PDA

View Full Version : Shoulda Known, "Baby Killer!" Screamer From TX.



Gayle in MD
03-22-2010, 01:59 PM
The Baby Killer screamer finally fessed up! /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smirk.gif

Repulsive!

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Randy Neugebauer (R-Tex.) identified himself as the member of congress who shouted "baby killer" during Rep. Bart Stupak's (D-Mich.) speech on the floor of the House of Representatives Sunday night.

Neugebauer, a three-term member of Congress from Texas, issued a statement of apology on Monday, saying that the statement was not directed at Stupak.

"In the heat and emotion of the debate, I exclaimed the phrase 'it's a baby killer' in reference to the agreement reached by the Democratic leadership," Neugebauer said. "I deeply regret that my actions were mistakenly interpreted as a direct reference to Congressman Stupak himself."


<span style="color: #000066"> <span style='font-size: 20pt'>Yeah, Right! Who does he think he's fooling!</span> </span>

Neugebauer's official Congressional Web site is down at the moment but his campaign site can be found here.

Here is the Texas Republican's statement of apology:

"Last night was the climax of weeks and months of debate on a health care bill that my constituents fear and do not support. In the heat and emotion of the debate, I exclaimed the phrase 'it's a baby killer' in reference to the agreement reached by the Democratic leadership. While I remain heartbroken over the passage of this bill and the tragic consequences it will have for the unborn, I deeply regret that my actions were mistakenly interpreted as a direct reference to Congressman Stupak himself.
<span style="color: #000066"> <span style='font-size: 20pt'>BWA HA HA HA! </span> </span>
"I have apologized to Mr. Stupak and also apologize to my colleagues for the manner in which I expressed my disappointment about the bill. The House Chamber is a place of decorum and respect. The timing and tone of my comment last night was inappropriate."


Neugebauer's outburst came at the end of an intense day of debate and voting on the health care reform bill. Stupak, an anti-abortion Democrat who struck a deal with the White House in exchange for a "yes" vote on the bill, had taken to the floor of the House to deliver a speech opposing a Republican amendment that would have reintroduced stricter abortion financing language in the bill -- language that Stupak, himself, previously introduced.

</div></div> /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smirk.gif

llotter
03-22-2010, 02:14 PM
Never, never break the politically correct rules of the Left. Never, never speak the truth if a lie will feel better. There is no escape from the PC world even as its distance from reality endangers us all.

pooltchr
03-22-2010, 02:19 PM
I think the kool-ade they drink every day also affects the eyesight....they are so blind!!!!!

Steve

LWW
03-22-2010, 03:42 PM
Just because someone agreed to kill babies doesn't mean that they agreed to kill babies.

The pretzel logic of the left is truly staggering.

LWW

pooltchr
03-22-2010, 04:09 PM
I wonder if it's ok to kill "pre-existing" babies??????????

/forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/wink.gif

Steve

wolfdancer
03-22-2010, 04:25 PM
The best way to prevent pregnancies, and eliminate the need for non health issue abortions ....is from an old Firestone (?) ad line:
"where the rubber meets the road"

Sev
03-22-2010, 06:41 PM
So whats your point?
Every abortion ends the potential existence of a human being.

If the language allows for abortion then it is a baby killer.
If the executive order is rescinded it allows for abortion.
Therefore its a baby killer.

Just pointing it out.

LWW
03-23-2010, 03:11 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: pooltchr</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I wonder if it's ok to kill "pre-existing" babies??????????

/forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/wink.gif

Steve </div></div>

With no limitation on lifetime totals, and without deductibles.

LWW

LWW
03-23-2010, 03:13 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Sev</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If the executive order is rescinded it allows for abortion. </div></div>

The EO is completely meaningless.

LWW

Gayle in MD
03-23-2010, 05:56 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: wolfdancer</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The best way to prevent pregnancies, and eliminate the need for non health issue abortions ....is from an old Firestone (?) ad line:
"where the rubber meets the road" </div></div>

I thought it was pretty revealing that none of those republicans who knew all along, exactly who screamed out the untrue, rude language, "Baby Killer" which was very inappropriate and out of order, typically brash, and as unamerican as the rest of the republican ideology, and behavior throughout, would say which of their nutcase coherats of Congress, committed the offensive act.

As we all know, women have fought for and earned though legal process for the right to decide their own private, personal decisions in their lives, without force or dictation from any men, or other women, and more revealing, is that there never was any langueage in the bill which allowed federal funding for abortion, NEVER. Bachmann and other republicans denied that anyone in their conference shouted out the inappropriate language, until they realized that they couldnt get away with their denials. It wasn't until the offender found out that he was going to be outed by a number of others who were in clear view, and would surely report his actions, that he finally owned up.

It was nothing more than the usual republican tactics of lies, fear and false statemente, used to rev up the bulk of their base, the kind of people who stand on the corner and spit at other people who disagree with their disgusting lack of respect for others, and particularly repulsive since they, and their pundits, promote murdering innocent American Doctors, and show no respsect for the laws of our land.

Last weekend gave us all a clear, concise pictorial, or the republican base, as they acted like nasty unruly children, throughout the weekend, bening egged on by the republican leaders who waved and encouraged the disgraceful behavior from the balconies.

