Really Jack?

Farnorth's picture
Farnorth
Offline
Joined: 5/23/02

buckmaster81 Said:
Have any of you here actually read any of these bills or are you all pining over skewed info you have recieved from media sources???

Aha, so you're claiming that the information reported is "skewed".  If so, why hasn't that been corrected by those in the Legislature that proposed and passed the Legislation?

I know the answer to that BTW.  What has been reported is factually correct.

A lot of what has been discussed here goes deeper than what is in the Bills that became Law.  But not deeper than the "personhood" changes that will be a statewide vote in 2014.  That definitely moves the line to Conception.  If that passes, destruction of a fertilized egg becomes murder.  At least, the way I read the summaries.  I've yet to hear anybody dispute that.

buckmaster81's picture
buckmaster81
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 2/9/03

Farnorth Said:

buckmaster81 Said:
Have any of you here actually read any of these bills or are you all pining over skewed info you have recieved from media sources???

Aha, so you're claiming that the information reported is "skewed".  If so, why hasn't that been corrected by those in the Legislature that proposed and passed the Legislation?

I know the answer to that BTW.  What has been reported is factually correct.

A lot of what has been discussed here goes deeper than what is in the Bills that became Law.  But not deeper than the "personhood" changes that will be a statewide vote in 2014.  That definitely moves the line to Conception.  If that passes, destruction of a fertilized egg becomes murder.  At least, the way I read the summaries.  I've yet to hear anybody dispute that.

What the hell does that really have to do what was passed by the Leg. and signed by the Gov. ?

As for the fertilized egg comment you made, I personally don't think egg implantation/invetro is a good thing. If things don't work naturally, there is a reason. Why not adopt? For society as a whole that seems to be a much better option.

Which part of HB 1305 are you most opposed to?

HB1456?

SB2305?

Hunt Hard and NEVER GIVE UP

Plainsman's picture
Plainsman
Offline
AMATEUR
Joined: 6/19/03

Espringer, if we are talking about when life begins lets google some scientific literature and see what they consider life.  I am always amazed that some will give and eagle or whooping crane egg more respect than a fellow human.  The only debate is can we kill the kid at one month old, two months old, what?  So now I am asking that question seriously.  Some say they are not human yet.  Really, are they a puppy?  How about some honest debate, not just trying to work our way past this hideous thing so we can justify killing our problems.

buckmaster81's picture
buckmaster81
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 2/9/03

Plainsman Said:
Espringer, if we are talking about when life begins lets google some scientific literature and see what they consider life.  I am always amazed that some will give and eagle or whooping crane egg more respect than a fellow human.  The only debate is can we kill the kid at one month old, two months old, what?  So now I am asking that question seriously.  Some say they are not human yet.  Really, are they a puppy?  How about some honest debate, not just trying to work our way past this hideous thing so we can justify killing our problems.

Exactly!! Cuz iffin' we can just kill our problems I would like for that to carry over to adults too!

Hunt Hard and NEVER GIVE UP

espringers's picture
espringers
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 7/25/07

 dude... you just said "the truth is life begins as conception".  if that's your position, i was just looking for your opinions on the questions i posed... nothing more nothing less.  i ain't trying to work by anything in an attempt to justify killing anything.  

Born to hunt and fish... Forced to work!

Alpine's picture
Alpine
Offline
Joined: 1/13/12

"So I ask this at what point does the mothers life become less important than babies life?"

I ignored this question as others have because I thought the answer was so obvious, contrary to what espringers would tell you.

What you are talking about in terms of any pregnancy is the rare exception.  That has to be established 1st of all, in very few pregnancys is this an issue.

The answer?  AT NO point, obviously.  The mothers and babies life are of equal importance at all times.  Now any doctor will tell you, they will do everything they can to save the mother and/or the baby if their is a threat to either.  In the rare case when the mothers life is threatend normally you can bet the babies is too and often much more so.  All measures need to be made to save either/both.  It is often more likely to save the mother than the baby unless this acute problem is directly involving the mother with no relation to the baby.

We are talking about TWO human lives here.  Equal importance. 

 

Farnorth's picture
Farnorth
Offline
Joined: 5/23/02

buckmaster81 Said:

Farnorth Said:

buckmaster81 Said:
Have any of you here actually read any of these bills or are you all pining over skewed info you have recieved from media sources???

Aha, so you're claiming that the information reported is "skewed".  If so, why hasn't that been corrected by those in the Legislature that proposed and passed the Legislation?

I know the answer to that BTW.  What has been reported is factually correct.

A lot of what has been discussed here goes deeper than what is in the Bills that became Law.  But not deeper than the "personhood" changes that will be a statewide vote in 2014.  That definitely moves the line to Conception.  If that passes, destruction of a fertilized egg becomes murder.  At least, the way I read the summaries.  I've yet to hear anybody dispute that.

What the hell does that really have to do what was passed by the Leg. and signed by the Gov. ?

As for the fertilized egg comment you made, I personally don't think egg implantation/invetro is a good thing. If things don't work naturally, there is a reason. Why not adopt? For society as a whole that seems to be a much better option.

Which part of HB 1305 are you most opposed to?

HB1456?

SB2305?

