why do conservatives care about other peoples abortions?

[jc456]

It isn't a notion: it's science. You need to read something other than right wing blogs.

A fetus has human DNA. By the time the woman knows she is pregnant the child has a brain, eyes, fingers, toes and a heart beat and about everything else you have.

Science is not on the side of the abortionists.

and global warming exists, yet no evidence and they swallow that hook line sinker and pole. it is truly funny!!!!

 

[DrDoomNGloom]

When you bring a child into a life of misery, what do you call it?

Look, I'm not going to continue to argue with you people. You base your whole position on a false premise. A fetus is not a child. Abortions are not killing children, they are ending the development before it becomes a child.

And, btw, all over the world, most countries allow abortion. It is only the extreme right wing in Ameria that has such fits about it. You make America look foolish. Sad. You people would believe the Sun circled the Earth and that the Earth was flat if your religious leaders told you so.

I'm Guessing Esmeralda is unwilling to discuss when life starts ................

So the fetus is not alive??

Murder does not specifically speak of children, it covers living entities of the human race.

So when does life start??

 

[jc456]

Why do you care?

What they want is to live in a world where women value the life they are carrying inside them enough to put it first. They are misguided in this wish, however, as many women can't place the value of their future child's life ahead of their own conveniences and desires. It's sad, but it is the reality of the world we live in. In a perfect world, women wouldn't get pregnant without intending to, and they would desire the product of their union with a man they love and care about. It would require a much more emotionally and intellectually advanced human being than we currently have populating the planet.

and the lapse in judgement began with the lapse of morals. Ask them lefties.

 

[GreenBean]

has anyone suggested killing those who are a burden on society ??

Yes - Margaret Sanger - the founder of Planned Parenthood

Links to that, not unplanned pregnancies but actual homo sapiens that were concieved ??

Good talking point but pure out and out SHIT, SHIT SHIT SHIT

actual homo sapiens that were concieved ??

Possibly .... But ,There are many quotes from Sanger that tend to indicate this - Libs have been trying to sweep them under the carpet or explain them away but to no avail - here's one ....

"The most merciful thing that the large family does to one of its infant members is to kill it." - infant to be implies it was already born ....

I had that same web sitye, but as I stated your first post was PURE SHIT and you are UNABLE to SUBSTANTIATE IT!!

GROW THE **** UP!!

YOU: has anyone suggested killing those who are a burden on society ??

ME: Yes - Margaret Sanger - the founder of Planned Parenthood

YOU: Links to that, not unplanned pregnancies but actual homo sapiens that were concieved ??

ME: "The most merciful thing that the large family does to one of its infant members is to kill it."

- infant to me implies it was already born ....


Paper Scissors Rock - You Lose - Regards and have a nice Day

 

[Flash]

When you bring a child into a life of misery, what do you call it?

A human will always chose life over death.

You filthy ass Libtards have always believed in eugenics where the state determines who is worthy of life or death and that is despicable.

It is not up to you to decide what is misery and what is a life worth living.

 

[DrDoomNGloom]

has anyone suggested killing those who are a burden on society ??

Yes - Margaret Sanger - the founder of Planned Parenthood

Links to that, not unplanned pregnancies but actual homo sapiens that were concieved ??

Good talking point but pure out and out SHIT, SHIT SHIT SHIT

actual homo sapiens that were concieved ??

Possibly .... But ,There are many quotes from Sanger that tend to indicate this - Libs have been trying to sweep them under the carpet or explain them away but to no avail - here's one ....

"The most merciful thing that the large family does to one of its infant members is to kill it." - infant to be implies it was already born ....

I had that same web sitye, but as I stated your first post was PURE SHIT and you are UNABLE to SUBSTANTIATE IT!!

GROW THE **** UP!!

YOU: has anyone suggested killing those who are a burden on society ??

ME: Yes - Margaret Sanger - the founder of Planned Parenthood

YOU: Links to that, not unplanned pregnancies but actual homo sapiens that were concieved ??

ME: "The most merciful thing that the large family does to one of its infant members is to kill it."

- infant to me implies it was already born ....


Paper Scissors Rock - You Lose - Regards and have a nice Day

She waas speaking of an abortion before conception occurred, once again you are un able to support your side of the debate and then result to some kind of childish statement in an attempt at cuteness??

How ******* old are you, the children's forum would be a more appropriate venue for your ignorant ass !!!

