# Why Abortion And Euthanasia Should Be Legal



## Noomi (Oct 29, 2013)

This story is a few months old, but its incredibly sad. A little boy born with a defective small intestine. He had surgery, but doctors discovered that his entire small bowel had died, and as a result, he couldn't eat or drink, and there was nothing that could be done for him.
He was given high doses of morphine as he starved to death - after 13 days of life:



> On the 20th of April 2013 my sister went into labour three weeks early and my baby nephew was born at 1:30am on my daughters birthday.
> 
> One week earlier my sister began having a few contractions so she went to the hospital. When a scan was performed the doctors noticed that the babys small intestine appeared to be blocked, so my sister was transferred to John Hunter Hospital. The surgeon said baby Jailan had bowel atresia and that when he was 12 hours old he would be sent to theatre to cut out the blockage and reattach the intestines. The doctor was confident, and assured us that he had performed this surgery numerous times with high success rates.
> 
> We were upset that bub had to have surgery, but reassured that it was a relatively easy and fairly common operation.



Jailan's story: a life too short | Parent Exchange

If the condition had been discovered during the pregnancy, surely it would be kinder to abort Jailan than to give birth to him and watch him starve and die?
And surely it would be kinder for parents to have the option to euthanase their sick children, so they do not have to suffer like this?

Jailan may not have felt pain, given the morphine he was on, but his parents, and relatives had to stand by and watch him grow smaller and weaker, until finally, he died of starvation and dehydration.

I do not understand how some people consider this is a better death than a termination in the womb.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Oct 29, 2013)

You are right, they should have just killed the mother when she got pregnant.


----------



## Noomi (Oct 29, 2013)

Quantum Windbag said:


> You are right, they should have just killed the mother when she got pregnant.



Please be serious. That was a gorgeous little boy who had to die in such a dreadful way. I really want to know why some people would prefer that he starved to death as opposed to having his life ended before his suffering began?


----------



## PixieStix (Oct 29, 2013)

Dear God, 

Noomi still trying to justify abortion


----------



## Noomi (Oct 29, 2013)

What would you do in this situation, Pixie? Let the baby starve, I guess?


----------



## lakeview (Oct 29, 2013)

Noomi said:


> If the condition had been discovered during the pregnancy, surely it would be kinder to abort Jailan than to give birth to him and watch him starve and die?



I guess so but in this case the condition _wasn't_ discovered during the pregnancy and according to your OP the child seemed to be wanted by the parents. I don't think you'll be able to turn this kid into a poster child for abortion.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Oct 29, 2013)

Noomi said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > You are right, they should have just killed the mother when she got pregnant.
> ...



Yet you are trying to turn his story into a whacko thread to justify killing other babies. 

I want to point out one serious flaw with your idiotic premise, abortion is legal in Australia.


----------



## Noomi (Oct 29, 2013)

lakeview said:


> Noomi said:
> 
> 
> > If the condition had been discovered during the pregnancy, surely it would be kinder to abort Jailan than to give birth to him and watch him starve and die?
> ...



Of course not, and its not my intention to say that this child should have been aborted. My point is that a choice should be given, to either abort or to euthanase, children who are severely ill and who will die.

I don't think anyone gets that, though.


----------



## Noomi (Oct 29, 2013)

Quantum Windbag said:


> Noomi said:
> 
> 
> > Quantum Windbag said:
> ...



And it will stay legal, too.


----------



## lakeview (Oct 29, 2013)

Noomi said:


> Of course not, and its not my intention to say that this child should have been aborted. My point is that a choice should be given, to either abort or to euthanase, children who are severely ill and who will die.
> 
> I don't think anyone gets that, though.



You can count me among those who don't get it. It makes no sense to me to try to make a point by highlighting a situation in the OP that has no relevance to the point you're trying to make.


----------



## PixieStix (Oct 29, 2013)

Straw man anyone?


----------



## PixieStix (Oct 29, 2013)

Noomi said:


> What would you do in this situation, Pixie? Let the baby starve, I guess?



I certainly would not murder the baby


----------



## Drake_Roberts (Oct 29, 2013)

Just out of curiosity, but how many people on this thread are Catholic and thus disagree and trash Noomi simply because Noomi was raised with a different set of values than you? I am a Catholic and disagree with late term abortions on a fundemental basis, but am I trashing Noomi? No. Euthanasia, however, I can complete agree with. And yes, I am well aware of how hypocritical that sounds.


----------



## Noomi (Oct 29, 2013)

PixieStix said:


> Noomi said:
> 
> 
> > What would you do in this situation, Pixie? Let the baby starve, I guess?
> ...



What would you be doing by letting it starve to death, though?


----------



## Tank (Oct 29, 2013)

"it"?


----------



## lakeview (Oct 29, 2013)

Drake_Roberts said:


> Just out of curiosity, but how many people on this thread are Catholic and thus disagree and trash Noomi simply because Noomi was raised with a different set of values than you? I am a Catholic and disagree with late term abortions on a fundemental basis, but am I trashing Noomi? No. Euthanasia, however, I can complete agree with. And yes, I am well aware of how hypocritical that sounds.



There's a big difference between disagreeing and trashing. The OP is about abortion and euthanasia, neither of which are applicable in this case and I won't speak for anyone else but that's why I raised an eyebrow at this.

The OP herself admitted that abortion isn't relevant in this case and as for euthanasia the article in the OP states that the parents of the child chose to believe that the doctors were wrong and that the child would survive. We have an OP in a thread about abortion and euthanasia where the situation given in the OP has nothing to do with abortion or euthanasia and that might be why some people are disagreeing with the OP, I've seen no sign that religion has anything to do with the dissent so far.


----------



## Noomi (Oct 29, 2013)

I needed a story that would make people think about what they would do in a similar or identical situation. This is that story. I want to know what people would do if they were in the same situation, and so far, no one has answered.


----------



## syrenn (Oct 29, 2013)

Noomi said:


> This story is a few months old, but its incredibly sad. A little boy born with a defective small intestine. He had surgery, but doctors discovered that his entire small bowel had died, and as a result, he couldn't eat or drink, and there was nothing that could be done for him.
> He was given high doses of morphine as he starved to death - after 13 days of life:
> 
> 
> ...



you do realize that abortion and euthanasia are two totally different subjects?


----------



## Votto (Oct 29, 2013)

Why abortion and euthanasia should be legal?  I've got a better reason.


----------



## lakeview (Oct 29, 2013)

Noomi said:


> I needed a story that would make people think about what they would do in a similar or identical situation. This is that story. I want to know what people would do if they were in the same situation, and so far, no one has answered.



Fair enough. I would not want to abort unless a life-threatening defect were identified, then I'd be alright with it. I disagree with euthanasia and would have done what was done in the story, stuck with the palliative care. I think euthanasia is a very slippery slope and do not wish to see my nation turn into Belgium or the Netherlands.


----------



## syrenn (Oct 29, 2013)

Noomi said:


> I needed a story that would make people think about what they would do in a similar or identical situation. This is that story. I want to know what people would do if they were in the same situation, and so far, no one has answered.



do i think that defective babies should be put down... you bet.  
do i think adults should have the option of being put down upon request... you bet. 

How about you?


----------



## Noomi (Oct 29, 2013)

syrenn said:


> Noomi said:
> 
> 
> > This story is a few months old, but its incredibly sad. A little boy born with a defective small intestine. He had surgery, but doctors discovered that his entire small bowel had died, and as a result, he couldn't eat or drink, and there was nothing that could be done for him.
> ...



Of course.


----------



## syrenn (Oct 29, 2013)

Noomi said:


> syrenn said:
> 
> 
> > Noomi said:
> ...


then why are you trying to combine the issues?


----------



## Noomi (Oct 29, 2013)

syrenn said:


> Noomi said:
> 
> 
> > I needed a story that would make people think about what they would do in a similar or identical situation. This is that story. I want to know what people would do if they were in the same situation, and so far, no one has answered.
> ...



I agree with both. I would want to meet my baby, but once I had, I would want him/her to be given too much morphine so they pass away peacefully in my arms, rather than watch them die like Jailan did.

I know they loved him and adored him, but god, I couldn't have done what they did. They are incredibly brave people.


----------



## BDBoop (Oct 29, 2013)

Noomi said:


> This story is a few months old, but its incredibly sad. A little boy born with a defective small intestine. He had surgery, but doctors discovered that his entire small bowel had died, and as a result, he couldn't eat or drink, and there was nothing that could be done for him.
> He was given high doses of morphine as he starved to death - after 13 days of life:
> 
> 
> ...



Excellent thread, Noomi.

I quite agree, of course; at least in part that is because I lost my mother to Lewy Body Dementia and if my day comes as hers did, I am going to want to end my life legally.

If we do it for our pets, why not ourselves.


----------



## Noomi (Oct 29, 2013)

syrenn said:


> Noomi said:
> 
> 
> > syrenn said:
> ...



Because I can't have a separate thread with the identical story, so why not combine the two?

People are against abortion, I gave them a story to make them consider what they might do if they were in a situation like this, when a severe defect was discovered in utero.

People are against euthanasia, so I ask them what they would do if they had a sick child like this - would they want to end their life, or watch their child die a natural (yet horrible) death?


----------



## BDBoop (Oct 29, 2013)

Noomi said:


> lakeview said:
> 
> 
> > Noomi said:
> ...



I get it. But then it has been noted on previous occasions; I have an open mind.


----------



## syrenn (Oct 29, 2013)

Noomi said:


> syrenn said:
> 
> 
> > Noomi said:
> ...



so let me ask you this....

they give you the dose.... hand you the drugs.  Would YOU be willing to deliver the dose that would kill it?


----------



## Tank (Oct 29, 2013)

Noomi said:


> What would you be doing by letting it starve to death, though?


"IT", his name is Jailan


----------



## BDBoop (Oct 29, 2013)

Know how I know you're a dick?



Votto said:


> Why abortion and euthanasia should be legal?  I've got a better reason.
> 
> View attachment 28192


----------



## BDBoop (Oct 29, 2013)

syrenn said:


> Noomi said:
> 
> 
> > syrenn said:
> ...



I would. Yes. As a parent? Watching a baby suffer, and knowing that suffering will be all he knows?

Yes.


----------



## Noomi (Oct 29, 2013)

syrenn said:


> Noomi said:
> 
> 
> > syrenn said:
> ...



Yes, I would. It would be a hard decision, but when I consider the other option - letting him starve to death while I watch, the choice would be easy. It wouldn't be because I wanted him dead, it would be because I loved and adored him and couldn't bare to see him suffer.


----------



## Noomi (Oct 29, 2013)

Tank said:


> Noomi said:
> 
> 
> > What would you be doing by letting it starve to death, though?
> ...



Oops, sorry. I meant to say 'him'.


----------



## Michelle420 (Oct 29, 2013)

Noomi said:


> This story is a few months old, but its incredibly sad. A little boy born with a defective small intestine. He had surgery, but doctors discovered that his entire small bowel had died, and as a result, he couldn't eat or drink, and there was nothing that could be done for him.
> He was given high doses of morphine as he starved to death - after 13 days of life:
> 
> 
> ...



Belgium may vote to do that soon

Belgium to Vote Soon on Allowing Doctors to Euthanize Children

Belgiuim to Vote Soon on Allowing Doctors to Euthanize Children | LifeNews.com


----------



## PixieStix (Oct 29, 2013)

Noomi said:


> Tank said:
> 
> 
> > Noomi said:
> ...



oospy


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Oct 29, 2013)

Drake_Roberts said:


> Just out of curiosity, but how many people on this thread are Catholic and thus disagree and trash Noomi simply because Noomi was raised with a different set of values than you? I am a Catholic and disagree with late term abortions on a fundemental basis, but am I trashing Noomi? No. Euthanasia, however, I can complete agree with. And yes, I am well aware of how hypocritical that sounds.



I trashed her because the OP is incredibly stupid.


----------



## Noomi (Oct 29, 2013)

Quantum Windbag said:


> Drake_Roberts said:
> 
> 
> > Just out of curiosity, but how many people on this thread are Catholic and thus disagree and trash Noomi simply because Noomi was raised with a different set of values than you? I am a Catholic and disagree with late term abortions on a fundemental basis, but am I trashing Noomi? No. Euthanasia, however, I can complete agree with. And yes, I am well aware of how hypocritical that sounds.
> ...



Sometimes I think your OP's and opinions are retarded but I haven't ever been nasty about it. I have been nothing but respectful...


----------



## syrenn (Oct 29, 2013)

Noomi said:


> syrenn said:
> 
> 
> > Noomi said:
> ...



good for you. I actually did not think you would consider doing it yourself.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Oct 29, 2013)

Noomi said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > Drake_Roberts said:
> ...



So?


----------



## Tank (Oct 29, 2013)

Noomi said:


> Tank said:
> 
> 
> > Noomi said:
> ...


When you think of a baby as a "it" abortion becomes a much easier option


----------



## Noomi (Oct 29, 2013)

syrenn said:


> Noomi said:
> 
> 
> > syrenn said:
> ...



I would because I would love my child to death and want them to leave this life as calmly and peacefully as possible, with my holding them as they take their last breath. It'd kill me to say goodbye, but it'd hurt even more to stand by and wait until nature finally decided to claim them.


----------



## Noomi (Oct 29, 2013)

Quantum Windbag said:


> Noomi said:
> 
> 
> > Quantum Windbag said:
> ...



I respectfully ask the same in return.



Tank said:


> Noomi said:
> 
> 
> > Tank said:
> ...



Baby is not an 'it', he was born, and had a name.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Oct 29, 2013)

Noomi said:


> lakeview said:
> 
> 
> > Noomi said:
> ...



Exactly.


----------



## BDBoop (Oct 29, 2013)

drifter said:


> Noomi said:
> 
> 
> > This story is a few months old, but its incredibly sad. A little boy born with a defective small intestine. He had surgery, but doctors discovered that his entire small bowel had died, and as a result, he couldn't eat or drink, and there was nothing that could be done for him.
> ...



Apparently, they have a little something over in Belgium called 'empathy,' or 'compassion.'


----------



## BDBoop (Oct 29, 2013)

Noomi said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > Noomi said:
> ...



Tank? She got it. No need to hammer the point to death.


----------



## Michelle420 (Oct 29, 2013)

I hope we do not go the way of Belgium.

In my opinion a physicians job is healer.

This looks like a good book and the synopsis conveys some of my concerns.



> When his teenaged son Christopher, brain-damaged in an auto accident, developed a 106-degree fever following weeks of unconsciousness, John Campbell asked the attending physician for help. The doctor refused. Why bother? The boys life was effectively over.
> 
> Campbell refused to accept this verdict. He demanded treatment and threatened legal action. The doctor finally relented. With treatment, Christophers temperature subsided almost immediately. Soon afterwards he regained consciousness and today he is learning to walk again.
> 
> ...



[ame=http://www.amazon.com/Culture-Death-Assault-Medical-America/dp/189355449X]Culture of Death: The Assault on Medical Ethics in America: Wesley J. Smith: 9781893554498: Amazon.com: Books[/ame]



> The bill is widely supported and is expected to become law. Supporters of Belgiums proposed euthanasia law say it is necessary and compassionate, but critics say it is only the next phase in what they call a culture of death.
> 
> Euthanasia is now considered medical therapy in Belgium.
> 
> ...



Belgiuim to Vote Soon on Allowing Doctors to Euthanize Children | LifeNews.com


----------



## BDBoop (Oct 29, 2013)

Noomi said:


> syrenn said:
> 
> 
> > Noomi said:
> ...



I am really enjoying this "We'd keep the baby alive and suffering just to back our moral position on abortion" brigade.


----------



## Tank (Oct 29, 2013)

BDBoop said:


> I am really enjoying this "We'd keep the baby alive and suffering just to back our moral position on abortion" brigade.


Who is going to decide what "suffering" is?


----------



## BDBoop (Oct 29, 2013)

drifter said:


> Michel De Keukelaere, a law student and the founder of the March for Life in Brussels said, Children never choose to die. I dont believe a child under 18 who is sick and who is ill wants to die.



Really? I DO wish they'd stop committing suicide, then.


----------



## syrenn (Oct 29, 2013)

Noomi said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > Noomi said:
> ...


"it" works for me....

everything can be descried as ..... it.


----------



## Michelle420 (Oct 29, 2013)

BDBoop said:


> drifter said:
> 
> 
> > Michel De Keukelaere, a law student and the founder of the March for Life in Brussels said, Children never choose to die. I dont believe a child under 18 who is sick and who is ill wants to die.
> ...



My sister committed suicide June 10th 2013, who are you referring to?


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Oct 29, 2013)

BDBoop said:


> Noomi said:
> 
> 
> > syrenn said:
> ...



I am not enjoying the hypocrites that insist that it is a choice and while demanding that everyone agree with them.


----------



## Mr. H. (Oct 29, 2013)

Noomi said:


> What would you do in this situation, Pixie? Let the baby starve, I guess?



I've told this here before, but I'll repeat it for the sake of thread continence...

I accompanied Mrs. H. to her ultrasound when she was a few month pregnant. The attending physician was present, with blood work data in hand. He matter-of-factly informed us that our child had all the markers of being born with Down's Syndrome. 

He then advised us to go down to the coffee shop and discuss our "options". 

I could have cold-cocked the fucker. 

So there we sat, coffee in hand. I stayed silent waiting for her to make the first move. 

All she said was "you take what life gives you". (Mind you, she's a flaming Liberal Feminazi). 

I replied "yup". 

So we went home, making mental preparations for a life of endless challenges. 

Long story made longer- our daughter was born a bit premature and spent a week in the neonatal intensive care unit. But perfectly.... perfect. 

She's now a senior at one of the most prestigious arts academy high schools in the country, bound for the college of the arts of her choice. 

My wife and I had planned for the worst, and hoped for the best. And that's what we were blessed with. 

Abortion flushes our progeny down the toilet, while affording parents the convenience of their own lifestyles. 

Ours is a fuck and flush society.


----------



## BDBoop (Oct 29, 2013)

drifter said:


> BDBoop said:
> 
> 
> > drifter said:
> ...



Per my quote of your quote. "Children never choose to die." My response followed.


----------



## BDBoop (Oct 29, 2013)

Quantum Windbag said:


> BDBoop said:
> 
> 
> > Noomi said:
> ...



I don't honestly give a shit what you are or not enjoying, as long as you are not trying to make someone else's decisions for them.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Oct 29, 2013)

BDBoop said:


> drifter said:
> 
> 
> > Michel De Keukelaere, a law student and the founder of the March for Life in Brussels said, Children never choose to die. I dont believe a child under 18 who is sick and who is ill wants to die.
> ...



That is not them choosing to die, it is them taking the only option they think they have. If you really want them to stop killing themselves you need to give them real options, not fake government programs that attempt to treat them like cogs in a machine.


----------



## Noomi (Oct 29, 2013)

Tank said:


> BDBoop said:
> 
> 
> > I am really enjoying this "We'd keep the baby alive and suffering just to back our moral position on abortion" brigade.
> ...



I think starving to death is suffering. I think we should let the parents decide, myself.


----------



## BDBoop (Oct 29, 2013)

Quantum Windbag said:


> BDBoop said:
> 
> 
> > drifter said:
> ...



What a fucking crock of semantics.


----------



## BDBoop (Oct 29, 2013)

Noomi said:


> Tank said:
> 
> 
> > BDBoop said:
> ...



Agreed.


----------



## Noomi (Oct 29, 2013)

Mr. H. said:


> Noomi said:
> 
> 
> > What would you do in this situation, Pixie? Let the baby starve, I guess?
> ...



I know your story, Mr. H, you have shared it with us many times, and you have a gorgeous daughter who is a talented dancer. I have seen her photo.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Oct 29, 2013)

BDBoop said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > BDBoop said:
> ...



That would be the person that that started the thread, not me.


----------



## Tank (Oct 29, 2013)

I noticed all the people for abortion, have already been born


----------



## Lumpy 1 (Oct 29, 2013)

Noomi said:


> lakeview said:
> 
> 
> > Noomi said:
> ...



I get it and I'm reminded of a heartless liberal Democrat.


----------



## Michelle420 (Oct 29, 2013)

BDBoop said:


> drifter said:
> 
> 
> > BDBoop said:
> ...



The article also said:



> Not only do two thirds of Belgians favor the new euthanasia bill, but in a controversial poll, three quarters said it would be okay for parents to euthanize their sick children without the child&#8217;s consent.
> 
> &#8220;The child does not have the maturity to get married or to buy alcohol or to buy cigarettes if he is 14. Now we are saying that because he is suffering, he might have the possibility to ask for euthanasia,&#8221; Carine Boucher, with the European Center for Bio-ethics in Brussels, said.



A 3 year olds concept of death is not the same as a 30 yr olds.

Not only that the other link and synopsis I included addresses the concerns I have about it.

You see people have recovered even when they were told they wouldn't.

Yes people commit suicide and that is why people who are devastated by it have formed suicide prevention and also suicide support groups. 

Some people who choose to do that do so because of a hopelessness and they shouldn't have to feel that way, I don't view suicide as the answer to depression or hopelessness.

I would also request that since my sister did recently commit suicide any replies to me on that subject be addressed sensitively because for me it still hurts and is emotional.

I know you are a nice person so I don't feel we will have a problem.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Oct 29, 2013)

BDBoop said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > BDBoop said:
> ...



Ever talk to someone who jumped off the Golden Gate bridge? 



> "I don't believe anyone wants to die by suicide. What really happens is you come to a point in your mental instability where you feel you have no more options," Kevin tells Yahoo! Shine. "When I was on the bridge I was crying desperately and wanted to survive, but the voices in my head telling me to jump became louder. I firmly believe there is a big difference between wanting to die and needing to get rid of pain."
> 
> Kevin, now 32, is one of an estimated 33 survivors of suicide attempts on the Golden Gate Bridge. Now a prevention specialist and metal health advocate, he believes there's more to teen suicide prevention than just bullying awareness.
> 
> "There is no direct correlation between bullying and suicide," says Hines. "There are only people who have been bullied that die by suicide." Hines himself was bullied in grade school and he believes it contributed to his inferiority complex. "It added to my sadness and bullying needs to stop," he says. "But there are underlying issues that the media is not focusing on and people are ignoring."



Yahoo Shine - Women's Lifestyle | Healthy Living and Fashion Blogs


----------



## Tank (Oct 29, 2013)

BDBoop said:


> Noomi said:
> 
> 
> > Tank said:
> ...


What if they are born deaf and blind, or with no limbs, or addicted to drugs, or mentally handicap, where will it end?


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Oct 29, 2013)

BDBoop said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > BDBoop said:
> ...



Indeed.


----------



## Noomi (Oct 29, 2013)

Tank said:


> BDBoop said:
> 
> 
> > Noomi said:
> ...



If I was born blind, deaf, and couldn't walk or communicate in any way, I would want to die. Why live when you are not aware of your own existence?


----------



## Tank (Oct 29, 2013)

Noomi said:


> Tank said:
> 
> 
> > BDBoop said:
> ...


Once you open this can of worms where are you going to draw the line?


----------



## Noomi (Oct 29, 2013)

Tank said:


> Noomi said:
> 
> 
> > Tank said:
> ...



Should we not draw a line and let people suffer in pain until they die, or let people or their parents decide?


----------



## Tank (Oct 29, 2013)

Noomi said:


> Tank said:
> 
> 
> > Noomi said:
> ...


What if a child is just with real bad hearing and the parents decide that is "suffering"


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Oct 29, 2013)

Noomi said:


> Tank said:
> 
> 
> > BDBoop said:
> ...



How the fuck do you know what you would want in a circumstance you cannot imagine?


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Oct 29, 2013)

Noomi said:


> Tank said:
> 
> 
> > Noomi said:
> ...



Children who are fat suffer, their parents should be able to kill them.

Children with cleft plates suffer, their parents should be able to kill them.

Children who are gay suffer, their parents should be able to kill them.

See how stupid it sounds?


----------



## Gracie (Oct 29, 2013)

I agree with ya Noomi. 

Ok. Done with the thread.


----------



## Lumpy 1 (Oct 29, 2013)

Gracie said:


> I agree with ya Noomi.
> 
> Ok. Done with the thread.


----------



## Tank (Oct 29, 2013)

Some children starve because their parents can't afford to feed them


----------



## Noomi (Oct 29, 2013)

Tank said:


> Noomi said:
> 
> 
> > Tank said:
> ...



I wear hearing aids because I am partially deaf. I don't consider myself to be suffering at all - apart from not being able to get a job because no one likes someone who is deaf.

Deafness isn't a disability, you can manage just fine without great hearing. I do.


----------



## Noomi (Oct 29, 2013)

Tank said:


> Some children starve because their parents can't afford to feed them



And that is why you have government programs to assist these families.


----------



## Tank (Oct 29, 2013)

Noomi said:


> Tank said:
> 
> 
> > Some children starve because their parents can't afford to feed them
> ...


You don't get the point


----------



## Noomi (Oct 29, 2013)

Tank said:


> Noomi said:
> 
> 
> > Tank said:
> ...



What was your point, then?


----------



## Mr. H. (Oct 29, 2013)

Lumpy 1 said:


> Gracie said:
> 
> 
> > I agree with ya Noomi.
> ...



I don't agree with her. 

But she's still ok in my book. 

The WHORE


----------



## Tank (Oct 29, 2013)

Noomi said:


> Tank said:
> 
> 
> > Noomi said:
> ...


"Suffering" is all in the eye of the beholder.

Once you decide a person can be killed because another deems them to be "suffering" there will be no end.


----------



## Noomi (Oct 29, 2013)

Tank said:


> Noomi said:
> 
> 
> > Tank said:
> ...



And I can see your point, and understand it, but I think we can put provisions in place so people aren't being killed willy nilly.


----------



## Zander (Oct 29, 2013)

Noomi said:


> I needed a story that would make people think about what they would do in a similar or identical situation. This is that story. I want to know what people would do if they were in the same situation, and so far, no one has answered.



OK, here is my answer. If the defect was discovered early on, say,  during the first trimester- I'd probably get an abortion. But if it was after that......I think I would rather know my son for 13 days than to never meet or know him.  I'd rather hope for a miracle than give up hope!  

PS- I am pro-choice and pro-euthanasia


----------



## Michelle420 (Oct 29, 2013)

Noomi said:


> Tank said:
> 
> 
> > Noomi said:
> ...



The point was, if an 8 yr old has trouble hearing, perhaps gets teased at school or suffers socially, academically and wants to be euthanized because of it and the parents agree, should that be allowed?

In Belgium people have been euthanized for depression, not liking their gender or being deaf and blind.

A doctor's main job in my opinion is to heal a patient.

Parents deciding to end their child's life is inclusive of all those reasons mentioned above as they have happened already with adults deciding that option for themselves in belgium so the idea of euthanasia is not exclusively based on terminal illness suffering.


----------



## Noomi (Oct 29, 2013)

Zander said:


> Noomi said:
> 
> 
> > I needed a story that would make people think about what they would do in a similar or identical situation. This is that story. I want to know what people would do if they were in the same situation, and so far, no one has answered.
> ...



Thank you for your honest response.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Oct 29, 2013)

Tank said:


> Noomi said:
> 
> 
> > Tank said:
> ...



We get the point. 

Your argument is known as a slippery slope fallacy. 

Its also a straw man fallacy as well as a red herring. 

Consequently your argument fails.


----------



## BDBoop (Oct 29, 2013)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> Tank said:
> 
> 
> > Noomi said:
> ...



Apparently, their hope is to leave everybody with nothing. No options, no decisions, no hope.


----------



## Tank (Oct 29, 2013)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> Tank said:
> 
> 
> > Noomi said:
> ...


So where you going to draw the line?


----------



## Lumpy 1 (Oct 29, 2013)

Mr. H. said:


> Lumpy 1 said:
> 
> 
> > Gracie said:
> ...



I think Noomi is presenting a valuable and interesting thread, I disagree with her mostly but find her blunt progressive opinions are well worth the read..

but still, she's .....


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Oct 29, 2013)

BDBoop said:


> C_Clayton_Jones said:
> 
> 
> > Tank said:
> ...



Correct: no choice. 

Which is consistent for authoritarian conservatives who fear dissent and the ability of each individual to make decisions concerning private matters in accordance with his own good conscience.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Oct 30, 2013)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> BDBoop said:
> 
> 
> > C_Clayton_Jones said:
> ...



Where there is life there is choice, killing people is the "No choice" option here.


----------



## gallantwarrior (Oct 30, 2013)

Noomi said:


> lakeview said:
> 
> 
> > Noomi said:
> ...



Seems to me there was no choice.  The child would have died, regardless of the parent's choice.  Would they have chosen to abort the child if they had known his condition?  Hindsight is always 20-20.  You say abortion is legal in Australia, is euthanasia?


----------



## gallantwarrior (Oct 30, 2013)

Noomi said:


> PixieStix said:
> 
> 
> > Noomi said:
> ...



What would you do?


----------



## GWV5903 (Oct 30, 2013)

Noomi said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > Noomi said:
> ...



Sorry, but you're looking for justification, and it's clear you know it's not right...


----------



## gallantwarrior (Oct 30, 2013)

Noomi said:


> Tank said:
> 
> 
> > BDBoop said:
> ...



If you were born blind, deaf, and couldn't walk or communicate in any way, you would know nothing else and would not understand that you should die because you had none of those capabilities.  You would be unaware that any of those things were supposed to be part of your existence.  Ref: Helen Keller.


----------



## BDBoop (Oct 30, 2013)

Quantum Windbag said:


> Noomi said:
> 
> 
> > Quantum Windbag said:
> ...



Okay, fuck you.


----------



## BDBoop (Oct 30, 2013)

gallantwarrior said:


> Noomi said:
> 
> 
> > Tank said:
> ...


.