1.  Are you not aware of the Personhood Constitutional Initiative passed by the Legislature?  It was approved last Friday along with one of the three Bills that went ot Dalrymple.

2.  Seriously?  You're opposed to invitro fertilization?  Adoption is better?  Because we all know that process works fantastically well.  I won't even get into how hypocritical most people are about that subject.

3.  Who says I'm opposed to any of the bills signed into law?  I've said several times that I'm almost 100% in the middle on this subject and that makes me an enemy of BOTH sides.

buckmaster81's picture
buckmaster81
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 2/9/03

Farnorth Said:

buckmaster81 Said:

Farnorth Said:

buckmaster81 Said:
Have any of you here actually read any of these bills or are you all pining over skewed info you have recieved from media sources???

Aha, so you're claiming that the information reported is "skewed".  If so, why hasn't that been corrected by those in the Legislature that proposed and passed the Legislation?

I know the answer to that BTW.  What has been reported is factually correct.

A lot of what has been discussed here goes deeper than what is in the Bills that became Law.  But not deeper than the "personhood" changes that will be a statewide vote in 2014.  That definitely moves the line to Conception.  If that passes, destruction of a fertilized egg becomes murder.  At least, the way I read the summaries.  I've yet to hear anybody dispute that.

What the hell does that really have to do what was passed by the Leg. and signed by the Gov. ?

As for the fertilized egg comment you made, I personally don't think egg implantation/invetro is a good thing. If things don't work naturally, there is a reason. Why not adopt? For society as a whole that seems to be a much better option.

Which part of HB 1305 are you most opposed to?

HB1456?

SB2305?

1.  Are you not aware of the Personhood Constitutional Initiative passed by the Legislature?  It was approved last Friday along with one of the three Bills that went ot Dalrymple.

2.  Seriously?  You're opposed to invitro fertilization?  Adoption is better?  Because we all know that process works fantastically well.  I won't even get into how hypocritical most people are about that subject.

3.  Who says I'm opposed to any of the bills signed into law?  I've said several times that I'm almost 100% in the middle on this subject and that makes me an enemy of BOTH sides.

1. This issue is seperate independent of the others.

2. YES! Ever hear of Nataly Suleman?

3. You did????

Hunt Hard and NEVER GIVE UP

Farnorth's picture
Farnorth
Offline
Joined: 5/23/02

buckmaster81 Said:

Farnorth Said:
1.  Are you not aware of the Personhood Constitutional Initiative passed by the Legislature?  It was approved last Friday along with one of the three Bills that went ot Dalrymple.

2.  Seriously?  You're opposed to invitro fertilization?  Adoption is better?  Because we all know that process works fantastically well.  I won't even get into how hypocritical most people are about that subject.

3.  Who says I'm opposed to any of the bills signed into law?  I've said several times that I'm almost 100% in the middle on this subject and that makes me an enemy of BOTH sides.

1. This issue is seperate independent of the others.

2. YES! Every here of Nataly Suleman?

3. You did????

1.  In the initial post you quoted, I clearly said that these bills didn't go that far but the Personhood Legislation DID and it's all tied together.  You cay say it's not but that doesn't change the fact that the Legislature dealt with it all at the same time and the same people introduced it.  It's ultimately ALL about WHERE TO DRAW THE LINE. (Conception-6 weeks-24 weeks)  Pick those or anything in between.  In case you're wondering, I chose those three for a reason.  Current Roe v Wade places the line approximately at 24 weeks, one of the Bills signed into Law moves it to more or less 6 weeks, and the Personhood legislation goes all the way back to fertilization.

2.  Your opposition is related to ONE case?  You throw the name out there like you know something that nobody else knows.  WFT is the matter with you?  Why didn't you just say Octomom?  The thousands of people that invitro helps to conceive a child of their own with their genetics isn't important?  Probably not to you because you aren't in their shoes.  Personally, my wife and I have two kids of our own.  Adoption would have been an absolute LAST resort.  There's something extra special about having kids that look like you and the rest of the family.  Nothing wrong with adoption but it's flat out a different situation that not everybody chooses.  I wouldn't want somebody else choosing that for me if there were other options.  THAT is a subject that moves me AWAY from the Sitte viewpoint on the timeline of this debate.

3.  I've posted exactly that several times.  I'm virtually 100% in the middle.  It's apparent that you don't read comments before blathering on.  You have a specific agenda.  That's fine too but it's not a real discussion of opinions. 

Chargers's picture
Chargers
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 4/7/09

buckmaster81 Said:

What the hell does that really have to do what was passed by the Leg. and signed by the Gov. ?

As for the fertilized egg comment you made, I personally don't think egg implantation/invetro is a good thing. If things don't work naturally, there is a reason. Why not adopt? For society as a whole that seems to be a much better option.

Which part of HB 1305 are you most opposed to?

HB1456?

SB2305?

all i can say is wow.

BringingTheRain's picture
BringingTheRain
Offline
Joined: 1/5/10

Meatball Said:
      BTR are you kidding, how did this turn into christian genocide. You want to debate WWII history . Hitler was all about natural selection, strongest survives, aka abortion, kill the handicapped, mental, political, jews christians, it didnt matter.
     He even set up houses where SS officers would go and impregnant german women so he could form his own breed of superior race.