 

[jc456]

Again jar I am not a control freak

"and yet i'm trying to control the flow of the argument, but definitely not a control freak. So much so that I have posted dys on here to not show that I am a control freak. Dude, this is just special." You truly know how to post the stupid!!! join Bear at morestupid@bear513.com!!!

 

[jc456]

Oh my God I am talking to another child in jc456?

Listen slugger I can teach a lot of things like hydraulics, programming robotics, electrical , electronics, carpentry, pneumatics , how to weld, how to use a mill , surfaces grinder it a lath I can teach you a lot

But one thing I can't teach you in kid is in:

Wisdom

I know, you have to have someone to teach it. Good luck with your lessons on learning wisdom, you truly need it.

 

[jc456]

All you are posting jar is your own fantasys I own you *****

I don't think you have the wisdom to hold on to anything so own is a very big word for folks such as you. I don't think you know the meaning. See you're ass has been slashed so badly here, your feel for ownership only comes from your calling him papa.

 

[boilermaker55]

You have missed the point entirely. Not uncommon for someone of your caliber. As you can see, name calling is so easy and so immature. But then again that happens quite often from the right.
See how much this accomplishes.
My comment was about the moral comments and picking and choosing that some seem to enjoy.
Is it moral or is it not.

Morally wrong as it does not sit well with the conservatives, but then morals seem to change once the child is born and the parent(s) struggle with providing a common welfare for their child(ren). Then they are a burden on society and let them fend for themselves.
So the morals are pick and choose.

If you save a child from being murdered it is not your responsibility to provide welfare for the rest of its life.

It is the responsibility of the parents that conceived the child to provide for the welfare. Once the child becomes of age it is his/her responiblity to provide for their own welfare.

Again the concept of personal responsibility eludes a Libtard.

 

[boilermaker55]

Here we are again throwing insults around. My question was how come the morals change.
If you cannot accept the fact that it was a question and how do you separate the two situations, name calling does not answer the question.
So, working along with your mentality. It's totally ignorant and stupid of you not knowing the difference. But then you are a right wing conservative idiot.
See how easy.\

It was questioning the morals of some and comparing them to the other.\

Morally wrong as it does not sit well with the conservatives, but then morals seem to change once the child is born and the parent(s) struggle with providing a common welfare for their child(ren). Then they are a burden on society and let them fend for themselves.
So the morals are pick and choose.

has anyone suggested killing those who are a burden on society ??

Just because the first part of your tirade is true does not make it all true, akin to saying, "The sky is blue. Babies eat *****." ...................

NO YOU WERE MAKING STEREOTYPICAL GENERALIZATIONS ....................but I understand you are a Liberal and unaware of your behavior!!

 

[Flash]

You have missed the point entirely. Not uncommon for someone of your caliber. As you can see, name calling is so easy and so immature. But then again that happens quite often from the right.
See how much this accomplishes.
My comment was about the moral comments and picking and choosing that some seem to enjoy.
Is it moral or is it not.

Morally wrong as it does not sit well with the conservatives, but then morals seem to change once the child is born and the parent(s) struggle with providing a common welfare for their child(ren). Then they are a burden on society and let them fend for themselves.
So the morals are pick and choose.

If you save a child from being murdered it is not your responsibility to provide welfare for the rest of its life.

It is the responsibility of the parents that conceived the child to provide for the welfare. Once the child becomes of age it is his/her responiblity to provide for their own welfare.

Again the concept of personal responsibility eludes a Libtard.

You made a comment on the morality of welfare and how it is connected to abortion. I answered it.

It is not my fault you didn't like the answer. Libtards usually run from the concept of personal responsibility.

As a Conservative I feel a responsibility to protect a child from being murdered (as should all humans) but I don't feel it is my responsibility to provide welfare for the child. It is the parent's responsibility to do that. It is also the parent's responsibility not to kill their child but the state allows them to do it.

 

[boilermaker55]

You did exactly what was expected. You never made on statement about morals being morals. Only separating them when convenient.
Once again your ignorance and immaturity and stupidity precede you.
Thank you affirming.

You have missed the point entirely. Not uncommon for someone of your caliber. As you can see, name calling is so easy and so immature. But then again that happens quite often from the right.
See how much this accomplishes.
My comment was about the moral comments and picking and choosing that some seem to enjoy.
Is it moral or is it not.