AS a Democratic voter, I can only say, I hoe their disgusting behavior and non stop repulsive actions, continue. It is good for the rest of America to see regularly, who the republican base really is, and how they behave, without an dignity, and without any respect for others.

I can only say....Bravo Republican Base, your ignorance, racism, antiamericanism, and sexism becomes more undeniable through your own repulsive, immature, unamerican behavior, before the cameras of our great country. Keep hanging yourselves, in the unreality that you represent all the rest of the country, and thank heaven nothing could be farther from the truth...

G.

LWW
03-23-2010, 06:22 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">AS a Democratic voter, I can only say, I hoe their disgusting behavior and non stop repulsive actions, continue.

G. </div></div>

Spelling and grammar review before posting is always a good idea.

LWW

pooltchr
03-23-2010, 08:44 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">screamed out the untrue, rude language, "Baby Killer" which was very inappropriate and out of order,
G. </div></div>

At least be honest enough to quote the entire statement "It's a baby killer". He was talking about the bill itself, not about the individual speaking.

Y'all just have a hard time understanding context.
Just like Rush hoping Obama fails (His policies, not the country) or Rush going to Costa Rica for healthcare (Not moving there, just traveling there)

You seem to hear only what you want to hear. That's why it's so hard to have any meaningful discussion with you.

Steve

LWW
03-23-2010, 08:55 AM
AHHHH ... NESSST?

What is this madness of which you speak?

LWW

PoolFool
03-23-2010, 02:05 PM
The difference is that with this new law, taxpayers who do not believe in abortions now have to pay for them. It's disgusting but not a surprise given who is in charge now.

PoolFool

Gayle in MD
03-23-2010, 03:23 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: PoolFool</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The difference is that with this new law, taxpayers who do not believe in abortions now have to pay for them. It's disgusting but not a surprise given who is in charge now.

PoolFool </div></div>

That is absolutely not true. There is no money provided for abortions.

Although, I might add, that it is time to stop deiscriminating against women who decide, as they have every right according to the Constitution of the United States of America, to have an abortion, and no man, person, or woman, has the right to interfere with a woman's right to control her own body.

I am against war, but this government uses my tax dollars to pay for wars.

G.

PoolFool
03-23-2010, 03:57 PM
She should have controlled her own body before she got pregnant.
Of course the exception being forced sex.

PoolFool

eg8r
03-23-2010, 04:03 PM
What a shame. He did not need to offer an apology. The bill is a baby killer and those that approve the abortion portion support the free killing of innocent babies. They are no different than the extremist muslim terrorists.

eg8r

Sev
03-23-2010, 05:32 PM
We do however have the right to keep our tax dollars out of the hands of irresponsible people.

Having sex comes with personal responsibility. If a pregnancy occurs and she wants an abortion the expense should be born only by the female. After all the male portion of the act doesn't have a say in the matter. therefore responsibility should fall solely on the shoulders of the female.

Gayle in MD
03-23-2010, 05:49 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: PoolFool</div><div class="ubbcode-body">She should have controlled her own body before she got pregnant.
Of course the exception being forced sex.

PoolFool </div></div>

Another misogynist, huh? Judgemental. Arrogant and ponpous over someting which is none of your business in the first place.

Fine, I always like to weed them out early.

Maybe the MAN she had sex WITH should have controlled HIS own body. It does take two to tango.

If men could get pregnant, they could have an opinion. They can't, and they don't.

G.

Gayle in MD
03-23-2010, 05:53 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body">What a shame. He did not need to offer an apology. The bill is a baby killer and those that approve the abortion portion support the free killing of innocent babies. They are no different than the extremist muslim terrorists.

eg8r </div></div>

No, YOU are no different, since you think you can dictate to all others, according to your particular religious belief.

Fetuses are not babies.

Regardless of your irrelevant opinions and unfounded judgement, this Twxas hick had no right to scream such a ridiculous charge out at another person. He was out of order, just as you are, when you presume to condemn what you know nothing about, and have no business trying to dictate or force your personal beliefs about, upon another person, who has their own beliefs and opinions.

G.

sack316
03-23-2010, 06:05 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
If men could get pregnant, they could have an opinion. They can't, and they don't.

G. </div></div>

That's kind of a sexist statement in itself, IMHO.

I dunno, if I got someone pregnant, and there was a way... I'd rather be "pregnant" with the child myself (baby, fetus, slinky, whatever anyone wants to call it) that for it to be destroyed. I know, I know, but "we can't".

Still, we can go topless, you can't. I wouldn't say you shouldn't have a say on whose half nude body you see wandering around.

I can grow a beard, (hopefully) my girl wouldn't be able to. I'd still love her input on how I wear my facial hair.

We can fertilize eggs, you can't. I'd want you to have some say over when that happens.

Anyway, sure, you are correct in that "we can't" and thus any opinion is less valid or perhaps even irrelevant. That doesn't mean it is right.

Sack

Gayle in MD
03-23-2010, 06:11 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sack316</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
If men could get pregnant, they could have an opinion. They can't, and they don't.

G. </div></div>

That's kind of a sexist statement in itself, IMHO.

I dunno, if I got someone pregnant, and there was a way... I'd rather be "pregnant" with the child myself (baby, fetus, slinky, whatever anyone wants to call it) that for it to be destroyed. I know, I know, but "we can't".