 England a protestant nation, USA christian nation fought this evil, how about russia where churches were shut down , and your god was stalin and his communist state.Look what they did, he killed anybody they thought was threat to the state. This is what happens when respect for life is gone.

Hitler believed in evolution and selective breeding, can you imagine when a country aborts babies because they are female. This is about sucking a baby out of some woman. It doesnt matter if you are a christian or not 

So you just happened to mention Hitler and natural selection and you weren't at all associating it with him killing off people he didn't like?

He was completely nuts, but you acting as if  Christianity didn't play a role is just embarrassing. At least you didn't try and claim Hitler was atheist.

beminoid31's picture
beminoid31
Offline
Joined: 12/26/08

 I know someone that had invetro. Reason being is that she and her girlfriend, yep they are gay/lesbian, couldn't have a kid together and they didnt want to adopt. I'm happy for them. Guarantee they will be better than most parents. That's 2 negatives according to buckmaster. Most that are pro-life are anti- gay. And yet they say an unborn has rights as much as we do. Unless you're gay then there's a line. 

cant drink all day unless you start in the morning.
Im only one man
GET SOME!!!!!

BringingTheRain's picture
BringingTheRain
Offline
Joined: 1/5/10

beminoid31 Said:
 I know someone that had invetro. Reason being is that she and her girlfriend, yep they are gay/lesbian, couldn't have a kid together and they didnt want to adopt. I'm happy for them. Guarantee they will be better than most parents. That's 2 negatives according to buckmaster. Most that are pro-life are anti- gay. And yet they say an unborn has rights as much as we do. Unless you're gay then there's a line. 

Plainsman's picture
Plainsman
Offline
AMATEUR
Joined: 6/19/03

beminoid31 Said:
 I know someone that had invetro. Reason being is that she and her girlfriend, yep they are gay/lesbian, couldn't have a kid together and they didnt want to adopt. I'm happy for them. Guarantee they will be better than most parents. That's 2 negatives according to buckmaster. Most that are pro-life are anti- gay. And yet they say an unborn has rights as much as we do. Unless you're gay then there's a line. 

Really?????   I'm interested in how you can guarantee that.  Who are you going to carry that guarantee with?  So if they fail we will expect you to pick up the tab on the kid right?  If not you didn't really mean what you said.  Just throwing out bs right?  If not lets have that guarantee in writing.  Your not risking anything if your as sure as you say you are.  This is one of those put up or shut up I think.   

As for Hitler being Christian and thinking people are stupid if they don't know it I would suggest just a tiny bit of research.  Not a lot.  Maybe someone could read just a few sentences.  Pick any of your pet sites.  Here is Wikipedia:

The adult Adolf Hitler was a rationalist and a materialist, who saw Christianity as a religion fit for slaves, and a rebellion against the natural law of selection and survival of the fittest.[1] Raised a Catholic, Hitler had some respect for the 'great position' of that church, but became deeply hostile to its teachings

From straight dope:

You are right that Hitler did mention Christianity many times in his writings. He paid Christianity a lot of lip service in Mein Kampf, and he claimed to be a Christian. But Hitler's secretary, Martin Bormann, also declared that "National Socialism [Nazism] and Christianity are irreconcilable"

From answers.org

The claim is sometimes made that Hitler was a Christian - a Roman Catholic until the day he died. In fact, Hitler rejected Christianity.

This is just the first three things that pop up when you google it.  The only place you find them saying yes Hitler was Christian is on atheist websites.  They just don't want to give it up.  I guess it's true of him as a child, but he not only rejected the Catholic church, but in later life he rejected God.  Most of the time people think of people and what they were as they left this world or committed atrocities.  To say Hitler was Christian is stretching the truth and twisting reality to bad mouth Christianity.  That can be the only reason people try to deceive us on this point.   I wonder what atrocities we would be capable of without laws?  Many are willing to kill an innocent helpless human.  Would you kill your own?  Why not?

I think Christians are blamed for many things that are not true.  I think the big reason is people hate anyone that expect morals out of their fellow man.  Morals are restricting right?

Alpine's picture
Alpine
Offline
Joined: 1/13/12
"He was completely nuts, but you acting as if  Christianity didn't play a role is just embarrassing. At least you didn't try and claim Hitler was atheist."

You're now orbiting Pluto if I read this right.  Tell us, what role did "Christianity" play"

Hitler was a Christian?  Or was he a Jew?  Or did he worship other gods, some that he made up in his own twisted mind?

 

 

buckmaster81's picture
buckmaster81
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 2/9/03

Farnorth Said:

buckmaster81 Said:

Farnorth Said:
1.  Are you not aware of the Personhood Constitutional Initiative passed by the Legislature?  It was approved last Friday along with one of the three Bills that went ot Dalrymple.

2.  Seriously?  You're opposed to invitro fertilization?  Adoption is better?  Because we all know that process works fantastically well.  I won't even get into how hypocritical most people are about that subject.

3.  Who says I'm opposed to any of the bills signed into law?  I've said several times that I'm almost 100% in the middle on this subject and that makes me an enemy of BOTH sides.

