T-Minus 4 Days till Weitz Permanent Collaborators Status

[Granite]

I was pointing out the error PlastikBuddha made when he incorrectly stated the following in post #45:

Thank you for clarifying. I will take this as confirmation that you do not care about or respect the founding documents of your country.

By the way, Buddha's absolutely correct. An establishment of the citizenship of the unborn is nowhere to be found in either the Declaration or the Constitution.

 

[Jukia]

Thank you for clarifying. I will take this as confirmation that you do not care about or respect the founding documents of your country.

By the way, Buddha's absolutely correct. An establishment of the citizenship of the unborn is nowhere to be found in either the Declaration or the Constitution.

Oh yeah?? But what about the Nazi's and the Jews. So there!!!

As an aside, who do the fundys back for President. The Huckster is not likely to get the nomination, and McCain's website, while decrying abortion and claiming to want to overturn Roe, states it should be a state decision.

 

[Jefferson]

Oh yeah?? But what about the Nazi's and the Jews. So there!!!

As an aside, who do the fundys back for President. The Huckster is not likely to get the nomination, and McCain's website, while decrying abortion and claiming to want to overturn Roe, states it should be a state decision.

Alan Keyes.

 

[Jukia]

Alan Keyes.

Bring a pencil to the polling place to write that in.

 

[Turbo]

Jukia, do you think abortion should be legal?

 

[Delmar]

Bring a pencil to the polling place to write that in.

The Alan Keyes website reported that he made the ballot in 28 states but people from some of those states have reported going to vote and finding that he is not on the ballot! Dirty tricks, me thinks!

 

[Jukia]

Jukia, do you think abortion should be legal?

Yes

 

[Turbo]

Well, Jukia, we "fundys" see abortion as murder. Let me try to put things in perspective for you:

Imagine that you live in a country where blacks are not legally regarded as persons, that the Supreme Court has ruled that the lynching a black people shall be legal in every state, and that has been the status quo for 35 years.

In an upcoming Presidential election, one major party candidate defends the status quo of the "right to choose" to lynch a black. The other says that it should be left to the states whether or not lynching blacks should be legal within each state.

Who would you back for President?

 

[Jukia]

Turbo: what is your position on invitro fertilization? In general, more embryos are created than used. The extras are stored long term or destroyed. I am unaware of the survival rate of the long term storage, but it seems to me pretty obvious that many embryos will not survive and we know that from the start. How can you create these embryos knowing they will die later, how is that not = murder?

 

[Turbo]

Turbo: what is your position on invitro fertilization? In general, more embryos are created than used. The extras are stored long term or destroyed. I am unaware of the survival rate of the long term storage, but it seems to me pretty obvious that many embryos will not survive and we know that from the start. How can you create these embryos knowing they will die later, how is that not = murder?

I am against creating more embryos than will be implanted, and of those embryos that are already being stored, I am against killing them.

I knew a couple who did in vitro, and ended up with quadruplets. Their doctor offered to abort some of them, but since they recognize that abortion is murder, they didn't. They did the right thing.


While we're at it, I am also against the use of hormonal birth control (the pill, the patch, etc.) because when they fail to prevent ovulation, they cause abortions. Even many pro-lifers are unaware of this and I inform them about it whenever I can.


Notice that I gave you a direct answer. You didn't give me an answer at all, let alone a direct one.

How about it?

Imagine that you live in a country where blacks are not legally regarded as persons, that the Supreme Court has ruled that the lynching a black people shall be legal in every state, and that has been the status quo for 35 years.

In an upcoming Presidential election, one major party candidate defends the status quo of the "right to choose" to lynch a black. The other says that it should be left to the states whether or not lynching blacks should be legal within each state.

Who would you back for President?​

 

[Jukia]

Notice that I gave you a direct answer. You didn't give me an answer at all, let alone a direct one.

How about it?

Imagine that you live in a country where blacks are not legally regarded as persons, that the Supreme Court has ruled that the lynching a black people shall be legal in every state, and that has been the status quo for 35 years.

In an upcoming Presidential election, one major party candidate defends the status quo of the "right to choose" to lynch a black. The other says that it should be left to the states whether or not lynching blacks should be legal within each state.

Who would you back for President?​

Neither.
Notice I gave you a real world question and you gave me a hypothetical.

My understanding, again is that the in vitro process creates many more embryos than can be used. Should it be banned?

 

[Turbo]

Neither.

Good answer.

In light of this, maybe you should stop mocking "fundys" who refuse to back a major candidate when there are none that don't support what we see as legalized murder.

Notice I gave you a real world question and you gave me a hypothetical.

What's wrong with hypotheticals? I gave it to help you relate our predicament, which you had mocked. It worked at least to some extent because you came to the same conclusion that we do: That when both candidates are pro-legalized murder of a certain demographic group, then neither is worthy of support.

My understanding, again is that the in vitro process creates many more embryos than can be used.

It doesn't have to, but that's typically done to bring down costs.

Should it be banned?

Creating embryos that will be abandoned should be banned, yes. I already explained that.

 

[nicholsmom]

This sort of think makes me think of the Crusades.

The abortion battleground is the hearts and minds of hormonal pregnant women.

 

[johana]

This sort of think makes me think of the Crusades.

