Just a clump of cells

[SassyIrishLass]

And to what would that be relevant?

I mean Summit has Mickey Thompson Drag Radials on sale too... but I didn't think this was the place to mention it... because we're not discussing racing. So I wonder, why you'd inform us your irrelevance... again?

Were they not Christians?

The Pilgrims were Separatists

What kind of dumbass answer is that? The Pilgrims were Christians. They were Protestants. They believed abortion was allowable until the time of quickening.

Now how is that Christians could make that determination?

Why don't you take some time to educate yourself on Pilgrims being Separatists and what Separatists were instead of acting like a hysterical loon.

Prove to me that Separatists were not Christians.

I think they were Christians in their own way, they had some weird ideals and beliefs. They rejected Christmas and Easter, I know that much.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Were they not Christians?

The Pilgrims were Separatists

What kind of dumbass answer is that? The Pilgrims were Christians. They were Protestants. They believed abortion was allowable until the time of quickening.

Now how is that Christians could make that determination?

Why don't you take some time to educate yourself on Pilgrims being Separatists and what Separatists were instead of acting like a hysterical loon.

Prove to me that Separatists were not Christians.

I think they were Christians in their own way, they had some weird ideals and beliefs. They rejected Christmas and Easter, I know that much.

Who decides what is or isn't a Christian belief?

 

[SassyIrishLass]

The Pilgrims were Separatists

What kind of dumbass answer is that? The Pilgrims were Christians. They were Protestants. They believed abortion was allowable until the time of quickening.

Now how is that Christians could make that determination?

Why don't you take some time to educate yourself on Pilgrims being Separatists and what Separatists were instead of acting like a hysterical loon.

Prove to me that Separatists were not Christians.

I think they were Christians in their own way, they had some weird ideals and beliefs. They rejected Christmas and Easter, I know that much.

Who decides what is or isn't a Christian belief?

I don't know. But the fact remains they were what were called Separatists. Are Jehovah Witness Christians?

 

[SassyIrishLass]

Interesting article on them. Hope it helps.

Faith of the Pilgrims Plimoth Plantation

 

[PaintMyHouse]

. They rejected Christmas and Easter, I know that much.

They are unbiblical.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

You didn't answer the questions.

If abortion is murder then what's the penalty for induced abortion, the same as killing a person right? It would have to be or the fetus is only partly a person? Stop trying to have it both ways and tells us what should be the penalty for killing a fetus?

Is that because a fetus isn't a real person? You just said we could kill it to save the mother right?

Of course, it depends on why the abortion was induced, a fetus is a STAGE in human development, or are you stupid enough to NOT REALIZE a ZYGOTE is a human. It all has to do with MANS interfering with natures course. But if you have more to say, get it out! AND when 2 lives hang in the balance, and only one can survive, THEN, and only THEN does a mothers RIGHT come into play to make that decision.

So if the only way to save the mother is to kill the child, that's what you call it right, at what stage of life can I kill a child? Only in the womb, out of the womb? Doesn't the child in the womb have the same rights as the child outside the womb? Seems like the one in the womb matter less than the mother eh?

What do you NOT UNDERSTAND here, besides you immorality?

The Unborn Victims of Violence Act of 2004 (Public Law 108-212) is a United States law which recognizes a child in utero as a legal victim, if they are injured or killed during the commission of any of over 60 listed federal crimes of violence. The law defines "child in utero" as "a member of the species Homo sapiens, at any stage of development, who is carried in the womb".

Of course, we can let them BOTH DIE, if that's your ethics!

Answer the questions, or admit that your position is irrational and you cannot answer.

What questions do you think I didn't answer?

All of them, as usual.

If what's in the womb is a a child, and if killing it is always murder, then no abortion, regardless of the reason, can ever be allowed. To do anything else would mean that what was in the womb was one thing in one case and another thing in another. So V, abortion or no abortion, that is your choice, if what's in there is really a child that is.

 

[Vigilante]

You are a disgusting, vile BITCH, I can't, in common sensibility call you human!

LIfe, even a HARD LIFE is preferable to death, that's why the human spirit clings to life instead of giving into death, you dumbass!