Morally wrong as it does not sit well with the conservatives, but then morals seem to change once the child is born and the parent(s) struggle with providing a common welfare for their child(ren). Then they are a burden on society and let them fend for themselves.
So the morals are pick and choose.

If you save a child from being murdered it is not your responsibility to provide welfare for the rest of its life.

It is the responsibility of the parents that conceived the child to provide for the welfare. Once the child becomes of age it is his/her responiblity to provide for their own welfare.

Again the concept of personal responsibility eludes a Libtard.

You made a comment on the morality of welfare and how it is connected to abortion. I answered it.

It is not my fault you didn't like the answer. Libtards usually run from the concept of personal responsibility.

As a Conservative I feel a responsibility to protect a child from being murdered (as should all humans) but I don't feel it is my responsibility to provide welfare for the child. It is the parent's responsibility to do that. It is also the parent's responsibility not to kill their child but the state allows them to do it.

 

[Wry Catcher]

If Liberals can argue that child can be put to death before it is born because it is a bother to a mother then why not after it is born? What has really changes except for a few more weeks of life?

They have this notion that if it can not survive outside of it's environment that it is not a human life. That it is just a thing called a fetus not a developing baby.
Never mind that all life has to be in a certain environment while it is developing but it is still life.

I'd appreciate it if you and others stopped labeling all liberals as having the same beliefs on specific issues. They don't. I know many liberal Catholics who oppose Abortion on principle and oppose Capital Punishment and gay marriage too.

Now if you feel the need to lump a certain set of liberals as holding the same beliefs, go for it; I have coined the term Callous Conservative because the ideas they hold on governance show a total disregard for others. I don't lump all conservatives into that set, not do I lump all of the Crazy Right Wing into the general set of Conservatives - they belong to the idiot fringe and are an embarrassment to real conservatives.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

If Liberals can argue that child can be put to death before it is born because it is a bother to a mother then why not after it is born? What has really changes except for a few more weeks of life?

They have this notion that if it can not survive outside of it's environment that it is not a human life. That it is just a thing called a fetus not a developing baby.
Never mind that all life has to be in a certain environment while it is developing but it is still life.

I'd appreciate it if you and others stopped labeling all liberals as having the same beliefs on specific issues. They don't. I know many liberal Catholics who oppose Abortion on principle and oppose Capital Punishment and gay marriage too.

Now if you feel the need to lump a certain set of liberals as holding the same beliefs, go for it; I have coined the term Callous Conservative because the ideas they hold on governance show a total disregard for others. I don't lump all conservatives into that set, not do I lump all of the Crazy Right Wing into the general set of Conservatives - they belong to the idiot fringe and are an embarrassment to real conservatives.

The fact that pro-choice is viewed as a liberal tenet justifies the generalization. IMO

 

[jc456]

You have missed the point entirely. Not uncommon for someone of your caliber. As you can see, name calling is so easy and so immature. But then again that happens quite often from the right.
See how much this accomplishes.
My comment was about the moral comments and picking and choosing that some seem to enjoy.
Is it moral or is it not.

Morally wrong as it does not sit well with the conservatives, but then morals seem to change once the child is born and the parent(s) struggle with providing a common welfare for their child(ren). Then they are a burden on society and let them fend for themselves.
So the morals are pick and choose.

If you save a child from being murdered it is not your responsibility to provide welfare for the rest of its life.

It is the responsibility of the parents that conceived the child to provide for the welfare. Once the child becomes of age it is his/her responiblity to provide for their own welfare.

Again the concept of personal responsibility eludes a Libtard.

i see that you have no idea on what and who do posting on here. See insults, that's a lefty function, when facts are not available, debate by name calling. It is in your material, go to page three.

 

[peach174]

If Liberals can argue that child can be put to death before it is born because it is a bother to a mother then why not after it is born? What has really changes except for a few more weeks of life?

They have this notion that if it can not survive outside of it's environment that it is not a human life. That it is just a thing called a fetus not a developing baby.
Never mind that all life has to be in a certain environment while it is developing but it is still life.

I'd appreciate it if you and others stopped labeling all liberals as having the same beliefs on specific issues. They don't. I know many liberal Catholics who oppose Abortion on principle and oppose Capital Punishment and gay marriage too.

Now if you feel the need to lump a certain set of liberals as holding the same beliefs, go for it; I have coined the term Callous Conservative because the ideas they hold on governance show a total disregard for others. I don't lump all conservatives into that set, not do I lump all of the Crazy Right Wing into the general set of Conservatives - they belong to the idiot fringe and are an embarrassment to real conservatives.