Still, we can go topless, you can't. I wouldn't say you shouldn't have a say on whose half nude body you see wandering around.

I can grow a beard, (hopefully) my girl wouldn't be able to. I'd still love her input on how I wear my facial hair.

We can fertilize eggs, you can't. I'd want you to have some say over when that happens.

Anyway, sure, you are correct in that "we can't" and thus any opinion is less valid or perhaps even irrelevant. That doesn't mean it is right.

Sack </div></div>
No, it isn't sexist, it just happens to be the fact. And no, men have no right ot impose their opinions upon women.


You don't have to have an abortion if you don't think it's right.

I don't think it's right, either, for me, that is, but I have enough sense to know that this is America, and I don't get to force my personal opinions into other people's private, personal lives and decisions.

It is nobody's business except the woman who must make the decision.

I do know that that, is right.

G.

Sev
03-23-2010, 06:12 PM
4 ways to fix it.

1. Play Greek.
2. Swallow.
3. Abstinence.
4. Both parties use birth control.

Note on biology.

When ever cells are splitting and growing it is a form of life. If they are human cells then it is human. The chance of a human female giving birth to a wallaby are pretty slim.

sack316
03-23-2010, 06:17 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
No, it isn't sexist, it just happens to be the fact. And no, men have no right ot impose their opinions upon women.


You don't have to have an abortion if you don't think it's right.

I don't think it's right, either, for me, that is, but I have enough sense to know that this is America, and I don't get to force my personal opinions into other people's private, personal lives and decisions.

It is nobody's business except the woman who must make the decision.

I do know that that, is right.

G. </div></div>

Big difference between "forcing" opinions and having them. You said we are not allowed to have them.<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If men could get pregnant, they could <u>have</u> an opinion. They can't, and they don't.</div></div> Sorry, that's just silly. And basically saying "you, as a man, cannot HAVE an opinion because you are a man". Which, is sexist. I know that. That, is right.

Sack

Gayle in MD
03-23-2010, 06:19 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sack316</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
No, it isn't sexist, it just happens to be the fact. And no, men have no right ot impose their opinions upon women.


You don't have to have an abortion if you don't think it's right.

I don't think it's right, either, for me, that is, but I have enough sense to know that this is America, and I don't get to force my personal opinions into other people's private, personal lives and decisions.

It is nobody's business except the woman who must make the decision.

I do know that that, is right.

G. </div></div>

Big difference between "forcing" opinions and having them. You said we are not allowed to have them.<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If men could get pregnant, they could <u>have</u> an opinion. They can't, and they don't.</div></div> Sorry, that's just silly. And basically saying "you, as a man, cannot HAVE an opinion because you are a man". Which, is sexist. I know that. That, is right.

Sack </div></div>

I can't keep you from having an opinion, Sack, but I don't have to think it's fair or appropriate, and I don't.

G.

sack316
03-23-2010, 06:21 PM
Oh, and in all that it's also worth mentioning that I believe part of woman's liberation was the thought of "not needing or relying on a man". Don't rely on a man... women should protect themselves too. When someone gets pregnant (traditionally at least) it is due to 2 people's actions. Both are responsible for the predicament, and ideally both should work together towards a decision. Ultimately, I suppose I could grant the whole "my body my life" thing and agree final say should be up to the female. But both partners should have a say in the discussion, at least. IMHO.

Sack

Sev
03-23-2010, 06:22 PM
It also doesnt prove in any way that yours is correct. It is after all an opinion.

sack316
03-23-2010, 06:22 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
I can't keep you from having an opinion, Sack, but I don't have to think it's fair or appropriate, and I don't.

G. </div></div>

Well that is valid I suppose. However, I feel if I am blessed enough to have a child on the way... I don't feel it fair or appropriate for any say whatsoever to be taken away from me, as well.

Sack

wolfdancer
03-23-2010, 06:23 PM
As a Cath....ooops, better not mention my religion, nor my heritage, given the latest news out of Irel....er, strike that, as well.
We don't condone abortion....however I did not know until I read this thread, that is was entirely the woman's fault for getting pregnant, and therefore, like Pontius Pilate, the guy can wash his hands of the affair, and the onus is now entirely on the gal.

Sev
03-23-2010, 06:26 PM
Just following G's logic to its natural end.

sack316
03-23-2010, 06:30 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: wolfdancer</div><div class="ubbcode-body">....however I did not know until I read this thread, that is was entirely the woman's fault for getting pregnant, and therefore, like Pontius Pilate, the guy can wash his hands of the affair, and the onus is now entirely on the gal. </div></div>

Hmmm, yeah good point. Never thought of the other side of this. I guess if it is all on the woman, there is no such thing as a deadbeat dad if he bails prior to birth. I mean, afterall, he just said "Hey, it's your body and your life, and it's just a fetus in there. It's all on you, whatever you wanna do... but I'm outta here".

Odd, it's dead on line with the thinking, yet somehow don't think that particular "choice" would be held as heroic at all.

Sack

Gayle in MD
03-23-2010, 06:36 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sack316</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Oh, and in all that it's also worth mentioning that I believe part of woman's liberation was the thought of "not needing or relying on a man". Don't rely on a man... women should protect themselves too. When someone gets pregnant (traditionally at least) it is due to 2 people's actions. Both are responsible for the predicament, and ideally both should work together towards a decision. Ultimately, I suppose I could grant the whole "my body my life" thing and agree final say should be up to the female. But both partners should have a say in the discussion, at least. IMHO.