1. This issue is seperate independent of the others.

2. YES! Every here of Nataly Suleman?

3. You did????

1.  In the initial post you quoted, I clearly said that these bills didn't go that far but the Personhood Legislation DID and it's all tied together.  You cay say it's not but that doesn't change the fact that the Legislature dealt with it all at the same time and the same people introduced it.  It's ultimately ALL about WHERE TO DRAW THE LINE. (Conception-6 weeks-24 weeks)  Pick those or anything in between.  In case you're wondering, I chose those three for a reason.  Current Roe v Wade places the line approximately at 24 weeks, one of the Bills signed into Law moves it to more or less 6 weeks, and the Personhood legislation goes all the way back to fertilization.
Pure and simple purposeful termination of human life is wrong.  All of these arguments always revolve around viability of the child. I will let you in on a little secret a baby born full term isn't to viable without someone to care for him or her. That in itself shows the paper thinness of the pro-choicers position .
2.  Your opposition is related to ONE case?  You throw the name out there like you know something that nobody else knows.  WFT is the matter with you?  Why didn't you just say Octomom?  The thousands of people that invitro helps to conceive a child of their own with their genetics isn't important?  Probably not to you because you aren't in their shoes.  Personally, my wife and I have two kids of our own.  Adoption would have been an absolute LAST resort.  There's something extra special about having kids that look like you and the rest of the family.  Nothing wrong with adoption but it's flat out a different situation that not everybody chooses.  I wouldn't want somebody else choosing that for me if there were other options.  THAT is a subject that moves me AWAY from the Sitte viewpoint on the timeline of this debate.
The person I sited is one glaring example of the problems that exist. Your right I have never had to deal with infertility, and I stated that it was MY personal opinion that egg/implantation invitro was not a good thing.  There are health risks involved, multiple mis-carriages extreme costs both before and after. Many of the evolutionists here should agree that from a scientific stand point invitro is bad due to the fact that it can pass on genetics that would have never continued without medical intervention. This may seem cold but it is true. In my opinion adoption is a much better option.
3.  I've posted exactly that several times.  I'm virtually 100% in the middle.  It's apparent that you don't read comments before blathering on.  You have a specific agenda.  That's fine too but it's not a real discussion of opinions. 
I apologize I may have jumped to conclusions. My only agenda is to point out hypocricy, false claims, and to protect innocent human life. For CHRIST'S SAKE we spay and nueter animals so they don't have unwanted offspring yet we allow irresponsible people within our own society create and destroy human life on a whim.....ANIMALS are treated with more regard by many in AMERICA today.  It is an inconcievable tragedy and yet many just go "meh no biggy"

Hunt Hard and NEVER GIVE UP

buckmaster81's picture
buckmaster81
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 2/9/03

Chargers Said:

buckmaster81 Said:

What the hell does that really have to do what was passed by the Leg. and signed by the Gov. ?

As for the fertilized egg comment you made, I personally don't think egg implantation/invetro is a good thing. If things don't work naturally, there is a reason. Why not adopt? For society as a whole that seems to be a much better option.

Which part of HB 1305 are you most opposed to?

HB1456?

SB2305?

all i can say is wow.

Do you have a problem with personal opinions? I never said it should be a law.

Hunt Hard and NEVER GIVE UP

buckmaster81's picture
buckmaster81
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 2/9/03

beminoid31 Said:
 I know someone that had invetro. Reason being is that she and her girlfriend, yep they are gay/lesbian, couldn't have a kid together and they didnt want to adopt. I'm happy for them. Guarantee they will be better than most parents. That's 2 negatives according to buckmaster. Most that are pro-life are anti- gay. And yet they say an unborn has rights as much as we do. Unless you're gay then there's a line. 

Getting  a lil ahead of yourself there buddy. You ought to re-tune your mind reading device, cuz' I could give 2 lil turds either way if homosexuals can get married. I don't believe they should be treated special, but should be treated equally.

Hunt Hard and NEVER GIVE UP

Plainsman's picture
Plainsman
Offline
AMATEUR
Joined: 6/19/03

At least you didn't try and claim Hitler was atheist.

Actually BTR he denounced the church and existence of God so what would you call that?  As I posted before only atheist websites stick to the story about Hitler even though it isn't true.  If you were a Muslim at six years old and now you believe in no God how should the world remember you BTR?  That's the way the should remember Hitler if they are truthful. 

buckmaster81's picture
buckmaster81
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 2/9/03

Plainsman Said:

At least you didn't try and claim Hitler was atheist.

Actually BTR he denounced the church and existence of God so what would you call that?  As I posted before only atheist websites stick to the story about Hitler even though it isn't true.  If you were a Muslim at six years old and now you believe in no God how should the world remember you BTR?  That's the way the should remember Hitler if they are truthful. 

lol I was going to say something but I won't!!!

Hunt Hard and NEVER GIVE UP

Chargers's picture
Chargers
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 4/7/09

nope, do you??

i just completely disagree with your opinion and was making an opinion of my own.

buckmaster81 Said:

Chargers Said:

buckmaster81 Said:

What the hell does that really have to do what was passed by the Leg. and signed by the Gov. ?

As for the fertilized egg comment you made, I personally don't think egg implantation/invetro is a good thing. If things don't work naturally, there is a reason. Why not adopt? For society as a whole that seems to be a much better option.

Which part of HB 1305 are you most opposed to?

HB1456?

SB2305?

all i can say is wow.