Every abortion kills an innocent human being.
Every human being is a person.
Beginning at conception, every pregnancy involves two or more bodies.
It is just, reasonable, and necessary for society to outlaw certain choices.
The right to not be killed supersedes the right to not be pregnant.
Poverty, rape, disability, or “unwantedness” do not morally justify abortion.
The differences between embryos and adults are differences of degree not of kind.
LESS than 1% of all abortions are performed to save the life of the mother.
To be only "personally pro-life" is to not be pro-life at all.
If there is uncertainty about when human life begins, the benefit of the doubt should go to preserving life.
Abortion is more dangerous than childbirth.\
Prior to abortion's legalization, 90% of abortions were done by doctors, not by "coat hangers in back alleys."
The 8 week+ unborn baby feels real physical pain during an abortion.
Abortion is condemnable for the same reasons that slavery and genocide are.
Abortion is not a “women's only” issue.
Every legal surgical abortion stops a beating heart and terminates measurable brain waves.
The right to not be killed supersedes the right to privacy.
Abortion disproportionally targets minority babies. Thank you Ms. Sanger!
Abortion has become a form of gendercide, shrinking the global female population at an alarming rate.
Laws concerning abortion have significantly influenced whether women choose to have abortions.

Just some reasons abortions are immoral and unethical, and THIS comes from an agnostic that doesn't put a religious view on any of these points!

Then you support the death penalty for women who have abortions? Or life imprisonment?

Of course!

Now we have three on USMB who are out on the farthest edge of the fringe on abortion.

It's murder, even by definition, the taking of ones life!

By whose definition? Cite the source, and its authority, to declare that a fetus is no different than you or me where laws covering murder are concerned.

Are you this stupid, REALLY? For the THIRD TIME in this thread...

The Unborn Victims of Violence Act of 2004 (Public Law 108-212) is a United States law which recognizes a child in utero as a legal victim, if they are injured or killed during the commission of any of over 60 listed federal crimes of violence. The law defines "child in utero" as "a member of the species Homo sapiens, at any stage of development, who is carried in the womb".

You need help understanding that by this ACT. a ZYGOTE is a homo sapien, at ant stage of development?

 

[Vigilante]

Of course, it depends on why the abortion was induced, a fetus is a STAGE in human development, or are you stupid enough to NOT REALIZE a ZYGOTE is a human. It all has to do with MANS interfering with natures course. But if you have more to say, get it out! AND when 2 lives hang in the balance, and only one can survive, THEN, and only THEN does a mothers RIGHT come into play to make that decision.

So if the only way to save the mother is to kill the child, that's what you call it right, at what stage of life can I kill a child? Only in the womb, out of the womb? Doesn't the child in the womb have the same rights as the child outside the womb? Seems like the one in the womb matter less than the mother eh?

What do you NOT UNDERSTAND here, besides you immorality?

The Unborn Victims of Violence Act of 2004 (Public Law 108-212) is a United States law which recognizes a child in utero as a legal victim, if they are injured or killed during the commission of any of over 60 listed federal crimes of violence. The law defines "child in utero" as "a member of the species Homo sapiens, at any stage of development, who is carried in the womb".

Of course, we can let them BOTH DIE, if that's your ethics!

Answer the questions, or admit that your position is irrational and you cannot answer.

What questions do you think I didn't answer?

All of them, as usual.

If what's in the womb is a a child, and if killing it is always murder, then no abortion, regardless of the reason, can ever be allowed. To do anything else would mean that what was in the womb was one thing in one case and another thing in another. So V, abortion or no abortion, that is your choice, if what's in there is really a child that is.

As with Obamacares WAIVERS, Abortion is the only form of murder currently allowed by the fucked up SCOTUS! IF the FATHER kills the baby in the mothers womb, he is arrested for MURDER... rather UNFAIR way of doing things! You're for being FAIR aren't you?

 

[PaintMyHouse]

So if the only way to save the mother is to kill the child, that's what you call it right, at what stage of life can I kill a child? Only in the womb, out of the womb? Doesn't the child in the womb have the same rights as the child outside the womb? Seems like the one in the womb matter less than the mother eh?

What do you NOT UNDERSTAND here, besides you immorality?

The Unborn Victims of Violence Act of 2004 (Public Law 108-212) is a United States law which recognizes a child in utero as a legal victim, if they are injured or killed during the commission of any of over 60 listed federal crimes of violence. The law defines "child in utero" as "a member of the species Homo sapiens, at any stage of development, who is carried in the womb".