Sack </div></div>

I don't agree.

Gayle in MD
03-23-2010, 06:39 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: wolfdancer</div><div class="ubbcode-body">As a Cath....ooops, better not mention my religion, nor my heritage, given the latest news out of Irel....er, strike that, as well.
We don't condone abortion....however I did not know until I read this thread, that is was entirely the woman's fault for getting pregnant, and therefore, like Pontius Pilate, the guy can wash his hands of the affair, and the onus is now entirely on the gal. </div></div>
Yeah, well we already know that the righties aren't up on science, so it shouldn't surprise us.


Please send me a PM regareding that threat. I need to forward it along to someone.

G.

sack316
03-23-2010, 06:42 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sack316</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Oh, and in all that it's also worth mentioning that I believe part of woman's liberation was the thought of "not needing or relying on a man". Don't rely on a man... women should protect themselves too. When someone gets pregnant (traditionally at least) it is due to 2 people's actions. Both are responsible for the predicament, and ideally both should work together towards a decision. Ultimately, I suppose I could grant the whole "my body my life" thing and agree final say should be up to the female. But both partners should have a say in the discussion, at least. IMHO.

Sack </div></div>

I don't agree. </div></div>

Fair enough, and I'll respect your opinion as you do mine (I hope).

But what about the instance I listed above? Does the line of thinking apply across the board? is one free to leave without judgment prior to birth, and it be "ok"?

Sack

Sev
03-23-2010, 06:43 PM
Then a male should be able absolve himself of any child that a woman decided to carry to term with no expectation of financial or personal help to the individual who owns the other half of the child's genetic code. Nor should tax money be proffered either.
It is the woman's sole responsibility.

By your logic.

Gayle in MD
03-23-2010, 06:43 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sack316</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: wolfdancer</div><div class="ubbcode-body">....however I did not know until I read this thread, that is was entirely the woman's fault for getting pregnant, and therefore, like Pontius Pilate, the guy can wash his hands of the affair, and the onus is now entirely on the gal. </div></div>

Hmmm, yeah good point. Never thought of the other side of this. I guess if it is all on the woman, there is no such thing as a deadbeat dad if he bails prior to birth. I mean, afterall, he just said "Hey, it's your body and your life, and it's just a fetus in there. It's all on you, whatever you wanna do... but I'm outta here".

Odd, it's dead on line with the thinking, yet somehow don't think that particular "choice" would be held as heroic at all.

Sack </div></div>

Sack,
No one knows what another person's life is all about, and hence, it is really no one's business except the woman involved.

Now even if you are in a relationship with a woman, that still does not supercede her relationship with herself. That comes first and foremost. ONLY she can make the decision, as it should be, with, or without your awareness. Oh, and as long as it is in HER body, it isn't YOUR fetus, so make sure you wear your raincoat. Possession is 9/10th(s) of the law.

If you leave someone who is pregnant, then she still has the right to make the decision.

If you seek to appeal to her, there is nothing wrong with making your feelings for HER, known, and offer support IF she is considering bringing the fetus to term.

I don't think a woman is going to tell a man, unless she is open to some sort of mutual agreement, decision, or planning, together.... do you?

However, she isn't required, IMO, to reveal anything she doesn't wish to reveal. Her body, her decision, ONLY her business, unless SHE chooses to include you.

G.

Sev
03-23-2010, 06:48 PM
You cant have it both ways. Responsibility is either both parties through the entire process or it is not.
If not then the female can have no expectation of support from the male. Ever.

PoolFool
03-23-2010, 07:01 PM
Haven't you read her posts? She is always wrong.(IMO)

PoolFool

sack316
03-23-2010, 11:05 PM
ok, so no real answer I guess.

I'll just have to assume that it would be fair, and a man is free to leave anytime before birth, and there would be nothing wrong with that.

And no worries about me. I'd love kids, but am not having any until marriage. Either she is on BC, or I am wrapping it up. But if I weren't cautious, just for the sake of the discussion, as 2 consenting adults it is the responsibility of both partners to ensure safety. In other words, yes the man should be safe. Also, the woman should be safe as well and require the use of a condom before even allowing intercourse. Like you said, it's her body, she makes the decisions about her body...she should make the best decision for herself prior to conception, not just after. Don't ya think? (both parties should).

Sack

Gayle in MD
03-24-2010, 12:09 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sack316</div><div class="ubbcode-body">ok, so no real answer I guess.

<span style="color: #000066">I thought I covered all of my opinions on the subject. If you are asking me if I think it is OK for a guy to walk away from being responsible for taking care of a baby, IMO, the question is too hypothetical for a judgement. Every situation is different. In a perfect world, people would only have sex if they really cared, and were in love with one another. In that case, one would think things would move along in a simple way, they would marry, and share the wonderful experience of being parents, together.

Life often is far more complicated since some people seem able to have sexual relations without being in love, or even being in like! While I can't understand such situations, or preferences, they do happen. </span>

I'll just have to assume that it would be fair, and a man is free to leave anytime before birth, and there would be nothing wrong with that.