----------



## Noomi (Oct 30, 2013)

gallantwarrior said:


> Seems to me there was no choice.  The child would have died, regardless of the parent's choice.  Would they have chosen to abort the child if they had known his condition?  Hindsight is always 20-20.  You say abortion is legal in Australia, is euthanasia?



Abortion is legal in my country, yes, and while the majority (around 75%) of people support voluntary euthanasia, the government refuses to allow it.


----------



## lakeview (Oct 30, 2013)

Noomi said:


> Abortion is legal in my country, yes, and while the majority (around 75%) of people support voluntary euthanasia, the government refuses to allow it.



Ah, here it is. Just an observation on my part but I think you're going about this all wrong. If you want a clearer discussion on this then maybe you should do a thread asking why your government still won't allow euthanasia as you wish to see it even though 75% of your people want it.


----------



## Katzndogz (Oct 30, 2013)

Euthanasia has a way of maneuvering around mercy and ending up with expediency.  People accept it because they are told it's a way of giving mercy to the suffering.   Meanwhile, what it really does is murder the inconvenient.  It becomes a method of early retirement, without the necessity of visiting and doctor visits.


----------



## Luddly Neddite (Oct 30, 2013)

Noomi said:


> This story is a few months old, but its incredibly sad. A little boy born with a defective small intestine. He had surgery, but doctors discovered that his entire small bowel had died, and as a result, he couldn't eat or drink, and there was nothing that could be done for him.
> He was given high doses of morphine as he starved to death - after 13 days of life:
> 
> 
> ...



The morphine would certainly dulled the pain somewhat but hat poor baby was literally tortured to death. 

I'm surprised that some compassionate doctor didn't hurry the process along. 

I once read that Freud's doctor, "Max" killed Freud when the pain of his cancer became unbearable. I knew a woman who died of breast cancer and even at the end, her doctor didn't want her to become addicted to narcotics.


----------



## Katzndogz (Oct 30, 2013)

Most doctors don't care if a patient who is terminal becomes addicted.  Usually it's the patient that doesn't want to become an addict.

Of course we have to accept that killing a patient by starvation and dehydration is the most common form of murder in hospices across the country.  It's how Terri Schiavo was murdered.   

A woman I know just had a baby.   The placentia died leaving the infant starving in the womb.  The baby was taken ten days early.  The doctors told her to just let the infant die.  He had no chance.   He is now a VERY healthy, alert five month old.  For being premature, he's a big bigger than most five month olds.


----------



## Luddly Neddite (Oct 30, 2013)

Noomi said:


> Tank said:
> 
> 
> > What if they are born deaf and blind, or with no limbs, or addicted to drugs, or mentally handicap, where will it end?
> ...




Read Johnny Got His Gun by Dalton Trumbo.

The situation is different, for sure, but its a very powerful book.


----------



## Luddly Neddite (Oct 30, 2013)

PixieStix said:


> Dear God,
> 
> Noomi still trying to justify abortion



So funny to invoke "god" while  campaigning for cruelty.


----------



## Katzndogz (Oct 30, 2013)

If doctors and "voters" got to decide.

In 1963, Hawking contracted motor neurone disease and was given two years to live. Yet he went on to Cambridge to become a brilliant researcher and Professorial Fellow at Gonville and Caius College. From 1979 to 2009 he held the post of Lucasian Professor at Cambridge, the chair held by Isaac Newton in 1663. Professor Hawking has over a dozen honorary degrees and was awarded the CBE in 1982. He is a fellow of the Royal Society and a Member of the US National Academy of Science. Stephen Hawking is regarded as one of the most brilliant theoretical physicists since Einstein.

He can't walk, can't speak, can't eat on his own.  When he was given only two years to live, and that with a deteriorating body, should he have been euthanized and saved all that money?

Should people with cerebral palsy be put to death?  It's expensive.

Ask Christy Brown if he should have died.


----------



## Luddly Neddite (Oct 30, 2013)

I had a litter of three kittens I was fostering. They looked good, fat and fluffy but one morning, I found one dead. Later that day, another one dead. Then the third became lethargic and I realized he was constipated. Nothing I did helped so I took him to the vet the next day. Radiograph showed his rectum had no opening out of the body. Of course, we put him down. 

How about you so-called "pro-lifers" move this thread to "Pets" and make it about a puppy or kitten that the owner gave pain killers to and then sat around waiting for the animal to finally die?

How many of you would be in favor that?

Who would even consider doing to a dog or cat what we do every day to people?

People Who Call Themselves "Pro-Life" Are Lying, Here Are 10 More Accurate Descriptions -


----------



## Luddly Neddite (Oct 30, 2013)

Tank said:


> Noomi said:
> 
> 
> > Tank said:
> ...



Obviously, you've never starved to death and have no clue the agony that baby suffered. 

More to the point, you just don't care. 

Neither does katzen who apparently believes all aborted fetuses and children purposely starved to death would have been brilliant.


----------



## Mr Natural (Oct 30, 2013)

PixieStix said:


> Dear God,
> 
> Noomi still trying to justify abortion



I'd say what she described is a pretty good justification.


----------



## earlycuyler (Oct 30, 2013)

Noomi said:


> This story is a few months old, but its incredibly sad. A little boy born with a defective small intestine. He had surgery, but doctors discovered that his entire small bowel had died, and as a result, he couldn't eat or drink, and there was nothing that could be done for him.
> He was given high doses of morphine as he starved to death - after 13 days of life:
> 
> 
> ...



Um, which was the abortion ? Both are cases for killing the patients not abortions. In cas you don't know, free abortions are 100% avalible in most states in this country. So then what's your point ? If the parents could have found out about this when the child was in the womb they are covered. As for adults, if I'm ever in a condition everyone knows what they are supposed to do, and that if they don't, I will. Either way, its really a non isseue.

Baby Mira doing well after rare in-utero heart surgery procedure led by Holland native

http://www.mlive.com/news/grand-rapids/index.ssf/2009/03/baby_mira_doing_well_after_rar.html



> Carrier II | The Grand Rapids PressIn the glow of light from an echocardiogram monitor, 6-week-old Mira Larrison sleeps while she is hooked up to an EKG machine to check the progress on her young heart at University of Michigan's Mott Children's Hospital.
> Story summary: Doctors at the University of Michigan's Mott Children's hospital performed surgery on a fetus with hypoplastic left heart syndrome (HLHS) while the baby was still in her mother's womb. The successful operation, the first in Michigan, was done by a pediatric cardiologist from Holland.
> 
> Something was wrong with Mira Larrison's heart.
> ...


----------



## earlycuyler (Oct 30, 2013)

Noomi said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > You are right, they should have just killed the mother when she got pregnant.
> ...



Wanna talk about dieing in a dreadfull fashion ? If it were me and my option were morphene OD and what's depicted in the vedio, I'll take the drugs pleas.

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=7HCRooaUhgU&desktop_uri=/watch?v=7HCRooaUhgU

For to long to many here only argure the talking points for reps, but none will champion the procedure.


----------



## Stephanie (Oct 30, 2013)

PixieStix said:


> Dear God,
> 
> Noomi still trying to justify abortion



no kidding, but don't talk about fur and animals
she'll have a cow
my gawd what happened to our society?


----------



## Luddly Neddite (Oct 30, 2013)

Stephanie said:


> PixieStix said:
> 
> 
> > Dear God,
> ...



Good question.

My bet is that you would put down a suffering puppy or kitten but you demand that this baby suffer. 

You so-called "pro-lifers" are anything but.


----------



## earlycuyler (Oct 30, 2013)

Luddly Neddite said:


> Stephanie said:
> 
> 
> > PixieStix said:
> ...



Right. They should stick a probe in its brain and scrambel them then chuck its carcus in the trash with the rest of the medical waist right ?


----------



## PixieStix (Oct 30, 2013)

earlycuyler said:


> Noomi said:
> 
> 
> > Quantum Windbag said:
> ...




They do not want the facts.  Millions of lives have been sacrificed on the altar of convenience

Our nation sanctions the shedding of innocent blood. And yet will spend millions of dollars on the defense of a brutal murderer, all in the guise of justice. He/she has rights that doe v bolton took from these millions of babies.


----------



## Luddly Neddite (Oct 30, 2013)

We have laws against torturing animals and laws forcing the torture of babies. 

And the nutters are good with that.


----------



## Stephanie (Oct 30, 2013)

Luddly Neddite said:


> Stephanie said:
> 
> 
> > PixieStix said:
> ...



My bet is you are a hateful nut case
damn sick and twisted human being


----------



## earlycuyler (Oct 30, 2013)

PixieStix said:


> earlycuyler said:
> 
> 
> > Noomi said:
> ...



If they spent as much time educating on the procedure as they did on how to use a diaphram I doubt abortion would be so populer. May ap Saundra Fluke could adress that.


----------



## Luddly Neddite (Oct 30, 2013)

Luddly Neddite said:


> We have laws against torturing animals and laws forcing the torture of babies.
> 
> And the nutters are good with that.



^^And, still, they pretend this is not true.^^


----------



## thanatos144 (Oct 30, 2013)

Progressives are in love with killing defenseless innocent people.


----------



## BDBoop (Oct 30, 2013)

earlycuyler said:


> Luddly Neddite said:
> 
> 
> > Stephanie said:
> ...



Yeah, bout that.

Do you have any idea how seldom that actually happens, and why it happens when it does? No. You don't. Now kindly stop showing your ass. It needs a shower, and you're stenching up the place.

We already have Pixie for that.


----------



## PixieStix (Oct 30, 2013)

BDBoop said:


> earlycuyler said:
> 
> 
> > Luddly Neddite said:
> ...



Stop pretending to being such a nice person, because you and I both know that you are a fake


----------



## bianco (Oct 30, 2013)

PixieStix said:


> Dear God,
> 
> Noomi still trying to justify abortion



In this case she has a point.


----------



## earlycuyler (Oct 30, 2013)

BDBoop said:


> earlycuyler said:
> 
> 
> > Luddly Neddite said:
> ...



Even without thhe probe, its not a kind process. In the end something with a beating heart, a heart sergons deems worthy of doing surgery on gets killed . Call it medical waste as JoeB and his gal new me do, but inthe end its killing. At least be adult enough to present the process as they are done and defend that.


----------



## Luddly Neddite (Oct 30, 2013)

thanatos144 said:


> Progressives are in love with killing defenseless innocent people.



So, you're also in favor of starving this baby to death. 

This whole thread is just more proof that you pro-lifers hate children.


----------



## earlycuyler (Oct 30, 2013)

Luddly Neddite said:


> thanatos144 said:
> 
> 
> > Progressives are in love with killing defenseless innocent people.
> ...



So then, how would an abortion have helped anyone in the quoted article ? As it was, it sounds like they maxed the kids morphine dose. What does abortion have to do with any of it at all ?


----------



## Spoonman (Oct 30, 2013)

Luddly Neddite said:


> Stephanie said:
> 
> 
> > PixieStix said:
> ...



so does that mean we should take out all the homeless and ill?  why not wipe out everyone on welfare?  you keep telling us how terrible their lives are


----------



## Luddly Neddite (Oct 30, 2013)

earlycuyler said:


> Luddly Neddite said:
> 
> 
> > thanatos144 said:
> ...



The parents should have the option of saving their beloved baby from the horrible death of starvation. 

No, "they" did not "max out" the morphine dose. If they had, the suffering baby would have quietly gone to sleep and not awakened.


----------



## Luddly Neddite (Oct 30, 2013)

Stephanie said:


> Luddly Neddite said:
> 
> 
> > Stephanie said:
> ...



So typical of you to hide behind name calling. 

Why don't you just answer the question? 

Several others have implied that they have no  objection with starving a baby to death. They are as chicken shit as you are about it.


----------



## Luddly Neddite (Oct 30, 2013)

Spoonman said:


> Luddly Neddite said:
> 
> 
> > Stephanie said:
> ...



Another coward, trying desperately to change the subject. Did you read the title of the thread? Go ahead and keep changing the subject but I'm staying on topic. If you wish to discuss your question, start a thread. 

Yes, I do believe that adults should have to option of ending their own lives. YOU should have that option because its YOUR body, YOUR life. 

If YOU want to end your life, you should have the option of going to a doctor and asking for help to to just that.


----------



## Luddly Neddite (Oct 30, 2013)

Another question the nutters always run away from ...

How come it was okay for the Santorums to abort their baby?

You all just adored them during the Clown Car Cavalcade. And, you worshiped him when he put a dead baby in a bag and took it home. 

Just more hypocrisy from the usual suspects.


----------



## earlycuyler (Oct 30, 2013)

Luddly Neddite said:


> earlycuyler said:
> 
> 
> > Luddly Neddite said:
> ...



Ok, so then abortionnhas mo bering on this child at all, so we are talking about a mercy killing then. If that's the case I am all for it. As for mega doseing morphene, I bet they did. They made my Father inlaw (quite comfortable) after his stroke. He wanted that, and I supported hin 1000%. I support it for me, and any other adult who feels they have a right to leave on their own terms with their dignity intact. As for the rest, don't see how an abortoin has any bering with this childs story sad as it is.


----------



## bianco (Oct 30, 2013)

Don't want to become pregnant with unwanted babies?
Simple solution...don't have sex.

There's a new style chastity belt out.
Saw a young woman in the mall wearing one, ...pretty coloured carbon fibre type...on the outside of her jeans/pants. 

If the padlock must be undone, with the wearer choosing to play the baby lottery game, then a whole range of precautions must be taken, including the 'morning after' pill.


The first thing that should happen is that 'abortion as contraception' should be abolished.


----------



## tinydancer (Oct 30, 2013)

I read the whole article. Very touching.

The OP wishes for euthanasia. The sister who told Jailan's story was torn over this situation as well anyone would be.

But the family including the sister loved every minute they had with precious little Jailan and were grateful for this time. 

So the OP would prefer abortion and euthanasia. Not these souls. Let's keep this very clear. 

Here is the heart of the story:

* &#8220;During the time he spent with us he was surrounded by absolute love.

 We made sure he had more than just days in the hospital and he got to experience the fresh, cool air that descended upon the evenings, the warmth and brightness of the sun at the family picnic he was taken to, walks in the pram, a drive in the car that rhythmically rocked him to sleep, and the clear black night sky filled with brightly shining stars that looked down on him.

&#8220;My sister and her partner got to have some beautiful memories of their son. People we had never meet were even offering their services to the family.

 A kind photographer offered a free shoot with Jailan when she heard the sad news, and we&#8217;re so grateful for the photos she took, which captured Jailan just as he was: perfect.

&#8220;Jailan was so strong and fought all the way. After 13 days of no food and 11 days of no fluid he passed away with all of us by his side. Words will never describe the love we all feel for Jailan, and we miss him every minute of every day.

 He was in our lives for such a short time but made a huge impact and we feel blessed to have had him in our lives.&#8221;*








http://parenting.kidspot.com.au/jai...&utm_campaign=obclick =obnetwork#.UnBi8FNQgek


----------



## tinydancer (Oct 30, 2013)

Luddly Neddite said:


> earlycuyler said:
> 
> 
> > Luddly Neddite said:
> ...



Jailan didn't suffer. The medical staff are professionals who care deeply about making sure that this baby and all babies don't suffer.

From the article:

*  She told us that when it comes to easing the pain of a very young baby  the medical staff are experienced at ensuring the child doesnt suffer needlessly.

We look at the signs that a baby will show  crying, discomfort, irritability  and you go from there. 

We believe all children should be pain-free and we can manage that very well to ensure pain is alleviated.*

Jailan's story: a life too short | Parent Exchange


----------



## earlycuyler (Oct 30, 2013)

tinydancer said:


> Luddly Neddite said:
> 
> 
> > earlycuyler said:
> ...



The thread title is "why abortion euthenasia shoul be legal" . I understand the euthenasia part. I even agree with it. What fail to see is how abortion has anythig to do with it at all, even though the OP seems to thinkit would.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Oct 30, 2013)

Noomi said:


> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> > Seems to me there was no choice.  The child would have died, regardless of the parent's choice.  Would they have chosen to abort the child if they had known his condition?  Hindsight is always 20-20.  You say abortion is legal in Australia, is euthanasia?
> ...



Government sanctioned death is always wrong. If parents want to kill their child because they honestly believe that it is the best thing, they should be willing to pay the face the music and argue they did the right thing in front of a jury.


----------



## koshergrl (Oct 30, 2013)

Noomi is all about killing all the people who make her uncomfortable.


----------



## koshergrl (Oct 30, 2013)

PS..never, in the history of mankind, has death been a reasonable method of eliminating suffering.

Never.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Oct 30, 2013)

Luddly Neddite said:


> I had a litter of three kittens I was fostering. They looked good, fat and fluffy but one morning, I found one dead. Later that day, another one dead. Then the third became lethargic and I realized he was constipated. Nothing I did helped so I took him to the vet the next day. Radiograph showed his rectum had no opening out of the body. Of course, we put him down.
> 
> How about you so-called "pro-lifers" move this thread to "Pets" and make it about a puppy or kitten that the owner gave pain killers to and then sat around waiting for the animal to finally die?
> 
> ...



If we did you would try to argue that the fucking government should force people to kill defective pets. My problem is not with mercy killing, it is with the idea that it should be legal to kill a human being just because a bunch of idiots think it is easier than the alternative.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Oct 30, 2013)

Luddly Neddite said:


> Tank said:
> 
> 
> > Noomi said:
> ...



I am positive you never starved to death either.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Oct 30, 2013)

Luddly Neddite said:


> We have laws against torturing animals and laws forcing the torture of babies.
> 
> And the nutters are good with that.



We have laws that force people to torture babies? Is that the best you got?


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Oct 30, 2013)

bianco said:


> PixieStix said:
> 
> 
> > Dear God,
> ...



Unless her point is that the parents should have been forced to abort the baby against their personal choice not to, she really doesn't.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Oct 30, 2013)

Luddly Neddite said:


> thanatos144 said:
> 
> 
> > Progressives are in love with killing defenseless innocent people.
> ...



I am in favor of it being *none of your fucking business.
*


----------



## earlycuyler (Oct 30, 2013)

Quantum Windbag said:


> Noomi said:
> 
> 
> > gallantwarrior said:
> ...



Well, they would be subject to the law. Murder is against the law. In this case, how is it right that this kid with no chance of survival should be forced to be in pain ? If it were me (thank you, thank you God) it never was, and God willing never will be, but had it been, I would gladly face the music and go head and end it. Its what I expect to be done for me if I am suffering on my way out, and I have made it quite clear to my family that those are my wishes, and it they go ignored, I will do it my self and be quite messy about it.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Oct 30, 2013)

Luddly Neddite said:


> earlycuyler said:
> 
> 
> > Luddly Neddite said:
> ...



Hey, asshole, they did have the choice. They chose to have the baby.

In other words, you, and Noomi, want to take the choice away from them.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Oct 30, 2013)

Luddly Neddite said:


> Another question the nutters always run away from ...
> 
> How come it was okay for the Santorums to abort their baby?
> 
> ...



In my opinion, it wasn't. Unfortunately, for you, you are the one that says he wants the government to leave people alone regarding abortion, yet get all sanctimonious when people choose to have their kids.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Oct 30, 2013)

earlycuyler said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > Noomi said:
> ...



Personal choice is one thing, governments killing people is another. I oppose all state sanctioned death, even the death penalty.


----------



## koshergrl (Oct 30, 2013)

earlycuyler said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > Noomi said:
> ...


 
He isn't being forced to be in pain. He was born with a condition that causes pain. It's nobody's fault. And when things like this happen, it still is not our job to say "that kid is suffering too much, KILL it!" Because everybody has different ideas of how much is too much.

The fact is, life can be quite painful. People all around us are dying slow painful deaths. That doesn't mean we should off them all. I don't know when people got it into their heads that every person has a *right* to live a completely pain-free life, devoid of all conflict and disappointment.

You don't have that right. The baby didn't have that right. NOBODY has that right. Life holds great joy, and great suffering. Through suffering, we learn, and one of the things we learn is that we should APPRECIATE life, and APPRECIATE the value of the most inconsequential things....and to APPRECIATE the capacity humans have to bear pain and adversity, to flower despite it, and to OVERCOME.

Starvation is by no means the worst death there is. I would prefer a long death via starvation to a quick death via dope. Call me crazy. But that's my choice.

And nobody has the right to make it for me. Just as nobody has the right to make the choice for another human. Regardless of how incapacitated they are.


----------



## earlycuyler (Oct 30, 2013)

Quantum Windbag said:


> earlycuyler said:
> 
> 
> > Quantum Windbag said:
> ...



Me to. Murder as punishment for murder don't sound like a good idea to me either. And let's face it, it ain't helping. And no, there should be no requirement to kill the terminally I'll. But it should be legal for family to make this decision with their Dr.'s.


----------



## earlycuyler (Oct 30, 2013)

koshergrl said:


> earlycuyler said:
> 
> 
> > Quantum Windbag said:
> ...



This is why one needss to make their wishes known.


----------



## koshergrl (Oct 30, 2013)

Children don't have that authority or ability.

Nobody has the right to end the life of an innocent. For any reason.


----------



## koshergrl (Oct 30, 2013)

I so don't get the mindset of a group of people who expect us to write "Please don't kill me if I am unable to tell you not to" to keep from being killed.


----------



## Luddly Neddite (Oct 30, 2013)

Quantum Windbag said:


> Luddly Neddite said:
> 
> 
> > thanatos144 said:
> ...



I could not agree more. Your choices are none of my business. Just as other women's choices are 

*none of your fucking business.
*​


----------



## earlycuyler (Oct 30, 2013)

koshergrl said:


> I so don't get the mindset of a group of people who expect us to write "Please don't kill me if I am unable to tell you not to" to keep from being killed.



No one is saying that.


----------



## Luddly Neddite (Oct 30, 2013)

koshergrl said:


> earlycuyler said:
> 
> 
> > Quantum Windbag said:
> ...



As for the dosage of morphine given to the starving baby - if enough were given to actually mask the horrendous pain of starvation, the baby would stop breathing.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Oct 30, 2013)

Luddly Neddite said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > Luddly Neddite said:
> ...



You are the one that is complaining about the choice this family made, not me.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Oct 30, 2013)

Luddly Neddite said:


> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> > earlycuyler said:
> ...



What the fuck are you talking about? 

Starvation is Not Painful, Experts Say - Health News - redOrbit


----------



## tinydancer (Oct 30, 2013)

Luddly Neddite said:


> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> > earlycuyler said:
> ...



These are medical professionals administering the morphine you fool. Not Marquis de Sade wannabes.

And the family have treasured memories of their whole time with Jailan.

From the story.

* During the time he spent with us he was surrounded by absolute love. We made sure he had more than just days in the hospital and he got to experience the fresh, cool air that descended upon the evenings, the warmth and brightness of the sun at the family picnic he was taken to, walks in the pram, a drive in the car that rhythmically rocked him to sleep, and the clear black night sky filled with brightly shining stars that looked down on him.*

He was not in pain. The medical personnel made sure of it. And he was dearly loved for the few short days of his life. 







* Jailan's story: a life too short | Parent Exchange*


----------



## Luddly Neddite (Oct 30, 2013)

Quantum Windbag said:


> Luddly Neddite said:
> 
> 
> > Quantum Windbag said:
> ...



Not quite.

I've been saying they should have the choice to either end the baby's suffering or abort the fetus. 

YOU have been doing the usual tired whine about wanting take basic rights away from women. 

But, to be clear, I could not stand to starve a baby to death.  I just could not do that. 

Further, it is sickening to me that some of you seem to think that's just a damn dandy thing to do. There is no end to what rw's are willing to do. And, its sick.


----------



## Luddly Neddite (Oct 30, 2013)

Quantum Windbag said:


> Luddly Neddite said:
> 
> 
> > koshergrl said:
> ...



Thanks for this. 

Why did they give morphine then?

I still could not starve my baby to death. No, I can't say what I would do instead but i do know I could not stand that.

In researching, I read this. Very touching. 

Christina Symanski, 24, starved herself to death after she was paralysed so boyfriend could move on | Mail Online


----------



## Noomi (Oct 30, 2013)

Quantum Windbag said:


> Children who are fat suffer, their parents should be able to kill them.
> 
> Children with cleft plates suffer, their parents should be able to kill them.
> 
> ...



Why are the children fat? Its not the kids fault, but the parents.
Kids are born with cleft palates but that can be fixed with surgery. Its not suffering.
Kids who are gay suffer because of ignorance and bigotry.

Its hardly the same thing.


----------



## Noomi (Oct 30, 2013)

The baby wouldn't have felt any pain when he starved to death because of the pain relief he had. Just like Terri Schivio didn't suffer in pain when she died. But starvation is still a pretty horrible way to leave this earth.


----------



## Luddly Neddite (Oct 30, 2013)

tinydancer said:


> Luddly Neddite said:
> 
> 
> > koshergrl said:
> ...



How about you educate your self on the side effects of morphine on the lungs of a 13 day old infant. 

Or don't.


----------



## Noomi (Oct 30, 2013)

koshergrl said:


> Children don't have that authority or ability.
> 
> Nobody has the right to end the life of an innocent. For any reason.



Why are we allowed to let people live in pain until they die, but if we allowed that to happen to an animal, we'd be hauled before a judge?

I love animals, but why don't we, as people - who can make our own decisions - have the right to decide when we live and when we die?


----------



## earlycuyler (Oct 30, 2013)

Noomi said:


> The baby wouldn't have felt any pain when he starved to death because of the pain relief he had. Just like Terri Schivio didn't suffer in pain when she died. But starvation is still a pretty horrible way to leave this earth.



Bullshit. Schivo died of starvation and dehydration. A hot shot of morphine would.have been kind.


----------



## Noomi (Oct 30, 2013)

earlycuyler said:


> Noomi said:
> 
> 
> > The baby wouldn't have felt any pain when he starved to death because of the pain relief he had. Just like Terri Schivio didn't suffer in pain when she died. But starvation is still a pretty horrible way to leave this earth.
> ...



She died the same way Jailan did - but her brain was mush, and prevented her from being aware of anything going on around her. That is the difference.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Oct 30, 2013)

Luddly Neddite said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > Luddly Neddite said:
> ...



And they chose to keep the child alive, yet you are in here whinging about the child suffering, even though it didn't.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Oct 30, 2013)

Luddly Neddite said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > Luddly Neddite said:
> ...



Because the boy had a necrotic bowel? I am not sure, but that sounds painful to me.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Oct 30, 2013)

Noomi said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > Children who are fat suffer, their parents should be able to kill them.
> ...



It is just as stupid.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Oct 30, 2013)

Noomi said:


> The baby wouldn't have felt any pain when he starved to death because of the pain relief he had. Just like Terri Schivio didn't suffer in pain when she died. But starvation is still a pretty horrible way to leave this earth.



It really isn't that bad, you should read the article I posted.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Oct 30, 2013)

Noomi said:


> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> > Children don't have that authority or ability.
> ...



No one has ever been hauled before a judge for not killing their pet.


----------



## Noomi (Oct 30, 2013)

Quantum Windbag said:


> Noomi said:
> 
> 
> > The baby wouldn't have felt any pain when he starved to death because of the pain relief he had. Just like Terri Schivio didn't suffer in pain when she died. But starvation is still a pretty horrible way to leave this earth.
> ...



I never said it was bad, just that it would be a horrible way to go.


----------



## Noomi (Oct 30, 2013)

Quantum Windbag said:


> Noomi said:
> 
> 
> > koshergrl said:
> ...



If they refuse to treat the animal, and they are found it, its animal cruelty.


----------



## earlycuyler (Oct 30, 2013)

Noomi said:


> earlycuyler said:
> 
> 
> > Noomi said:
> ...



Sorry, but you are wrong, but feel free to tell your self what you need to benok with it. But the facts are, she died of being starved of nutrients due to removel of her feeding tube.its a fact.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Oct 30, 2013)

Noomi said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > Noomi said:
> ...



No it isn't. Animal cruelty is mistreating an animal, or forcing a cat to be a vegan. The latter, by the way, is not illegal, even though it should be.


----------



## Noomi (Oct 30, 2013)

earlycuyler said:


> Noomi said:
> 
> 
> > earlycuyler said:
> ...



I never said she didn't die of starvation, I just said she didn't feel any pain from it.


----------



## Noomi (Oct 30, 2013)

Quantum Windbag said:


> Noomi said:
> 
> 
> > Quantum Windbag said:
> ...



Refusing to take a suffering animal to a vet (say the animal has a broken leg) is animal cruelty. The animal is in pain and it is suffering.

I agree that forcing a cat to follow a vegan diet is wrong, and completely retarded, too.


----------



## Katzndogz (Oct 30, 2013)

Seems like the death merchants resent this family's loving memories of the child.


----------



## earlycuyler (Oct 30, 2013)

Noomi said:


> earlycuyler said:
> 
> 
> > Noomi said:
> ...



You mean she did not feel any pain after she was dead ? On what do you base this opinion ? See, even her doctors say diffrent. A morphine hot shot would have been they way to go. No one deserves to die of starvation.


----------



## Luddly Neddite (Oct 30, 2013)

Quantum Windbag said:


> Luddly Neddite said:
> 
> 
> > Quantum Windbag said:
> ...



I don't really mind that your posts are mostly lies because that's what you do. You're not able to do anything else. 

But, since you consider this CHILD an *"IT"*, you really don't have any right to criticize anyone. 

And, how many times has that spelling been corrected?

When are you going start spelling it correctly?

Or, perhaps you could just explain how one "whings".


----------



## Katzndogz (Oct 30, 2013)

Noomi said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > Noomi said:
> ...



Actually no it is not animal cruelty to refuse to take an animal with a broken leg to the vet unless you broke the animal's leg.