Of course, we can let them BOTH DIE, if that's your ethics!

Answer the questions, or admit that your position is irrational and you cannot answer.

What questions do you think I didn't answer?

All of them, as usual.

If what's in the womb is a a child, and if killing it is always murder, then no abortion, regardless of the reason, can ever be allowed. To do anything else would mean that what was in the womb was one thing in one case and another thing in another. So V, abortion or no abortion, that is your choice, if what's in there is really a child that is.

As with Obamacares WAIVERS, Abortion is the only form of murder currently allowed by the fucked up SCOTUS! IF the FATHER kills the baby in the mothers womb, he's is arrested for MURDER... rather UNFAIR way of doing things! You're for being FAIR aren't you?

As I said V, you can't answer because you are irrational, and so ends that.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

What kind of dumbass answer is that? The Pilgrims were Christians. They were Protestants. They believed abortion was allowable until the time of quickening.

Now how is that Christians could make that determination?

Why don't you take some time to educate yourself on Pilgrims being Separatists and what Separatists were instead of acting like a hysterical loon.

Prove to me that Separatists were not Christians.

I think they were Christians in their own way, they had some weird ideals and beliefs. They rejected Christmas and Easter, I know that much.

Who decides what is or isn't a Christian belief?

I don't know. But the fact remains they were what were called Separatists. Are Jehovah Witness Christians?

LOL! No...

 

[Vigilante]

What do you NOT UNDERSTAND here, besides you immorality?

The Unborn Victims of Violence Act of 2004 (Public Law 108-212) is a United States law which recognizes a child in utero as a legal victim, if they are injured or killed during the commission of any of over 60 listed federal crimes of violence. The law defines "child in utero" as "a member of the species Homo sapiens, at any stage of development, who is carried in the womb".

Of course, we can let them BOTH DIE, if that's your ethics!

Answer the questions, or admit that your position is irrational and you cannot answer.

What questions do you think I didn't answer?

All of them, as usual.

If what's in the womb is a a child, and if killing it is always murder, then no abortion, regardless of the reason, can ever be allowed. To do anything else would mean that what was in the womb was one thing in one case and another thing in another. So V, abortion or no abortion, that is your choice, if what's in there is really a child that is.

As with Obamacares WAIVERS, Abortion is the only form of murder currently allowed by the fucked up SCOTUS! IF the FATHER kills the baby in the mothers womb, he's is arrested for MURDER... rather UNFAIR way of doing things! You're for being FAIR aren't you?

As I said V, you can't answer because you are irrational, and so ends that.

Yes, your concession speech has been recorded. when one can't argue logically his point, as you CAN'T let's claim the other is irrational.... I see you're yet another liberal with the Obumanations severe problem.....

He thinks he's KING, you think your GOD! The entertainment value here is monumental!

 

[Dragonlady]

If you look at worldwide abortion statistics, the countries with the highest rates of abortion, are countries where abortion is illegal. The countries where abortion is the easiest to obtain, are the ones with the lowest rate of abortion.

And that myth that abortion is more dangerous than childbirth is just that - a right wing lie to frighten women into not having abortions.

Every pregnancy is NOT intended to result in a live birth. 30% of all pregnancies end in spontaneous miscarriage. A fertilized egg is not a life. It's the possibility of a life.

Even a miserable life is better than no life?? Those who commit suicide would disagree.

Conservatives blame the poor for having too many children. Yet they vilify poor people for having abortions.

When you are prepared to vote for increased financial supports for poor families so they can afford these additional babies, you can start talking about limiting abortions. Although, if there were paid maternity leave and free prenatal and neonatal care, that would go a long way to reduce the number of abortions in the US.

But if you're not prepared to put your money where your mouth is, stop pretending that you hate abortion, because you don't. You just want women who have sex, punished for it.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Answer the questions, or admit that your position is irrational and you cannot answer.

What questions do you think I didn't answer?

All of them, as usual.

If what's in the womb is a a child, and if killing it is always murder, then no abortion, regardless of the reason, can ever be allowed. To do anything else would mean that what was in the womb was one thing in one case and another thing in another. So V, abortion or no abortion, that is your choice, if what's in there is really a child that is.

As with Obamacares WAIVERS, Abortion is the only form of murder currently allowed by the fucked up SCOTUS! IF the FATHER kills the baby in the mothers womb, he's is arrested for MURDER... rather UNFAIR way of doing things! You're for being FAIR aren't you?