The abortion battleground is the hearts and minds of hormonal pregnant women.

That's exactly it.

The only reasonable way to best guarantee life and health for a fetus is by convincing the mother the baby deserves it and that she can do it.

All these posts I've seen here on TOL promoting hateful attitudes towards unwed mothers and women with unexpected and unwanted pregnancies are completely and utterly at odds with the desire to end abortion. You win the hearts and minds of women who are pregnant or, better, before they're pregnant and you've won the war.

These thuggish tactics don't win hearts and minds. They marginalise your cause.

 

[Prolifeguyswife]

I don't think I've seen hateful attitudes on TOL towards unwed mothers. I think it's just towards the unwed mothers of dead babies.
I've never heard a woman say "I wish I'd had an abortion", but I've heard hundreds of women say "I wish I'd had my baby."

I'm not concerned with sparing the "feelings" of women who are considering killing their children. I'm concerned with sparing the lives of the children that will be murdered if no one speaks up for them.

How many babies have you saved with your "winning the hearts and minds" theory? Thousands have been saved by speaking the truth, and offering real help to women in crisis pregnancies.

 

[Nathon Detroit]

I don't think I've seen hateful attitudes on TOL towards unwed mothers. I think it's just towards the unwed mothers of dead babies.
I've never heard a woman say "I wish I'd had an abortion", but I've heard hundreds of women say "I wish I'd had my baby."

I'm not concerned with sparing the "feelings" of women who are considering killing their children. I'm concerned with sparing the lives of the children that will be murdered if no one speaks up for them.

How many babies have you saved with your "winning the hearts and minds" theory? Thousands have been saved by speaking the truth, and offering real help to women in crisis pregnancies.

I would add.....

It isn't hateful to harshly rebuke the wicked. Often times its the most loving thing one can do.

You shall not hate your brother in your heart. You shall surely rebuke your neighbor, and not bear sin because of him. ​

Said another way.... it's hateful to allow your neighbor to think it's OK to murder their child, yet it's loving to rebuke them with the truth (even though it might be hard to do).

 

[nicholsmom]

I don't think I've seen hateful attitudes on TOL towards unwed mothers. I think it's just towards the unwed mothers of dead babies.
I've never heard a woman say "I wish I'd had an abortion", but I've heard hundreds of women say "I wish I'd had my baby."

Good point. However, how and when are these choices made, and by whom?

I'm not concerned with sparing the "feelings" of women who are considering killing their children. I'm concerned with sparing the lives of the children that will be murdered if no one speaks up for them.

How is it that so many people here completely misunderstand what it means to treat others with kindness & compassion? I begin to think it is willful disobedience to the direct commands of Christ & the instructions given in the epistles. Changing the "hearts & minds of women" is not about "touchy-feeliness" it's about using the most effective means of reaching them. Babies are not going to be saved, nor are the women themselves, by being attacked. They need to be taken by the hand & shown the truth in love. They will not be led to crisis pregnancy centers by people who see them as "women who are considering killing their children", but rather by people who want to help them make a wise choice for life. Like it or not, it is an emotional event.

How many babies have you saved with your "winning the hearts and minds" theory?

Babies are saved every day with this approach. It is what crisis pregnancy centers are all about. If the preganant woman didn't expect to be treated with kindness & compassion, she would not grace the doors of a crisis pregnancy center. It is pro-life rather than anti-abortion activities that have the most far-reaching affect upon the real battlegrouned - the hearts & minds of the woman facing a crisis pregnancy.

 

[nicholsmom]

I would add.....

It isn't hateful to harshly rebuke the wicked.

It isn't useful either. I've never heard of anyone being saved by this method, nor of any baby being saved from abortion by it.

I know you've never before been pregnant, but you must know that even women in the best of situations is overly emotional when pregnant. You can't just gloss that over, or make is a non-reality, just because it makes you uncomfortable.

It is what it is.

 

[Poly]

Babies are not going to be saved, nor are the women themselves, by being attacked. They need to be taken by the hand & shown the truth in love.

I don't know where you get the idea that people here are suggesting that you attack the woman thinking about getting an abortion. Many here have made it their mission to strongly plead with mothers not to kill their babies and make sure they have the facts. Strong feelings and emotions may come out when they desperately urge them to reconsider what they're about to do but it's not as if they're standing outside of clinics screaming "You're a miserable wretch and you'll go to hell for this!" I've seen it get a little heated when it comes to a person who is taking the mother there for "support" and attacks those who are doing the pleeding.

Now attacking the ones who actually murder the babies is another story. They should be rebuked and exposed. There should be no compassion where they're concerned.

 

[Rusha]

Solution is clear---pregnant women should report their condition immediately. probably to a cleric, a Christian evangelist one at that. She can then be quarantined, so that she does not drink, smoke, do drugs, etc. Over the counter pregnancy tests should be banned. Any woman who fails to register yet gives birth to a baby gets a nick put in her ear, that way everyone will know---a little more subtle than a Scarlet A.

Not hardly ... as against abortion as I am, that is a huge invasion of privacy. There is no way I would have ever considered reporting *my* three pregnancies to some clergy because it was none of their business and when seeking guidance, I would want someone I am comfortable with and trust ... not some state appointed clergyman.