Do you have a problem with personal opinions? I never said it should be a law.

buckmaster81's picture
buckmaster81
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 2/9/03

Chargers Said:
nope, do you??

i just completely disagree with your opinion and was making an opinion of my own.

buckmaster81 Said:

Chargers Said:

buckmaster81 Said:

What the hell does that really have to do what was passed by the Leg. and signed by the Gov. ?

As for the fertilized egg comment you made, I personally don't think egg implantation/invetro is a good thing. If things don't work naturally, there is a reason. Why not adopt? For society as a whole that seems to be a much better option.

Which part of HB 1305 are you most opposed to?

HB1456?

SB2305?

all i can say is wow.

Do you have a problem with personal opinions? I never said it should be a law.

I was just afraid you may have soiled yourself....

Hunt Hard and NEVER GIVE UP

johnr's picture
johnr
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 2/18/04

Neat

rhameboy's picture
rhameboy
Offline
Joined: 8/22/07
It comes down to nothing more than your religious beliefs and not personal rights!

If your god believes its wrong he will do the punishing....

Or did he tell you to stick your nose in everyone's business and correct what you think he wants.........

You people in see thru dwellings!

 


rhameboy's picture
rhameboy
Offline
Joined: 8/22/07

So since they have taken some of our  rights we are to let the faith based take all of them?

johnr Said:


Farnorth's picture
Farnorth
Offline
Joined: 5/23/02

buckmaster81 Said:

Pure and simple purposeful termination of human life is wrong.  All of these arguments always revolve around viability of the child. I will let you in on a little secret a baby born full term isn't to viable without someone to care for him or her. That in itself shows the paper thinness of the pro-choicers position .

The person I sited is one glaring example of the problems that exist. Your right I have never had to deal with infertility, and I stated that it was MY personal opinion that egg/implantation invitro was not a good thing.  There are health risks involved, multiple mis-carriages extreme costs both before and after. Many of the evolutionists here should agree that from a scientific stand point invitro is bad due to the fact that it can pass on genetics that would have never continued without medical intervention. This may seem cold but it is true. In my opinion adoption is a much better option.


I apologize I may have jumped to conclusions. My only agenda is to point out hypocricy, false claims, and to protect innocent human life. For CHRIST'S SAKE we spay and nueter animals so they don't have unwanted offspring yet we allow irresponsible people within our own society create and destroy human life on a whim.....ANIMALS are treated with more regard by many in AMERICA today.  It is an inconcievable tragedy and yet many just go "meh no biggy"

Good comments.  Not that I agree 100% but it narrows things down a bit and that's good.

1..  Your first paragraph would indicate that you are a TRUE pro life advocate.  Intentionally terminating a life is wrong.  Period.  It matters not if there is the health or even possible life of the Mother at stake.  God's will determines who lives and who dies.  I admire the willingness to take that stand although I doubt that many would not reconsider it if it was their wife's life in question.

2.  You have made your point regarding invitro fertilization and things of that sort.  A co-worker has a child who is only here as a result of that so I'm sure they have a different opinion (Good Catholics too BTW).  We'll have to agree to disagree on that subject. 

3.  No apology was really necessary.  Some of these post are long (mine included).  I happen to agree with you that too many people are cavalier about other humans but treat pets different.  I got some angry pushback a week or so ago when I opined that a guy asking about rehoming a dog should buck up and either find it a home or put it down if it was not working out.  It's a dog for Christ sake.

Plainsman's picture
Plainsman
Offline
AMATEUR
Joined: 6/19/03

So since they have taken some of our rights we are to let the faith based take all of them?

I find it interesting that you think one has to be religious to have a conscience.  I'll bet you have a conscience.  Do you think it's wrong to steal, murder, rape?  I'm sure you do.  So do you have to be religious to be offended by those things?   Your right I am Christian, but I have always thought there were decent people that were atheist.  Are you  telling me I'm wrong?   All sarcasm aside I think abortion is disgusting to more than just religious people. 

beminoid31's picture
beminoid31
Offline
Joined: 12/26/08

 Ill put up plainsman. I'm not scared. They both have good jobs, house, 2 dogs, and now a kid. Yeah they both work in law enforcement. Protect and serve. Known them for 8yrs now. They were together when I met them. Good people do good things so I got no problem saying I guarantee. You're welcome

cant drink all day unless you start in the morning.
Im only one man
GET SOME!!!!!

beminoid31's picture
beminoid31
Offline
Joined: 12/26/08

 Sorry buckmaster. The church goers you seem to be I put words in your mouth because the bible is against it. My bad. Problem is they don't get treated equal

cant drink all day unless you start in the morning.
Im only one man
GET SOME!!!!!

rhameboy's picture
rhameboy
Offline
Joined: 8/22/07

Plainsman Said:

So since they have taken some of our rights we are to let the faith based take all of them?

I find it interesting that you think one has to be religious to have a conscience. I have a conscience and my personal belief is in line with yours. It should be my personal right to have my own belief.  I'll bet you have a conscience.  Do you think it's wrong to steal, murder, rape? I do and god did not teach me that! I'm sure you do.  So do you have to be religious to be offended by those things?   Your right I am Christian, but I have always thought there were decent people that were atheist.  Are you  telling me I'm wrong?   All sarcasm aside I think abortion is disgusting to more than just religious people. I agree and still do believe it is ones own right to make the decision.