As I said V, you can't answer because you are irrational, and so ends that.

Yes, your concession speech has been recorded. when one can't argue logically his point, as you CAN'T let's claim the other is irrational.... I see you're yet another liberal with the Obumanations severe problem.....

He thinks he's KING, you think your GOD! The entertainment value here is monumental!

You may not be an actual child V, but you might as well be.

 

[Vigilante]

If you look at worldwide abortion statistics, the countries with the highest rates of abortion, are countries where abortion is illegal. The countries where abortion is the easiest to obtain, are the ones with the lowest rate of abortion.

And that myth that abortion is more dangerous than childbirth is just that - a right wing lie to frighten women into not having abortions.

Every pregnancy is NOT intended to result in a live birth. 30% of all pregnancies end in spontaneous miscarriage. A fertilized egg is not a life. It's the possibility of a life.

Even a miserable life is better than no life?? Those who commit suicide would disagree.

Conservatives blame the poor for having too many children. Yet they vilify poor people for having abortions.

When you are prepared to vote for increased financial supports for poor families so they can afford these additional babies, you can start talking about limiting abortions. Although, if there were paid maternity leave and free prenatal and neonatal care, that would go a long way to reduce the number of abortions in the US.

But if you're not prepared to put your money where your mouth is, stop pretending that you hate abortion, because you don't. You just want women who have sex, punished for it.

Who cares where abortion is more or less, has nothing to do with what we are talking about!

Yes, a RW lie......
Woman Dies After Second-Trimester Abortion at Planned Parenthood LifeNews.com

Woman Dies After Botched 33-Week Abortion Takes Her Life LifeNews.com

WORLD Woman dies after Cleveland abortion Daniel James Devine April 1 2014

Woman Dies in Late-Term Abortion Performed by Doctor Linked to Sebelius - Breitbart

47 000 Women Die Each Year From Unsafe Abortions ThinkProgress
Need more? This from only the first page of a search engine!

We are discussing MANS INTERVENTION< not what happens NATURALLY as part of life's process!

At least the SUICIDE had THERE CHOICE to live or die, the UNBORN have NO SUCH LUXURY!

Poor, have no corner on abortions, seems STUPIDITY and LACK OF RESPONSIBILITY are the causes of abortion!

It’s a question pro-aborts endlessly badger pro-lifers with: “If you so badly want babies to be born, how many are you willing to adopt?” They hope that by casting pro-lifers as somehow not doing enough to give “unwanted” children a home, they can divert attention away from the deaths they’re responsible for and guilt a few of us into shutting up. If that reminds you of a child snapping, “If you love it so much, why don’t you marry it?,” that’s because the challenge is about as sophisticated.

Sorry, but moral high ground doesn’t come that cheaply, the primary reason being that it doesn’t change the tiny details of a) who’s making children they don’t want in the first place, and b) who’s actually killing them and perpetuating that killing. Can anyone think of any other scenario where “I should be able to harm someone unless you aid me in some way” would be taken even remotely seriously as moral reasoning? If I forbid somebody from stealing my neighbor’s car, am I therefore obligated to let the would-be thief borrow my own?

Of course not. It’s preposterous. Again, pro-aborts are (intentionally) confusing the difference between abstaining from harm and going out of one’s way to do good. Our obligation to the former doesn’t necessarily entail the latter. And just because Person A won’t help Person B, it doesn’t give Person C a license to kill Person B. So even if this objection were to reveal that pro-lifers are somehow negligent in this area, it wouldn’t legitimize legal abortion.

It’s certainly true that all people, pro-lifers included, should do their part to find abandoned children homes, including adopting them themselves when they can. But, at the risk of ruining a perfectly good narrative by asking the obvious question, how do pro-aborts know we already aren’t? Do they have any reason other than malice to suggest that pro-life Americans aren’t adopting at a perfectly respectable rate compared to the rest of the population? Heck, how do we know pro-lifers aren’t adopting more than our “choice”-minded brethren? (After all, conservatives and religious Americans are more charitable in other ways.)

Personally, I’m not aware of adoption data to either effect, so if any of our critics can prove they’ve got facts behind the smears, step right up. It is, however, worth noting that even when pro-lifers do exactly what pro-aborts chastise us for allegedly not doing, it doesn’t make them hate us any less – just ask Rep. Michele Bachmann.