----------



## Gracie (Oct 30, 2013)

Oy. This is such a painful subject.
With that said....I would have done what was best for the child...not what was best for me...or worried what others would think of me due to my choice. I would not let an animal suffer pain any more than I would a baby. If I knew in advance my child was going to be born with a very painful and unoperable disease..it would not be born. Period. And to hell with what anyone thinks of that decision.

Going back to animals....I had a tenant when I was managing apartments, and she had a dog that HOWLED from pain. She was very old, could barely walk, only ate small bites of cat food from me when I went over to try to soothe her. Her owner couldn't/wouldn't put her down. Refused. SHE was at work. SHE didn't have to hear the howling all day. Finally I had enough. I told her if she didn't take that dog to the vet and have her put down to finally find some peace, I would do it myself and she can go fuck herself while suing me. And I meant it. She knew I meant it, and took her the next day to the vet to do it. She never spoke to me again, paid the rent via envelope, and moved a few weeks later. I was glad to see her go. Talk about a selfish bitch.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Oct 30, 2013)

Noomi said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > Noomi said:
> ...



Not if you can treat it yourself.


----------



## Noomi (Oct 30, 2013)

Katzndogz said:


> Noomi said:
> 
> 
> > Quantum Windbag said:
> ...



What kind of stupid laws do you have over there?


----------



## Noomi (Oct 30, 2013)

Quantum Windbag said:


> Noomi said:
> 
> 
> > Quantum Windbag said:
> ...



No one can treat a broken leg, you risk causing even more pain, and the bones may not fuse properly, making the animal limp.


----------



## Gracie (Oct 30, 2013)

In other words...she didn't want to be alone. She wanted that dog with her, pain or not. SELFISH. That bitch can rot for all I care. And I hope someone shows her more mercy than she did that dog.


----------



## Gracie (Oct 30, 2013)

Hogwash. I worked at a pet grooming service. Some rich bitch got a dog that was dirty, matted and had a broken leg. She wanted the dog cleaned up before taking it to the vet, so this dog was crying, held up with a chain around its neck so it could be groomed, then thrown in the closet with heat and fans to dry its fur. I didn't know about it until I heard the howls from the "drying" closet. I called the ASPCA immediately...and the sheriff. Sheriff got there first...and pulled that dog out of that cage right away, and took it to the vet. They shut the grooming place down and I flipped the whole crew off as I walked out with the sheriff. The owner was fined for animal cruelty along with the staff. One month later...the business closed.

So yes..it IS against the law not to help an animal in distress.


----------



## Noomi (Oct 30, 2013)

Gracie said:


> Going back to animals....I had a tenant when I was managing apartments, and she had a dog that HOWLED from pain. She was very old, could barely walk, only ate small bites of cat food from me when I went over to try to soothe her. Her owner couldn't/wouldn't put her down. Refused. SHE was at work. SHE didn't have to hear the howling all day. Finally I had enough. I told her if she didn't take that dog to the vet and have her put down to finally find some peace, I would do it myself and she can go fuck herself while suing me. And I meant it. She knew I meant it, and took her the next day to the vet to do it. She never spoke to me again, paid the rent via envelope, and moved a few weeks later. I was glad to see her go. Talk about a selfish bitch.



My neighbors had an old dog named Sally, who was chained up all day and night. Never got any exercise at all. Sally developed a massive tumor on her lower belly, around her nipples. It grew to the size of a half watermelon, and she had to walk with her paws spread because it wobbled and irritated her. She had to sleep on her side because she couldn't even sit down, the tumor was in the way.

Her owners didn't take her to a vet, couldn't be bothered. They reckoned she wasn't in pain, but sometimes a dog won't whimper when they are hurting. Sally had been ignored for so many years she probably didn't think there was any point to whining.

Eventually, my neighbor, a farmer, took her out the back paddock and shot her in the head. He missed the first time, and had to take a second shot at her. Then he threw her body into the back of his car and drove out to a disuse mine shaft and tossed her in. That was it. The family pet of more than ten years, neglected, and shot in the head because he was too selfish to take her to a vet.


----------



## Noomi (Oct 30, 2013)

Gracie said:


> Hogwash. I worked at a pet grooming service. Some rich bitch got a dog that was dirty, matted and had a broken leg. She wanted the dog cleaned up before taking it to the vet, so this dog was crying, held up with a chain around its neck so it could be groomed, then thrown in the closet with heat and fans to dry its fur. I didn't know about it until I heard the howls from the "drying" closet. I called the ASPCA immediately...and the sheriff. Sheriff got there first...and pulled that dog out of that cage right away, and took it to the vet. They shut the grooming place down and I flipped the whole crew off as I walked out with the sheriff. The owner was fined for animal cruelty along with the staff. One month later...the business closed.
> 
> So yes..it IS against the law not to help an animal in distress.



Good for you, Gracie. I stopped working at the RSPCA because I hated the way the animals were treated there.


----------



## Gracie (Oct 30, 2013)

I am done with this thread. It is just too fucking depressing. And I don't like being depressed.

Sorry, Noomi.


----------



## Noomi (Oct 30, 2013)

Gracie said:


> I am done with this thread. It is just too fucking depressing. And I don't like being depressed.
> 
> Sorry, Noomi.



That's fine, Gracie.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Oct 30, 2013)

Luddly Neddite said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > Luddly Neddite said:
> ...



I do not consider the child anything but a child. It is a third person, singular, oblique pronoun.

The word is whinge.

Where do I send the bill for the English lesson?


----------



## Gracie (Oct 30, 2013)

But before I go....

Solomon Makes a Difficult Decision



> 16 One day two women[a] came to King Solomon, 17 and one of them said:
> 
> Your Majesty, this woman and I live in the same house. Not long ago my baby was born at home, 18 and three days later her baby was born. Nobody else was there with us.
> 
> ...



Decent people with mercy SHOW mercy without thinking about THEMSELVES. This is one such story.

Toodles.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Oct 30, 2013)

Noomi said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > Noomi said:
> ...



Vets treat broken legs all the time.


----------



## earlycuyler (Oct 30, 2013)

What don't understand is why so many find death so terrible. For me, it just is. I see nothing wrong with hastening death for a suffering person or thing. Just as long as its what they want.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Oct 30, 2013)

Gracie said:


> Hogwash. I worked at a pet grooming service. Some rich bitch got a dog that was dirty, matted and had a broken leg. She wanted the dog cleaned up before taking it to the vet, so this dog was crying, held up with a chain around its neck so it could be groomed, then thrown in the closet with heat and fans to dry its fur. I didn't know about it until I heard the howls from the "drying" closet. I called the ASPCA immediately...and the sheriff. Sheriff got there first...and pulled that dog out of that cage right away, and took it to the vet. They shut the grooming place down and I flipped the whole crew off as I walked out with the sheriff. The owner was fined for animal cruelty along with the staff. One month later...the business closed.
> 
> So yes..it IS against the law not to help an animal in distress.



That is different than treating a dog yourself.

By the way, I am willing to bet the rich bitch didn't get charged with anything.


----------



## earlycuyler (Oct 30, 2013)

Gracie said:


> I am done with this thread. It is just too fucking depressing. And I don't like being depressed.
> 
> Sorry, Noomi.



The way it was presented was, but its a valid topic. Death and dieing just is.


----------



## Noomi (Oct 30, 2013)

Quantum Windbag said:


> Noomi said:
> 
> 
> > Quantum Windbag said:
> ...



Yes, but pet owners don't.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Oct 30, 2013)

Noomi said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > Noomi said:
> ...



Vets don't own pets?


----------



## MisterBeale (Oct 30, 2013)

It's funny how, in issues of pain and suffering, life and death, everyone all of a sudden becomes an expert and thinks they know what is best.  Pitiful that the government knows what's right.  Terrible that doctors and clinics know better.

Worse still when spiritually vacuous and materially selfish souls think they know best.


----------



## Noomi (Oct 30, 2013)

Quantum Windbag said:


> Noomi said:
> 
> 
> > Quantum Windbag said:
> ...



Of course they do, but I don't think we were referring specifically to vets treating their own animals, were we?


----------



## Noomi (Oct 30, 2013)

Quantum Windbag said:


> Gracie said:
> 
> 
> > Hogwash. I worked at a pet grooming service. Some rich bitch got a dog that was dirty, matted and had a broken leg. She wanted the dog cleaned up before taking it to the vet, so this dog was crying, held up with a chain around its neck so it could be groomed, then thrown in the closet with heat and fans to dry its fur. I didn't know about it until I heard the howls from the "drying" closet. I called the ASPCA immediately...and the sheriff. Sheriff got there first...and pulled that dog out of that cage right away, and took it to the vet. They shut the grooming place down and I flipped the whole crew off as I walked out with the sheriff. The owner was fined for animal cruelty along with the staff. One month later...the business closed.
> ...



Do you think she should have been charged?


----------



## Michelle420 (Oct 30, 2013)

Gracie said:


> Oy. This is such a painful subject.
> With that said....I would have done what was best for the child...not what was best for me...or worried what others would think of me due to my choice. I would not let an animal suffer pain any more than I would a baby. If I knew in advance my child was going to be born with a very painful and unoperable disease..it would not be born. Period. And to hell with what anyone thinks of that decision.
> 
> Going back to animals....I had a tenant when I was managing apartments, and she had a dog that HOWLED from pain. She was very old, could barely walk, only ate small bites of cat food from me when I went over to try to soothe her. Her owner couldn't/wouldn't put her down. Refused. SHE was at work. SHE didn't have to hear the howling all day. Finally I had enough. I told her if she didn't take that dog to the vet and have her put down to finally find some peace, I would do it myself and she can go fuck herself while suing me. And I meant it. She knew I meant it, and took her the next day to the vet to do it. She never spoke to me again, paid the rent via envelope, and moved a few weeks later. I was glad to see her go. Talk about a selfish bitch.



Just to clarify what the baby had is operable and does not have bad odds. This was an unusual situation.

Intestinal Atresia



> What will happen at birth?
> 
> In most cases, a child with intestinal atresia will be born without any immediate problems. Afterwards, he or she will be taken to the neonatal intensive care unit. The neonatologists, specialized doctors for high-risk babies, will immediately assess your baby and begin appropriate treatment, if necessary. In most cases, you and your family will be able to see and hold your newborn.





> What will happen after delivery?
> 
> Once the baby has been fully assessed, a pediatric surgeon will perform an operation in order to fix the intestinal atresia. The goal of this surgery is to remove the bowel obstruction and allow the digestive tract to be functional. However, depending on the location of the obstruction and the condition of the intestine, different types of operations may be necessary with the potential of having more than one surgery. This can only be determined by the pediatric surgeon during the operation.
> 
> ...





> What are the long-term outcomes and considerations?
> 
> The potential immediate complications after surgery include leaking from the repaired bowel connections, bleeding, and infection inside the abdomen and wound. The severity and treatment of these complications should be discussed with your pediatric surgeon if they occur.
> 
> The overall outcomes for most intestinal atresias are excellent depending on the type of atresia. Most infants may have minor intestinal problems in the first few weeks, but will recover and lead completely normal lives.



Fetal Intestinal Atresia


----------



## Moonglow (Oct 30, 2013)

dying for 10 days with narcotics to kill the pain  in a hospice house is not my idea of a good way to go.


----------



## Noomi (Oct 30, 2013)

drifter said:


> Gracie said:
> 
> 
> > Oy. This is such a painful subject.
> ...



Jailan had no small intestine, doctors couldn't fix him...


----------



## Michelle420 (Oct 30, 2013)

Noomi said:


> This story is a few months old, but its incredibly sad. A little boy born with a defective small intestine. *He had surgery, but doctors discovered that his entire small bowel had died*, and as a result, he couldn't eat or drink, and there was nothing that could be done for him.
> He was given high doses of morphine as he starved to death - after 13 days of life:
> 
> 
> ...



Sounds like the parents might have a lawsuit, why weren't they told early on, and what when wrong in the surgery?


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Oct 30, 2013)

Noomi said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > Noomi said:
> ...



I know how to set a broken bone in a human, I learned it in First Aid training. It not only makes sense for everyone to know how to set a bone, it is perfectly legal. You are going to have a real hard time convincing me it is harder to set a bone on a dog than a human leg.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Oct 30, 2013)

Noomi said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > Gracie said:
> ...



no, I think somebody should take her into an alley, beat the crap out of her, making sure they break her leg in the process, and then take her to a salon to get a haircut before they take her to the hospital. But that would get me in trouble with the idiots that think government should deal with assholes.


----------



## earlycuyler (Oct 30, 2013)

Quantum Windbag said:


> Noomi said:
> 
> 
> > Quantum Windbag said:
> ...



Dogs do cooperate. My dogs vet has a nice scar on hiscarm from setting a dogs leg.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Oct 30, 2013)

earlycuyler said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > Noomi said:
> ...



If somebody set my broken leg without drugs I would probably bite them.


----------



## thanatos144 (Oct 30, 2013)

tinydancer said:


> Luddly Neddite said:
> 
> 
> > koshergrl said:
> ...



They dont understand love of a baby. They are to selfish.


----------



## thanatos144 (Oct 30, 2013)

Moonglow said:


> dying for 10 days with narcotics to kill the pain  in a hospice house is not my idea of a good way to go.



Who the fuck are you to deny a child life no mater how short? Are you God? Your Ego knows no bounds and your depravity no depth.


----------



## earlycuyler (Oct 30, 2013)

Quantum Windbag said:


> earlycuyler said:
> 
> 
> > Quantum Windbag said:
> ...



Had it done . Honestly I don't remember it. I did puke though. I remember that. Oh, and it was my arm.


----------



## Noomi (Oct 31, 2013)

thanatos144 said:


> Moonglow said:
> 
> 
> > dying for 10 days with narcotics to kill the pain  in a hospice house is not my idea of a good way to go.
> ...



What about the quality of life a person has? Isn't this important to consider?


----------



## thanatos144 (Oct 31, 2013)

Noomi said:


> thanatos144 said:
> 
> 
> > Moonglow said:
> ...



Any life is good life you sick freak.


----------



## MisterBeale (Oct 31, 2013)

Noomi said:


> thanatos144 said:
> 
> 
> > Moonglow said:
> ...





Tell me Noomi, in this example that you cited, what other quality of life would this newborn child have to compare its existence to?

How could it theoretically not know that this is all there is to what life is, and not exult that there even IS a state of being, that is, consciousness?

Having never known a feeling of being otherwise than what it is, how do you know it is so terrible?

Have you ever fasted?

I have.  I can tell you, after the second day, hunger signils pretty much shut down.

So, your example of the child living in agony. . . it just doesn't make sense.  You are projecting a state of mind you know absolutely nothing about.  YOU ARE IMAGINING that you know what the state of existence of this newborn consciousness is like.  What are you, some sort of omnipotent goddess?

I have a recommendation for you.  See your health care provider.  Tell them that you wish to fast.  Then fast for a week.  For every day that you fast, meditate on this issue for an hour.  Then get back to us and tell us all about your wisdom.


----------



## koshergrl (Oct 31, 2013)

Noomi said:


> thanatos144 said:
> 
> 
> > Moonglow said:
> ...


 
You don't kill people because YOU question their *quality* of life.

The baby had a wonderful quality of life. So fuck off. Your whole abortion theme rotates around whether or not YOU are made uncomfortable by the thought of another person's discomfort, or *quality* of life. I don't suspect your quality of life is any higher than that of the baby's...should we off you?


----------



## Spoonman (Oct 31, 2013)

koshergrl said:


> Noomi said:
> 
> 
> > thanatos144 said:
> ...



i guess if we are offing people based on the quality of their life we should just teminate all the homeless, all the poor for that matter. any one who is sick, gone.


----------



## koshergrl (Oct 31, 2013)

That is exactly the plan. Morons like Noomi buy into it. Just as moronic Germans bought into the lie that the world would be a better place if they eliminated all the retards, the genetically deficient, and Jews.

It's the exact same thing.


----------



## Luddly Neddite (Oct 31, 2013)

thanatos144 said:


> Noomi said:
> 
> 
> > thanatos144 said:
> ...



Why do the meddlers believe they can speak for every human condition on the planet?

Simply put, you could not be more wrong BECAUSE "quality of life" is in the eye of the beholder.


----------



## koshergrl (Oct 31, 2013)

Why do the death cultists believe they are authorized to determine the value, and terminate, lives that are not their own?

Quality of life is in teh eye of the beholder. Which is why one person NEVER has the right to determine the quality of another's life deems it necessary to kill that person.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Oct 31, 2013)

Luddly Neddite said:


> thanatos144 said:
> 
> 
> > Noomi said:
> ...



It is always in the eye of the idiot that isn't living it.


----------



## MisterBeale (Oct 31, 2013)

Luddly Neddite said:


> thanatos144 said:
> 
> 
> > Noomi said:
> ...



Is it really now?  Who should be the beholder that gets to make the legal decisions to end life based on what they see?  Loved ones?  Health Care Providers?  The Government?  You?  I sure hope that those who do decide know the real meaning of pity.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vrlTeoFcf-Q]One of the best Lord of the Rings Quotes: Gandalf in Moria - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## BDBoop (Oct 31, 2013)

Luddly Neddite said:


> thanatos144 said:
> 
> 
> > Noomi said:
> ...



I do believe they have declared themselves Gods.


----------



## Tank (Oct 31, 2013)

Killed or not killed?


----------



## Votto (Oct 31, 2013)

syrenn said:


> Noomi said:
> 
> 
> > I needed a story that would make people think about what they would do in a similar or identical situation. This is that story. I want to know what people would do if they were in the same situation, and so far, no one has answered.
> ...



Are you trying to give us hope that the defective within society can be extinguished?


----------



## Votto (Oct 31, 2013)

Votto said:


> syrenn said:
> 
> 
> > Noomi said:
> ...



Or are they just trying to creep us out?



You be the judge.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Oct 31, 2013)

BDBoop said:


> Luddly Neddite said:
> 
> 
> > thanatos144 said:
> ...



i do believe you have resorted to hyperbole.

Unless you can hand out life as casually as you kill you are the one who is playing god.


----------



## BDBoop (Oct 31, 2013)

Personally? If the humane thing to do is put a suffering animal out of their misery, why would we not do the same for humans.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Oct 31, 2013)

BDBoop said:


> Personally? If the humane thing to do is put a suffering animal out of their misery, why would we not do the same for humans.



For one things, humans know enough to not lick their stitches.


----------



## Tank (Oct 31, 2013)

BDBoop said:


> Personally? If the humane thing to do is put a suffering animal out of their misery, why would we not do the same for humans.


A horse is put down for a broken leg


----------



## Votto (Oct 31, 2013)

BDBoop said:


> Personally? If the humane thing to do is put a suffering animal out of their misery, why would we not do the same for humans.



Then we will just treat humans like animals.  Kill them and eat them.  Sounds good to me.  

Incidentally, how do you like yourself prepared, medium or well done?


----------



## Votto (Oct 31, 2013)

Tank said:


> BDBoop said:
> 
> 
> > Personally? If the humane thing to do is put a suffering animal out of their misery, why would we not do the same for humans.
> ...



I once put a fat tic in a microwave.


----------



## Drake_Roberts (Nov 1, 2013)

The thread title is "why abortion euthenasia shoul be legal" . I understand the euthenasia part. I even agree with it. What fail to see is how abortion has anythig to do with it at all, even though the OP seems to thinkit would.[/QUOTE]

Obviously, you are an idiot. The OP has said on numerous occasions that she was finding a story under which she could make the push for abortion/euthanasia. Maybe if you read the whole thread you could avoid making an idiot out of yourself.


----------



## BDBoop (Nov 1, 2013)

Votto said:


> BDBoop said:
> 
> 
> > Personally? If the humane thing to do is put a suffering animal out of their misery, why would we not do the same for humans.
> ...



We don't eat animals that were suffering, especially not pets.

Your point is invalid, amd I am too tired to find you a bunny with a pancake on its head.


----------



## Drake_Roberts (Nov 1, 2013)

Everyone on this thread should shut up. Anybody ever wonder why the American Congress and most governments are ineffective? Maybe it's because they bicker like idiots and fail to see the bigger picture. Perhaps if you bigoted fools would shut up and honestly listen to the other side's argument and keep an open mind, somone might actually get something done. Stop being so prejudiced. Clearly both sides have flaws, why not work together to eliminate those?


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Nov 1, 2013)

Quantum Windbag said:


> You are right, they should have just killed the mother when she got pregnant.



I think abortions should be based on political affiliation. Liberals must have mandatory abortions.


----------



## Drake_Roberts (Nov 1, 2013)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > You are right, they should have just killed the mother when she got pregnant.
> ...



This is what I mean. Saying that all Liberals should be aborted is just plain wrong. Believe it or not, some Liberals have actually done some good in the world. Yet you say they should all be aborted. Maybe ignorant children like you should stay off this forum and go to the carnival or something. 


Idiot.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Nov 1, 2013)

Drake_Roberts said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Quantum Windbag said:
> ...



Fuck off shit stain


----------



## choosy (Nov 1, 2013)

koshergrl said:


> That is exactly the plan. Morons like Noomi buy into it. Just as moronic Germans bought into the lie that the world would be a better place if they eliminated all the retards, the genetically deficient, and Jews.
> 
> It's the exact same thing.



Oh, thank you very much! In moronic Germany is Euthanasia not legal and abortion principle also. Of course it is legally possible for every woman to abort in the first 12 weeks of  pregnancy; if the fetus is disabled  there is no time limit. It sounds awful. But we think nobody can force a woman to have a baby - whether it is sick or healthy! 
It's an individual decision not a question of ethics or to make the world a better place!


----------



## choosy (Nov 1, 2013)

Noomi said:


> lakeview said:
> 
> 
> > Noomi said:
> ...



Dear Noomi, I'm almost always in your opinion. But to euthanase babys or children? It's difficult - euthanasia can only be an own individual decision. And the severely ill person must actively euthanized himself.  If others decide if life is worth living or not it may gets criminal. AND: Do you really think parents can live with to have euthanized their child?  Abortion is okay, because having a baby or not is a decision of a woman.


----------



## lakeview (Nov 1, 2013)

Drake_Roberts said:


> Everyone on this thread should shut up. Anybody ever wonder why the American Congress and most governments are ineffective? Maybe it's because they bicker like idiots and fail to see the bigger picture. Perhaps if you bigoted fools would shut up and honestly listen to the other side's argument and keep an open mind, somone might actually get something done. Stop being so prejudiced. Clearly both sides have flaws, why not work together to eliminate those?



Others are idiots and fools and should shut up. They don't see the big picture but I'm willing to bet _you_ think you see the big picture, don't you?

I found something online for you:

Levenson Self-Report Psychopathy Scale


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Nov 1, 2013)

choosy said:


> Noomi said:
> 
> 
> > lakeview said:
> ...


How is an abortion an individual decision, when you are and have been speaking of baby's and children? It's not an individual decision when you have a mother and a baby.


----------



## choosy (Nov 1, 2013)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> choosy said:
> 
> 
> > Noomi said:
> ...



Well, possibly my english is too bad. In context with an abortion there is no born baby. In the first 12 weeks of pregnancy  it is not even viable. It's mother have the right to decide to have it or not! After birth, a baby has the same rights as every other person - even more: born babys and children are under special protection!


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Nov 1, 2013)

choosy said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > choosy said:
> ...



What will the offspring of a human be when it comes out of the uterus?


----------



## choosy (Nov 1, 2013)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> choosy said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



I do not understand the question - lost in translation  sorry
Would you explain in other words?


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Nov 1, 2013)

choosy said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > choosy said:
> ...




When a human gives birth will it give brith to a dog?
Chicken?
Fish?
What will it's offspring be?


----------



## lakeview (Nov 1, 2013)

choosy said:


> Well, possibly my english is too bad. In context with an abortion there is no born baby. In the first 12 weeks of pregnancy  it is not even viable. It's mother have the right to decide to have it or not! After birth, a baby has the same rights as every other person - even more: born babys and children are under special protection!



No your English isn't bad, he knows what you're saying.

What he's asking you is what is the difference between a baby one minute after it's born and one minute before it's born and he's pointing out that since there are two humans involved why is it only the opinion of one that counts?

At least I think that's what he's asking, if I got it wrong I apologize


----------



## choosy (Nov 1, 2013)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> choosy said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



Oh, but then I also understood the first question. Of course, the offspring of a human is a human. But I think you already know ...


----------



## choosy (Nov 1, 2013)

lakeview said:


> choosy said:
> 
> 
> > Well, possibly my english is too bad. In context with an abortion there is no born baby. In the first 12 weeks of pregnancy  it is not even viable. It's mother have the right to decide to have it or not! After birth, a baby has the same rights as every other person - even more: born babys and children are under special protection!
> ...



The difference between a born and an unborn baby? I'm not able to speak for the US, but in Germany unborn babys don't have the same rights as born babys. And "Cell Clusters" (first 12 weeks)  don't have any rights.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Nov 1, 2013)

choosy said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > choosy said:
> ...



So with your answer that brings us back to your previous comment



> Abortion is okay, because having a baby or not is a decision of a woman.


It's not an individual decision when you have two humans involved.


----------



## choosy (Nov 1, 2013)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> choosy said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



When two *born* humans involved it is for sure not an individual decision!


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Nov 1, 2013)

choosy said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > choosy said:
> ...



Are you saying that the offspring of a human will be something other than a human?


----------



## Luddly Neddite (Nov 1, 2013)

Tank said:


> Killed or not killed?



There is a third choice - live birth.

That is as it should be. 

And, what any woman decides is none of your business. 

Two points:

1) Abortion is legal in the US. 
2) Many therapeutic D&C's are done and never counted as "abortions".

Oh, and BTW, its none of "your" business.


----------



## choosy (Nov 1, 2013)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> choosy said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



No, what I want to say is, that a born individual is the offspring of humans or animals.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Nov 1, 2013)

choosy said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > choosy said:
> ...



So abortion is murder of humans?


----------



## choosy (Nov 1, 2013)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> choosy said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



If you push a pregnant woman, she falls and loses her unborn baby. Are you a murderer in accordance with current legal? Or manslaughter? Or is it serious injury to the woman?


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Nov 1, 2013)

choosy said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > choosy said:
> ...



Scott Peterson Google it.
Peterson Convicted Of Double Murder (washingtonpost.com)


----------



## Drake_Roberts (Nov 1, 2013)

lakeview said:


> Drake_Roberts said:
> 
> 
> > Everyone on this thread should shut up. Anybody ever wonder why the American Congress and most governments are ineffective? Maybe it's because they bicker like idiots and fail to see the bigger picture. Perhaps if you bigoted fools would shut up and honestly listen to the other side's argument and keep an open mind, somone might actually get something done. Stop being so prejudiced. Clearly both sides have flaws, why not work together to eliminate those?
> ...



Thank you lakeview, I had never heard of that test before. For the record, I scored a 3.9 for primary psychopathy and a 2.4 for secondary psychopathy. I also went ahead and took the Machiavelli test. On that I got an 88 out of 100.


----------



## BDBoop (Nov 1, 2013)

choosy said:


> lakeview said:
> 
> 
> > choosy said:
> ...



In Germany, first 12 weeks: said zygote is referred to as a "Cell cluster?"


----------



## Drake_Roberts (Nov 1, 2013)

lakeview, what did you score on the Levenson Test?


----------



## Katzndogz (Nov 1, 2013)

If quality of life could be judged by those not living that life, Stephen Hawking would have been euthanized decades ago.


----------



## lakeview (Nov 1, 2013)

1.9 primary and 2.2 secondary so on primary I scored higher than 34.7% of the people who had tested at the time and on secondary I scored higher than 35.2% who had tested.


----------



## Drake_Roberts (Nov 1, 2013)

lakeview said:


> 1.9 primary and 2.2 secondary so on primary I scored higher than 34.7% of the people who had tested at the time and on secondary I scored higher than 35.2% who had tested.



Wow, not much of a psychopath are you. Have you taken the Machiavelli Test yet?


----------



## choosy (Nov 1, 2013)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> choosy said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



I always forget that laymen speak right in America!  This legal system is awful ...
How I know you, in the US a stillbirth  (Weight below 500 g) will be buried.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Nov 1, 2013)

choosy said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > choosy said:
> ...



Convicted by a jury of his peers
and in California of all places.


----------



## choosy (Nov 1, 2013)

BDBoop said:


> choosy said:
> 
> 
> > lakeview said:
> ...


----------



## BDBoop (Nov 1, 2013)

choosy said:


> BDBoop said:
> 
> 
> > choosy said:
> ...


----------



## choosy (Nov 1, 2013)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> choosy said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



A Jury of laymen is a Jury of laymen!


----------



## thanatos144 (Nov 1, 2013)

Luddly Neddite said:


> thanatos144 said:
> 
> 
> > Noomi said:
> ...



Spoken like a true Nazi


----------



## Drake_Roberts (Nov 1, 2013)

lakeview said:


> Drake_Roberts said:
> 
> 
> > Everyone on this thread should shut up. Anybody ever wonder why the American Congress and most governments are ineffective? Maybe it's because they bicker like idiots and fail to see the bigger picture. Perhaps if you bigoted fools would shut up and honestly listen to the other side's argument and keep an open mind, somone might actually get something done. Stop being so prejudiced. Clearly both sides have flaws, why not work together to eliminate those?
> ...



Oh, lakeview. You are not among the bigoted idiots of whom I spoke. Anyone smart enough to catch that I never call myself wrong and imply that I see the bigger picture is definitely brilliant enough to see that. And no, this is not sarcasm.


----------



## choosy (Nov 1, 2013)

BDBoop said:


> choosy said:
> 
> 
> > BDBoop said:
> ...


----------



## BDBoop (Nov 1, 2013)

choosy said:


> BDBoop said:
> 
> 
> > choosy said:
> ...