We are not labeling all liberals as having the same beliefs.
It is a liberal law and was made legal by liberals.

 

[Kosh]

If Liberals can argue that child can be put to death before it is born because it is a bother to a mother then why not after it is born? What has really changes except for a few more weeks of life?

They have this notion that if it can not survive outside of it's environment that it is not a human life. That it is just a thing called a fetus not a developing baby.
Never mind that all life has to be in a certain environment while it is developing but it is still life.

I'd appreciate it if you and others stopped labeling all liberals as having the same beliefs on specific issues. They don't. I know many liberal Catholics who oppose Abortion on principle and oppose Capital Punishment and gay marriage too.

Now if you feel the need to lump a certain set of liberals as holding the same beliefs, go for it; I have coined the term Callous Conservative because the ideas they hold on governance show a total disregard for others. I don't lump all conservatives into that set, not do I lump all of the Crazy Right Wing into the general set of Conservatives - they belong to the idiot fringe and are an embarrassment to real conservatives.

The fact that pro-choice is viewed as a liberal tenet justifies the generalization. IMO

Yes the far left way of choosing, when a woman walks into a clinic they are pressured to have an abortion or else..

Gotta love those far left bullies and how they treat women..

 

[jc456]

If Liberals can argue that child can be put to death before it is born because it is a bother to a mother then why not after it is born? What has really changes except for a few more weeks of life?

They have this notion that if it can not survive outside of it's environment that it is not a human life. That it is just a thing called a fetus not a developing baby.
Never mind that all life has to be in a certain environment while it is developing but it is still life.

I'd appreciate it if you and others stopped labeling all liberals as having the same beliefs on specific issues. They don't. I know many liberal Catholics who oppose Abortion on principle and oppose Capital Punishment and gay marriage too.

Now if you feel the need to lump a certain set of liberals as holding the same beliefs, go for it; I have coined the term Callous Conservative because the ideas they hold on governance show a total disregard for others. I don't lump all conservatives into that set, not do I lump all of the Crazy Right Wing into the general set of Conservatives - they belong to the idiot fringe and are an embarrassment to real conservatives.

And again, the stupid never stops. So here you are pleading for some sort of filtering to not group you or your belief structure as everybody, and turn around and do just that!! You all are definitely k00ks. That must be a pre-requisite for left posting on the message board, remember to bring the stupid!!!

 

[Wry Catcher]

It's not just conservatives. It is after all ending a life. Everyone should be uncomfortable with that. With all the forms of birth control why does it so often come to an abortion?

Now there is a question begging for an answer. Why indeed is there opposition to age appropriate sex education as part of health education, easy and free access to contraception, and empathy for the women, sometimes a minor, with the issue of ending a pregnancy in cases of incest, rape and domestic violence?

The only concern I have about anything you posted here is that I wonder if providing condoms is condoning inappropriate sexual activity.

Saying, "they are gonna do it anyway" - to me - is just throwing in the towel. Do we no longer expect anyone to show any mastery of their urges at all? Is our expectation that people are going to behave like sharks with legs or do we hold people to a higher standard?

I'm a Democrat, but first and foremost I'm a pragmatic. Which is better "inappropriate" sexual intercourse (in my mind that's rape, incest and the use of power and control) or an unwanted pregnancy ending in abortion?

They are going to do it anyway. That is a fact not easily dismissed. The condom protects against pregnancy and disease, and in educating women & men its use is something they can control especially if they are free and easily available.

IMHO - inappropriate sex is sex without consent. And a minor cannot give consent. So any sex among minors is sex without consent. I don't think we should just poo - poo that away. You are right - condoms can help minimize the risk of pregnancy and disease and if minors are going to have non-consensual sex, then yeah, better WITH a condom. But when a kid can go to the school bookstore, PAY for a pencil and pick up free condoms, what message does that send? Honestly, what do you think that kid picks up from that? Don't you think that makes that kid think it's OK?

Is that a beneficial message to send?

sometimes a message like that is better than no message at all.

Did I write the condom should be given at one's school? I do believe their use and purpose ought to be discussed as part of an age appropriate and comprehensive health curriculum. A curriculum which Includes lectures on respect for the rights of others, sexually transmitted disease and the duties and responsibilities of parenthood.