And no worries about me. I'd love kids, but am not having any until marriage. Either she is on BC, or I am wrapping it up.



But if I weren't cautious, just for the sake of the discussion, as 2 consenting adults it is the responsibility of both partners to ensure safety. In other words, yes the man should be safe. Also, the woman should be safe as well and require the use of a condom before even allowing intercourse. Like you said, it's her body, she makes the decisions about her body...she should make the best decision for herself prior to conception, not just after. Don't ya think? (both parties should).

Sack </div></div>

<span style="color: #000066">Any and every person who is of age, and has sex of their own free will, is responsible for looking out for themselves.

If you take a look at rape statistics, sadly, many of them unreported, you will see that I have good reasons for being pro choice.

It is a shame, really, that there are so many unfortunate circumstances that come about in life, which are not expected, or are spontaneous, and end in unintended consequences.

Many women, for example, get used to taking the pill, are not sleep around types, and decide to give their bodies a rest from the pill when they are not in a relationship.

Some, think they are not fertile, and can't have children.

Some are told by their partner that he has had a vascetomy, when he hasn't.

Those are just a few examples, but suffice it to say, the world is chock full of living, breathing "Accidents" walking around, and in fact, probably atleast half the people living wouldn't be here if preventing and avoiding unwanted pregnancies were a simple, fool proof result of having sex, since there is such a thing as passion, and alcohol....for example.

It is a complicated subject, but overall, the decision should always belong to the woman, regardless of any perripheral circumstances, and people, in general, should respect another person's right to make their own decisions in life, about such personal, private matters, IMO.

G. </span>

Qtec
03-24-2010, 01:24 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">It is a complicated subject, but overall, the decision should always belong to the woman, regardless of any perripheral circumstances, and people, in general, should respect another person's right to make their own decisions in life, about such personal, private matters, IMO.

G </div></div>

Well said G.

It's ironic that all the CCB MEN, who are all for <u>forcing </u>EVERY WOMAN in the USA to have a baby if they get pregnant, are the same one's who have been having fits and crying about Obama taking THEIR freedoms away!

Q

sack316
03-24-2010, 05:04 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I thought I covered all of my opinions on the subject. If you are asking me if I think it is OK for a guy to walk away from being responsible for taking care of a baby, IMO, the question is too hypothetical for a judgement. Every situation is different. In a perfect world, people would only have sex if they really cared, and were in love with one another. In that case, one would think things would move along in a simple way, they would marry, and share the wonderful experience of being parents, together.</div></div>

I do agree With your thoughts here. Except for the hypothetical part. Somewhere right now there's some loser bailing on his pregnant girlfriend. I don't think it's OK. But following the same line of thinking from this thread, perhaps it should be (?)

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Life often is far more complicated since some people seem able to have sexual relations without being in love, or even being in like! While I can't understand such situations, or preferences, they do happen. </div></div>

Again, agreed and very true.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Any and every person who is of age, and has sex of their own free will, is responsible for looking out for themselves.</div></div>

We agree again

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If you take a look at rape statistics, sadly, many of them unreported, you will see that I have good reasons for being pro choice. </div></div>

Don't forget, even as odd as my questions and comment may seem in relation to this, that I am actually pro choice too.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">It is a shame, really, that there are so many unfortunate circumstances that come about in life, which are not expected, or are spontaneous, and end in unintended consequences.</div></div>

True enough.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Many women, for example, get used to taking the pill, are not sleep around types, and decide to give their bodies a rest from the pill when they are not in a relationship.

Some, think they are not fertile, and can't have children.

Some are told by their partner that he has had a vascetomy, when he hasn't.</div></div>

I agree again. However, if my earlier question was, then these would be hypothetical as well

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Those are just a few examples, but suffice it to say, the world is chock full of living, breathing "Accidents" walking around, and in fact, probably atleast half the people living wouldn't be here if preventing and avoiding unwanted pregnancies were a simple, fool proof result of having sex, since there is such a thing as passion, and alcohol....for example.

It is a complicated subject, but overall, the decision should always belong to the woman, regardless of any perripheral circumstances, and people, in general, should respect another person's right to make their own decisions in life, about such personal, private matters, IMO.

</div></div>

I'm not about taking away the right. I'm not about taking away final say or the ultimate decision. But under more 'normal' or 'ideal' scenarios (rape and such things obviously an exception), I think at least a discussion between both parties is not too much to ask.

I do understand WHY it is a woman's right, and how it's her body and her physical health that will undergo a very strenuous and possibly dangerous change for quite some time-- perhaps even the rest of her life. I totally get that.

I just don't think that should take away from common courtesy or personal responsibility either.

Sack

Sev
03-24-2010, 07:43 AM
Actually Q it is not very complicated.

My personal take on it is if a woman wants to get an abortion she can. When I was in college I brought girls to clinics. I had no horse in the race and really did not care.
However. As Sack said there is the courtesy of personal responsibility. Half the embryo is genetic material of another individual. At the very least a discussion should take place.

Look at it this way. If a person owns a house and has agreed to store a car in the garage that is titled to another individual, just because that car is in the garage does not make it the home owners property.
The home owner can demand to have the car removed or have it removed. However destroying or damaging the car with out the owners permission is still a crime.

Now if the female is going to operate on a dictatorial path then she should assume all financial responsibility for her decisions. She should not expect any financial help from the potential father of the child or financial aid to get an abortion if she decides to.

