Churchmouse: """""I believe abortion should be illegal...so that all unborns are saved. """" OK, so now pleases explain how making abortion illegal ends abortions so that "all" unborns are saved.... you can't do it. You can't name a time in history when there hasn't been abortions. And you'll have to change nature and/or biology becasue some abortions are natural....how do you plan to do that...wave a magic wand? A poster here thinks "god" aborts some fetuses...maybe you should have a chat with him....or it... ANY of you Anti-Choicers, you Anti-Freedom folks! Step right up and answer those awkward questions! What's the matter? All of a sudden you're shy about posting ????
I don't sit at my computer all day long...like you do. Don't you have a life? I mean don't you interact with real people outside computer?
LOL! That's a life??!! How are you involved in that trial? Ya got time to answer two posts but can't handle: Churchmouse: """""I believe abortion should be illegal...so that all unborns are saved. """" OK, so now pleases explain how making abortion illegal ends abortions so that "all" unborns are saved.... you can't do it. You can't name a time in history when there hasn't been abortions. And you'll have to change nature and/or biology becasue some abortions are natural....how do you plan to do that...wave a magic wand? A poster here thinks "god" aborts some fetuses...maybe you should have a chat with him....or it...
Well as it is part of my job to sit at a computer all day, then it is part of my life. The people I interact with are by the most disabled people who cannot talk, hence what my job is about is providing them with welfare funded computer systems that allow them to communicate with others, attend school and just general lead as normal a life as possible. We even have systems that allow people to control a computer just by using their eyes. Shame is though people like you are always wanting to cut funding for these people.
Making abortion legal says.....no woman can kill her human child in the womb. No legalized killing can take place, the government does not condone it...it protects the life in the womb. Of course the option is always open for a woman to self abort...or a doctor to illegally kill. Do you think that the majority of the fifty million women who got abortions would all have gotten abortions anyway? I don't think so. No I can't...but I can remember a time when abortion was illegal in the United States...and more babies were born. There will always be people who try to buck the system...doctors who will illegally perform something in this case abortion...or the rare times a woman might try to kill her unborn.... by her own hand. But to have something be legal just because its going to happen anyway is not right. In that case legalize everything....child porn, rape, stealing...etc. I am talking about unnatural abortion.....to kill on demand something different. Spontaneous abortion is different than hiring the hit. A poster here thinks "god" aborts some fetuses...maybe you should have a chat with him....or it... ANY of you Anti-Choicers, you Anti-Freedom folks! Step right up and answer those awkward questions! What's the matter? All of a sudden you're shy about posting ????[/QUOTE]
[/QUOTE] Nope, YOU posted : Churchmouse: """""I believe abortion should be illegal...so that all unborns are saved. """" YOU claimed making abortion illegal would save all unborns. Clearly it hasn't and never will.... YOU prefer that women die with unsafe abortions....how is that "pro-Life"?
I don't have the statistics, but they are out there. "Many" is subject to debate. Yes, everyone regrets something.
Nope, YOU posted : Churchmouse: """""I believe abortion should be illegal...so that all unborns are saved. """" I stand corrected....all unborns can't be saved as long as people who hold the pro-choice/abort worldview...are out there fighting to allow women the right to kill. But if abortion is illegal.....I believe the majority...more than a majority would be saved. Yes a wishful thought.....wouldn't it be wonderful? Oh I can't wait for your answer here. Clearly it hasn't and never will.... YOU prefer that women die with unsafe abortions....how is that "pro-Life"?[/QUOTE]
[/QUOTE] Clean up your jumbled post and use the correct quotes.......a day spent in court has you rattled.
Sigh, as well as biology not being your strong point neither it seems is geography .. ever here of time difference, when I post it is usually fairly late in the evening, currently my time is 0015 which, depending on your time zone would be around 7.15pm for you.
hopefully this won't be removed by MODS as being off topic - http://www.eyegaze.com/assistive-technology-device/ Here is a video of our software and 'eyegaze' system at work http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=czZbcDp8yuA and a load more videos here http://www.youtube.com/user/SmartboxAT
If 99% of people disagreed with something I believed I'd probably be wrong. SOME people can't get that....THEY have a problem. And, trust me, 99% of the people in this world will never be Anti-Choice.
[/QUOTE] What? You're too lazy to straighten out that messed up post with messed up quotes? Try again: Churchmouse: """""I believe abortion should be illegal...so that all unborns are saved. """" OK, so now pleases explain how making abortion illegal ends abortions so that "all" unborns are saved....you can't do it. You can't name a time in history when there hasn't been abortions. And you'll have to change nature and/or biology becasue some abortions are natural....how do you plan to do that...wave a magic wand?
That's all well and good and, as a rule of thumb, a strong majority should probably be judged as likely right but with the caveat that it is possible for the consensus to be wrong. I prefer to stay neutral on issues when the facts are unknown to me. 99 out of 100 will not make a wrong answer into a correct answer. A consensus cannot change objective facts any more than I can wish the tooth fairy into existence. If 99 of 100 say the earth is flat, go with the facts and ignore the consensus because reality is the standard of truth, not majority opinion.
You seemed to miss the point entirely. pro religious freedom is about people being able to believe what they want and practice as they please as long as they don't go against any laws also with the no specific endorsement or infringements on what people choose to believe personally. It wasn't about what you personally believe on religious freedom or gun control they were examples of holding opinions like being pro-choice while not personally being for abortion as their choice. Having the option open to people by law and personally choosing not to participate in that choice is separate and again was the point I was trying to make. Again it's simple you can be pro the ability to do something while not being pro it's activity personally, with the same comparison as before you can be pro Gun rights while being personally against the usage of them. Language you use is important in defining opinions. I feel like I'm repeating myself far too often though since you posted it you should first present your case why a zygote should have the same protections as a person instead of just stating it. Until you provide evidence it's a person your point is rather circular. If you are using people then I would be against it because that would be against people having the right to choose to do as they would, though you could make the case much of what we do with animals is slavery, torture and murder as some people can make a case for. I have always wondered a pro-lifers stance on veganism so if any pro-life people would care to add this it would be interesting for my curiosity. Actually you can hold the position that drugs should be legal while holding the position that children shouldn't be available for them since we do so for many other drugs most notably alcohol. Actually the argument usually stated by pro-drug legalization groups is that kids shouldn't be able to have them because they cannot consent and just because kids will be exposed to them (as many are already) that isn't a reason to make them illegal to adults. I would agree they are pro-choice that's what I've been arguing whether they are pro-abortion is a separate matter. Maybe my repetition of the same arguments is useful in getting you and I to come to an agreement.