----------



## Wry Catcher (Nov 1, 2013)

Quantum Windbag said:


> You are right, they should have just killed the mother when she got pregnant.



Windbag, you are a total contradiction, I guess a product of your hypocrisy.  You are callous and have what appears to be a total disregard for those who have been born, yet claim to care so much for a fetus.

I'm sure you support the cut to food stamps which was effective today, effecting living, thinking children and oppose the ACA which would provide health care for many children not previously covered.

I don't understand that ideology, in all honesty I find it evil.


----------



## choosy (Nov 1, 2013)

BDBoop said:


> choosy said:
> 
> 
> > BDBoop said:
> ...


----------



## brandinsmith (Nov 1, 2013)

That is sooo sad


----------



## brandinsmith (Nov 1, 2013)

I could not imagine having to watch my baby starve.


----------



## brandinsmith (Nov 1, 2013)

I am definatly pro choice, but this just enforces it.


----------



## choosy (Nov 1, 2013)

brandinsmith said:


> I could not imagine having to watch my baby starve.


----------



## Drake_Roberts (Nov 1, 2013)

brandinsmith, are you just posting so you can use URLs? If not, those posts could have been condensed to one. And because this is your first day on USMB, welcome to the club!


----------



## thanatos144 (Nov 1, 2013)

brandinsmith said:


> I am definatly pro choice, but this just enforces it.



What choice is there when the only choice you allow is killing?


----------



## Drake_Roberts (Nov 1, 2013)

choosy said:


> brandinsmith said:
> 
> 
> > I could not imagine having to watch my baby starve.



???

What are you talking about, brandinsmith? You could not possibly imagine your baby starving. I could, but I guess that's because I don't have any children, so...


----------



## gallantwarrior (Nov 1, 2013)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > You are right, they should have just killed the mother when she got pregnant.
> ...



I thought they already did...oh, wait, except when each pulse counts for more public assistance.


----------



## Drake_Roberts (Nov 1, 2013)

thanatos144 said:


> brandinsmith said:
> 
> 
> > I am definatly pro choice, but this just enforces it.
> ...



thanatos144, is it not true that pro choice means you can choose whether or not you have an abortion? If the only choice allowed was killing, no new children would be born in the U.S. ever again. I think you need to refer to my earlier post on keeping an open mind and not being prejudiced. (Page 17, I think)


----------



## choosy (Nov 1, 2013)

thanatos144 said:


> brandinsmith said:
> 
> 
> > I am definatly pro choice, but this just enforces it.
> ...



To avoid abortions is maybe a chance, isn't it. Basically no woman is really happy with abortion.


----------



## gallantwarrior (Nov 1, 2013)

choosy said:


> Noomi said:
> 
> 
> > lakeview said:
> ...



Interesting that you consider euthanasia to be solely the individual's choice, regardless whether they are children or adults.  Yet, you consider abortion to be the mother's choice alone.  I wonder whether the baby she flushes down the drain would agree to being aborted (euthanized)?


----------



## Peterf (Nov 1, 2013)

PixieStix said:


> Dear God,
> 
> Noomi still trying to justify abortion



Trying - and succeeding.


----------



## thanatos144 (Nov 1, 2013)

Drake_Roberts said:


> thanatos144 said:
> 
> 
> > brandinsmith said:
> ...



What complete bull shit. I hope you dont expect me to buy that? Pro-choice is called that because it sounds better then pro baby killing. Every time someone tries to make it harder for a women to choose to kill her baby you pro-choice assholes scream.


----------



## gallantwarrior (Nov 1, 2013)

choosy said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > choosy said:
> ...



Was heisst der Nachwuchs einen Menschen als der vom Gerbaermutter heraus kommt?


----------



## Peterf (Nov 1, 2013)

Noomi said:


> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> > Children don't have that authority or ability.
> ...



Like you I love animals.  And I also love people.   If someone close to me was enduring severe suffering, with no hope of cure,  I would consider it my duty to help them to die.


----------



## Drake_Roberts (Nov 1, 2013)

thanatos144 said:


> Drake_Roberts said:
> 
> 
> > thanatos144 said:
> ...



You obviously have not read my earlier posts on this thread. What part of "I am against abortions" do you not understand? Last time I checked, marching in the Right to Life March in D.C. didn't qualify someone as "pro-choice." What you mistook for me claiming to be pro-choice was me just trying to see if you were not being a pig-headed idiot blinded by prejudice.

BTW, nice profile pic. I tried to find on of the burning flag from Symphony of Destruction but I failed. Megadeth forever.


----------



## Peterf (Nov 1, 2013)

Katzndogz said:


> If quality of life could be judged by those not living that life, Stephen Hawking would have been euthanized decades ago.



A poor example.    Stephen Hawkins has, at any time, been able to give his own assessment of the quality of his life.


----------



## Peterf (Nov 1, 2013)

choosy said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > choosy said:
> ...



And, of course, humans ARE animals.


----------



## gallantwarrior (Nov 1, 2013)

choosy said:


> thanatos144 said:
> 
> 
> > brandinsmith said:
> ...



First, you declare the decision of one person to kill another is acceptable, now you presume to tell us that no person who has made such a decision is really happy with it?
So, if _no_ women would be "really happy with abortion", why do _any_ women choose to do it?
Oh, yeah!  Every woman has a choice not to have an abortion, it's called "prevention".  She doesn't want a baby, she shouldn't have sex.


----------



## Peterf (Nov 1, 2013)

gallantwarrior said:


> choosy said:
> 
> 
> > thanatos144 said:
> ...



Because,my brave and warlike friend,   women who have abortions may consider them to be the lesser of two evils.    Choices are not always between the good and the bad.  They are often bewteen bad and worse.


----------



## choosy (Nov 1, 2013)

gallantwarrior said:


> choosy said:
> 
> 
> > [
> ...


----------



## choosy (Nov 1, 2013)

gallantwarrior said:


> choosy said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



Nice try - this german sentence is completely without logical content!!!!


----------



## gallantwarrior (Nov 1, 2013)

choosy said:


> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> > choosy said:
> ...



Hey, thanks for reminding me why I left Germany in the first place.  You're a peach!


----------



## choosy (Nov 1, 2013)

gallantwarrior said:


> choosy said:
> 
> 
> > thanatos144 said:
> ...



Were are you from? Smurf village? I think to discuss with naive people is a waste of time


----------



## choosy (Nov 1, 2013)

gallantwarrior said:


> choosy said:
> 
> 
> > gallantwarrior said:
> ...



You've never been in Germany


----------



## BDBoop (Nov 1, 2013)

choosy said:


> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> > choosy said:
> ...



Not actually naive. They are what I generally refer to as "willfully ignorant."


----------



## lakeview (Nov 1, 2013)

choosy said:


> Were are you from? Smurf village?



You really need to work on your smack talk.


----------



## choosy (Nov 1, 2013)

BDBoop said:


> choosy said:
> 
> 
> > gallantwarrior said:
> ...



 I have to remember that term "willfully ignorant" - great!


----------



## gallantwarrior (Nov 1, 2013)

choosy said:


> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> > choosy said:
> ...



You know this how?  Been to Germany?  Honey, I lived there.  But don't let me try to change you mind.  People like you are one of the reasons I left Germany.  People like you are why I cringe each and every time some German shows up here and makes a total ass of himself.  "Und vhat tym vill zee moose be here?"


----------



## choosy (Nov 1, 2013)

gallantwarrior said:


> choosy said:
> 
> 
> > gallantwarrior said:
> ...



You don't speak any german. 
No german woman would ever say: "She doesn't want a baby, she shouldn't have sex." Only she is older than 80 years!


----------



## koshergrl (Nov 1, 2013)

Peterf said:


> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> > choosy said:
> ...


 
Nope. Having a baby isn't "bad" unless a woman is in an abusive relationship.

So what you maintain is that women in abusive relationships should kill their babies, to protect their abusers. Got it.


----------



## gallantwarrior (Nov 1, 2013)

choosy said:


> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> > choosy said:
> ...



Again with your ASS-up-tions.  You don't know how old I am, either.  But keep 'em comin', sugartits.  I notice that you liked "willfully ignorant" so much that you've decided to adopt it as a lifestyle.


----------



## choosy (Nov 1, 2013)

koshergrl said:


> Peterf said:
> 
> 
> > gallantwarrior said:
> ...



Is there any reason for you to judge about a woman? Be glad never have been in such a worse situation. I truly be glad not have to concider to get a Baby or not! An abortion is not to kill an baby! It's to remove a cell cluster. But I think many woman have that feeling as if they would kill a baby. Also because of women and men like you. It is presumptuous!


----------



## choosy (Nov 1, 2013)

gallantwarrior said:


> choosy said:
> 
> 
> > gallantwarrior said:
> ...



Yes, in relation to you I'm willfully ignorant now! I'll see you in Smurf Village


----------



## choosy (Nov 1, 2013)

gallantwarrior said:


> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> > (....)
> ...


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Nov 1, 2013)

choosy said:


> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> > gallantwarrior said:
> ...


----------



## Peterf (Nov 1, 2013)

koshergrl said:


> Peterf said:
> 
> 
> > gallantwarrior said:
> ...



I've just thanked you by mistake.   Never mind - enjoy!

There are many circumstances where carrying a potential baby to term is bad for the potential mother, the wider family or, indeed, the eventual child itself.    Better no baby than an unwanted baby.

You have a right to your religious principles but no right to attempt to force them on the rest of us by means of legislation.  Do you not agree with this simple proposition?


----------



## gallantwarrior (Nov 1, 2013)

Returning to the OP:
Decisions of this nature should be left to the family.  Like that whole Terri Shaivo media circus here.  Do I think that euthanasia should be an option?  Why not?  I know I wouldn't want to bet pumped full of drugs and plugged into machinery just to live.  Again, that would be my decision, or my family's decision, if I were incapacitated.
Abortion really is an entirely different issue.


----------



## Zoom-boing (Nov 1, 2013)

Heart wrenching story, my heart goes out to the family.

As to the OP, yes the cause of this baby's death was starvation because his body was incapable of processing food, no stone was left unturned to fix the problem but in the end, nothing could be done.  While he did starve to death,  he did not suffer.  He was given morphine the entire time to ease any pain.  While it did not hasten or halt his death, it did give the family time to cherish him.  As far as I can tell, he did not suffer.  

This past year has been shitty for us.  Lost my sil 5/20; my aunt (my mom's sister) 5/28; my dad 5/30; my mom fell and broke her hip (snapped the ball from the bone) 6/2 and she died 6/10.  

My mom had r/a, congestive heart failure, pulmonary fibrosis.  Her c02 levels were 120 (normal is 45, lowest her dropped to on 100% oxygen were 75).  She had a directive/living will .. no heroic measures.  She had been on oxygen the past 2 1/2 years or so.  Due to the circumstances (she fell Sun night, my aunt's funeral was Mon, my dad's funeral was Wed) we talked to the staff and all agreed that using a bi-pap (forced oxygen) was not heroic.  She was on morphine the entire time, had swallowing problems and could not eat.  Fluids were given via i/v but no feeding tube per her directives.  She was in and out of consciousness and, except for Thursday, was completely aware ... but she was fading.  We were discussing long-term options (surgery wasn't one of them).  She made the decision on Fri night to have the bi-pap taken off (she still was receiving oxygen via tubes in her nose, as she had been).  We had a good Friday ... she was awake and knew us all, don't think she remembered about her sister and my dad, we talked, laughed.  Last thing my mom said to us was "I love you all, each and every one of you". Man, how many people get to have that?  She never woke up again.  She faded quickly and died early Monday morning.  A feeding tube may have extended her time by ... a few days at best.

My brothers and I watched her for a solid week, as did the staff.  She did not suffer. Let me repeat that.  She was without food for a week but she did not suffer.  Morphine was administered as needed for pain.  She did not suffer.  Too much would have killed her (yes, she was dying anyway), not enough would have meant awful pain (from her r/a, awful bedsores, broken hip, but as far as I've read, starvation is not painful).  She did not suffer.  Had we had the option to give her a lethal dose of morphine, would we have?  No.  Had we done that we never would have had that Friday,never would have heard her last words to us. 

Until you are actually in certain situations/circumstances  ... it's very, very easy to say what you would or would not do.  Having been in a circumstance where a lethal dose of morphine would have brought about the end of my mom's life a few days early I know that I would not be able to do that.  Easing any pain and letting nature take it's course is a delicate balancing act, but is what seems most appropriate in these types of situations.  

I think this is quite a difficult topic ... don't you?  What is considered too much suffering? What if they aren't suffering at all, pain meds are controlling the suffering ... do we kill them because oh well, they're going to be dead in a few days anyway?  What if they are in horrific pain and pain meds do nothing to ease their suffering ... do we kill them then?  What of the stories where someone was suppose to die, there was no chance ... but they lived?  imo, legalizing euthanasia presents a slippery slope with no easy answers. 

As far as abortion goes, killing a fetus takes away their choice of ... well, everything.


----------



## Zoom-boing (Nov 1, 2013)

gallantwarrior said:


> Returning to the OP:
> Decisions of this nature should be left to the family.  Like that whole Terri Shaivo media circus here.  Do I think that euthanasia should be an option?  Why not?  I know* I wouldn't want to bet pumped full of drugs and plugged into machinery just to live.  Again, that would be my decision, or my family's decision, if I were incapacitated.*
> Abortion really is an entirely different issue.



Which is why adults should have a living will/directive to ensure that their wishes are followed.


----------



## choosy (Nov 1, 2013)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> choosy said:
> 
> 
> > gallantwarrior said:
> ...


----------



## BDBoop (Nov 1, 2013)

gallantwarrior said:


> choosy said:
> 
> 
> > gallantwarrior said:
> ...



I don't think "gallant" means what you think it means.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Nov 1, 2013)

choosy said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > I  lived in Germany for two years not to many sweet breasted German girls in that country. Have they found out what a bar of soap is used for?
> ...



really? so germans have learned what a bath is for? Glad to hear that.


----------



## Drake_Roberts (Nov 1, 2013)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> choosy said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



What part of those last few posts has anything to do with abortion or euthanasia? This thread is about pushing for your side in the abortion/euthanasia argument and not a place to debate the regular bathing habits of German women. If you really want to discuss that go make a thread somewhere else.



Sick pervs...


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Nov 1, 2013)

Drake_Roberts said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > choosy said:
> ...



fuck off. Hows that?


----------



## Drake_Roberts (Nov 1, 2013)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Drake_Roberts said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



 Cursing seriously is not necessary. Are you that blind? What part of talking about a girl's bathing habits and breasts is not perverted? Enlighten me, please. And before you even try it, I am not a homosexual. I am perfectly straight.


----------



## tinydancer (Nov 1, 2013)

Now to the trash heap.

Interesting the libs are working on this. *XXXX*


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Nov 1, 2013)

Drake_Roberts said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Drake_Roberts said:
> ...



Fuck off shit stain. move along


----------



## Drake_Roberts (Nov 1, 2013)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Drake_Roberts said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



Is your knowledge of English so atrocious that you only know the words "fuck off, shit stain"? And for the record, I do believe I have been on this thread longer than you, so you move along. Let people who actually make meaningful posts stay. IE: You leave the thread.


P.S. Negging, seriously? How low can you get?


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Nov 1, 2013)

Drake_Roberts said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Drake_Roberts said:
> ...



I've been a member of this board longer than you shut the fuck up and move on.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Nov 1, 2013)

Wry Catcher said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > You are right, they should have just killed the mother when she got pregnant.
> ...



Do I support the 30% increase in SNAP over 3 years?

Not really, but you think it makes you a better Christian to steal money and give it away.


----------



## Drake_Roberts (Nov 1, 2013)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Drake_Roberts said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



So you have. But I have been on this thread longer than you. And criticising the amount of time I've spent on USMB does not answer my question. I know you're only dodging it because you know I'm right.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Nov 1, 2013)

Drake_Roberts said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Drake_Roberts said:
> ...



I really don't give a shit how long you have been in a thread.


----------



## Drake_Roberts (Nov 1, 2013)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Drake_Roberts said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



Well I don't care how long you've been on this forum. See my point. And again, question dodging.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Nov 1, 2013)

Drake_Roberts said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Drake_Roberts said:
> ...



when you have something relevant to say say it, until shut the fuck up move on.


----------



## koshergrl (Nov 1, 2013)

Drake_Roberts said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Drake_Roberts said:
> ...


 
We don't come here to have our discussions censored. The language gets fairly blue. Get over it, stop boring everybody with your prating.


----------



## gallantwarrior (Nov 1, 2013)

Drake_Roberts said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Drake_Roberts said:
> ...



Considering she started it, why aren't you dressing her down?


----------



## BorisTheAnimal (Nov 1, 2013)

So, how long before we start to "compassionately" euthanize the mental defects, the political opponents, and all the other "undesirables"  BD and Noomi share the same sick ideology as Adolf Hitler.


----------



## IlarMeilyr (Nov 1, 2013)

PixieStix said:


> Dear God,
> 
> Noomi still trying to justify abortion



If Noomi had been aborted instead of whelped, we wouldn't be subjected to her looney posts.

There.

Abortion justified!


----------



## koshergrl (Nov 1, 2013)

My point is that I can see that there are posters here..Noomi, joeb spring to mind...who obviously have a crap quality of life. It screams from every post they submit..they aren't probably able to see it, because it's all they know...

But I think they, and the rest of the world, would be a happier place without them. Just as they claim that they can determine for babies whether or not their lives can be justified, I feel I can declare that the lives of certain adults aren't justified...

So does that give me the right and the obligation to end their lives?

If I were to try, I'm sure they would object.

So does that mean that if you are unable to make your wishes known, you have no right to live?

What if noomi woke up tomorrow completely unable to communicate. She could still think, and walk around, and eat and drink and still had her memory..but some spell was cast on her that made her unable to communicate.

I see her and think "Oh my gosh, that poor girl! And someone is going to have to take care of her now, she can't make a living..obviously she needs to die."

Death cultists maintain that if you can't communicate, then your life may be forfeit.

Which is essentially just survival of the fittest. If someone can kill you, then they have the right to kill you. 

And that's a-ok by death cultists. They assume that they will always be the ones doing the killing.

Which tells you a little about their depraved mindset.


----------



## IlarMeilyr (Nov 1, 2013)

And, furthermore:

This thread CLEARLY belongs in a section dedicated to the topic of

Australia!


----------



## IlarMeilyr (Nov 1, 2013)

Australia is close enough to Asia, I suppose.

And there ARE youth in Asia.

So ...


----------



## Drake_Roberts (Nov 1, 2013)

gallantwarrior said:


> Drake_Roberts said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



I started off by "dressing down" everyone involved in that argument. It just so happened that bigrebnc1775 was the only one who wanted to fight me about it. Thus, bigrebnc1775 is the only one I still have a quarrel with.


----------



## BDBoop (Nov 1, 2013)

"She started it."


----------



## Drake_Roberts (Nov 1, 2013)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Drake_Roberts said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



For the sake of everyone on the boards I will stop railing on your language and your clear lack of mastery of the English language. But as to me saying something relevant, doesn't that sound exactly like I was saying earlier? Or have you forgotten?


Let people decide whether or not to be euthanized by saying it in their directive or something. Late-term abortions are bad. Morning-after pills and contraceptives are not. There, happy? Now shut up.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Nov 1, 2013)

Drake_Roberts said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Drake_Roberts said:
> ...



Last word FUCK OFF EAT SHIT AND DIE.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Nov 1, 2013)

Drake_Roberts said:


> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> > Drake_Roberts said:
> ...



YOU DO NOT DICTATE TO ME THAT'S WHY i TOLD YOU TO FUCK OFF AND THAT WILL BE THE ONLY RESPONSE YOU GET FROM ME.


----------



## lakeview (Nov 1, 2013)

All caps is a bad sign...someone's head is about to come unscrewed.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Nov 1, 2013)

lakeview said:


> All caps is a bad sign...someone's head is about to come unscrewed.



Nope had caps lock on, if you notice the I is not in caps. Just didn't want to have to retype what I posted.


----------



## Noomi (Nov 1, 2013)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Drake_Roberts said:
> 
> 
> > gallantwarrior said:
> ...



If you were a woman I would assume you had your period and would sympathize with you.


----------



## Drake_Roberts (Nov 1, 2013)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> lakeview said:
> 
> 
> > All caps is a bad sign...someone's head is about to come unscrewed.
> ...



bigrebnc1775 posted something without cursing me out! It's a miracle! Quick! Somebody write down the date! This board needs to create a list of the most suprising posts ever, because this would be number 1!


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Nov 1, 2013)

Drake_Roberts said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > lakeview said:
> ...



fuck off and eat shit an die.


----------



## Drake_Roberts (Nov 1, 2013)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Drake_Roberts said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



And he starts cursing again. Seriously though, if I "ate shit" every time you told me to, I would have choked on it. You sound so much like a broken record.


----------



## MeBelle (Nov 1, 2013)

Wry Catcher said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > You are right, they should have just killed the mother when she got pregnant.
> ...



 [MENTION=23420]Quantum Windbag[/MENTION] 
Shame on you! You forgot to turn on your sarcasm font.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Nov 1, 2013)

Drake_Roberts said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Drake_Roberts said:
> ...



Irrelevance always get's a go fuck yourself from me. GO FUCK YOURSELF.


----------



## Drake_Roberts (Nov 2, 2013)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Drake_Roberts said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



Caps!?! Is someone getting angry? Didn't anybody ever teach you not to curse?


Euthanasia is fine by me, so long as there is consent from all parties involved. Late-term abortions suck, blah, blah, blah.

How's that for relevance?


----------



## MeBelle (Nov 2, 2013)

Luddly Neddite said:


> Another question the nutters always run away from ...
> 
> *How come it was okay for the Santorums to abort their baby?*
> 
> ...



Busted again in another lie @Luddy Neddite

I should start a list!


----------



## Drake_Roberts (Nov 2, 2013)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Drake_Roberts said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



Do they not teach civility where you come from? Last time I checked, death threats are not civil.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Nov 2, 2013)

Drake_Roberts said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Drake_Roberts said:
> ...



Civility is dead whiny ass liberals protecting obama killed it.


----------



## BDBoop (Nov 2, 2013)

Drake_Roberts said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Drake_Roberts said:
> ...



See his avatar? He is determined to look like a Neanderthal at all times.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Nov 2, 2013)

BDBoop said:


> Drake_Roberts said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



Did you get the return favor message. I meant every word you are exactly that.


----------



## BDBoop (Nov 2, 2013)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> BDBoop said:
> 
> 
> > Drake_Roberts said:
> ...



Nope, sorry; missed it.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Nov 2, 2013)

BDBoop said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > BDBoop said:
> ...



Why did you respond then? liar.


----------



## tinydancer (Nov 2, 2013)

Back to the original point of the thread Jailan. Remember him guys?

Here's a situation where the parents and the whole family loved this child who was born, not aborted, to death. 

Surrounded by love.


----------



## BDBoop (Nov 2, 2013)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> BDBoop said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



Prove it.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Nov 2, 2013)

BDBoop said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > BDBoop said:
> ...



The mods can check it out. 
   Today


11-02-2013Re: New reputation!
02:59 AM BDBoop


11-02-2013New reputation!
02:18 AM BDBoop


----------



## BDBoop (Nov 2, 2013)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> BDBoop said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



Surely. They will likely be wondering why you're going on about private messages on an open board, though.


----------



## tinydancer (Nov 2, 2013)

Now I beat up on Noomi  and she beats up on me a lot because we differ in how we want to resolve situations, but at least we are engaged. That's the point of debate.

Having burdened the world with three like me  I understand any woman who carries to term knowing that the child may only have days to live.

 But like Jailan, one second, one minute, one hour, one day means I will have wrapped my arms around the soul that grew inside me all those months. And I can hold him before that last breath before he goes to his greater Father. 

Not a fetus. A baby. A soul. Who lived inside me. Kicked inside me. Moved side to side inside me. You can keep calling "it a fetus" all you want, but all of them have been my babies to me. 

I admire this mother and this father. I especially love Jailan's aunt to death for sharing this story of this sweet life.

And Noomi for bringing this story forward. Even though we disagree.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Nov 2, 2013)

BDBoop said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > BDBoop said:
> ...



Didn't post the content stupid.

oh and by the way

No Posting contents of PMs without permission from the sender. A Rep Comment is Not considered a PM. Responses to a Rep comment are considered PM's.


----------



## Peterf (Nov 2, 2013)

BorisTheAnimal said:


> So, how long before we start to "compassionately" euthanize the mental defects, the political opponents, and all the other "undesirables"  BD and Noomi share the same sick ideology as Adolf Hitler.




No they don't.  And nor do I and other advocates of euthanasia.  Attributing false beliefs to one's opponents is a cheap debating tactic - can't you come up with something better?


----------



## Peterf (Nov 2, 2013)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Drake_Roberts said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



I see you describe yourself as 'Constitutional Watchdog'.    If your constitution lacks any more eloquent defender than you I fear for its survival.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Nov 2, 2013)

Peterf said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Drake_Roberts said:
> ...


obama whiners defending the pos has killed civility


----------



## Noomi (Nov 2, 2013)

tinydancer said:


> Now I beat up on Noomi  and she beats up on me a lot because we differ in how we want to resolve situations, but at least we are engaged. That's the point of debate.
> 
> Having burdened the world with three like me  I understand any woman who carries to term knowing that the child may only have days to live.
> 
> ...



I admire her, too, for sharing her story with us. It must have been so hard, but we all know who Jailan was, and can appreciate the short time he spent with us on this earth.


----------



## Noomi (Nov 2, 2013)

By the way, thanks for keeping this debate civil and respectful, [MENTION=25451]tinydancer[/MENTION] -its appreciated.


----------



## Peterf (Nov 2, 2013)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Peterf said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



No it hasn't.   Much as I disagree with those fighting in the last ditch to defend M Obama's tattered reputation I find it easy to remain civil.   I also think  expressing coherent ideas is an advantage in a debate.    Considerably more effective than spewing torrents of filth.  Imo.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Nov 2, 2013)

Peterf said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Peterf said:
> ...



Sweden? Fuck off.
obama's policies do not effect your sorry ass nor does his failures I say again fuck off.


----------



## lakeview (Nov 2, 2013)

Peterf said:


> BorisTheAnimal said:
> 
> 
> > So, how long before we start to "compassionately" euthanize the mental defects, the political opponents, and all the other "undesirables"  BD and Noomi share the same sick ideology as Adolf Hitler.
> ...



I agree with you in the sense that I don't believe that Noomi and BD, or you for that matter, are Hitler's ideological twins but I wouldn't be so quick to accuse BTA of attributing false beliefs to advocates of Euthanasia.

What people say when they're trying to convince others is one thing, what they do when the convincing part is over is another thing.

Euthanasia isn't common so we don't have a broad base of real world experience to look at but what little we do have does seem to show that BTA's concern is more valid than you'd care to admit. 

There are 4 states in America where assisted suicide is legal and I haven't yet heard of any abuses occurring in any of those states, on the other hand Belgium is a perfect example of what BTA is talking about; a place where euthanasia was first enacted with strict oversight and could only be applied to people who were adults, terminally-ill, and gave consent...look at what that's morphed into within 10 years.

I don't know many euthanasia proponents but I did spend quite a bit of time seeing and listening to Jack Kevorkian interviewed here in the local media. He is widely believed to have been an advocate of "death with dignity" for elderly, terminally-ill patients but that's not true, he wanted death on demand, for everyone regardless of age or physical condition, and he wanted to pair that with an aggressive organ harvesting program. Kevorkian wasn't the only euthanasia advocate who felt/feels that way either. I'm not saying you all think that way but enough do that simply dismissing BTA's concerns out of hand is a little bit of a cheap debating tactic.


----------



## BDBoop (Nov 2, 2013)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> BDBoop said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



I think you've gone from a solid 10 on the "Completely unhinged scale" to a respectable 18.

Of a possible 10.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Nov 2, 2013)

BDBoop said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > BDBoop said:
> ...



You lied that's good enough for me.


----------



## BDBoop (Nov 2, 2013)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> BDBoop said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



I baited you, and you responded as expected.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Nov 2, 2013)

BDBoop said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > BDBoop said:
> ...



You baited?
The problem with that you said you did not respond to that PM and then you claim I violated a board rule, seems to me the trap you set had trapped you in the liar pit.


----------



## BDBoop (Nov 2, 2013)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> BDBoop said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



Oh, yay!! You win the internetz.

Sorry. Honest to God, I truly am. But this game you play? Just doesn't hold my attention like it holds yours. It's like watching a kitten with a string - but even kittens get bored and wander off. 

Like me.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Nov 2, 2013)

BDBoop said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > BDBoop said:
> ...



Just showing you as a liar is win enough for me.


----------



## Peterf (Nov 2, 2013)

lakeview said:


> Peterf said:
> 
> 
> > BorisTheAnimal said:
> ...



Thank you for your thoughtful comments.

I agree with you; getting legislation and oversight right is not easy.  But there is so much unnecessary suffering around that allowing euthanasia for some seems to me to be something worth campaigning for.   Any law can be misused, broken or twisted but that is not, I think, a reason not to have a  law that will benefit many.

I've not heard of Kevorkian.   I won't look him up, being content to take your word for him being bad news.


----------



## Drake_Roberts (Nov 2, 2013)

BDBoop said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > BDBoop said:
> ...



Shame on you BD. No scale for measuring mental stability would ever be able to chart bigreb. The number would be too high for human minds to comprehend.


----------



## TheBarber (Nov 2, 2013)

Lakeview, wtf does it matter to you if someone kevorkians themself? Why don't you myob?


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Nov 2, 2013)

Drake_Roberts said:


> BDBoop said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...


You're sub par move along shit stain.