There is nothing complicated about the entire matter. Your either pregnant or your not. You either bring it to term or you do not. You bring your partner into the process or you do not.

You receive financial assistance or you do not.

Gayle in MD
03-24-2010, 01:22 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sack316</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I thought I covered all of my opinions on the subject. If you are asking me if I think it is OK for a guy to walk away from being responsible for taking care of a baby, IMO, the question is too hypothetical for a judgement. Every situation is different. In a perfect world, people would only have sex if they really cared, and were in love with one another. In that case, one would think things would move along in a simple way, they would marry, and share the wonderful experience of being parents, together.</div></div>

I do agree With your thoughts here. Except for the hypothetical part. Somewhere right now there's some loser bailing on his pregnant girlfriend. I don't think it's OK. But following the same line of thinking from this thread, perhaps it should be (?)


<span style="color: #000066">I didn't say it was OK. I said it can be difficult to place blame, which, as I stated, each involved is responsible. A man who relies solely on the woman, to take measures to avoid pregnancy, is as wrong as a woman who relies solely on the man. However, only the woman bears the result, which is an unwanted pregnancy. Even if one sees it through that prisim, it doesn't deal with lies that are told, or hidden agendas, which an come from each of the partners.

Legally, men can be held to account, and forced to pay financially for the unwanted result. women pay both economically, physcially, emotionally, it is far more than just a financial risk for a woman.</span>
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Life often is far more complicated since some people seem able to have sexual relations without being in love, or even being in like! While I can't understand such situations, or preferences, they do happen. </div></div>

Again, agreed and very true.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Any and every person who is of age, and has sex of their own free will, is responsible for looking out for themselves.</div></div>

We agree again

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If you take a look at rape statistics, sadly, many of them unreported, you will see that I have good reasons for being pro choice. </div></div>

Don't forget, even as odd as my questions and comment may seem in relation to this, that I am actually pro choice too.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">It is a shame, really, that there are so many unfortunate circumstances that come about in life, which are not expected, or are spontaneous, and end in unintended consequences.</div></div>

True enough.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Many women, for example, get used to taking the pill, are not sleep around types, and decide to give their bodies a rest from the pill when they are not in a relationship.

Some, think they are not fertile, and can't have children.

Some are told by their partner that he has had a vascetomy, when he hasn't.</div></div>

I agree again. However, if my earlier question was, then these would be hypothetical as well... <span style="color: #000066">No, not hypothetical, just examples, I wasn't asking for a judgement from you, just giving examples of how complext this issue is. There are many variables involved. </span>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Those are just a few examples, but suffice it to say, the world is chock full of living, breathing "Accidents" walking around, and in fact, probably atleast half the people living wouldn't be here if preventing and avoiding unwanted pregnancies were a simple, fool proof result of having sex, since there is such a thing as passion, and alcohol....for example.

It is a complicated subject, but overall, the decision should always belong to the woman, regardless of any perripheral circumstances, and people, in general, should respect another person's right to make their own decisions in life, about such personal, private matters, IMO.

</div></div>

I'm not about taking away the right. I'm not about taking away final say or the ultimate decision. But under more 'normal' or 'ideal' scenarios (rape and such things obviously an exception), I think at least a discussion between both parties is not too much to ask.

<span style="color: #000066">And I think that a woan has every right to privacy, and every right to the sole decision. As I stated, a woman wouldn't even tell a man unless she felt connected to him, nor should she feel obligated to do so. If he didn't use protection, she is the sole recipient of the result. He need to insure that it doesnt happen, just as much as she does.

Financially, he sould pay equally in terms of supporting the child, since obviously, he failed to the same degree as she did to insure that it didn't result in an unwanted result. </span>

I do understand WHY it is a woman's right, and how it's her body and her physical health that will undergo a very strenuous and possibly dangerous change for quite some time-- perhaps even the rest of her life. I totally get that.

I just don't think that should take away from common courtesy or personal responsibility either.

Sack </div></div>

<span style="color: #000066">As I said, that part depends on the circumstances and under the conditions prevailing. Each aduolt must make their own decisions for themself. An adult, male or female, who has been decieved, or exploited in some way, is not going to feel any obligation to the deceiver.

Placing blame, except in the case of rape, is not a black and white phenomenon, it is complicated. Therefore, blanket statements which do not take into consideration the prerripheral circumstances, or conditions prevailing, always fall short of the reality involved

G..</span>

Gayle in MD
03-24-2010, 01:22 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">It is a complicated subject, but overall, the decision should always belong to the woman, regardless of any perripheral circumstances, and people, in general, should respect another person's right to make their own decisions in life, about such personal, private matters, IMO.

G </div></div>

Well said G.

Thanks Q.

It's ironic that all the CCB MEN, who are all for <u>forcing </u>EVERY WOMAN in the USA to have a baby if they get pregnant, are the same one's who have been having fits and crying about Obama taking THEIR freedoms away!