Besides, moving on from the macro to the individual level, it’s awfully presumptuous to assume whether the circumstances of a stranger’s personal life – yes, even a pro-lifer – are conducive to providing an orphaned child a good home, whether due to the number of children one already has (conservatives tend to have more kids than liberals), making too little to handle adoption’s steep price tag, being unmarried and therefore unable to provide a two-parent home, or simply because one isn’t good with kids.

Lastly, regardless of how many pro-lifers are personally adopting, the fact is that we’ve more than stepped up to support adoption – just take a look at Students for Life’s rundown of adoption activism and groups, and compare it to Planned Parenthood’s own abortion-to-adoption ratio (fun fact: the United States actually has more crisis pregnancy centers than Planned Parenthood clinics).

Another day, another shabby excuse for mass slaughter dispatched. It’s a sad commentary on our culture that there remain any venues where you can be taken seriously badgering someone to take care of a stranger’s child while cherishing the child’s own mother’s right to kill him or her.

You're still a disgusting living being with NO MORALS or ETHICS! But continue, as I love putting you 's down!

 

[Vigilante]

What questions do you think I didn't answer?

All of them, as usual.

If what's in the womb is a a child, and if killing it is always murder, then no abortion, regardless of the reason, can ever be allowed. To do anything else would mean that what was in the womb was one thing in one case and another thing in another. So V, abortion or no abortion, that is your choice, if what's in there is really a child that is.

As with Obamacares WAIVERS, Abortion is the only form of murder currently allowed by the fucked up SCOTUS! IF the FATHER kills the baby in the mothers womb, he's is arrested for MURDER... rather UNFAIR way of doing things! You're for being FAIR aren't you?

As I said V, you can't answer because you are irrational, and so ends that.

Yes, your concession speech has been recorded. when one can't argue logically his point, as you CAN'T let's claim the other is irrational.... I see you're yet another liberal with the Obumanations severe problem.....

He thinks he's KING, you think your GOD! The entertainment value here is monumental!

You may not be an actual child V, but you might as well be.

You just are a brute for bitch slapping! Dumber than a stone!

 

[TemplarKormac]

The countries where abortion is the easiest to obtain, are the ones with the lowest rate of abortion.

That right there shows you what women really think of it. Pretty much solidifies my argument.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

The countries where abortion is the easiest to obtain, are the ones with the lowest rate of abortion.

That right there shows you what women really think of it. Pretty much solidifies my argument.

That is because those are rational societies not run by the politics of right-wing morons such as yourself. They understand abortion, and birth control, and human sexuality, and deal with it honestly, unlike the US.

 

[Vigilante]

The countries where abortion is the easiest to obtain, are the ones with the lowest rate of abortion.

That right there shows you what women really think of it. Pretty much solidifies my argument.

That is because those are rational societies not run by the politics of right-wing morons such as yourself. They understand abortion, and birth control, and human sexuality, and deal with it honestly, unlike the US.

Also countries that stone women for cheating, kill GAYS, and your favorite DRUG DEALERS...No Meth for you!

 

[Dragonlady]

You posted about 1 death per year from an abortion in each of 2012, 2013 and 2014. How scary!

And the article on 47,000 deaths from abortions is about deaths in Third World Countries, many of whom have banned abortion.

Here's an article from the Washington Post which says that maternal deaths in childbirth in the US are the highest in the developed world.

Maternal deaths in childbirth rise in the U.S. - The Washington Post

Facts are not your friends b cause every fact supports the idea that the liberal agenda for women's choice reduces abortions, which is what you SAY you want.

If you want to reduce abortion, the way to go is to remove ALL restrictions, which we have done in Canada. Then start supporting families with health care, maternity leave, subsidized child care.

Stop talking about family values and start living them. Put your money where your mouth is.

 

[Plasmaball]

I'm going to be flatly blunt. The pro-Abortion crowd is dead wrong about human biology. A human is a human inside the womb and out. This video is proof of such. This is the unborn child of a French couple who watch in amazement at the vigorous movement of the baby in the womb. To say the child isn't viable while in the womb is wrong, simply put. To say the child is not a real person until after birth is also wrong, this one seems real enough to me.

you are sadly not just a clump....