----------



## lakeview (Nov 2, 2013)

TheBarber said:


> Lakeview, wtf does it matter to you if someone kevorkians themself? Why don't you myob?



It's not the "themself" part that I'm concerned about, that wasn't obvious to you?


----------



## TheBarber (Nov 2, 2013)

lakeview said:


> TheBarber said:
> 
> 
> > Lakeview, wtf does it matter to you if someone kevorkians themself? Why don't you myob?
> ...



So what's the problem? Your side can't think of ways to protect whomever you're trying to protect without blocking everyone? What's the deal?


----------



## lakeview (Nov 2, 2013)

TheBarber said:


> lakeview said:
> 
> 
> > TheBarber said:
> ...



Why don't you tell me specifically what I said that you disagree with, and why, and then I'll respond. If you have multiple problems with what I said then we can do this multiple times.


----------



## TheBarber (Nov 2, 2013)

lakeview said:


> TheBarber said:
> 
> 
> > lakeview said:
> ...



I just think that people should be able to do what they want at the end of THEIR life.


----------



## choosy (Nov 2, 2013)

Both abortion and euthanasia must be individual decisions. No one may be forced to make a decision! 
A terminally ill person should have no pain. It should be all painkillers available - even if they shorten life! If a seriously ill person chooses to die, he should get the opportunity to suicide in a human way. For example with a cocktail of drugs under medical supervision.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Nov 2, 2013)

choosy said:


> Both abortion and euthanasia must be individual decisions. No one may be forced to make a decision!
> A terminally ill person should have no pain. It should be all painkillers available - even if they shorten life! If a seriously ill person chooses to die, he should get the opportunity to suicide in a human way. For example with a cocktail of drugs under medical supervision.



abortion is not a individual decision their are two individuals involved.


----------



## Luddly Neddite (Nov 2, 2013)

Unless its you having the abortion, its none of your business.


----------



## choosy (Nov 2, 2013)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> choosy said:
> 
> 
> > Both abortion and euthanasia must be individual decisions. No one may be forced to make a decision!
> ...



Does idividual life begins after fertilization? 
Individual life is not really possible for an embryo, is it? Nobody says abortion is great. Abortion is always a last Resort!


----------



## Drake_Roberts (Nov 2, 2013)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Drake_Roberts said:
> 
> 
> > BDBoop said:
> ...



I'm the one who's sub-par? The non-cursing, brilliant psychopath is sub-par? What have you been smoking?


Has anyone ever noticed that bigreb only curses when talking to me? He didn't even curse when BD called him mentally unhinged.


----------



## lakeview (Nov 2, 2013)

TheBarber said:


> lakeview said:
> 
> 
> > TheBarber said:
> ...



I agree with that. I'm willing to bet that you think it's that person's business and no one else's, correct?


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Nov 2, 2013)

Drake_Roberts said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Drake_Roberts said:
> ...



yes you're sub par bitch move along.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Nov 2, 2013)

choosy said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > choosy said:
> ...



does a human embryo become anything other than a human?
Life does begin in the womb


----------



## Drake_Roberts (Nov 2, 2013)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Drake_Roberts said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



I'm a bitch? You're the one who continuously loses his temper and curses. Yet I am the bitch.

Interesting...


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Nov 2, 2013)

Drake_Roberts said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Drake_Roberts said:
> ...



Temper? nope and yes you're a bitch you should not have directed your bullshit comment to me.


----------



## GWV5903 (Nov 2, 2013)

Luddly Neddite said:


> thanatos144 said:
> 
> 
> > Progressives are in love with killing defenseless innocent people.
> ...



I am in favor of giving you a frontal lobotomy because your opinion is so insensitive to reality, but I digress...

Yeah, we hate them so much that we want to let them live...

Hopefully someday you realize how detached you are from your spirit...


----------



## choosy (Nov 2, 2013)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> choosy said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



A human embryo becomes a human,  when it matures long enough!
Life can also start in a test tube, but without a woman it never gets to a human.


----------



## choosy (Nov 2, 2013)

GWV5903 said:


> Luddly Neddite said:
> 
> 
> > thanatos144 said:
> ...



*NO ONE* can decide whether a life is worth living - only a person itself.
BUT a woman can decide if she want to get a Baby or not.  It is irrelevant whether the embryo is healthy or diseased! It is an important decision to become a mother or not. Life is significantly altered by a child! A woman must decide if she wants to take responsibility.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Nov 2, 2013)

choosy said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > choosy said:
> ...


So what you're saying is that there is a chance a human embryo will become something other than what it was created from?


----------



## TheBarber (Nov 2, 2013)

Abortion is meaningless on an over-populated planet.


----------



## koshergrl (Nov 2, 2013)

A human embryo is, by definition, human.

And the planet is certainly not overpopulated. The notion is ridiculous.


----------



## thanatos144 (Nov 2, 2013)

TheBarber said:


> Abortion is meaningless on an over-populated planet.



Why are you not doing your part to help then?


----------



## Drake_Roberts (Nov 2, 2013)

TheBarber said:


> Abortion is meaningless on an over-populated planet.



Overpopulated? How is Earth overpopulated?  I know where I live is not overpopulated and many other places aren't either. Where do you live, Beijing?


----------



## Mr Natural (Nov 2, 2013)

koshergrl said:


> A human embryo is, by definition, human.
> 
> And the planet is certainly not overpopulated. The notion is ridiculous.



What's ridiculous is the notion that the planet is not overpopulated with humans.


----------



## Againsheila (Nov 2, 2013)

Noomi said:


> This story is a few months old, but its incredibly sad. A little boy born with a defective small intestine. He had surgery, but doctors discovered that his entire small bowel had died, and as a result, he couldn't eat or drink, and there was nothing that could be done for him.
> He was given high doses of morphine as he starved to death - after 13 days of life:
> 
> 
> ...



I do not understand how some people can use a sick, dying child as justification to kill a healthy unborn child.  I guess we're even.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Nov 2, 2013)




----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Nov 2, 2013)

Mr Clean said:


> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> > A human embryo is, by definition, human.
> ...



Why don't you do your part? Take a long walk on a short pier?


----------



## thanatos144 (Nov 2, 2013)

Mr Clean said:


> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> > A human embryo is, by definition, human.
> ...



So when are you going to do your part to help?


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Nov 2, 2013)

Peterf said:


> BorisTheAnimal said:
> 
> 
> > So, how long before we start to "compassionately" euthanize the mental defects, the political opponents, and all the other "undesirables"  BD and Noomi share the same sick ideology as Adolf Hitler.
> ...



I can actually site people that advocate crap you just said that no one believes. Does that make you a liar, or stupid?


----------



## Luddly Neddite (Nov 2, 2013)

Bizarre that we think we can and should control other people' bodies. 


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com


----------



## tinydancer (Nov 2, 2013)

Mr Clean said:


> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> > A human embryo is, by definition, human.
> ...



Well then take your poison in your cities, die and give the earth back.  I live in the middle of nowhere quite happily.

So do something about your overpopulation where you live. Seriously. Leave the rest of us in the middle of nowhere people alone. 

In other words, don't bitch at the likes of me.


----------



## Zoom-boing (Nov 2, 2013)

choosy said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > choosy said:
> ...



A human embryo doesn't "become" human, a human embryo _is _a human from the get go.  A human being in the very earliest stages of development.  Abortion kills that individual human being.


----------



## tinydancer (Nov 2, 2013)

Againsheila said:


> Noomi said:
> 
> 
> > This story is a few months old, but its incredibly sad. A little boy born with a defective small intestine. He had surgery, but doctors discovered that his entire small bowel had died, and as a result, he couldn't eat or drink, and there was nothing that could be done for him.
> ...



Jailan was beautiful and all around him loved him. It's worth the read to go to the story of Jailan's life. 

You will read about spirit and love and not about a sick dying child. 

You will read how the human spirit can embrace a life as short as Jailan's was and how it touched the whole family.

Jailan lived. Jailan lived. Jailan lived. And then he passed.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Nov 2, 2013)

Luddly Neddite said:


> Bizarre that we think we can and should control other people' bodies.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com


----------



## thanatos144 (Nov 2, 2013)

I find it disgusting that progressives use sick kids to push infanticide


----------



## Luddly Neddite (Nov 2, 2013)

Saying it doesn't make it so. The state should not have control of people's bodies. We own our bodies and must fight to keep that ownership. 

This is a prime example of the radical right's wanting the state to have complete control over us. It's also why abortion is and should forever be safe and legal and with no restrictions. 

There lots of countries where women are controlled by radicals. Go live in one of them. 



Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Nov 2, 2013)

Luddly Neddite said:


> Saying it doesn't make it so. The state should not have control of people's bodies. We own our bodies and must fight to keep that ownership.
> 
> This is a prime example of the radical right's wanting the state to have complete control over us. It's also why abortion is and should forever be safe and legal and with no restrictions.
> 
> ...



it goes both way you saying what you say doesn't make it so.



bigrebnc1775 said:


> Luddly Neddite said:
> 
> 
> > Bizarre that we think we can and should control other people' bodies.
> ...


----------



## Peterf (Nov 2, 2013)

Quantum Windbag said:


> Peterf said:
> 
> 
> > BorisTheAnimal said:
> ...



Neither.  It just makes me someone who knows the difference between 'site' and 'cite'.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Nov 2, 2013)

Peterf said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > Peterf said:
> ...



I see them every day, what;s your point?


----------



## Luddly Neddite (Nov 2, 2013)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> it goes both way you saying what you say doesn't make it so.



Who owns and controls your body?

If you are male, who owns and controls your sperm?

Who owns and controls your reproduction decisions?

Those are all rhetorical questions because no state and no government has the right to own your body or any of its functions. 

If you want to give that very basic right away, go for it. But "you" sure as hell don't have the right to force others to give away the rights and ownership of their body.

(This non-issue really shows the truth behind radical rw's crazy agenda. It proves that every position they SAY they hold is a lie.)


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Nov 2, 2013)

Luddly Neddite said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > it goes both way you saying what you say doesn't make it so.
> ...



I'll give you the same answer that you have removed.


----------



## Drake_Roberts (Nov 2, 2013)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> choosy said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



I know this may seem suprising, but I actually agree with bigreb. Does 2+2=4? Yes, it does. So does 1 human plus 1 human equal a giraffe? No, it does not. From the moment of conception, an embryo is a member of the human race. It is not magically changed into a human at the moment of birth. That is what you pro-choice people fail to understand. A human is a human, no matter how small.

If my girlfriend and I ever get married, I can guarantee we would not abort any children we might concieve.

Back to the math metaphors: 1+2=3. Abortion+Baby=Murder.


----------



## Luddly Neddite (Nov 2, 2013)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Luddly Neddite said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



That's not true but you're too cowardly to actually address the question.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Nov 2, 2013)

Luddly Neddite said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Luddly Neddite said:
> ...


So too you that is not the body of a human? really how much paint chips did you eat as a child?


----------



## Luddly Neddite (Nov 2, 2013)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Luddly Neddite said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



_So, to you, that is not the body of a human?_

Is THAT what you meant?

Because, if it is, THAT was not and is not the question. You're such a coward, you removed the questions I asked. 

If you cannot or will not address those questions, then, piss off. 

If you should decide you can try to answer my questions, then, piss off. 

IOW, coward, piss off because, at the bottom of every single thing you have written is your vile belief that the state should have the power to force women to reproduce. I will never agree to that.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Nov 2, 2013)

Luddly Neddite said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Luddly Neddite said:
> ...



Shut the fuck up and answer the god damn question.
Are you saying that is not a body of a human?


----------



## Drake_Roberts (Nov 2, 2013)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Luddly Neddite said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



Just answer the question, Luddly. Avoiding the question does nobody any good. If you read the entirety of bigreb and I's argument, you know that if you don't, prepare for a several page long argument.


----------



## Luddly Neddite (Nov 2, 2013)

Luddly Neddite said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > it goes both way you saying what you say doesn't make it so.
> ...



Is there any radical rw who has the courage to answer these very easy and very straightforward questions?

My bet is - nope.

Just as they don't hold the man equally responsible. 

(Although, to be fair, maybe the rw's are like Limbaugh and don't know it takes two to make a pregnancy.)


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Nov 2, 2013)

Luddly Neddite said:


> Luddly Neddite said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



You are to much of a god damn pussy to answer my question you don't get to ask any questions of anyone PUSSY.


----------



## JoeB131 (Nov 2, 2013)

Noomi said:


> PixieStix said:
> 
> 
> > Noomi said:
> ...



My first question is, could this baby have gotten a transplant?  

I have no problem terminating such a pregnancy if a defect this severe is discovered, but I'm a little cautious about Euthansia given our current system of "managed care".


----------



## Luddly Neddite (Nov 2, 2013)

Drake_Roberts said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Luddly Neddite said:
> ...



No I didn't read it but, I don't serve at his pleasure. I've mostly ignored for most of the time I've been posting here and will continue to mostly ignore him. 

There is nothing in this issue to argue about but really, there is only one fact that no amount of rw twist and shout will ever change -

Unless you are the woman getting the abortion, its none of your business. 

littlereb and the others are anxious to give away the rights of others, but they're too cowardly to admit they would not give away their own.


----------



## earlycuyler (Nov 2, 2013)

JoeB131 said:


> Noomi said:
> 
> 
> > PixieStix said:
> ...



You love our system of managed care . You should read the article then you would have known that abortion was never considred by the parents. Hell, I did not even see them mention putting the kid down. Guess your just in this to support your girl friend eh ?


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Nov 2, 2013)

And here we see the hypocrisy and inconsistency of bigrebnc1775 and others on the social right: where they preach conservative dogma about less government, the evils of too much government, and how government is incompetent and shouldnt tell people how to run their lives. Then, all of a sudden, when it comes to abortion or same-sex couples, its governments place to dictate to citizens how to run their lives, government regulation is a good thing, and government is no longer incompetent. 

There was at time, before the advent of the idiocy of the social right, when conservatives were at least consistent in their advocacy of less government, including with regard to abortion.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Nov 2, 2013)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> And here we see the hypocrisy and inconsistency of bigrebnc1775 and others on the social right: where they preach conservative dogma about &#8216;less government,&#8217; the evils of &#8216;too much government,&#8217; and how government is &#8216;incompetent&#8217; and shouldn&#8217;t tell people how to run their lives. Then, all of a sudden, when it comes to abortion or same-sex couples, it&#8217;s government&#8217;s place to dictate to citizens how to run their lives, government regulation is a good thing, and government is no longer incompetent.
> 
> There was at time, before the advent of the idiocy of the social right, when conservatives were at least consistent in their advocacy of &#8216;less government,&#8217; including with regard to abortion.



Such hypocrisy and inconsistency coming from you. You preach about protecting those who can't protect themselves but throw away an unborn child like it was trash.

I'm onto to garbage like you liberals. It has nothing to do with protecting the rights but all about protecting votes.


----------



## Peterf (Nov 3, 2013)

Quantum Windbag said:


> Peterf said:
> 
> 
> > Quantum Windbag said:
> ...



My point is not a misplaced semi-colon.    It is what is called a full stop in English and, I believe, a period in American.


----------



## Peterf (Nov 3, 2013)

Drake_Roberts said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > choosy said:
> ...


----------



## JoeB131 (Nov 3, 2013)

earlycuyler said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > Noomi said:
> ...



Gee, I don't know, I halfway disagreed with her.  

My problem with Euthansia at least in this country is that when you have big insurance companies being given the option to kill patients to keep their expenses down, a lot more of us will be declared "uncurable".


----------



## tinydancer (Nov 3, 2013)

Peterf said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > Peterf said:
> ...



Why are you so obsessed with spelling? Many people post on the fly and spelling mistakes occur.

Focus on the meaning of the post.  It makes the board far more enjoyable.


----------



## tinydancer (Nov 3, 2013)

JoeB131 said:


> earlycuyler said:
> 
> 
> > JoeB131 said:
> ...




Well hells bells we agree on something 

Not just big insurance companies though. In Britain the NHS was busted for giving bonuses to hospitals for putting patients on the death transit to hell errrrrrrrrrrrrthe Liverpool Care Pathway and freeing up beds.

One will always find a bean counter or a bureaucrat that can screw up a good program.


----------



## tinydancer (Nov 3, 2013)

Peterf said:


> Drake_Roberts said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...


----------



## BDBoop (Nov 3, 2013)

I draw the line at "it is none of my business."


----------



## choosy (Nov 3, 2013)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> choosy said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



Of corse!  Millions of human embryos never become anythink like a human!


----------



## choosy (Nov 3, 2013)

Zoom-boing said:


> choosy said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



Yes, abortion kills human embryos!  No one denies! Is it individual - yes it is! A fly or finger prints are also indiviually, aren't they.


----------



## choosy (Nov 3, 2013)

Drake_Roberts said:


> TheBarber said:
> 
> 
> > Abortion is meaningless on an over-populated planet.
> ...



Of course, the world is overpopulated! But abortion is not a remedy for overpopulation!!!  Only equal opportunitie and saccess to resources , education and contraceptives are effectively! Abortion is the last resort of a woman not to have a baby.  No one may dispute this right! Because there is no real alternative. And it is no alternative to say - don't to have sex!  That is unrealistic and unworldly! To deny overpopulation is also unworldly. It  is not indicative of a good Formation, sorry to say ...


----------



## Lumpy 1 (Nov 3, 2013)

BDBoop said:


> I draw the line at "it is none of my business."



That's how the German people felt during the Jewish extermination, well that and fear of ruling class repercussions.


----------



## thanatos144 (Nov 3, 2013)

Lumpy 1 said:


> BDBoop said:
> 
> 
> > I draw the line at "it is none of my business."
> ...



Socialists like mass murder


----------



## MisterBeale (Nov 3, 2013)

thanatos144 said:


> Lumpy 1 said:
> 
> 
> > BDBoop said:
> ...


----------



## Drake_Roberts (Nov 3, 2013)

Peterf said:


> Drake_Roberts said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Nov 3, 2013)

Peterf said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > Peterf said:
> ...



Was that supposed to be cleaver? 

Just a hint, if you want to make grammar jokes, you should learn to use English properly.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Nov 3, 2013)

BDBoop said:


> I draw the line at "it is none of my business."



Yet you keep shoving your morality down everyone's throat.


----------



## choosy (Nov 4, 2013)

Lumpy 1 said:


> BDBoop said:
> 
> 
> > I draw the line at "it is none of my business."
> ...



The comparison is really disgusting. Systematically murdering people has nothing to do with abortion. 

I can understand that people reject abortion. For me personally, it also wouldn't be an option. But I have no doubt that there are women who see no other way out. To prevent as many abortions, you have to analyze why women get into such situations. It is not a solution to demonize. Sex education, free contraceptives and financial support could be a step in the right direction. In the end the possibility must remain on abortion as a last resort. Not least for raping women!


----------



## RKMBrown (Nov 4, 2013)

Noomi said:


> This story is a few months old, but its incredibly sad. A little boy born with a defective small intestine. He had surgery, but doctors discovered that his entire small bowel had died, and as a result, he couldn't eat or drink, and there was nothing that could be done for him.
> He was given high doses of morphine as he starved to death - after 13 days of life:
> 
> 
> ...



I've got a better question.  Why would someone want to kill a perfectly healthy baby that has never hurt anyone and simply desires a chance to live the life god and his parents gave him?


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Nov 4, 2013)

choosy said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > choosy said:
> ...



Where are your facts? Site one time that two humans gave birth to something other than a human.


----------



## Octarine (Nov 4, 2013)

Noomi said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > You are right, they should have just killed the mother when she got pregnant.
> ...



It could have been possible to operate and save his life but obviously, once it was discovered he was beyound nedical help then euthanasia should have been an option. I cannot see how watching a new born baby starve to death is more acceptable.


----------



## RKMBrown (Nov 4, 2013)

choosy said:


> Lumpy 1 said:
> 
> 
> > BDBoop said:
> ...



How can a baby rape a woman?


----------



## BDBoop (Nov 4, 2013)

choosy said:


> Lumpy 1 said:
> 
> 
> > BDBoop said:
> ...



Yeah, well - Lumpy is an idiot, and apparently doesn't grasp the Godwin concept.


----------



## Noomi (Nov 4, 2013)

RKMBrown said:


> I've got a better question.  Why would someone want to kill a perfectly healthy baby that has never hurt anyone and simply desires a chance to live the life god and his parents gave him?



We are not talking about a healthy baby. Stay on topic.


----------



## Noomi (Nov 4, 2013)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> choosy said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



She means that millions of pregnancies end in miscarriage, often before the woman knows she is pregnant. That's millions of embryos who don't become people.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Nov 4, 2013)

Noomi said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > choosy said:
> ...



If that is what she meant that is the wrong answer. Look at my question and ask yourself does that answer apply to the question.


----------



## lakeview (Nov 4, 2013)

Noomi said:


> RKMBrown said:
> 
> 
> > I've got a better question.  Why would someone want to kill a perfectly healthy baby that has never hurt anyone and simply desires a chance to live the life god and his parents gave him?
> ...



Don't do this. You know very well that this thread veered away from the specific incident in your OP a long time ago and there has been an awful lot of generalization in here due in no small part to the thought your chosen story has generated, good choice by the way, that story is thought provoking.


----------



## IlarMeilyr (Nov 4, 2013)

Looking at some of our more far left wing liberal Democrat Parody "leaders," the question might be asked:

*Why Should Not Abortion And Euthanasia Be Encouraged?*


----------



## RKMBrown (Nov 4, 2013)

Noomi said:


> RKMBrown said:
> 
> 
> > I've got a better question.  Why would someone want to kill a perfectly healthy baby that has never hurt anyone and simply desires a chance to live the life god and his parents gave him?
> ...



You cherry picked a situation that does not even fit the OP. Then you ask me to stay on topic?  The OP is off topic in the very first post.  Presumably because you could not find an example that fits the OP statements?  So we are supposed to argue about some mythical baby that, does not actually exist, that we are gonna save from the agony of birth by having a doctor perform some horrific procedure on him?  I'm a detail guy.  I need actual facts, not what ifs.  What is the tool we are going to use to make this determination that the baby will not live, when will we know, what are the actual options, the physical procedures that are options to birth, that we are gonna use.  

I suspect the "solution" may be much worse than the issue.


----------



## RKMBrown (Nov 4, 2013)

That said, I have no personal issue with abortions that take place before the baby has a beating heart and/or measure-able brain wave activity.  IOW if the baby is not a living thinking, heart beating human yet I have no legal proof that the baby can feel and/or is alive yet.  Thus, at that point the issue is one of stopping the pregnancy before the baby is alive, which to me is arguably more responsible than stopping the life of the baby, after the baby is measurably alive.

IMO an advocate for a baby needs to be provided by a court in cases where the baby is alive, and the mother and doctor have good reason to terminate that life.


----------



## koshergrl (Nov 4, 2013)

IlarMeilyr said:


> Looking at some of our more far left wing liberal Democrat Parody "leaders," the question might be asked:
> 
> *Why Should Not Abortion And Euthanasia Be Encouraged?*


 
They do encourage it. They tout abortion and euthanasia as a cureall...the ultimate in "women's health", the best way to make the old and infim *happy*...they protect women from the risky venture of a full term pregnancy, while all but eliminating child abuse, poverty, and disease!

In addition, it's good for the environment and will put an end to famine!

Yup, killing people..it's what's best for them.


----------



## IlarMeilyr (Nov 5, 2013)

koshergrl said:


> IlarMeilyr said:
> 
> 
> > Looking at some of our more far left wing liberal Democrat Parody "leaders," the question might be asked:
> ...



If Rose Kennedy had practiced a little abortion (or euthanasia) instead of just casual lobotomization, the world may never have been infested with Teddy _glub glub_ Kennedy --  and Mary Jo might still be alive today.


----------



## thanatos144 (Nov 5, 2013)

IlarMeilyr said:


> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> > IlarMeilyr said:
> ...



You honestly think the other two were any better then Teddy?


----------



## RKMBrown (Nov 5, 2013)

[MENTION=38085]Noomi[/MENTION]  Irony:  An argument against abortion is off topic in an abortion thread, but an argument for aborting an already dead US Senator is on topic.


----------



## GWV5903 (Nov 5, 2013)

choosy said:


> GWV5903 said:
> 
> 
> > Luddly Neddite said:
> ...



I see you're right in line behind Luddly...


----------



## IlarMeilyr (Nov 5, 2013)

thanatos144 said:


> IlarMeilyr said:
> 
> 
> > koshergrl said:
> ...



Yes.  Yes I do.


----------



## lakeview (Nov 5, 2013)

HotSauce said:


> People need to learn to mind their own beeswax. The US is supposed to be the land of the free. So let's try not to tell everyone what to do, ok?



Why don't you shut up and stop telling everyone else what to do?


----------



## BDBoop (Nov 5, 2013)

HotSauce said:


> People need to learn to mind their own beeswax. The US is supposed to be the land of the free. So let's try not to tell everyone what to do, ok?



What are you trying to do, break up our happy home!?


----------



## choosy (Nov 5, 2013)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Noomi said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



 Now we are getting closer! BIRTH is the answer! I think we are talking about unborn embryos! An Embryo outside an uterus never becomes a baby! And yes, abortion kills human Embryos. That's why abortion is a last resort and not a kind of family planning or contraception. 

There is no other chance for a pregnant woman not to become a mother.


----------



## koshergrl (Nov 5, 2013)

People die of natural causes all the time.

That is not a justification for KILLING them.


----------



## choosy (Nov 5, 2013)

It would be great if all the pro-lifers would use their power to protect* born *children!


----------



## koshergrl (Nov 5, 2013)

Shut the hell up with the straw man. Right to lifers do protect born children, and they pour a LOT of money and time into the ventures that help born children.

Kindly stop promoting the myth that abortion in some way protects children. It doesn't, it never has, and there are absolutely no statistics that show that it is in any way connected to the treatment/quality of life of born children...or, rather, the stats show the exact opposite of what the death cultists maintain...i.e., child abuse, child murder, child neglect have all increased since legalized abortion.


----------



## Againsheila (Nov 5, 2013)

choosy said:


> It would be great if all the pro-lifers would use their power to protect* born *children!



It would be great if people who can't afford children would give them up for adoption to people who can afford them and want them desperately, rather than killing them in the womb.


----------



## thanatos144 (Nov 5, 2013)

IlarMeilyr said:


> thanatos144 said:
> 
> 
> > IlarMeilyr said:
> ...



then you are wrong


----------



## Againsheila (Nov 5, 2013)

Here you go Noomi, you ought to be thrilled with this...






Then again, you probably want to euthanize the 1 out of 10 that isn't aborted too.


----------



## BDBoop (Nov 5, 2013)

Againsheila said:


> Here you go Noomi, you ought to be thrilled with this...
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Wow. That was an inordinately low blow.

And by the way, the decision to do so was made by individual women who have the legal right to do so. Therefore, genocide was not involved.

Lastly - I have often disproved memes that back my position. Where is the citation that your meme is based in reality.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Nov 5, 2013)

BDBoop said:


> Againsheila said:
> 
> 
> > Here you go Noomi, you ought to be thrilled with this...
> ...



Abortion is as low as anyone can go


----------



## BDBoop (Nov 5, 2013)

It's an estimate by  Dr. Brian Skotko, a pediatric geneticist at Children's Hospital Boston. I don't find him offering any proof to back his allegation.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Nov 5, 2013)

choosy said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Noomi said:
> ...



Humans do not create anything other than humans stop dancing.


----------



## Noomi (Nov 6, 2013)

Againsheila said:


> Here you go Noomi, you ought to be thrilled with this...
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Not everyone can cope with raising a special needs child, and they shouldn't be forced to. It costs a lot of money, and Downs kids have heart problems, among other medical issues. Its a financial drain.

That said, I am not sure what I would do if I was going to have a baby with Downs. 12 months ago I would have said kill it. But since I have met this wonderful young lady named Sarah who used to do karate with me, I have started to change my mind.

Don't think I am thrilled with the fact so many are aborted - I do consider the fact that a lot of parents cannot afford to raise a special needs child - especially if they have other kids at home.


----------



## lakeview (Nov 6, 2013)

Noomi said:


> That said, I am not sure what I would do if I was going to have a baby with Downs. 12 months ago I would have said kill it. But since I have met this wonderful young lady named Sarah who used to do karate with me, I have started to change my mind.



I'm sure you think this makes you sound open minded but it doesn't, it makes you sound like someone who shouldn't be debating the life or death of others in any capacity.


----------



## thanatos144 (Nov 6, 2013)

BDBoop said:


> Againsheila said:
> 
> 
> > Here you go Noomi, you ought to be thrilled with this...
> ...



Because the woman decided to participate in the genocide it makes it okay? Did you guys ask the babies if it wanted to live? Did you care about its right to its body?


----------



## thanatos144 (Nov 6, 2013)

HotSauce said:


> thanatos144 said:
> 
> 
> > BDBoop said:
> ...



Yes put every doctor that performs one that isn't for saving a life in jail.


----------



## BDBoop (Nov 6, 2013)

HotSauce said:


> thanatos144 said:
> 
> 
> > HotSauce said:
> ...



And on what charges? Abortion is not against the law.


----------



## thanatos144 (Nov 6, 2013)

HotSauce said:


> thanatos144 said:
> 
> 
> > HotSauce said:
> ...



Fraud is illegal already and fraud in the crime of murder just means more penalties.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Nov 6, 2013)

Noomi said:


> Againsheila said:
> 
> 
> > Here you go Noomi, you ought to be thrilled with this...
> ...



Yes, it is really hard to raise a child that is is unconditionally loving.


----------



## Againsheila (Nov 6, 2013)

Noomi said:


> Againsheila said:
> 
> 
> > Here you go Noomi, you ought to be thrilled with this...
> ...