Q

</div></div>

eg8r
03-24-2010, 02:11 PM
A fetus is a baby and if you approve to kill it then you are pro-baby killing.

eg8r

Gayle in MD
03-24-2010, 03:16 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body">A fetus is a baby and if you approve to kill it then you are pro-baby killing.

eg8r </div></div>

I am pro choice. You are pro dictating to all others according to your personal beliefs. You are wrong to judge others for their personal, private decisions, and wrong about the facts, not to mention that you have a lot of nerve to think that what others do in their private lives, is subject to your narrow minded, personal, F-ed-up religious BS opinion.

You are anti women's rights, anti choice, and anti legal rights.

Typical misogynist, MCP. A fetus is not a baby....Get over it.

wolfdancer
03-24-2010, 03:32 PM
Wonder how this thread would read.....if humans were like seahorses?
That's gotta hurt (http://www.buzzfeed.com/punkmonkey/seahorse-gives-birth-16k9)

pooltchr
03-24-2010, 04:32 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body">A fetus is a baby and if you approve to kill it then you are pro-baby killing.

eg8r </div></div>

Notice how they label themselves as "pro-choice" while the other side is "pro-life"? I guess they figured "Pro death" was a bit too accurate.
If they were pro choice, seems they forgot about the rights of a child to be born!!!

Steve

sack316
03-24-2010, 05:27 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Placing blame, except in the case of rape, is not a black and white phenomenon, it is complicated. Therefore, blanket statements which do not take into consideration the prerripheral circumstances, or conditions prevailing, always fall short of the reality involved
G.. </div></div>

Ah, blanket statements such as how a man should not be allowed an opinion? /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/wink.gif

And we have come full circle on this one. Excellent discussion, I must say!

Sack

sack316
03-24-2010, 05:30 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">As I stated, a woman wouldn't even tell a man unless she felt connected to him, nor should she feel obligated to do so. </div></div>

I'd hope a woman wouldn't sleep with the man in the first place, without the feeling of some sort of connection. "You can be in me, but ya can't know what's in me". /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/crazy.gif

/forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/wink.gif

Sack

pooltchr
03-24-2010, 06:57 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sack316</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
I'd hope a woman wouldn't sleep with the man in the first place, without the feeling of some sort of connection. "You can be in me, but ya can't know what's in me". /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/crazy.gif

/forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/wink.gif

Sack </div></div>

uh oh...that one is going to earn you all kinds of rants!!!

Steve

wolfdancer
03-24-2010, 07:47 PM
I guess you ain't never had one too many, and like the guy that woke up from a drunk, in bed with two big, fat ugly women....tried to sneak out by crawling over one of them....but she woke up and said "I's only the bridesmaid, honey"
So, if I read you right.....a woman needs a connection, but the guy only needs an erection?
Wow, that means that women can't have a little recreational sex, even after a few drinks and some GHB?

Sev
03-24-2010, 07:49 PM
Treat em like the bunny farm. Hand em a 100.00 when your done and be on your way.
No questions are ever asked.

wolfdancer
03-24-2010, 08:55 PM
A hundred? ain't there any "WalMart" type hookers left? Last time I paid it was just $20, which was like 10,000 "P"s...I was doing my best to shore up the war torn economy of Viet Nam.
It was the last days of the war, and unbelievably, I was the only one that thought to bring my golf clubs along. With gunfire and small explosions going off in the distance, I could see why....hard to keep your "A" game going with all that distraction.
Now who else can tie abortion to golf to war

Qtec
03-25-2010, 01:44 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body">A fetus is a baby and if you approve to kill it then you are pro-baby killing.

eg8r </div></div>

A fetus is not a baby!

Q

Qtec
03-25-2010, 02:06 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: pooltchr</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body">A fetus is a baby and if you approve to kill it then you are pro-baby killing.

eg8r </div></div>

Notice how they label themselves as "pro-choice" while the other side is "pro-life"? I guess they figured "Pro death" was a bit too accurate.
If they were pro choice, seems they forgot about the rights of a child to be born!!!

Steve </div></div>


Wrong again.


Q
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Abortion-rights advocates should not cede the terms <u>"pro-life" and "right to life" </u>to the anti-abortionists. It is a woman's right to her life that gives her the right to terminate her pregnancy.

Nor should abortion-rights advocates keep hiding behind the phrase "a woman's right to choose." Does she have the right to choose murder? <u>That's what abortion would be, if the fetus were a person.</u>

The status of the embryo in the first trimester is the basic issue that cannot be sidestepped. The embryo is clearly pre-human; only the mystical notions of religious dogma treat this clump of cells as constituting a person.

<span style='font-size: 17pt'>We must not confuse potentiality with actuality.</span> An embryo is a potential human being. It can, granted the woman's choice, develop into an infant. But what it actually is during the first trimester is a mass of relatively undifferentiated cells that exist as a part of a woman's body. If we consider what it is rather than what it might become, we must acknowledge that the embryo under three months is something far more primitive than a frog or a fish. To compare it to an infant is ludicrous.

If we are to accept the equation of the potential with the actual and call the embryo an "unborn child," we could, with equal logic, call any adult an "undead corpse" and bury him alive or vivisect him for the instruction of medical students.

