else, namely Tanya, perhaps Mother Heishman.
Children who
have a mother and a father who didn't reject them, who didn't abort
them, who spends time with their children, takes an active interest in
their interest.
You've spent most of your wife's, mother's, and children's time in
here.
Some kind of family man you are.
Furthermore, he supports the constant borrowing of money by the
government, which means that he is putting his children in debt.
Borrowing? I work for a living and I pay my way in life. Where is the
borrowing coming from???
What a pity, people like the above liberals,
I am only one liberal.
have the hatred and
contempt for others like they do.
I do not have the health, emotionality, or energy to hate you or
anybody else.
They even get ***** of you
vote,
I have only calmly and meticulously pointed out your irresponsible
voting habits.
and don't vote for the people THEY want you to vote for.
Sad...very very sad...
Where have I suggest as such?
Oh well, the bright thing is...I am not like them!!!!
Actually it's a dim reality that there's not just one like you who's
running rampantly posting retarded retorts.
You got it.
Not even close, but then again, when were any of you actually close to
the truth???
.
|
|
|
| User: "David W. Barnes" |
|
| Title: Re: Women Want to Know of Abortion Risks Beforehand, New Survey Shows |
07 Sep 2006 09:53:06 PM |
|
|
In article <1157464078.296584.10180@e3g2000cwe.googlegroups.com>,
osprey <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
David W. Barnes wrote:
In article <1157453593.073202.103760@d34g2000cwd.googlegroups.com>,
Anamika <starchaser@inorbit.com> wrote:
osprey wrote:
Another fine example of liberal behavior.
It isn't anything you haven't disclosed already.
When they can't get to the
person they hate,
I don't hate you. And yes, I have gotten to you. That it is why you
can't directly deal with me directly and indirectly curse me in
third-party flames.
He does the same with me. He is a coward.
What did you say about suing me? Come on Barnes, tell us why you said
you would sue me but suddenly changed your mind.
I need a cause of action.
they go for attacking the family.
I attacked YOU as a person, a father--not your family.
He needs to lie. The truth won't support his *****.
Show all this alledged proof to support your claims about me.
You have indicated that you feel I am infringing on your privacy
interests, which I respect. However, you can fix that if you truly
want me to post the proof. Repeat the following:
"I, Robert Heishman, give David W. Barnes and the person who uses the
alias, "David W. Barnes," on these newsgroups, permission to reveal any
and all information about me, my family, my property, my job, and any
other information he deems necessary to provide proof of his
allegations. I forever waive any and all civil and criminal remedies
that may be available to me in any federal or state court."
Otherwise, admit that I have the proof of what I said and that you are
afraid I will actually do so, so you hide behind a claim of privacy.
Admit that what I say is true and you are now scared to have the proof
revealed.
And furthermore,
they just make ***** up.
The truth really hurts you, doesn't it?
And you can tell he knows it is the truth.
It must really bother the liberals in here
that I have children
I have two.
whom are loved and taken care of.
You're children whom you claim to love and support are "taken care of"
by somebody else, namely Tanya, perhaps Mother Heishman.
Children who
have a mother and a father who didn't reject them, who didn't abort
them, who spends time with their children, takes an active interest in
their interest.
You've spent most of your wife's, mother's, and children's time in
here.
Some kind of family man you are.
Furthermore, he supports the constant borrowing of money by the
government, which means that he is putting his children in debt.
Borrowing? I work for a living and I pay my way in life. Where is the
borrowing coming from???
What do you think is propping up the economy? The country under the
Bush White House borrows money to support its spending and later,
probably under a more responsible Democrat, taxes will have to be
raised to pay back the BORROWING. And you children will be the ones to
pay.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Attila" |
|
| Title: Re: Women Want to Know of Abortion Risks Beforehand, New Survey Shows |
02 Sep 2006 02:59:15 PM |
|
|
On 2 Sep 2006 02:59:58 -0700, "osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> in
alt.abortion with message-id
<1157191198.664906.307610@e3g2000cwe.googlegroups.com> wrote:
Attila wrote:
On 1 Sep 2006 21:33:25 -0700, "osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> in
alt.abortion with message-id
<1157171605.170644.225210@74g2000cwt.googlegroups.com> wrote:
Attila wrote:
On 1 Sep 2006 07:38:41 -0700, "osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> in
alt.abortion with message-id
<1157121521.765508.308800@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> wrote:
I guess I might be one of those you would consider a "fundie". That is
if you refer to a fundie meaning someone who simply believes in God.
So? What gives you the right to force others to live according to
your unproven religious beliefs?
Nothing gives me the right to force it on others and I DON'T force it
on others.
You were the one who said once you believe that parents teaching their
children about God, should be considered child abuse and it should be
outlawed. Now what were you saying about forcing your beliefs???
That is stopping others from forcing their beliefs. Especially on
those unable to defend themselves.
There is a difference.
Yea, you wish to have a dictatorship and I wish to allow parents the
right to raise their families how they wish.
They can't raise their families as they wish now. Can cannibalism be
taught? Bank robbery?
Did you forget you are supposed to have me killfiltered?
I understand, you got embarrassed because I killed your little
pro-freedom concept and how you are actually NOT pro-freedom. Of course
now you wish for me to ignore you.
No, you had me kill filtered for years then complained when I changed
my screen name a couple of years ago. I just wanted to make sure you
noticed. Now go bother the inmates since you are part of their
punishment.
I would hate
for you to unknowingly waste time in responding.
I too, do not support late term abortions, unless the mothers life is
truly in danger and it's the only way to save her life.
I also do not support the "choice" of abortion; however, I do support a
woman's right to choose. That just simply means I don't support
abortion, I think it's wrong; however, I don't believe in stopping
people from making a legal choice.
I like your last paragraph, I think all men should feel that way.
Let me ask you this though,
We allow a woman the right to choose to relieve herself from the
obligations and responsibilities of motherhood, by giving her the
choice to carry to term or to abort.
Life is full of both acceptance and rejection of "obligations" and
"responsibilities". What is wrong with that?
Do you think a man should have the choice to relieve himself from the
responsibilities for fatherhood, by allowing him to choose to support
her and the child or to walk away?
Totally different issue.
No it's not. It's just an issue you are not prepared to deal with.
Of course I am,
No, you're not.
I just did Doofus.
but that issue goes to the costs of raising a child,
which someone must pay for.
Hmm, haven't women been saying for years now they don't need men? So
you basically agree with many others who view men as nothing more than
a sperm bank and a walking pay check.
Nope. My comment had nothing to do with how women may or may not view
men.
Society says the parents have this
responsibility and I have no intention of voluntarily paying to raise
children through the payment of public money. If the parents do not
pay who does?
I see you ignored the actual subject of the comment. No answer?
Why am I not surprised?
Lets say that we have a couple. The man has clearly expressed he has no
desire to have children. The woman agrees, and tells him she doesn't
either. So they have a wild night of passionate sex, and oooops...the
birth control fails.
A few weeks later she misses her period. She takes a pregnancy test
and she sees that it is positive.
She goes to the doctor and finds out that she is indeed, pregnant. She
tells her boyfried, and she assures him she is going to get an
abortion. But she waits a few weeks and she decides she just can't go
through with it. She is going to keep the baby. She tells him about
it, and he is upset.
Now, as it stands now, he has two choices.
a) pay support
or
b) go to jail if he doesn | | | | | | |