Adoption is always an answer, and yes, there are people willing to adopt special needs babies as well.  In fact, my neighbor went in search of 2 special needs children to adopt.  One had a cleft palate, she adopted him when he was 11.  He's had several surgeries and no, it wasn't cheep and no they aren't rich.


----------



## Againsheila (Nov 6, 2013)

BDBoop said:


> Againsheila said:
> 
> 
> > Here you go Noomi, you ought to be thrilled with this...
> ...



I consider advocating killing a dying child to be a low blow.  I consider killing a baby in the womb all the way up to birth do be a low blow.  I do not consider citing facts and objecting to that position to be a low blow.


----------



## choosy (Nov 8, 2013)

koshergrl said:


> Shut the hell up with the straw man. Right to lifers do protect born children, and they pour a LOT of money and time into the ventures that help born children.
> 
> Kindly stop promoting the myth that abortion in some way protects children. It doesn't, it never has, and there are absolutely no statistics that show that it is in any way connected to the treatment/quality of life of born children...or, rather, the stats show the exact opposite of what the death cultists maintain...i.e., child abuse, child murder, child neglect have all increased since legalized abortion.



I *never* said that abortion in some way protects children! I would *never* presume to judge the quality of life of anyone! In particular, children with Down syndrome are considered to be very happy children. Abortion is not to protect children - how does it work??? I've always said that it is an individual decision of a woman. You may call it selfish. But to raise a child  cost money and time *and* parents must assume a special responsibility. Women should decide whether they want to take this responsibility.


----------



## koshergrl (Nov 8, 2013)

lakeview said:


> Noomi said:
> 
> 
> > That said, I am not sure what I would do if I was going to have a baby with Downs. 12 months ago I would have said kill it. But since I have met this wonderful young lady named Sarah who used to do karate with me, I have started to change my mind.
> ...


 
Noomi's life experience has been very, very narrow. Pray for her horizons to widen and that she comes to understand how very dangerous many of her closely held beliefs are.


----------



## RKMBrown (Nov 8, 2013)

Noomi said:


> Againsheila said:
> 
> 
> > Here you go Noomi, you ought to be thrilled with this...
> ...



So here we have an actual "issue" related to the OP, but instead of aborting the child to help the child go through a life of pain, what we really have is aborting a child because the child will be "different" be a burden on the parents time and finances.  

Why then can't we just go around killing people after birth based on burden?  Why is killing a child after birth different than killing a baby with a beating heart in a womb, to save us from the "burden" of having to raise the child?  Why not do an IQ test when the child is 10 and if under a certain threshold let the parents kill the child at that time?  

What's the difference?


----------



## koshergrl (Nov 8, 2013)

There is no difference.

And the death cultists know it, and they're okay with it. They know that most people find it abhorrent, however, so they lie about it.

In other words, you won't get a straight answer from them.


----------



## koshergrl (Nov 8, 2013)

"In October of 1939 amid the turmoil of the outbreak of war Hitler ordered widespread "mercy killing" of the sick and disabled. 

"Code named "Aktion T 4," the Nazi euthanasia program to eliminate "life unworthy of life" at first focused on newborns and very young children. Midwives and doctors were required to register children up to age three who showed symptoms of mental retardation, physical deformity, or other symptoms included on a questionnaire from the Reich Health Ministry.

"A decision on whether to allow the child to live was then made by three medical experts solely on the basis of the questionnaire, without any examination and without reading any medical records. 

"Each expert placed a + mark in red pencil or - mark in blue pencil under the term "treatment" on a special form. A red plus mark meant a decision to kill the child. A blue minus sign meant a decision against killing. Three plus symbols resulted in a euthanasia warrant being issued and the transfer of the child to a 'Children's Specialty Department' for death by injection or gradual starvation. 

"The decision had to be unanimous. In cases where the decision was not unanimous the child was kept under observation and another attempt would be made to get a unanimous decision. 

"The Nazi euthanasia program quickly expanded to include older disabled children and adults. Hitler's decree of October, 1939, typed on his personal stationary, enlarged "the authority of certain physicians to be designated by name in such manner that persons who, according to human judgment, are incurable can, upon a most careful diagnosis of their condition of sickness, be accorded a mercy death." 

The History Place - Holocaust Timeline: Nazi Euthanasia


----------



## koshergrl (Nov 8, 2013)

I like this...you know how today's progressives insist that the Catholics were complicit, somehow, in the Holocaust (complete fabrication...they were held hostage and killed by Nazis)...

"
On August 3, 1941, a Catholic Bishop, Clemens von Galen, delivered a sermon in Münster Cathedral attacking the Nazi euthanasia program calling it "plain murder." The sermon sent a shockwave through the Nazi leadership by publicly condemning the program and urged German Catholics to "withdraw ourselves and our faithful from their (Nazi) influence so that we may not be contaminated by their thinking and their ungodly behavior.

"As a result, on August 23, Hitler suspended Aktion T4, which had accounted for nearly a hundred thousand deaths by this time. 

"The Nazis retaliated against the Bishop by beheading three parish priests who had distributed his sermon, but left the Bishop unharmed to avoid making him into a martyr."


The History Place - Holocaust Timeline: Nazi Euthanasia


----------



## choosy (Nov 8, 2013)

RKMBrown said:


> Noomi said:
> 
> 
> > Againsheila said:
> ...



*You can not force a woman to have a baby! * Why is killing a child after birth is different? I hope you know the difference! There are laws ... *And* -a born baby is not dependent on a woman! 
Why do you want to take women this right??? There are no alternatives


----------



## koshergrl (Nov 8, 2013)

Nobody *forces* women to have babies. That is the law of NATURE. If you have a problem with the fact that women can get pregnant and once pregnant, give birth, then take it up with NATURE. 

But a woman does NOT have the right to terminate the life of another. Even if that other is dependent upon her for life. 

We are OBLIGATED to protect those who come under our protection, regardless of the MANNER they are placed there. If you go to a park, and you see two 5 year olds playing, and no adult...you can be held CRIMINALLY NEGLIGENT if you allow something to happen to those children, or if you leave them alone after you realize they are not being supervised. Because everybody is OBLIGATED to protect the vulnerable.

So if you become pregnant, by whatever method, under whatever circumstance, you are OBLIGATED to protect the life inside of you until you can find someone else to take that burden from you...and murder is NOT an acceptable way to discharge the responsibility.

A woman's right to her own body does not extend to the killing of another. End of story.


----------



## koshergrl (Nov 8, 2013)

As a matter of fact, abortion is more often *forced* upon women than birth is. I have yet to hear a single woman complain about being *forced* to give birth...but there are thousands upon thousands of women who will testify to being coerced into abortions they did not want, and later regret.


The majority of women who get abortions state that they are getting them under coercion. Almost 100 percent of late term abortions are coercive. 

Which is why the abortionists don't want anyone to know what they REALLY do in those clinics.


----------



## choosy (Nov 8, 2013)

koshergrl said:


> As a matter of fact, abortion is more often *forced* upon women than birth is. I have yet to hear a single woman complain about being *forced* to give birth...but there are thousands upon thousands of women who will testify to being coerced into abortions they did not want, and later regret.
> 
> 
> The majority of women who get abortions state that they are getting them under coercion. Almost 100 percent of late term abortions are coercive.
> ...



You really think, that women were almost forced to get abortions? And how do the women get under coercion in THOSE CLINICS?   Are they captured and deported?


----------



## koshergrl (Nov 8, 2013)

I don't *think*, I know. 

Aside from that, your post is unintelligible. Try to use English.


----------



## koshergrl (Nov 8, 2013)

"
Reasons women give for having abortions:
&#8226; Forced by mother 
&#8226; Father opposed
&#8226; Husband or boyfriend persuaded me 
&#8226; No other option given
&#8226; Would have been kicked out 
&#8226; Loss of family&#8217;s support 
&#8226; Lack of support from society 
&#8226; Clinic persuaded me4 
​"In 95% of all cases, the male partner plays a central role in the decision.5  Of men interviewed at abortion clinics 45% recalled urging abortion, including 37% of married men.6  Many of these men reported being justified in being the primary decision maker in the decision to have the abortion.6"

Forced Abortions in America


----------



## koshergrl (Nov 8, 2013)

"pro-choice ethicist Daniel Callahan, director of the Hastings Center, has acknowledged the same basic problem:
That men have long coerced women into unwanted abortion when it suits their purposes is well-known but rarely mentioned. Data reported by the Alan Guttmacher Institute indicate that some 30 percent of women have an abortion because someone else, not the woman, wants it.14   "

Forced Abortions in America​


----------



## koshergrl (Nov 8, 2013)

*Citations*​1. VM Rue et. al., &#8220;Induced abortion and traumatic stress: A preliminary comparison of American and Russian women,&#8221; Medical Science Monitor 10(10): SR5-16 (2004).
2. See the special report, _Forced Abortion in America_. 
3. M Gissler et. al., &#8220;Pregnancy Associated Deaths in Finland 1987-1994 -- definition problems and benefits of record linkage,&#8221; Acta Obsetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica 76:651-657 (1997); and M. Gissler, &#8220;Injury deaths, suicides and homicides associated with pregnancy, Finland 1987-2000,&#8221; European J. Public Health 15(5):459-63 (2005).
4. Frederica Mathewes-Green, _Real Choices_ (Ben Lomond, CA: Conciliar Press, 1997).
5. Mary K. Zimmerman, _Passage Through Abortion_ (New York, Prager Publishers, 1977).
6. Arthur Shostak and Gary McLouth, _Men and Abortion: Lessons, Losses, and Love _(New York: Preager Publishers, 1984).
7. Brian McQuarrie, &#8220;Guard, clinic at odds at abortion hearing,&#8221; _Boston Globe_, April 16, 1999.
8. Carol Everett with Jack Shaw. _Blood Money_ (Sisters, OR: Multnomah Books, 1992). See also Pamela Zekman and Pamela Warwick, &#8220;The Abortion Profiteers,&#8221; _Chicago Sun Times_ special reprint, Dec. 3, 1978 (originally published Nov. 12, 1978), p. 2-3, 33.
9. Julie A. Gazmararian et al., &#8220;The Relationship Between Pregnancy Intendedness and Physical Violence in Mothers of Newborns,&#8221; Obstetrics & Gynecology, 85 :1031 (1995); Hortensia Amaro et al., &#8220;Violence During Pregnancy and Substance Use,&#8221; American Journal of Public Health, 80: 575 (1990); and J. McFarlane et al., &#8220;Abuse During Pregnancy and Femicide: Urgent Implications for Women&#8217;s Health,&#8221; Obstetrics & Gynecology, 100: 27, 27-36 (2002).
10. I.L. Horton and D. Cheng, &#8220;Enhanced Surveillance for Pregnancy-Associated Mortality-Maryland, 1993-1998,&#8221; JAMA 285(11): 1455-1459
(2001); see also J. Mcfarlane et. al., "Abuse During Pregnancy and Femicide: Urgent Implications for Women's Health," Obstetrics & Gynecology 100: 27-36 (2002).
11. &#8220;Is Your Mother&#8217;s Feminism Dead? New Agenda for Women Revealed in Landmark Two-Year Study,&#8221; press release from the Center for the Advancement of Women (advancewomen.org - advancewomen Resources and Information.), June 24, 2003; and Steve Ertelt, &#8220;Pro-Abortion Poll Shows Majority of Women Are Pro-Life,&#8221; LifeNews.com  June 25, 2003.
12. See Theresa Burke, _Forbidden Grief: The Unspoken Pain of Abortion_ (Springfield, IL: Acorn Books, 2000) and www.unchoice.info.
13. &#8220;National Opinion Survey of 600 Adults Regarding Attitudes Toward a Pro-Woman/Pro-Life Agenda,&#8221; Scott Rasmussen Public Opinion Research commissioned by the Elliot Institute, conducted in Dec. 2002.
14. Daniel Callahan, "An Ethical Challenge to Prochoice Advocates," _Commonweal_, Nov. 23, 1990, 681-687, 684.
15. JR Cougle, DC Reardon & PK Coleman, &#8220;Depression Associated With Abortion and Childbirth: A Long-Term Analysis of the NLSY Cohort,&#8221; Medical Science Monitor 9(4):CR105-112, 2003.
16. Frank, et.al., "Induced Abortion Operations and Their Early Sequelae," Journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners 35(73):175-180, April 1985; Grimes and Cates, "Abortion: Methods and Complications", in Human Reproduction, 2nd ed., 796-813; M.A.
Freedman, "Comparison of complication rates in first trimester abortions performed by physician assistants and physicians," Am. J. Public Health 76(5):550-554, 1986).
17. DC Reardon et. al., &#8220;Deaths Associated With Pregnancy Outcome: A Record Linkage Study of Low Income Women,&#8221; Southern Medical Journal 95(8):834-41, (2002).
 
Forced Abortions in America


----------



## RKMBrown (Nov 8, 2013)

choosy said:


> RKMBrown said:
> 
> 
> > Noomi said:
> ...



That's like saying I can't force you to not run over a child crossing the street, if you desire to run someone over I should let you?  You think because the baby is in your belly it has no rights?  wow Does that mean someone in my car has no rights, in my house has no rights?  What's the difference?  A born baby is not dependent on a woman?  HUH? Have you not heard of mothers throwing their children into dumpsters? Starving their kids by locking them up or malnutrition?  

Yes, I wish to take away the current law that overlooks murder's of children in the womb.  Heart beating till you take a pair of pliers and crush the babies head or crush it using a high powered vacuum to suck it's limbs and body parts through a tube?  Abortion of a live fetus is a nightmarish act, not a blessing.


----------



## choosy (Nov 8, 2013)

koshergrl said:


> "
> Reasons women give for having abortions:
>  Forced by mother
>  Father opposed
> ...



My English is really bad - should we try in German?

In fact the reasons for abortion are often not to have support! That´s why I say: Abortion must be the last resort. But to offend women as murderess is no solution!


----------



## koshergrl (Nov 8, 2013)

You should try in German perhaps on a German messageboard.

This is an American messageboard, and we speak English. So if you are going to argue that women should be able to kill their babies, brush up on your skills.


----------



## Noomi (Nov 8, 2013)

RKMBrown said:


> Noomi said:
> 
> 
> > Againsheila said:
> ...



You don't seem to understand that not everyone is rich and can afford to raise a special needs child. Unless you are prepared to pay for the cost of the raising of such children, keep your mouth shut.


----------



## thanatos144 (Nov 8, 2013)

Noomi said:


> RKMBrown said:
> 
> 
> > Noomi said:
> ...



Killing a baby saves you money. Maybe you should put that on a poster or tv ad

tapatalk post


----------



## Noomi (Nov 8, 2013)

That went over your head, didn't it?


----------



## RKMBrown (Nov 9, 2013)

Noomi said:


> RKMBrown said:
> 
> 
> > Noomi said:
> ...



Let's check over the costs of raising a child in America for someone in poverty.  Health care... free.  Food.. free.  School... free.   I'm confused.  What cost?  You mean "time?"

Keep my mouth shut?  So no one is allowed to speak for the child?  Does that make it easier if no one disagrees?  I'm not sin free, not by a long shot, but this act is not a blessing for the child or mother or doctor that will have to live with it.


----------



## thanatos144 (Nov 9, 2013)

Noomi said:


> That went over your head, didn't it?



No it just proves you're a sick person 

tapatalk post


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Nov 9, 2013)

thanatos144 said:


> Noomi said:
> 
> 
> > RKMBrown said:
> ...



Abortion is not killing a baby, to argue such is ignorant idiocy and demagoguery. 

If you believe abortion is wrong, then dont have an abortion. 

But thankfully the Constitution prohibits you from attempting to codify your subjective opinion and ignorance.


----------



## RKMBrown (Nov 9, 2013)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> thanatos144 said:
> 
> 
> > Noomi said:
> ...


Huh? What does the Constitution have to do with killing babies?


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Nov 9, 2013)

thanatos144 said:


> Noomi said:
> 
> 
> > That went over your head, didn't it?
> ...



Those who defend privacy rights are not sick.

Indeed, its quite likely that those who refer to abortion as baby killing suffer from some sort of obsessive disorder themselves, particularly when they seek to compel other citizens to believe as they do through the authority of the state, in violation of the Constitution.


----------



## Sunshine (Nov 9, 2013)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> thanatos144 said:
> 
> 
> > Noomi said:
> ...



Branching out a little there C?


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Nov 9, 2013)

RKMBrown said:


> C_Clayton_Jones said:
> 
> 
> > thanatos144 said:
> ...



Nothing. 

And no one ever said it did.

But the Constitution does address the issue concerning a womans right to make decisions concerning reproduction, free from interference by the state:  



> [O]ur holding [finds] that the Constitution protects a woman's right to terminate her pregnancy in its early stages, _Roe v. Wade_, 410 U.S. 113 (1973)[.]
> 
> Before viability,* the State's interests are not strong enough to support a prohibition of abortion* or the imposition of a substantial obstacle to the woman's effective right to elect the procedure.
> 
> Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pa. v. Casey, 505 U.S. 833 (1992)



Consequently, and again, abortion is not killing babies, a womens right to terminate her pregnancy, in the context of the right to privacy, is indeed protected by the Constitution.


----------



## RKMBrown (Nov 9, 2013)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> RKMBrown said:
> 
> 
> > C_Clayton_Jones said:
> ...



So I can murder someone in the "privacy" of my home and it's constitutional?


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Nov 9, 2013)

RKMBrown said:


> Noomi said:
> 
> 
> > RKMBrown said:
> ...



Citizens are not required to justify the exercising of a fundamental right, such as the right to privacy, as some sort of a prerequisite to indeed exercise that right. That youre confused as to why a woman might seek to terminate her pregnancy is legally, Constitutionally, and thankfully irrelevant. 

As far as keeping your mouth shut, youre at liberty to express your opinions as you see fit, provided you understand there is no child to speak for:  



> The effect of state regulation on a woman's protected liberty is doubly deserving of scrutiny in such a case, as the State has touched not only upon the private sphere of the family but upon the very bodily integrity of the pregnant woman.
> 
> Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pa. v. Casey, 505 U.S. 833 (1992)


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Nov 9, 2013)

RKMBrown said:


> So here we have an actual "issue" related to the OP, but instead of aborting the child to help the child go through a life of pain, what we really have is aborting a child because the child will be "different" be a burden on the parents time and finances.
> 
> Why then can't we just go around killing people after birth based on burden?  Why is killing a child after birth different than killing a baby with a beating heart in a womb, to save us from the "burden" of having to raise the child?  Why not do an IQ test when the child is 10 and if under a certain threshold let the parents kill the child at that time?
> 
> What's the difference?



The difference is that the courts have wisely, correctly, and appropriately determined that, prior to viability, the individual alone is best suited to make a personal, private decision such as to terminate a pregnancy, not the state. 

We do not want the state, bureaucrats, and certainly not politicians deciding when life begins; the Constitution allows each individual to make that determination himself, free from interference by the state, in accordance with his own good conscience and beliefs.


----------



## thanatos144 (Nov 9, 2013)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> thanatos144 said:
> 
> 
> > Noomi said:
> ...



I don't remember ever seeing it in the constitution that government couldn't make laws against killing babies 

tapatalk post


----------



## thanatos144 (Nov 9, 2013)

Liberals have to ignore that abortion kills children 

tapatalk post


----------



## RKMBrown (Nov 9, 2013)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> RKMBrown said:
> 
> 
> > So here we have an actual "issue" related to the OP, but instead of aborting the child to help the child go through a life of pain, what we really have is aborting a child because the child will be "different" be a burden on the parents time and finances.
> ...



Which individual the helpless baby or the mother or the doctor?


----------



## Dot Com (Nov 12, 2013)




----------



## Noomi (Nov 12, 2013)

Dot Com said:


>



^this


----------



## Noomi (Nov 12, 2013)

RKMBrown said:


> Which individual the helpless baby or the mother or the doctor?



What helpless baby? You mean the kidney bean sized blob that isn't even aware of its own existence?


----------



## LiberalatHeart (Nov 12, 2013)

I think that cartoon just about sums up the Republicans' pro-life position. 

I find it absolutely amazing that a bunch of old men can decide what a woman does with HER body, and then they spout personal freedoms. It is HER decision, not the courts and not elected officials. And those of you that judge those who seek abortions, shame on you....you are in the wrong for judging those and shoving your ideologies down their throats. You guys talk about smaller government when it comes to taxation and health programs, but you are just fine with government forced ultra-sounds and forced steps that one has to go through before having an abortion. And the cartoon is also correct that you guys are so attentive when the woman is pregnant, but once you have forced her to have a child...then you are gone and the tables have turned to insulting and no help is given to them.

Just like in Nebraska where a 15 year old has been sentenced to "Forced Childbirth" by the state's Supreme Court. That is nice, a girl who has no means of supporting herself now has to find a way to get through school and care for a child. The Supreme Court was made up of 5 MEN and 1 WOMAN, they should be made to donate money to help her now....since they are forcing her to do something AGAINST HER WILL.

Where is it your choice or my choice whether or not a woman wants an abortion?? It isn't and it is simply grotesque that one could hold that state of mind. 

I must say, I have finally found a reason to use this emoticon:


----------



## RKMBrown (Nov 12, 2013)

LiberalatHeart said:


> I think that cartoon just about sums up the Republicans' pro-life position.



Liar.


----------



## RKMBrown (Nov 12, 2013)

Noomi said:


> RKMBrown said:
> 
> 
> > Which individual the helpless baby or the mother or the doctor?
> ...


When you see this baby do you reach for your hammer or do you want to do it with a pair of pliers, maybe cut the baby up into parts while it's writhing pain?




20weeks.

I mean after-all the mother will be put out to have to undergo the horror of raising a child.


----------



## Noomi (Nov 12, 2013)

RKMBrown said:


> Noomi said:
> 
> 
> > RKMBrown said:
> ...



It is still a fetus at 20 weeks.


----------



## RKMBrown (Nov 12, 2013)

Dot Com said:


>



Libtard logic.  Because we all see republicans running around screaming at new born babies telling them to get a job while they scream at the mother calling her a tramp.

You people are freaks.


----------



## RKMBrown (Nov 12, 2013)

Noomi said:


> RKMBrown said:
> 
> 
> > Noomi said:
> ...



Does that word give you bloodlust noomi?  Are you so angry at the fetus that you can't see a baby in that picture?


----------



## thanatos144 (Nov 12, 2013)

The only answer to all problems to liberals ie kill it. 

tapatalk post


----------



## Noomi (Nov 12, 2013)

RKMBrown said:


> Noomi said:
> 
> 
> > RKMBrown said:
> ...



I bet it gives you a hard on to think of all the women you can force to have babies.


----------



## RKMBrown (Nov 12, 2013)

Noomi said:


> RKMBrown said:
> 
> 
> > Noomi said:
> ...


I see, so you are good with killing the baby in the picture because you think men get a hard on for forcing women to carry babies to term. No, Noomi, I don't get a hard on thinking about this subject.  You've got a pretty sick mind.

My wife of thirty years is the only woman that does it for me.  We lost our first 3 babies, then had three great kids.


----------



## Noomi (Nov 12, 2013)

I am sorry you lost your longed for 'babies', but that doesn't give you the right to expect women to carry an unwanted child to term.


----------



## LiberalatHeart (Nov 12, 2013)

RKMBrown said:


> LiberalatHeart said:
> 
> 
> > I think that cartoon just about sums up the Republicans' pro-life position.
> ...



Well, that is a waste of bandwidth...you are telling me what I stated is untrue. Please show me evidence to the contrary. What programs have Republicans proposed or sponsored which will help single women and teens that are forced to have children? I can tell you, absolutely zero...zip, nada, zilch. Your party feels that it has the RIGHT to force women to give birth to children due to their religious beliefs, what happened to the separation of church and state that you guys parade around??? The fact is, is that men have NO place in telling women what they can or cannot do....anyone who thinks so needs some sense knocked into them


----------



## LiberalatHeart (Nov 12, 2013)

RKMBrown said:


> Noomi said:
> 
> 
> > RKMBrown said:
> ...



Good for you, that is your opinion....and in this nation, you are entitled to your opinion (not matter how stupid or ignorant it is). That does not mean that you can force your religious beliefs down women's throats on their right to choose....and I think you are arrogant for thinking that way. Those who believe abortions should be illegal no matter the situation, need to be strapped to an anchor and thrown off the pier. You think you can sit on a moral high ground because you will NEVER be in a situation where you might want/need an abortion...so you (or your party) cannot force this on those women who chose to seek abortions.


----------



## RKMBrown (Nov 12, 2013)

LiberalatHeart said:


> RKMBrown said:
> 
> 
> > LiberalatHeart said:
> ...



You are so full of shit it's coming out of every one of your orifices. Millions of infants murdered in the womb.  And for what?  To save the mother from the horror of having to raise a child?  How many children have you helped kill to save yourself some time, and money?  Or is it the one day of child birth or carrying the baby to term?  What angers you so much with babies that you want to kill them rather than give them the gift of life?


----------



## LiberalatHeart (Nov 12, 2013)

I have not helped kill any fetus's nor do I have hatred towards them. And that statement about one day and carrying to term, is nice to read on paper but it real life it is something else completely. The real world is not the movie "Juno," there are no sunshines and rainbows for those women who cannot afford or sustain a child/pregnancy. And you are in no place to judge them....

My main issue (which I can tell you cannot grasp or refuse to acknowledge) is that it is not OUR place to tell women what they can or cannot do when it comes to childbirth and pregnancy. Women are a hell of a lot better fit to decide as it affects them, you have not given birth and never will...same for me, we are in no place to tell them what to do.

I would love for you to point out where I am full of shit, because all of what I have stated are facts and also exposing disgusting talking points of the right wing. I WANT YOU TO GIVE ME ONE BILL WHERE REPUBLICANS HAVE INTRODUCED LEGISLATION OR SPONSORED IT, TO HELP SINGLE MOTHERS AND TEENS WHO WERE FORCED TO HAVE CHILDREN DUE TO THEIR RESTRICTIVE POLICIES...JUST ONE FUCKING PIECE. You can't, because the fuckers have not done a single damn thing except chastise and insult women who chose to do what they want with their body. Also, the GOP is intent on defunding financial assistance to those in need while stuffing their own pockets...re: SNAP benefit cuts. So do not tell me I am full of shit, when I am pointing out your party's disgusting stance.


----------



## Noomi (Nov 13, 2013)

RKMBrown said:


> LiberalatHeart said:
> 
> 
> > RKMBrown said:
> ...



No babies are murdered in the womb. Abortion is not murder.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Nov 13, 2013)

Noomi said:


> RKMBrown said:
> 
> 
> > LiberalatHeart said:
> ...



What do humans give birth to noomi? A baby is a baby is a baby. When it's heart starts to beat it's a baby and it's murder 

Day 22:  heart begins to beat with the child's own blood, often a different type than  the mothers'.


----------



## Noomi (Nov 13, 2013)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Noomi said:
> 
> 
> > RKMBrown said:
> ...



In the womb its a fetus.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Nov 13, 2013)

Noomi said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Noomi said:
> ...



 Scott Peterson was convicted of a double murder his wife and unborn BABY.


----------



## Sunshine (Nov 13, 2013)

Noomi said:


> This story is a few months old, but its incredibly sad. A little boy born with a defective small intestine. He had surgery, but doctors discovered that his entire small bowel had died, and as a result, he couldn't eat or drink, and there was nothing that could be done for him.
> He was given high doses of morphine as he starved to death - after 13 days of life:
> 
> 
> ...



If people were killed due to physical  or mental defect, you wouldn't last long.


----------



## Dot Com (Nov 13, 2013)

any anti-choicers on this thread NOT Repub/t party voters?


----------



## thanatos144 (Nov 13, 2013)

Dot Com said:


> any anti-choicers on this thread NOT Repub/t party voters?



The correct term is anti baby killing. You are pro baby killing 

tapatalk post


----------



## RKMBrown (Nov 13, 2013)

Dot Com said:


> any anti-choicers on this thread NOT Repub/t party voters?



I'm libertarian not republican. Defending the right of the baby to life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness. Heart beating? Then you are an American with rights, IMO.


----------



## koshergrl (Nov 13, 2013)

Noomi said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Noomi said:
> ...


 
"A man accused of shooting and killing his pregnant teenage girlfriend and their unborn child was found guilty of two counts of second-degree murder on Wednesday"

http://www.twincities.com/crime/ci_24355935/attorneys-apple-valley-man-charged-killing-wife-unborn

"Rodriguez was nearly five months pregnant at the time and was expecting a baby boy."

Source: Man Found Guilty in Murder of Pregnant Teen Girlfriend, Unborn Baby | NBC 7 San Diego


"Man pleads guilty to killing his unborn child after tricking his girlfriend into taking abortion pill."

Man pleads guilty to killing his unborn child after tricking his girlfriend into taking abortion pill - Americas - World - The Independent

" A Duval County jury convicted a 27-year-old man in the death of Felicia Burney and her unborn child.Andrew Wayne King, 27, was found guilty of murder in the first-degree, killing an unborn child and burglary with assault and battery."

Jacksonville man convicted in deaths of woman, her unborn child | News - Home

"When an Apple Valley woman died in March, her 15-week-old fetus, too young to survive outside the womb, died with her. 
Margorie Holland's husband, Roger Holland, is charged with murder in the deaths."


----------



## koshergrl (Nov 13, 2013)

Funny how many women get killed because they refuse to get abortions.

Funny how the death cultists maintain that women are never coerced into abortions.


----------



## koshergrl (Nov 13, 2013)

"A jury in eastern Oklahoma has convicted a 27-year-old man of shooting dead his pregnant girlfriend and her unborn baby after she refused to get an abortion." 

"The 20-year-old woman, who aspired to be a nurse, allegedly told a friend a short time before the slaying that Simpson had threatened to end the pregnancy for her if she refused to abort the baby."