BringingTheRain's picture
BringingTheRain
Offline
Joined: 1/5/10

As for Hitler being Christian and thinking people are stupid if they don't know it I would suggest just a tiny bit of research.  Not a lot.  Maybe someone could read just a few sentences.  Pick any of your pet sites.  Here is Wikipedia:

You need to be more careful when you read what I write.
What I said, is people acting as if Christianity played no role is embarrassing. He used it in his speeches to gain support from the people who were 95% Christian.

This is just the first three things that pop up when you google it.  The only place you find them saying yes Hitler was Christian is on atheist websites.  They just don't want to give it up.  I guess it's true of him as a child, but he not only rejected the Catholic church, but in later life he rejected God.  Most of the time people think of people and what they were as they left this world or committed atrocities.  To say Hitler was Christian is stretching the truth and twisting reality to bad mouth Christianity.  That can be the only reason people try to deceive us on this point.   I wonder what atrocities we would be capable of without laws?  Many are willing to kill an innocent helpless human.  Would you kill your own?  Why not?

I think Christians are blamed for many things that are not true.  I think the big reason is people hate anyone that expect morals out of their fellow man.  Morals are restricting right?
 

You need to remember he was nuts, and multiple beliefs at multiple times. The only place that claims he was an atheist are religious sites and in sunday school. The one thing he never ever claimed to be at any time ever, is to be an atheist. He had modified religious beliefs, christian, pagan,  . These were with him well into his adult life. Adding to the cocktail of his madness was genetics, medicine, biology. You add that all together with his religous beliefs and you get Hitler.

The point of what I was saying, is that so many religious people conveniently either leave out the religion part the Hitler's madness, or, they've been misled to out right deny this.

BringingTheRain's picture
BringingTheRain
Offline
Joined: 1/5/10

Alpine Said:

"He was completely nuts, but you acting as if  Christianity didn't play a role is just embarrassing. At least you didn't try and claim Hitler was atheist."

You're now orbiting Pluto if I read this right.  Tell us, what role did "Christianity" play"

Hitler was a Christian?  Or was he a Jew?  Or did he worship other gods, some that he made up in his own twisted mind?

 

read his quotes.

Old Jake's picture
Old Jake
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 2/18/08

EyeKllr Said:

Old Jake Said:
A point of confusion for me is that a mother is allowed to abort her baby but if someone runs into her with a vehicle and her baby dies that person can be charged with murder. That is totally inconsistent to me. Does it really matter who kills the baby? How can a baby be a human being in one circumstance and a fetus in another?

Funny thing, that has come up in courts.

No one with an under three month pregnancy has been charged with the homicide of same in an accident.

Hey looky there...isnt that about the cut off time for an abortion as well.

Gee....think there might be a coincidence.

And lets not forget about the couple who know their child is to be born with numerous disabilities....make them have that child as well. Damned be their burden or the quality of the childs life....I mean it is all about your sitting at home feeling pretentious and trite in forcing your beliefs on others.

Looks like the chief justice of the California supreme court disagrees with your assessment.

www.nytimes.com/1994/05/20/us/when-the-death-of-a-fetus-is-murder.html

Old Jake's picture
Old Jake
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 2/18/08

buckmaster81 Said:

Plainsman Said:
Espringer, if we are talking about when life begins lets google some scientific literature and see what they consider life.  I am always amazed that some will give and eagle or whooping crane egg more respect than a fellow human.  The only debate is can we kill the kid at one month old, two months old, what?  So now I am asking that question seriously.  Some say they are not human yet.  Really, are they a puppy?  How about some honest debate, not just trying to work our way past this hideous thing so we can justify killing our problems.

Exactly!! Cuz iffin' we can just kill our problems I would like for that to carry over to adults too!

It would be great if retroactive abortion was legal in some cases.

EyeKllr's picture
EyeKllr
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 8/27/06

buckmaster81 Said:

EyeKllr Said:
During the first term the fetus has no brain - just a barely developed begginings of a stem.

Unfortunately the Anti Abortion types have really skewed the reality in their bid to ban abortion.

So much incorrect information out there.

Makes me wonder why they lie so much.......is it to win a point, convert those who dont know biology and development?

Is "winning" so important to them.

Personally I detest it, and I do not believe in abortion.

Never have.

But it is about legislation rights and freedoms and swinging the pendulum to one side or the  other.

I dont like that.

And that is where I am coming from.

One can use all the self serving misinformation out there to try and bolster thier cries to ban things - but it is still just about controling people and imposing one sides beliefs on others.

That isnt right, never has been and never will be.

Too me and many others it appears that you have not fully attained complete brain structure, and therefore we should have the choice to abort you.....

Anytime you want to come and try it........

Anytime....

Patience Suchka.......

bradyg's picture
bradyg
Offline
Joined: 10/16/07

Those who support abortions in all circumstances, I have one question for you. If you and your significant other were to get pregnant and have a miscarriage, would you morn your loss? If so, why? It wasn't your kid right? It was just a fetus, so why would you be sad?