 

Read more: Ka'loni Flynn case: Man found GUILTY of shooting dead pregnant girlfriend execution-style because 'he didn't want another child to support' | Mail Online


----------



## Againsheila (Nov 13, 2013)

Dot Com said:


> any anti-choicers on this thread NOT Repub/t party voters?



I'm not a Republican or a tea party person.  I know the real reason behind the Boston Tea Party and so would never join an organization that named themselves for it.  The real reason was that the tax was too low, not that it was too high.  The tax on tea was so low that the smugglers, our forefathers couldn't make money as the legal tea was cheaper than the black-market tea.

While I do not believe abortion should be outlawed, I don't think it should ever be used as a means of birth control.  Had the parents decided to terminated this pregnancy knowing the child would die within days of it's birth, I would have no problem with it.  I have a problem with someone suggesting that the child was not terminated due to abortion laws or that the child should have been terminated.  The decision was up to the parents not a person who's never had a child in her life.  As for aborting a child that's not perfect?  Well, my husband and I had a discussion when I was pregnant and if they discovered something wrong with my baby, I was going to abort.  I now have 2 sons with autism.  It's not been easy but do I regret giving birth to them?  Absolutely not!  A real eye opener for me.  

Sometimes things are the way they are because God wants us to learn from them.  Have I learned anything from my sons?  You bet.  I still remember the day my youngest son's teacher called to tell me that Andrew had drawn a stick figure on the board and written his name under it for the first time in his life.  He was in 2nd grade and the entire class cheered.  My sons are here for a reason.  How sad to deprive the world of them because they weren't perfect.  I was an idiot.  I like to think I'm wiser now.

Noomi has never had a child, she's young and in my opinion has a lot to learn.  I found her OP insulting and I took it on a personal level seeing as I have two children who are not considered "normal".


----------



## Againsheila (Nov 13, 2013)

koshergrl said:


> Noomi said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



There is something wrong in our society when only the mother can decide if the baby is a baby or a fetus.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Nov 13, 2013)

Againsheila said:


> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> > Noomi said:
> ...



Whom else would you suggest decide, the state?


----------



## RKMBrown (Nov 13, 2013)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> Againsheila said:
> 
> 
> > koshergrl said:
> ...



Currently when the life of a child is threatened by its parents, law enforcement intercedes. All that needs to be done is use the same measure used for proof of death as proof of life. Beating heart? Then you are alive.


----------



## Againsheila (Nov 13, 2013)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> Againsheila said:
> 
> 
> > koshergrl said:
> ...



How about the father?  Why is it only the mother can decide if she want's to be a parent AFTER conception?  Why is it the father always gets the bill even though he has no say?  How about we give the father 3 months after finding out the woman is pregnant to decide if he wants to be a father or not?  Let him sign a paper opting out.  Then he's off the hook for child support and the woman has to make her decision based on that?  

I think it's sick that so many men are given the bill for a child they didn't want when the woman, and I KNOW this has happened, get pregnant on purpose.  One woman I talked to quit taking her pills that HE was paying for without ever telling him.  Then she wondered why he kicked her out when she got pregnant.  SHE wanted a baby so SHE had one and HE got the bill even though he paid for the birth control.  We really need a birth control pill for men.

Here's another idea...when a woman has a child 50% of the time give custody to the FATHER!  You know what single moms have told me when I've asked them what they would do if there was a 50/50 chance the father would get custody?  Every single one of them said they wouldn't get pregnant or would abort.  A lot like that woman in the Bible who'd rather the baby be dead than given to his real mom, huh?  And this is after they already had their children.  Those I've asked what they'd do if they couldn't force the father to pay child support?..it was 1/2 and 1/2.  

How about adoption?  There a people waiting years to adopt babies.  And don't give me that crap about the special needs or non white babies.  I know a lady that adopted a severe autistic boy when he was 16 and became available for adoption.  She'd been his school aid for years.

My neighbors adopted 2 special needs children from China.  They wouldn't adopt here to babies like Jessica who was taken away from her adoptive parents because the mother wanted her back.  If you give up your child for adoption, that's it, no second chances.  If your child is in foster care, 2 years and your parental rights are eliminated giving the child a chance for a real loving home.  My neighbor's oldest son and his wife have adopted 2 children in a foster to adopt program.  One is black and special needs, the other is white.  

And why, in society where birth-control is so readily available, are we even talking about abortion?  You don't want to have a kid don't have one. Get birth control, you can get it for free at any public health department or planned parenthood and even some of our public schools.  And with Obama care you can get it even when you are 80.


----------



## Casjah (Nov 13, 2013)

I cannot imagine how a newborn could go so long without food. The article says, "..after 13 days of no food and 11 days of no fluid he passed away.." No one can go 11 days with no fluid." And 13 days with no food would be a challenge for an adult, but not possible for a newborn. Also, it seems to me like it would be unlikely that the entire small intestine would have died. Something is just off with this story.

But going on the assumption that the facts are correct, I would not have allowed anyone to starve to death. In the case of a small child, I would leave it up to the parents in a hospital setting to decide about a course of action. If absolutely nothing could be done, there is no sense in allowing a child to starve to death. That is barbaric.




RKMBrown said:


> You are so full of shit it's coming out of every one of your orifices. Millions of infants murdered in the womb.  And for what?  To save the mother from the horror of having to raise a child?  How many children have you helped kill to save yourself some time, and money?  Or is it the one day of child birth or carrying the baby to term?  What angers you so much with babies that you want to kill them rather than give them the gift of life?



Can the woman be forced to be a mother after the child is born?


----------



## koshergrl (Nov 13, 2013)

Actually, killing a child because he's ill is barbaric.

Illness just happens.


----------



## Casjah (Nov 13, 2013)

koshergrl said:


> Actually, killing a child because he's ill is barbaric.
> 
> Illness just happens.



No. According to the article, the child was dying- being starved to death. That is a separate matter from a mere illness. It is barbaric to allow someone to starve to death.


----------



## koshergrl (Nov 13, 2013)

No, it's illness, nutbag. It's not someone intentionally starving a kid. 

Intentionally starving someone to death is what happened to Teri Schiavo..I'm sure you were all about that.

But this is about murdering a child based on a diagnosis.


----------



## Againsheila (Nov 13, 2013)

Casjah said:


> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> > Actually, killing a child because he's ill is barbaric.
> ...



Starvation is one of the most painless ways to go, especially if you are getting morphine.


----------



## RKMBrown (Nov 13, 2013)

Casjah said:


> I cannot imagine how a newborn could go so long without food. The article says, "..after 13 days of no food and 11 days of no fluid he passed away.." No one can go 11 days with no fluid." And 13 days with no food would be a challenge for an adult, but not possible for a newborn. Also, it seems to me like it would be unlikely that the entire small intestine would have died. Something is just off with this story.
> 
> But going on the assumption that the facts are correct, I would not have allowed anyone to starve to death. In the case of a small child, I would leave it up to the parents in a hospital setting to decide about a course of action. If absolutely nothing could be done, there is no sense in allowing a child to starve to death. That is barbaric.
> 
> ...


Are we not taxed to provide said nurturing? Takes a village.... Isn't that the current law of the land?


----------



## Dot Com (Nov 13, 2013)

> the babys small intestine appeared to be blocked, so my sister was transferred to John Hunter Hospital. The surgeon said baby Jailan had bowel atresia and that when he was 12 hours old he would be sent to theatre to cut out the blockage and reattach the intestines.



have the clingers  ever considered that this was their sky pixie''s will?


----------



## LiberalatHeart (Nov 13, 2013)

The sate has no right to interfere with women's right to choose, those who think that are simpletons. This is a complicated matter (I do not agree with late term abortions btw, I believe it is fine within the first trimester). You cannot tell a woman that it is wrong to do something that you have NO BUSINESS in...Also, beating hearts are not a good argument. Tell that to all of those veggie-heads that are in the hospital, are they alive...sure, as about as alive as a vegetable. You guys are so quick to judge and keep these FETUS"S alive UNTIL birth, then you guys switch talking points. Then those single women and teens are called whores and moochers....yea, that is real American. 

Ignorant fucks.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Nov 13, 2013)

RKMBrown said:


> C_Clayton_Jones said:
> 
> 
> > Againsheila said:
> ...



In your subjective, personal opinion, not as a fact of law. 

And you confuse criminal law  a child abused or neglected by his parents  with civil law  the right of the woman to decide personal, private matters absent unwarranted interference by the state  where prior to viability the mothers wishes are paramount. 

Indeed, the last thing we want is government bureaucrats and politicians deciding when life begins  where each individual makes that determination himself in the context of his faith or beliefs and in accordance with his own good conscience.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Nov 13, 2013)

Againsheila said:


> C_Clayton_Jones said:
> 
> 
> > Againsheila said:
> ...



The Supreme Court has already wisely and correctly ruled on that issue: 



> If this case concerned a State's ability to require the mother to notify the father before taking some action with respect to a living child raised by both, therefore, it would be reasonable to conclude as a general matter that the father's interest in the welfare of the child and the mother's interest are equal.
> 
> * Before birth, however, the issue takes on a very different cast. *It is an inescapable biological fact that state regulation with respect to* the child a woman is carrying will have a far greater impact on the mother's liberty than on the father's.* The effect of state regulation on a woman's protected liberty is doubly deserving of scrutiny in such a case, as the State has touched not only upon the private sphere of the family but upon the very bodily integrity of the pregnant woman. Cf. Cruzan v. Director, Missouri Dept. of Health, 497 U. S., at 281. The Court has held that "when the wife and the husband disagree on this decision, the view of only one of the two marriage partners can prevail. *Inasmuch as it is the woman who physically bears the child and who is the more directly and immediately affected by the pregnancy, as between the two, the balance weighs in her favor." *
> 
> Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pa. v. Casey, 505 U.S. 833 (1992)


----------



## RKMBrown (Nov 13, 2013)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> RKMBrown said:
> 
> 
> > C_Clayton_Jones said:
> ...


I see. So if I have no conscience I should be free to kill millions based merely on a personal belief that some races or other classifications are subhuman.


----------



## koshergrl (Nov 13, 2013)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> RKMBrown said:
> 
> 
> > C_Clayton_Jones said:
> ...


 
Life begins at conception. Nobody except brain dead morons contests that.

The argument is whether or not an individual has the right to end that life, based on whether or not that life is dependent upon them.

Of course it's a criminal matter. Just as it's a criminal matter when someone stands by and allows a child that is not in their care to walk into traffic. You have an obligation to protect vulnerable life, regardless of whether or not it *belongs* to you, and whether or not you lay claim to it. While it is in your care, you are responsible for it, and killing it is not an acceptable method of discharging your duty.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Nov 13, 2013)

koshergrl said:


> C_Clayton_Jones said:
> 
> 
> > RKMBrown said:
> ...



In your personal, subjective opinion, not as a fact of law, thankfully. See: _Griswold v. Connecticut_ (1965), _Eisenstadt v. Baird _(1972), _Roe v. Wade_ (1973), _Planned Parenthood v. Casey_ (1992). 

The right to privacy in the context of substantive due process is a fundamental tenet of individual liberty, a liberty the state may not preempt, including the right of a woman to decide whether or not to have a child. 

Which means you shouldnt have an abortion if thats your belief. 

Fortunately the Constitution protects citizens from personal, subjective opinions becoming part of secular law, where those who believe abortion is wrong are at liberty to express that belief, but are not at liberty to seek to codify it.


----------



## koshergrl (Nov 13, 2013)

Law doesn't determine when life begins.

Scientifically and biologically speaking, the life of a human begins at conception.

*yawn*.

""Human development begins after the union of male and female gametes or germ cells during a process known as _fertilization_ (conception).
"Fertilization is a sequence of events that begins with the contact of a _sperm_ (spermatozoon) with a _secondary oocyte_ (ovum) and ends with the fusion of their _pronuclei_ (the haploid nuclei of the sperm and ovum) and the mingling of their chromosomes to form a new cell. This fertilized ovum, known as a _zygote_, is a large diploid cell that is the beginning, or _primordium, of a human being_."
[Moore, Keith L. _Essentials of Human Embryology_. Toronto: B.C. Decker Inc, 1988, p.2]"


----------



## koshergrl (Nov 13, 2013)

"The development of a human begins with fertilization, a process by which the _spermatozoon_ from the male and the _oocyte_ from the female unite to give rise to a new organism, the _zygote_."
[Sadler, T.W. _Langman's Medical Embryology_. 7th edition. Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins 1995, p. 3]


----------



## koshergrl (Nov 13, 2013)

Zygote. This cell, formed by the union of an ovum and a sperm (Gr. _zyg tos_, yoked together), represents the _beginning of a human being_. The common expression 'fertilized ovum' refers to the zygote."
[Moore, Keith L. and Persaud, T.V.N. _Before We Are Born: Essentials of Embryology and Birth Defects_. 4th edition. Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders Company, 1993, p. 1]


----------



## koshergrl (Nov 13, 2013)

"Almost all higher animals start their lives from a single cell, the fertilized ovum (zygote)... The time of fertilization represents the starting point in the life history, or ontogeny, of the individual."
[Carlson, Bruce M. _Patten's Foundations of Embryology_. 6th edition. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1996, p. 3]


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Nov 13, 2013)

koshergrl said:


> Law doesn't determine when life begins.



No one ever said it did. 

Again, as we see in _Casey_, the Court wisely and correctly left that determination up to each individual, as deciding when life begins is not the purview of the courts, or the state, or a governing entity, or a majority of voters, for that matter. 

Prior to viability, the woman alone makes that decision.


----------



## Luddly Neddite (Nov 13, 2013)

Noomi said:


> I am sorry you lost your longed for 'babies', but that doesn't give you the right to expect women to carry an unwanted child to term.



What is conveniently ignored are the abortions that end a wanted pregnancy. 

I've read that as many as 2/3 of all abortions ended a wanted pregnancy.


----------



## Dot Com (Nov 13, 2013)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> > Law doesn't determine when life begins.
> ...



^ that. We use Blacks Law dictionary NOT koshergirl's creationism dictionary 

koshergirl seems to want to ram her ideology down everyone else's throats, the law be damned. Wonder if she is familiar w/ the phrase "we are a nation of laws, not of men"


----------



## Luddly Neddite (Nov 13, 2013)

RKMBrown said:


> Dot Com said:
> 
> 
> > any anti-choicers on this thread NOT Repub/t party voters?
> ...



Except if that beating heart belongs to a homosexual, transgender, a person of color or a woman.

Before you can BE a Libertarian, you first must know what it means.

From your posts, I'd say you're t-potty, through and through.


----------



## koshergrl (Nov 13, 2013)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> > Law doesn't determine when life begins.
> ...


 
I know that she can.

I also know it's wrong.

And that the woman does not have the *right* to determine whether her baby is alive, or shall continue living, or not. It is a false right accorded to her by bad law, that flies in the face of science. 

And you did maintain that a woman is best qualified to determine whether her baby is alive or not. And that is ridiculous.

""Although life is a continuous process, fertilization is a critical landmark because, under ordinary circumstances, a new, genetically distinct human organism is thereby formed.... The combination of 23 chromosomes present in each pronucleus results in 46 chromosomes in the _zygote_. Thus the diploid number is restored and the embryonic genome is formed. The embryo now exists as a genetic unity."
[O'Rahilly, Ronan and M&#65533;ller, Fabiola. _Human Embryology & Teratology_. 2nd edition. New York: Wiley-Liss, 1996, pp. 8, 29. This textbook lists "pre-embryo" among "discarded and replaced terms" in modern embryology, describing it as "ill-defined and inaccurate" (p. 12}]


----------



## koshergrl (Nov 13, 2013)

The time of fertilization represents the starting point in the life history, or ontogeny, of the individual."
[Carlson, Bruce M. _Patten's Foundations of Embryology_. 6th edition. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1996, p. 3]


----------



## Luddly Neddite (Nov 13, 2013)

The good news is that nutters like kosher girl don't make the law. 

There is only one person who has the right to control what a woman does with her own body. 

The woman herself. 

MYOB


----------



## RKMBrown (Nov 13, 2013)

Luddly Neddite said:


> RKMBrown said:
> 
> 
> > Dot Com said:
> ...



Screw you ass hole.


----------



## RKMBrown (Nov 13, 2013)

Luddly Neddite said:


> The good news is that nutters like kosher girl don't make the law.
> 
> There is only one person who has the right to control what a woman does with her own body.
> 
> ...



The baby is not her body you POS Libtard.


----------



## koshergrl (Nov 13, 2013)

Luddly Neddite said:


> The good news is that nutters like kosher girl don't make the law.
> 
> There is only one person who has the right to control what a woman does with her own body.
> 
> ...


 

Wrong again. A woman doesn't have the right to use her body to kill anyone.

Including her baby. Born or unborn.

Her rights end when they impede upon the rights of another.

German law dictated it was A-Ok to kill, maim and abort women in concentration camps, too.

Imagine the surprise of the women who supervised those horrors when they found out that they could be tried...and found guilty...of murder, regardless.

And hanged, too.


----------



## koshergrl (Nov 13, 2013)

Which is why it took Poland so long to legalize abortion. They remembered the horrors inflicted upon women in the name of "health" for a really long time.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Nov 13, 2013)

koshergrl said:


> *yawn*.



And this, of course, is one of the many problems with the social right: its ignorance of, and contempt for, the Constitution, its case law, and the rule of law. 

Social conservatism is indeed the bane of American society.


----------



## LiberalatHeart (Nov 13, 2013)

Nice to see that you believe that women who get abortions are criminals and should be hung, shows what an ignorant fuck you are....not to mention completely arrogant and self-righteous. Since you are ramming your religious beliefs down our throats, how's about taking a lesson out of the book you are thumping. In the Bible, it preaches "Let he is without sin, cast the first stone." You have NO right to to judge or tell women what they can or cannot do with their bodies. You can tell me that life begins at conception, I do not accept that....you are telling me that life is when there is a microscopic zygote that isn't even aware of its own existence????? Now that is hilarious.....women across the US are being PERSECUTED by Republicans in red states, passing restrictive law after restrictive law....and claiming religious grounds. You fuckers put up the founding documents every time you open your mouths, what happened to separation of church and state??? This is why your party will NEVER be elected to the White House for a LONG time, women are not on your side on this issue...only OLD WHITE MEN (as you can see from resident redneck RKMBrown). Also, I want you to tell me what legislation your party has proposed to help these single women and teens that you have forced to have children? You can keep ignoring the question or you can try and pull something out of your ass quick, BECAUSE NO SUCH LEGISLATION HAS BEEN PROPOSED OR SPONSORED BY REPUBLICANS. Instead, they force them to have children and then kick them to the curb....all while calling them whores, sluts, moochers, etc. 

Your party is circling the drain when it comes to almost all issues (especially social issues), because they are so ass backwards and downright HATEFUL


----------



## Dot Com (Nov 13, 2013)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> > *yawn*.
> ...



true. Emotions over laws. Thangod for the Courts.


----------



## RKMBrown (Nov 13, 2013)

Dot Com said:


> C_Clayton_Jones said:
> 
> 
> > koshergrl said:
> ...


Yes, or no late term abortions are illegal?  

Thus, the law has already decided "birth" is not a requirement for the baby to have protection from the blood-lust of the parents.   Just a matter of time before humans are shown just how vile 2nd trimester abortions are and the line will be moved to the left.  My guess is it will be moved to heart beat.


----------



## Lumpy 1 (Nov 13, 2013)

LiberalatHeart said:


> Nice to see that you believe that women who get abortions are criminals and should be hung, shows what an ignorant fuck you are....not to mention completely arrogant and self-righteous. Since you are ramming your religious beliefs down our throats, how's about taking a lesson out of the book you are thumping. In the Bible, it preaches "Let he is without sin, cast the first stone." You have NO right to to judge or tell women what they can or cannot do with their bodies. You can tell me that life begins at conception, I do not accept that....you are telling me that life is when there is a microscopic zygote that isn't even aware of its own existence????? Now that is hilarious.....women across the US are being PERSECUTED by Republicans in red states, passing restrictive law after restrictive law....and claiming religious grounds. You fuckers put up the founding documents every time you open your mouths, what happened to separation of church and state??? This is why your party will NEVER be elected to the White House for a LONG time, women are not on your side on this issue...only OLD WHITE MEN (as you can see from resident redneck RKMBrown). Also, I want you to tell me what legislation your party has proposed to help these single women and teens that you have forced to have children? You can keep ignoring the question or you can try and pull something out of your ass quick, BECAUSE NO SUCH LEGISLATION HAS BEEN PROPOSED OR SPONSORED BY REPUBLICANS. Instead, they force them to have children and then kick them to the curb....all while calling them whores, sluts, moochers, etc.
> 
> Your party is circling the drain when it comes to almost all issues (especially social issues), because they are so ass backwards and downright HATEFUL



Just wondering, when do you believe life within the womb has a right to survive?

..and why


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Nov 13, 2013)

koshergrl said:


> Noomi said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...


Lacy Peterson death happen in California of all stats


----------



## Noomi (Nov 13, 2013)

koshergrl said:


> Luddly Neddite said:
> 
> 
> > The good news is that nutters like kosher girl don't make the law.
> ...



A fetus has no rights. The woman's rights are greater than it.


----------



## Noomi (Nov 13, 2013)

Lumpy 1 said:


> Just wondering, when do you believe life within the womb has a right to survive?
> 
> ..and why



Only if the woman wishes it to live.


----------



## Noomi (Nov 13, 2013)

RKMBrown said:


> Luddly Neddite said:
> 
> 
> > The good news is that nutters like kosher girl don't make the law.
> ...



It is inside her body, using her body to sustain its own life. Why the fuck should she have to rent out her womb for nine months?


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Nov 13, 2013)

Noomi said:


> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> > Luddly Neddite said:
> ...



really? why is a person charged with a double murder if he kills a pregnant woman ?


----------



## koshergrl (Nov 13, 2013)

Noomi said:


> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> > Luddly Neddite said:
> ...


 
No, they aren't. That's what is so sad about this discussion. You actually think some people have *more* rights than others.

That's what every fascist gov't that has ever committed genocide was committed to convincing people of. That some people just don't count.

And they, and you, are wrong. Nobody has the right to remove life from an innocent human. No matter what the circumstances.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Nov 13, 2013)

Noomi said:


> RKMBrown said:
> 
> 
> > Luddly Neddite said:
> ...



If a FETUS is not an person like you say it isn't why will it have blood different than the mother?


----------



## Noomi (Nov 13, 2013)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> really? why is a person charged with a double murder if he kills a pregnant woman ?



Because the woman didn't consent to her fetus being killed. Abortion is a choice only she can make, no one else.


----------



## Noomi (Nov 13, 2013)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Noomi said:
> 
> 
> > RKMBrown said:
> ...



Not relevant. What is relevant is that it resides in her body, and uses her body to survive.


----------



## Lumpy 1 (Nov 13, 2013)

[ame=http://youtu.be/W8GRQHsAVjI]Give my creation... Life - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Nov 13, 2013)

Noomi said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Noomi said:
> ...



The baby didn't ask to be placed there it's not it's fault maybe the woman should have kept her legs closed or had her tubes tied.


----------



## koshergrl (Nov 13, 2013)

Noomi said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Noomi said:
> ...


 
That's true of any infant, born or unborn.

Murder is wrong. There is no justification for killing innocents.


----------



## Lumpy 1 (Nov 13, 2013)

koshergrl said:


> Noomi said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



Noomi has never met her child for the first time..there is no way she can understand the humbling miracle.


----------



## koshergrl (Nov 13, 2013)

It's not even that. It's that she is so callous of the lives of others, based on HER perception of them as less valuable than other people.

She even said just a couple of days ago..she used to think all people pregnant with downs babies should get abortions...until she got to know a person with downs. She sees everything through a terribly myopic lens.

She sees babies as an illness, not as people. Because that's what she's been taught, and because she's ignorant, and because she is arrogant enough to think that we have the right to cull *undesirables*. It's a disgusting viewpoint..and she doesn't even know enough to know how loathesome and dangerous it is.


----------



## RKMBrown (Nov 13, 2013)

Noomi said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Noomi said:
> ...



How ironic, the liberal parasite complaining about being "used" to survive.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Nov 13, 2013)

koshergrl said:


> It's not even that. It's that she is so callous of the lives of others, based on HER perception of them as less valuable than other people.
> 
> She even said just a couple of days ago..she used to think all people pregnant with downs babies should get abortions...until she got to know a person with downs. She sees everything through a terribly myopic lens.
> 
> She sees babies as an illness, not as people. Because that's what she's been taught, and because she's ignorant, and because she is arrogant enough to think that we have the right to cull *undesirables*. It's a disgusting viewpoint..and she doesn't even know enough to know how loathesome and dangerous it is.



Did the Egyptians do that to the Israelis for a while?


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Nov 13, 2013)

Noomi said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > really? why is a person charged with a double murder if he kills a pregnant woman ?
> ...



Lacy Peterson didn't have any say in the matter because she was dead also.


----------



## RKMBrown (Nov 13, 2013)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Noomi said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



Maybe Lacy's mom ok'd the stabbing


----------



## LiberalatHeart (Nov 13, 2013)

So you believe that women should also be forced to have a child if she is raped or due to incest? YOU IGNORANT PIECE OF SHIT.

Abortion is NOT your choice, it is up to the individual and that is how it will stay as long as sane individuals prevail over you extreme fucks. You cannot tell a woman that she cannot have an abortion, because you do not agree with it....that is not a determination of yours to make, ONLY HERS.

So you can throw religion around like monkeys throwing feces, or try and stand tall on the quicksand which is your moral ground...It will not work, your argument is a losing one. Enjoy knowing that!


----------



## Noomi (Nov 13, 2013)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Noomi said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



In other words, if the woman didn't act like a slut, she wouldn't be in this situation.


----------



## Noomi (Nov 13, 2013)

RKMBrown said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Noomi said:
> ...



You are completely ignorant of your own laws.


----------



## Noomi (Nov 13, 2013)

koshergrl said:


> It's not even that. It's that she is so callous of the lives of others, based on HER perception of them as less valuable than other people.
> 
> She even said just a couple of days ago..she used to think all people pregnant with downs babies should get abortions...until she got to know a person with downs. She sees everything through a terribly myopic lens.
> 
> She sees babies as an illness, not as people. Because that's what she's been taught, and because she's ignorant, and because she is arrogant enough to think that we have the right to cull *undesirables*. It's a disgusting viewpoint..and she doesn't even know enough to know how loathesome and dangerous it is.



You are a fool and you have no idea what I think, or how I was raised.


----------



## Lumpy 1 (Nov 13, 2013)

koshergrl said:


> It's not even that. It's that she is so callous of the lives of others, based on HER perception of them as less valuable than other people.
> 
> She even said just a couple of days ago..she used to think all people pregnant with downs babies should get abortions...until she got to know a person with downs. She sees everything through a terribly myopic lens.
> 
> She sees babies as an illness, not as people. Because that's what she's been taught, and because she's ignorant, and because she is arrogant enough to think that we have the right to cull *undesirables*. It's a disgusting viewpoint..and she doesn't even know enough to know how loathesome and dangerous it is.



I suppose a thread relating to the hows, whys and whens of supporting abortion would be interesting..


----------



## koshergrl (Nov 13, 2013)

Noomi said:


> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> > It's not even that. It's that she is so callous of the lives of others, based on HER perception of them as less valuable than other people.
> ...


 
I know you're ignorant, misinformed, callous and stupid.

How that relates to your upbringing, I'm sure I wouldn't hazard to guess.


----------



## RKMBrown (Nov 13, 2013)

Noomi said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Noomi said:
> ...



In other words, you insist that women who don't keep their legs closed and women that have their tubes tied are sluts? WOW

Don't know about Australia, but where I come from not all women that get pregnant are sluts.


----------



## Noomi (Nov 13, 2013)

koshergrl said:


> Noomi said:
> 
> 
> > koshergrl said:
> ...



You are the stupid and callous one because you want to force women to be brood mares.


----------



## Noomi (Nov 13, 2013)

RKMBrown said:


> Noomi said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



Obviously women are not sluts, but some people sure seem to think they are.


----------



## RKMBrown (Nov 13, 2013)

Noomi said:


> RKMBrown said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



And you are completely ignorant of the use of sarcasm.


----------



## RKMBrown (Nov 13, 2013)

Noomi said:


> RKMBrown said:
> 
> 
> > Noomi said:
> ...



Looking through the thread I only see one person calling women sluts.  Just sayin.


----------



## Noomi (Nov 13, 2013)

RKMBrown said:


> Noomi said:
> 
> 
> > RKMBrown said:
> ...



I never called anyone a slut. I was responding to a poster who does believe that women who have abortions are sluts.


----------



## Wry Catcher (Nov 13, 2013)

PixieStix said:


> Noomi said:
> 
> 
> > What would you do in this situation, Pixie? Let the baby starve, I guess?
> ...



Murder is always a crime.  Abortions can be legal.  Is your post hyperbole, or are you really so ignorant?


----------



## RKMBrown (Nov 13, 2013)

LiberalatHeart said:


> So you believe that women should also be forced to have a child if she is raped or due to incest?


Not sure who that question was directed to but I'll answer it.  

No.  Nor do I think a woman should be forced to have a child.  As I stated above, clearly I might add, IMO abortions should be legal right up until baby is demonstrably alive.  The common measure of heartbeat, IMO, should be sufficient to show cause/proof that the baby is alive.


----------



## Noomi (Nov 13, 2013)

RKMBrown said:


> LiberalatHeart said:
> 
> 
> > So you believe that women should also be forced to have a child if she is raped or due to incest?
> ...



And the heart starts to beat at around 28 days, and most women don't even know they are pregnant, and cannot have an abortion.


----------



## RKMBrown (Nov 13, 2013)

Noomi said:


> RKMBrown said:
> 
> 
> > Noomi said:
> ...



No, I checked again, you are the one that called women sluts. No one else, just you.


----------



## Noomi (Nov 13, 2013)

RKMBrown said:


> Noomi said:
> 
> 
> > RKMBrown said:
> ...



That is this thread, there are other threads where I have had a discussion with this person.


----------



## RKMBrown (Nov 13, 2013)

Noomi said:


> RKMBrown said:
> 
> 
> > LiberalatHeart said:
> ...



Is it 4weeks? I thought it was 6.  At any rate the day after pill is available, as well as early pregnancy testing. Doesn't early testing work after 9days?  Seems to me there is a viable window in there, from the morning after through the first 5weeks or so plenty of time, no?


----------



## RKMBrown (Nov 13, 2013)

Noomi said:


> RKMBrown said:
> 
> 
> > Noomi said:
> ...



Then, please accept my apology.  You were using sarcasm, and I missed it.


----------



## Noomi (Nov 13, 2013)

RKMBrown said:


> Noomi said:
> 
> 
> > RKMBrown said:
> ...



Apology accepted, and I should have made it clear that I was being sarcastic from the beginning.


----------



## RKMBrown (Nov 13, 2013)

Noomi said:


> RKMBrown said:
> 
> 
> > Noomi said:
> ...



On that note... please also accept my apology for my abrupt language.

I understand this issue is a "deeply" emotional one.  

I just love babies soooo much, that sometimes I get carried away with my rhetoric when this subject comes up.  I can't help but visualize the baby... when the topic of abortion comes up, it's a personal flaw of mine.  I could not push the button to bomb a city with children in it either, not even to save my life.  When it comes to women and children in danger, my brain goes into protect mode.


----------



## Noomi (Nov 13, 2013)

RKMBrown said:


> Noomi said:
> 
> 
> > RKMBrown said:
> ...



I am defensive of the issue as well. I used to be very pro life so I understand your arguments as I used to make them myself.

Its all good!

Edit: I love babies too, and hope to have my own someday. I also couldn't have an abortion unless I felt it absolutely necessary, but I will always defend the right of other women to have one.


----------



## RKMBrown (Nov 13, 2013)

Noomi said:


> RKMBrown said:
> 
> 
> > Noomi said:
> ...


Fair enough, and that is respectable stance to take.


----------



## Againsheila (Nov 13, 2013)

Luddly Neddite said:


> Noomi said:
> 
> 
> > I am sorry you lost your longed for 'babies', but that doesn't give you the right to expect women to carry an unwanted child to term.
> ...



I've known several women that have had abortions.  All but one of them regretted it.  One girl was 15 when she had her abortion, without her parents knowledge.  It bothered her so much she sought counseling and eventually told her parents everything.  When they told her they would have cared for the child she about lost it.  The entire family ended up in counseling and eventually she married and had a child but she never forgot the abortion nor the fact that it was encouraged by her school, her friends, and planned parenthood.  All of whom kept her pregnancy and her abortion from her parents.  If you have ever lost a child, you know how much that hurts.  I miscarried in-between my children.  I still mourn the loss of that child and it was only at a couple of weeks gestation.  Knowing I had aborted a child when I didn't have to?  It would have killed me.  There is something wrong in a society that encourages girls to have an abortion without ever informing the parents.


----------



## koshergrl (Nov 13, 2013)

Noomi said:


> RKMBrown said:
> 
> 
> > Noomi said:
> ...



Who is that poster, nooms, and please link the post where she called women who get abortions "sluts".


----------



## Dot Com (Nov 13, 2013)

I hope either President HRC or President Warren make taxpayer-funded abortions a reality soon after they are inaugurated. That way they will be safer & protected.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Nov 14, 2013)

Noomi said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Noomi said:
> ...



You're such an idiot.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Nov 14, 2013)

LiberalatHeart said:


> So you believe that women should also be forced to have a child if she is raped or due to incest? YOU IGNORANT PIECE OF SHIT.
> 
> Abortion is NOT your choice, it is up to the individual and that is how it will stay as long as sane individuals prevail over you extreme fucks. You cannot tell a woman that she cannot have an abortion, because you do not agree with it....that is not a determination of yours to make, ONLY HERS.
> 
> So you can throw religion around like monkeys throwing feces, or try and stand tall on the quicksand which is your moral ground...It will not work, your argument is a losing one. Enjoy knowing that!



You ignorant piece of shit abortion involves TWO BODIES, TWO INDIVIDUALS.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Nov 14, 2013)

Noomi said:


> RKMBrown said:
> 
> 
> > Noomi said:
> ...


Seems you are one of those that think that.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Nov 14, 2013)

RKMBrown said:


> LiberalatHeart said:
> 
> 
> > So you believe that women should also be forced to have a child if she is raped or due to incest?
> ...



That's 22 days after conception.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Nov 14, 2013)

Noomi said:


> RKMBrown said:
> 
> 
> > Noomi said:
> ...



I'm that person you're referring too, and you're a lying sack of shit.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Nov 14, 2013)

koshergrl said:


> Noomi said:
> 
> 
> > RKMBrown said:
> ...



I think it was me she was referring too.


----------



## Againsheila (Nov 14, 2013)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Noomi said:
> 
> 
> > RKMBrown said:
> ...



You know what?  Some women ARE sluts, so are some men, get over it!

Watched Jerry Springer at my father in laws once (he always has it on) Some lady was claiming that one of 5 different men was the father of her baby.  Turned out none of them was.  That means she slept with 6 different men over a two week period.  I consider that a slut.  Worse, again at my father in law's they were doing a follow up.  Now she was claiming it was one of 2 different men (in addition to the 5 men she already claimed).  It wasn't even one of them either.  Now we are up to at least 8 men that she slept with in a two week period.  She's either a slut or a hooker.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Nov 14, 2013)

Againsheila said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Noomi said:
> ...



Yes some are, but not every woman that gets pregnant is a slut, however noomi acts as if all are.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Nov 14, 2013)

Againsheila said:


> Luddly Neddite said:
> 
> 
> > Noomi said:
> ...



Anecdotal and legally irrelevant.   

That youve known several women doesnt constitute objective, documented evidence to support the state denying a woman her right to privacy. 

And it would be truly wrong of a society to dictate to a woman whether she may have a child or not.


----------



## thanatos144 (Nov 14, 2013)

Luddly Neddite said:


> RKMBrown said:
> 
> 
> > Dot Com said:
> ...



What a bunch of bullshit. You lie to cover up the fact that you champion killing black and female babies and all innocent defenseless life 

tapatalk post


----------



## thanatos144 (Nov 14, 2013)

LiberalatHeart said:


> So you believe that women should also be forced to have a child if she is raped or due to incest? YOU IGNORANT PIECE OF SHIT.
> 
> Abortion is NOT your choice, it is up to the individual and that is how it will stay as long as sane individuals prevail over you extreme fucks. You cannot tell a woman that she cannot have an abortion, because you do not agree with it....that is not a determination of yours to make, ONLY HERS.
> 
> So you can throw religion around like monkeys throwing feces, or try and stand tall on the quicksand which is your moral ground...It will not work, your argument is a losing one. Enjoy knowing that!



Is that how you excuse your support of baby killing? 

tapatalk post


----------



## thanatos144 (Nov 14, 2013)

Noomi said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Noomi said:
> ...



You do know how babies are made don't you dunmy?

tapatalk post


----------



## Dot Com (Nov 14, 2013)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> Againsheila said:
> 
> 
> > Luddly Neddite said:
> ...



You are correct sir. These righties are basing their arguments on emotion, anecdotal evidence, and encyclopedia entries  Oh!!! And the wholly babble


----------



## thanatos144 (Nov 14, 2013)

Dot Com said:


> C_Clayton_Jones said:
> 
> 
> > Againsheila said:
> ...



Why would it be based on emotion to be against infanticide based on race ,sex and convenience? 

tapatalk post


----------



## koshergrl (Nov 14, 2013)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> > Noomi said:
> ...


 
Did you call all women who get abortions sluts?

I assume you didn't, since I see no link or quote.

Gads I get sick of the lies. And what a thing to lie for!


----------



## Dot Com (Nov 14, 2013)

That tub 'o lard, drug addict-   El Rushbo called them sluts


----------



## koshergrl (Nov 14, 2013)

No, he called the female graduate students who want to sleep around, go to elitist liberal schools, and force the catholic church to pay for their abortions and birth control...sluts.

And they are.


----------



## RKMBrown (Nov 14, 2013)

koshergrl said:


> No, he called the female graduate students who want to sleep around, go to elitist liberal schools, and force the catholic church to pay for their abortions and birth control...sluts.
> 
> And they are.



Democrats, yes.  Sluts not so much.

So now we are to call all women that have safe pre-marital sex sluts? Or just the ones that are liberals?

Religious republicans need to realize that the public at large are not all members of the catholic church.

Forgive, me but I'm trying to ramp down my rhetoric in this thread.


----------



## koshergrl (Nov 14, 2013)

Where in my statement did I say "all "?

Sometimes people are so busy forming their own rhetoric that they don't actually read what is written, but instead add their own spin to it.

I find that really dishonest.


----------



## Dot Com (Nov 14, 2013)

SOCONs, doing what they THINK they do best- policing people's naughty bits 

 In other news, the top 1% made-off w/ 90% of the total profits of this great nation in the last 4 yrs since the banksters own Congress. Priorities SOCONs..... GET SOME!!!


----------



## koshergrl (Nov 14, 2013)

Nobody is policing naughty bits, as you call them, in your demeaning, misogynistic way.


----------



## thanatos144 (Nov 14, 2013)

koshergrl said:


> Nobody is policing naughty bits, as you call them, in your demeaning, misogynistic way.



Notice how they are worried that someone might want women treated as something other then a Vagina  to fill? 

tapatalk post


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Nov 14, 2013)

koshergrl said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > koshergrl said:
> ...



No I never did. but noomi has.


----------



## Katzndogz (Nov 14, 2013)

RKMBrown said:


> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> > No, he called the female graduate students who want to sleep around, go to elitist liberal schools, and force the catholic church to pay for their abortions and birth control...sluts.
> ...



Women who have safe pre marital sex and want someone else to pay their bills ARE sluts.  The cost really at least partly belongs to their sexual partner but asking for a share of cost is too much like telling the guy to pay for it, making that woman a slut!   Shifting the cost to anyone else is slutty.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Nov 14, 2013)

thanatos144 said:


> LiberalatHeart said:
> 
> 
> > So you believe that women should also be forced to have a child if she is raped or due to incest? YOU IGNORANT PIECE OF SHIT.
> ...



Yet another example of the ignorance, stupidity, and hate the Constitution protects citizens from.


----------



## RKMBrown (Nov 14, 2013)

koshergrl said:


> Where in my statement did I say "all "?
> 
> Sometimes people are so busy forming their own rhetoric that they don't actually read what is written, but instead add their own spin to it.
> 
> I find that really dishonest.



You said they are sluts.  If you meant to say "some" are sluts and others are not.  You might have said that rather than just saying they (note they is plural) are sluts (note sluts ends in an s and is also plural.

Questions end with question marks.  They look like this: ?
Statements end in periods.  They look like this: .

The reason I asked you the question "all?" was to get you to qualify whether you said what you meant or not.

I was surprised that you had agreed with Rush and said they are sluts.  I'm just as surprised you now deny you said it, and / or at least feel the need to qualify that you think they when referring to an entire group does not mean all of the group you are referring to.  I find your statements to be, dishonest.


----------



## RKMBrown (Nov 14, 2013)

Katzndogz said:


> RKMBrown said:
> 
> 
> > koshergrl said:
> ...


So anyone receiving any form of welfare and using that welfare to buy a condom is a slut?  I had no idea being a slut was having sex with a condom bought with welfare.  Are all the girls and boys in HS that take free condoms sluts?  Or just the ones that are democrats?

I'm trying to understand where the slut part originates from.  It was my understanding that the term meant a woman who has sex with a lot of men, esp. prostitutes. 

Is there some "feeling" that the act of tax payer funded condoms is some form of prostitution?  Do you somehow imagine that the woman having sex with her partner is gonna do it for the condom?  Perhaps hand out freebies to just any tax payer that comes by?


----------



## thanatos144 (Nov 14, 2013)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> thanatos144 said:
> 
> 
> > LiberalatHeart said:
> ...



It does not protect killing babies. 

tapatalk post


----------



## Spoonman (Nov 15, 2013)

the nazis were all about euthanasia and made it a common practice.  to bad it worked against many of them during the trials of nuremberg.   Seems the world courts don't really buy into this practice


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Nov 15, 2013)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> thanatos144 said:
> 
> 
> > LiberalatHeart said:
> ...



Do you think the Constitution protect illegal immigrants? I think you have suggested that in the past.


----------



## Againsheila (Nov 15, 2013)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



Wait a minute, Noomi, who is all in favor of abortion up to and including the 9th month and AFTER, calls someone who gets and abortion a slut???


----------



## chikenwing (Nov 15, 2013)

Noomi said:


> lakeview said:
> 
> 
> > Noomi said:
> ...



Your right for once! morally sound people don't think like you,ist just that simple.


----------



## Againsheila (Nov 15, 2013)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> Againsheila said:
> 
> 
> > Luddly Neddite said:
> ...



I don't have it right now, but several years ago I read a study that more than 75% of women who had abortions later regretted them.  That's a pretty significant amount of children that should never have been aborted.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Nov 15, 2013)

Againsheila said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > koshergrl said:
> ...



She did it in this thread.


----------



## Casjah (Nov 15, 2013)

RKMBrown said:


> Katzndogz said:
> 
> 
> > RKMBrown said:
> ...



Some people apparently think that anyone having more sex than they are must be sluts. Anyhow, labeling and stereotyping is rather obtunded, imo. It's simple and it boils down to personal freedom. While people may not agree with the decisions that others make, their grievance should not be made public policy. Furthermore, paying for abortions and euthanasia (if this is the case) is ultimately cheaper than 18 years of welfare or a decade of nursing home/hospice. It seems as if money is the real issue behind most policies. Concern for these people is limited to rhetoric, soapbox religiosity, and arm chair warriors with carpal tunnel syndrome.


----------



## Noomi (Nov 15, 2013)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Againsheila said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



I most certainly did not.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Nov 15, 2013)

noomi said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > againsheila said:
> ...



you were saying?



noomi said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > noomi said:
> ...


----------



## Noomi (Nov 15, 2013)

chikenwing said:


> Noomi said:
> 
> 
> > lakeview said:
> ...



So you would rather give birth to a baby and watch it die, rather than end its life peacefully and without pain?

How about giving parents the choice to decide what they want to do, instead of insisting you decide for them?


----------



## Noomi (Nov 15, 2013)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> noomi said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



That was your opinion - not mine. I said it, meaning that your opinion was that if the woman didn't act like a slut, she wouldn't be pregnant. That is how you lifers think, is it not?


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Nov 15, 2013)

Noomi said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > noomi said:
> ...



When did I say it? my opinion would mean I said it so bitch when did I say all women who have an abortion are sluts? I post your link of you saying it now shut the fuck up.


----------



## Casjah (Nov 15, 2013)

Noomi said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Noomi said:
> ...



 [MENTION=38085]Noomi[/MENTION] 

It's _obvious_ what you were saying. Don't worry about it. 

He's clearly backtracking. And with a position like that, who wouldn't.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Nov 15, 2013)

Casjah said:


> Noomi said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



and what god damn position is that troll?


----------



## Casjah (Nov 15, 2013)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Casjah said:
> 
> 
> > Noomi said:
> ...



 calm down before you hurt yourself. 

"The baby didn't ask to be placed there it's not it's fault maybe the *woman should have kept her legs closed *or had her tubes tied."

Let's just examine this statement, calmly if possible. "should have kept her legs closed.."  that particular comment is made by those who believe that only women should have to deal with the consequences of sexual intercourse. 

What about the guy who stuck his dick between those legs? Should he get his body permanently altered OR no longer have intercourse? well of course not. double standards. Women who have sex are sluts who need to keep their legs closed...or am I just misinterpreting your statement. You really didn't mean that she should "keep her legs closed" or get surgery thereby sterilizing herself. 

Right. keep driving..


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Nov 15, 2013)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Noomi said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



No one asked you to interfere with a womans right to privacy. 

Typical conservative. 

Advocating for bigger government and more government in citizens lives.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Nov 15, 2013)

Casjah said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Casjah said:
> ...


So married women don't have unplanned pregnancy's?  She was the one that called them sluts


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Nov 15, 2013)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Noomi said:
> ...



nor did the baby ask to be there but is is and needs to be defended


----------



## Noomi (Nov 15, 2013)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Noomi said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



See? You believe that she acted like a whore in 'spreading her legs' - don't you?


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Nov 15, 2013)

Noomi said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Noomi said:
> ...



needs repeating
So married women don't have unplanned pregnancy's? You were the one that called them sluts and now you're calling them whores.


----------



## Noomi (Nov 15, 2013)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Noomi said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



You are such a dumb fucker, I wonder why I waste my time on you.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Nov 15, 2013)

Noomi said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Noomi said:
> ...



stop calling women who have a abortions sluts and whores.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Nov 15, 2013)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> C_Clayton_Jones said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



By whom? 

By what authority? 

And in what manner? 

At least have the honesty to admit to your contempt for the Constitution and individual liberty.


----------



## Noomi (Nov 15, 2013)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Noomi said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



I didn't, and you know it, you troll.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Nov 15, 2013)

Noomi said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Noomi said:
> ...



show the link where I said it show the post where I said all women who have an abortion are sluts? I have shown the post where you said ity now your crying troll? STOP LYING HOW ABOUT IT TROLL?


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Nov 15, 2013)

Noomi said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Noomi said:
> ...



Actually theyre the ones you want to pay the most attention to  as they pose the greatest threat to our civil liberties.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Nov 15, 2013)

pay back is a bitch I OWE YOU.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Nov 15, 2013)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> Noomi said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



You support obama go to hell you bastard and your threat to liberty bull shit.


----------



## Noomi (Nov 15, 2013)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> c_clayton_jones said:
> 
> 
> > noomi said:
> ...



stfu.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Nov 15, 2013)

Noomi said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > c_clayton_jones said:
> ...


go to hell bitch.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Nov 15, 2013)

Noomi said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > c_clayton_jones said:
> ...



On the contrary, let him speak  he represents conservatives well.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Nov 15, 2013)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> Noomi said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



coming from you I consider that a compliment fucking ignorant bastard.


----------



## Noomi (Nov 15, 2013)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> C_Clayton_Jones said:
> 
> 
> > Noomi said:
> ...



Someone needs to get laid.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Nov 15, 2013)

Noomi said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > C_Clayton_Jones said:
> ...



At least I treat women with a lot more respect than calling them whores and sluts


----------



## RKMBrown (Nov 15, 2013)

Noomi said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > C_Clayton_Jones said:
> ...



Use a condom!


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Nov 15, 2013)

RKMBrown said:


> Noomi said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



yep or noomi will call them a slut or whore.


----------



## Noomi (Nov 15, 2013)

RKMBrown said:


> Noomi said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



Never had to!


----------



## Noomi (Nov 15, 2013)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Noomi said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



You were the one who said that if women kept their legs shut they wouldn't get pregnant. Where is your respect?


----------



## Drake_Roberts (Nov 15, 2013)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> Noomi said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



Come on now, that's not fair. You can't pick the stupidest member of a party and say he speaks for them all. Although, a lot of rightists I know sound disturbingly like him...


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Nov 15, 2013)

Drake_Roberts said:


> C_Clayton_Jones said:
> 
> 
> > Noomi said:
> ...



does stupid have to be one of the requirements to be a god damn liberal? Yes I think it does.
It's not wise to fuck with a pissed off tiger


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Nov 15, 2013)

Noomi said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Noomi said:
> ...



I didn't call them sluts you did stop bitching because you got busted.


----------



## Drake_Roberts (Nov 15, 2013)

Noomi said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Noomi said:
> ...



bigreb seriously said that? No suprise but still... 
No wonder everyone is mad at him. Just throwing it out there, but bigreb sounds like the biggest sexist I've ever heard.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Nov 15, 2013)

Drake_Roberts said:


> Noomi said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



humm new member  Oct 2013 or just a new name? I think it's the new name. fuck wit you don't know a mother fucking thing about me but I know you keep your head up obamas asshole.


----------



## Noomi (Nov 15, 2013)

Drake_Roberts said:


> Noomi said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



Yeah he is, but he's prattling on, claiming I called women sluts when I obviously didn't. He's a troll.


----------



## Drake_Roberts (Nov 15, 2013)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Drake_Roberts said:
> 
> 
> > C_Clayton_Jones said:
> ...



If stupidity is a requirement to being a liberal, you and Obama share the leftist throne. 
And you're a tiger? I guess that explains everything...



Idiot.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Nov 15, 2013)

Drake_Roberts said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Drake_Roberts said:
> ...



me a leftist now whose being the clown? I think you need to re-evaluate your standards. you have been found lacking  wipe your nose that obama shit stain is burning up what is left of your brain cell


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Nov 15, 2013)

Noomi said:


> Drake_Roberts said:
> 
> 
> > Noomi said:
> ...



you have been busted numerous times shut the hell up.


----------



## Drake_Roberts (Nov 15, 2013)

Noomi said:


> Drake_Roberts said:
> 
> 
> > Noomi said:
> ...



Noomi, no offense, but if it took you that long to realize bigreb is a troll, than you're somewhat of an idiot yourself. But I know that you knew bigreb was an idiot from the beginning, so it's all good.


----------



## RKMBrown (Nov 15, 2013)

Noomi said:


> RKMBrown said:
> 
> 
> > Noomi said:
> ...



I don't like em.  I use the control method... gulp.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Nov 15, 2013)

Drake_Roberts said:


> Noomi said:
> 
> 
> > Drake_Roberts said:
> ...



new member oct. 2013 and some how thinks  he knows me agreeing with a known liberal. you are one stupid fuck


----------



## Drake_Roberts (Nov 15, 2013)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Drake_Roberts said:
> 
> 
> > Noomi said:
> ...



Why do you think I made a new account? Is it not possible for someone to only have heard of this site in late October of this year? 

And what part of "I AM AGAINST ABORTION" do you fail to comprehend? And even if I did have only one brain cell, it's sure as hell smarter than any you have.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Nov 15, 2013)

Drake_Roberts said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Drake_Roberts said:
> ...



You don't know me at all there is no way you could because I have just come back and started posting. So you're either lying about anything and everything or you're just an old member with a new name. Conservative was a member that I would get into many arguments with   who is long gone\, or is he?


----------



## Drake_Roberts (Nov 15, 2013)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Drake_Roberts said:
> 
> 
> > Noomi said:
> ...



While your grammar is to atrocious for me to know what that post meant with certainty, I think I got the gist of it. Reading one post of yours reveals you to be an idiot. Your bad grammar, lack of decorum, blind prejudice, and frequent use of cursing only serves to support my assessment. And so what if I agree with a liberal? I have known many a good liberal. Shouldn't liberals and conservatives, you know, actually compromise on something once in a while. People like you are why our congress is so ineffective amd inept.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Nov 15, 2013)

Drake_Roberts said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Drake_Roberts said:
> ...



blah blah blah blah what was that you said?


----------



## Drake_Roberts (Nov 15, 2013)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Drake_Roberts said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



Who the bloody hell is Conservative!? Was he a 23 year old college student from Indiana? Did this Conservative fellow sound like I do? Did he criticise the same idiotic points you make? Probably not. If anyone ever asks you a synonym for "paranoid", you should answer with the following: "bigrebnc1775."


----------



## Drake_Roberts (Nov 15, 2013)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Drake_Roberts said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



And that solves the great mystery of what happens when bigrebnc knows he's lost an argument. He metaphorically plugs his fingers into his ears, then runs around shouting, "I can't hear you!" repeatedly until he runs into a wall or passes out. See, irrefutable proof that bigreb is a child.  And let me put my earlier post into stupid for you:

You
are
an
idiot.
Talking
to
liberals
is
okay.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Nov 15, 2013)

Drake_Roberts said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Drake_Roberts said:
> ...


idiot why did you change your name? Did you say something shameful and have your ass handed to you?


----------



## Drake_Roberts (Nov 15, 2013)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Drake_Roberts said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



Can anyone explain to me who the hell Conservative is? Why do you keep mistaking me for some guy you used to argue with?


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Nov 15, 2013)

Drake_Roberts said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Drake_Roberts said:
> ...



When a new member comes along and think they know anything about someone else tells me that is not a new member. YOU as Drake_Roberts hasn't been here that long, but you as someone else I'm not so sure, but I will figure it out. I'm just that smart.


----------



## Againsheila (Nov 16, 2013)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Casjah said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



I had an unplanned pregnancy, twice.  They are both alive and well thank you.  My mother says all 5 of us were accidents.  My cousin prefers to call her kids "surprises".  The truth is that a lot of women get pregnant without intending to, but deal with the consequence by having the baby and in almost all cases are better off for having had their children instead of killing them in the womb.

When I scheduled a tubal during my last c-section, the doctor told me ahead of time the chances of a failure were slightly higher than if I had it when I wasn't giving birth and asked me what I'd do if after the tubal I found myself pregnant.  I said "Well, I'd just figure that somebody up there wants that baby so I'd have the child!"  She said, "Good answer."


----------



## koshergrl (Nov 16, 2013)

I would venture a guess that fully 75 percent of all babies in the US are *accidents*, lol.


----------



## Casjah (Nov 16, 2013)

Drake_Roberts said:


> Noomi said:
> 
> 
> > Drake_Roberts said:
> ...



^this. Once a debate as degraded into people trading insults, it is over.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Nov 16, 2013)

Casjah said:


> Drake_Roberts said:
> 
> 
> > Noomi said:
> ...



That's ok that one is an old timer with a new name. I've dealt with that kind before.


----------



## lakeview (Nov 17, 2013)

Noomi said:


> So you would rather give birth to a baby and watch it die, rather than end its life peacefully and without pain?
> 
> How about giving parents the choice to decide what they want to do, instead of insisting you decide for them?



Another way to ask this is: Should we as a society be able to kill people without them giving their consent? Granted, you gave an extreme example in order to generate some debate and obviously a newborn cannot speak for themselves but you can't be so obtuse as to think that this example would apply to even a sizable minority of euthanasia cases should euthanasia be legalized. I have to admit that it's clever of you to disguise what amounts to the ultimate violation of someone's rights, the right to live, as something that actually enhances rights, in this case parent's rights.

I'd be OK with "looking the other way" if someone is documented to be terminally ill and some friends of his sign him out the of the hospital and help him hook up to an exit bag but I don't want to see medical professionals involved in euthanasia.


----------



## PixieStix (Nov 17, 2013)

This thread hasn't been euthanized yet? Good grief


----------



## koshergrl (Nov 17, 2013)

I wonder when it was determined that all lives should be completely painfree and peaceful, or terminated.


----------



## Noomi (Nov 18, 2013)

koshergrl said:


> I wonder when it was determined that all lives should be completely painfree and peaceful, or terminated.



I wonder why you have the right to decide to allow a person to suffer until they die.


----------



## RKMBrown (Nov 18, 2013)

Noomi said:


> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> > I wonder when it was determined that all lives should be completely painfree and peaceful, or terminated.
> ...



We all suffer, we all die.  Why do you insist on the holding a right to set the date and time of a child's death?


----------



## koshergrl (Nov 18, 2013)

Noomi said:


> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> > I wonder when it was determined that all lives should be completely painfree and peaceful, or terminated.
> ...


 
You're a fucking idiot. "Allowing" someone to live is not a *right* of mine. We don't have the *right* to not kill people. We have the obligation not to murder, and each living person has the right to live without being murdered, even if they are in pain.

The person who is suffering has the RIGHT to live out their lives to the end. Regardless of how little you like to take care of them, or how little you care to watch them suffer pain.


----------



## koshergrl (Nov 18, 2013)

Apparently noomi thinks we each have the obligation to kill those around us who we find discomfiting.


----------



## koshergrl (Nov 18, 2013)

Fucking freak.

She also thinks her immense dog has the right to kill little dogs who *annoy* him.

That is noom in a nutshell. A nasty person who thinks she has the right to eliminate those who disturb her peace of mind.


----------



## Drake_Roberts (Nov 18, 2013)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Casjah said:
> 
> 
> > Drake_Roberts said:
> ...



Where do you get "old timer" out of 23 year old college student? And I joined in October 2013, for the last time! And no, I did not have an account on USMB before that. Oh yes, and good luck attempting to prove your crackpot theory about me having another account. You can't prove a lie.


----------



## shonny (Sep 26, 2015)

drifter said:


> Gracie said:
> 
> 
> > Oy. This is such a painful subject.
> ...


I only just found this after typing in my nephew's name Jailan.

I believe in voluntary/Involuntary Euthanasia. After witnessing this first hand, parents need to have options.

 I could go on and on. It was never apparent he had a blockage until she went in labour. Apparently the ultrasound can not pick up exactly what it is and looks just like a shadow, however if she had a ultrasound between 20-35wks I believe he could of been born earlier and had survive as some of his tissue would still have been alive. 

Watching Jailan scream for food as the stomach bile ate away at his lining, watching him try to suck on anything your arm,neck looking for the breast as he was starving was so distressing. Watching him fade away, bones start to protrude, turning grey, his cries getting weaker, his breathing patterns change over the last few days and knowing there was not one thing we could.


----------



## thanatos144 (Sep 27, 2015)

Sent from my SM-G386T1 using Tapatalk


----------



## Delta4Embassy (Sep 28, 2015)

Euthanasia yes. Abortion no. Abortion is killing someone without a say. Euthanasia's killing yourself. If it's hopeless and you're in agony go ahead.


----------