Brady

EyeKllr's picture
EyeKllr
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 8/27/06

Old Jake Said:

EyeKllr Said:

Old Jake Said:
A point of confusion for me is that a mother is allowed to abort her baby but if someone runs into her with a vehicle and her baby dies that person can be charged with murder. That is totally inconsistent to me. Does it really matter who kills the baby? How can a baby be a human being in one circumstance and a fetus in another?

Funny thing, that has come up in courts.

No one with an under three month pregnancy has been charged with the homicide of same in an accident.

Hey looky there...isnt that about the cut off time for an abortion as well.

Gee....think there might be a coincidence.

And lets not forget about the couple who know their child is to be born with numerous disabilities....make them have that child as well. Damned be their burden or the quality of the childs life....I mean it is all about your sitting at home feeling pretentious and trite in forcing your beliefs on others.

Looks like the chief justice of the California supreme court disagrees with your assessment.

www.nytimes.com/1994/05/20/us/when-the-death-of-a-fetus-is-murder.html

Thanks to anti abortionists and their endless assault to make a embryo attain the same level as an actual born child....

That said, lets talk about other implications of this law. The unintended unintended consequences:

As another site was discussing - any fertilized egg is now.......a child....a baby...a human.

So all those fertilized embryos at hundreds of fertilization clinics - now are children - and should be put up for adoption if unused by the original donors. They cannot be disposed of - that would be murder according to those pushing the buttons on the national level of the ahem...right to life group.

Call that silly - but your kind are pushing for that as I write this. Do a net search.

Patience Suchka.......

EyeKllr's picture
EyeKllr
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 8/27/06

And that sums it up.

A Man, me, comes in - throws some rational thought into it - dispels some of the extremist views the so-called pro-lifers throw about...........and I get a backhanded death threat from a fool on the net who seems to think his identity is an unknown. What an idiot.

That said....

Does that summarize the so-called pro-life types. Yes.

In the end - what is the reality of it. Well it will cost this state millions, and why not the legislature cannot grasp the concept of saving money at this point. And they will lose.

And why - because the sitting POTUS will ensure it, and his handpicked SCOTUS will not let it stand.

No - in the foreseeable future - read decades...Roe V Wade will not be overturned, and ND will lose.

I am content with that.

I have said what I wanted to say and many of you best think long and hard - you want to impose laws on others....based on your personal beliefs when you are forced into nothing. What say you when the left starts forcing more and more of their beliefs on you.

Gay marriage.

Gun Bans.

And on and on....

Point - Dont champion big and intrusive government....one day it cuts the way you like, the next........not so much.

Kllr Out.

Patience Suchka.......

buckmaster81's picture
buckmaster81
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 2/9/03

I will agree with you on big govt. 

EyeKllr Said:
And that sums it up.

A Man, me, comes in - throws some rational thought into it - dispels some of the extremist views the so-called pro-lifers throw about...........and I get a backhanded death threat from a fool on the net who seems to think his identity is an unknown. What an idiot.

That said....

Does that summarize the so-called pro-life types. Yes.

In the end - what is the reality of it. Well it will cost this state millions, and why not the legislature cannot grasp the concept of saving money at this point. And they will lose.

And why - because the sitting POTUS will ensure it, and his handpicked SCOTUS will not let it stand.

No - in the foreseeable future - read decades...Roe V Wade will not be overturned, and ND will lose.

I am content with that.

I have said what I wanted to say and many of you best think long and hard - you want to impose laws on others....based on your personal beliefs when you are forced into nothing. What say you when the left starts forcing more and more of their beliefs on you.

Gay marriage.

Gun Bans.

And on and on....

Point - Dont champion big and intrusive government....one day it cuts the way you like, the next........not so much.

Kllr Out.

Hunt Hard and NEVER GIVE UP

Plainsman's picture
Plainsman
Offline
AMATEUR
Joined: 6/19/03
A Man, me, comes in - throws some rational thought into it - dispels some of the extremist views the so-called pro-lifers throw about...........and I get a backhanded death threat from a fool on the net who seems to think his identity is an unknown. What an idiot.

I seen that post something about aborting you.  Do you really take that serious?  I looked at it as the guy wanted you to think about the child's position.  You want to demonize him to win your debate.  How can I look at that as anything other than a cheap shot.  I guess it has become emotional on all sides. 

Does anyone understand yet that any law forces life style on others?  Every law passed does that, yet we still hear the bit about "I can't force my will".  That's all bs because the people who say it do it every day.   All of our freedoms or loss thereof hinge on the will of society every day.  The phrase "I can't force my will" is a cop out, and the truth is those people support abortion but don't want anyone to know it. 

Well maybe that last part is not correct for everyone involved.  Perhaps it would be more accurate to say "they could not support abortion anymore if the tried".  In other words they think they are neutral, but there is no such thing in this case.  Your either pro abortion or pro life.   Declaring neutrality is supporting abortion.  It's like a police officer coming upon a man prepared to shoot another and saying I'm neutral it''s not my business, I can't force me will.   
Mr. Mike's picture
Mr. Mike
Offline
Joined: 3/26/08

I really don't care which side of the fence anyone is on this, but I take big offense when someone starts forcing their views on me. I beleive we can agree to disagree and let it go at that. I would be really offended if I was a woman though.

"Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy" - - - Benjamin Franklin
"If it doesn't have BEER it ain't Heaven!" - - - Mr. Mike

EyeKllr's picture
EyeKllr
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 8/27/06

Explain to me how allowing abortion - forces it on you.

Are you legally now compelled to undergo an abortion. Are members of your family now ordered to undergo abortion.

No.

It is quite different than banning something - which means the choice is taken from all. Period. In essence they are forced/compelled to do something they do not want to do.

That really is the way it is.

As for his comments - I do take them as a threat. To give someone a retroactive abortion means kill them. I see no joke in that. If he is too slow to know thats a threat than he might consider a remedial english class.

Patience Suchka.......

buckmaster81's picture
buckmaster81
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 2/9/03

Not as offened as you would be if you were an aborted baby.... 

Mr. Mike Said:
I really don't care which side of the fence anyone is on this, but I take big offense when someone starts forcing their views on me. I beleive we can agree to disagree and let it go at that. I would be really offended if I was a woman though.

Hunt Hard and NEVER GIVE UP

EyeKllr's picture
EyeKllr
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 8/27/06

bradyg Said:
Those who support abortions in all circumstances, I have one question for you. If you and your significant other were to get pregnant and have a miscarriage, would you morn your loss? If so, why? It wasn't your kid right? It was just a fetus, so why would you be sad?

I would be sad - as I dont believe in abortion and my wife wouldnt be pregnated because we were too stupid to become unintentially pregnate.

My beef with this is all about government being intrusive.

Patience Suchka.......

EyeKllr's picture
EyeKllr
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 8/27/06

buckmaster81 Said:
Not as offened as you would be if you were an aborted baby.... 

Mr. Mike Said:
I really don't care which side of the fence anyone is on this, but I take big offense when someone starts forcing their views on me. I beleive we can agree to disagree and let it go at that. I would be really offended if I was a woman though.

If he were the aborted baby, in established times where an abortion is viable, he wouldnt have the cognitive abilities or otherwise......to even know he existed.

But thats just fact - dont let it get in the way of your beating a phoney horse.

Patience Suchka.......

EyeKllr's picture
EyeKllr
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 8/27/06

20 pages.

Too bad we didnt have this kind of passion when it came to marching on the state to demand they pass laws to preserve our 2nd Amend rights.....

Funny how the AG didnt want those laws - as it would offend the feds.

Where was he on the abortion bans - those will start an uproar with the feds.

Oh well.

Patience Suchka.......

buckmaster81's picture
buckmaster81
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 2/9/03

You have further proved my theory that you lack full mental capacities, considering your inability to understand sarcasm. You also unwittingly made  it quite apparent that you understand abortion = murder. Bravo!!!!!! 

EyeKllr Said:
Explain to me how allowing abortion - forces it on you.

Are you legally now compelled to undergo an abortion. Are members of your family now ordered to undergo abortion.

No.

It is quite different than banning something - which means the choice is taken from all. Period. In essence they are forced/compelled to do something they do not want to do.

That really is the way it is.

As for his comments - I do take them as a threat. To give someone a retroactive abortion means kill them. I see no joke in that. If he is too slow to know thats a threat than he might consider a remedial english class.

Hunt Hard and NEVER GIVE UP

buckmaster81's picture
buckmaster81
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 2/9/03

You have absolutely no grasp on sarcasm or parody do you? Maybe you should use your internet access to research those words lol 

EyeKllr Said:

buckmaster81 Said:
Not as offened as you would be if you were an aborted baby.... 

Mr. Mike Said:
I really don't care which side of the fence anyone is on this, but I take big offense when someone starts forcing their views on me. I beleive we can agree to disagree and let it go at that. I would be really offended if I was a woman though.

If he were the aborted baby, in established times where an abortion is viable, he wouldnt have the cognitive abilities or otherwise......to even know he existed.

But thats just fact - dont let it get in the way of your beating a phoney horse.

Hunt Hard and NEVER GIVE UP

Mr. Mike's picture
Mr. Mike
Offline
Joined: 3/26/08

EyeKllr Said:
Explain to me how allowing abortion - forces it on you.

Are you legally now compelled to undergo an abortion. Are members of your family now ordered to undergo abortion.

No.

It is quite different than banning something - which means the choice is taken from all. Period. In essence they are forced/compelled to do something they do not want to do.

That really is the way it is.

As for his comments - I do take them as a threat. To give someone a retroactive abortion means kill them. I see no joke in that. If he is too slow to know thats a threat than he might consider a remedial english class.

Allowing abortion? I didn't even mention that. You totally missed my point.

"Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy" - - - Benjamin Franklin
"If it doesn't have BEER it ain't Heaven!" - - - Mr. Mike

Mr. Mike's picture
Mr. Mike
Offline
Joined: 3/26/08

buckmaster81 Said:
Not as offened as you would be if you were an aborted baby.... 

Mr. Mike Said:
I really don't care which side of the fence anyone is on this, but I take big offense when someone starts forcing their views on me. I beleive we can agree to disagree and let it go at that. I would be really offended if I was a woman though.

FYI I was a CHOSEN BABY! ; ) In this life anyway, probably been aborted in previous lifes? It's all good I'm still here!

"Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy" - - - Benjamin Franklin
"If it doesn't have BEER it ain't Heaven!" - - - Mr. Mike

Pages