<span style='font-size: 14pt'>That tiny growth, that mass of protoplasm, exists as a part of a woman's body. It is not an independently existing, biologically formed organism, let alone a person. That which lives within the body of another can claim no right against its host. Rights belong only to individuals, not to collectives or to parts of an individual.</span>

("Independent" does not mean self-supporting--a child who depends on its parents for food, shelter, and clothing, has rights <span style='font-size: 17pt'>because it is an actual, separate human being</span>.)</div></div>

link (http://www.abortionisprolife.com/abortion-rights-are-pro-life.htm)


Q

Qtec
03-25-2010, 02:33 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Actually Q it is not very complicated. </div></div>

Actually, I think it is.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Now if the female is going to operate on a dictatorial path then she should assume all financial responsibility for her decisions. She should not expect any financial help from the potential father of the child or financial aid to get an abortion if she decides to. </div></div>

Should we financially punish the child because its mother wouldn't have an abortion?

/forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/sleep.gif

Q

Gayle in MD
03-25-2010, 05:47 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sack316</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">As I stated, a woman wouldn't even tell a man unless she felt connected to him, nor should she feel obligated to do so. </div></div>

I'd hope a woman wouldn't sleep with the man in the first place, without the feeling of some sort of connection. "You can be in me, but ya can't know what's in me". /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/crazy.gif

/forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/wink.gif



Sack </div></div>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> "You can be in me, but ya can't know what's in me". </div></div>

<span style="color: #000066">How about I can be in you, but I really don't give a S**T about you? Grow up, Sack, everyone is not like you, nor like me. If you can't embrace that simple core fact about people, then you are seriously in the RED! Out of touch with the reality of human nature, and human behavior!</span>

<span style="color: #000066">Unfortunately there are both men and women who look upon having sexual intercourse as nothing more than recreation. I think when considering the results of unplanned pregnancy, it is wise to realize the facts of life, one of which is that not everyone places a great deal of importance on the act during every encounter.

This is what I meant when I said that broad sweeping statements, regarding a courtesy between those who have had sex, do not incorporate all of the nuances and circumstances between the partners.

I would think, given recent entertainment news, everyone would at least be aware, (perhaps, painfully so) of the wide emotional range of individual degree of importance, or connection, that different people place on the act.

Hence, when I discuss what I think about what measure of responsibility should be involved between consenting adults, regarding notification, I again, refer to, Under The Conditions Prevailing....

Awareness of that phenomenon, does not automatically include personal approval. Just as subscribing to a philosophy of MYOB, regarding personal, private decisions, does not indicate approval, just enough humility to embrace one's propper place in the world, that's all.

Adults realize that their personal answers and values, only apply to them.

G.

</span>

pooltchr
03-25-2010, 07:50 AM
It's odd how the abortion advocates always talk about a woman's "choice" as to what to do with her body, but conveniently ignore the fact that she also had a choice whether or not to engage in an activity that might produce a child in the first place!
They don't expect a female to accept responsibility for choosing to have sex, and the possibile consequences of that action, yet believe she should have all the responsibility when it comes to terminating the life of the unborn child when that happens.
Selective responsibility????

Steve

Gayle in MD
03-25-2010, 08:06 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Actually Q it is not very complicated. </div></div>

Actually, I think it is.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Now if the female is going to operate on a dictatorial path then she should assume all financial responsibility for her decisions. She should not expect any financial help from the potential father of the child or financial aid to get an abortion if she decides to. </div></div>

Should we financially punish the child because its mother wouldn't have an abortion?

/forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/sleep.gif

Q

</div></div>

The six pillars of "Conservative" principles:

Racism
Sexism
Homophobia
Greed
Ignorance
Deceit

eg8r
03-25-2010, 09:04 AM
Sure it is.

eg8r

eg8r
03-25-2010, 09:05 AM
Pro-death is just more to the point, clear and concise. The lefties like the politically correct approach though.

eg8r

eg8r
03-25-2010, 09:07 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I am pro choice.</div></div>Did I ever question this? What is the need for you to make such a declaration as if all of your anti-women's rights posts about Tebow's mother were not enough indication. Pro-choice is just politically-correct speech for pro-death.

eg8r

cushioncrawler
03-25-2010, 04:00 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I am pro choice.</div></div>Did I ever question this? What is the need for you to make such a declaration as if all of your anti-women's rights posts about Tebow's mother were not enough indication. Pro-choice is just politically-correct speech for pro-death.eg8r</div></div>"Pro'kill" iz probly a better word than "pro'death". But "pro'abortion" iz better still.
madMac.
..................................What the Bible says about Abortion
........Abortion is not murder. A fetus is not considered a human life.
If men strive, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart from her, and yet no mischief follow: he shall be surely punished, according as the woman's husband will lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine. And if any mischief follow, then thou shalt give life for life. -- Exodus 21:22-23

........The Bible places no value on fetuses or infants less than one month old.
And if it be from a month old even unto five years old, then thy estimation shall be of the male five shekels of silver, and for the female thy estimation shall be three shekels of silver. -- Leviticus 27:6

........Fetuses and infants less than one month old are not considered persons.
Number the children of Levi after the house of their fathers, by their families: every male from a month old and upward shalt thou number them. And Moses numbered them according to the word of the LORD. -- Numbers 3:15-16

........God sometimes approves of killing fetuses.
And Moses said unto them, Have ye saved all the women alive? ... Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him. -- Numbers 31:15-17
(Some of the non-virgin women must have been pregnant. They would have been killed along with their unborn fetuses.)

Give them, O LORD: what wilt thou give? give them a miscarrying womb and dry breasts. -- Hosea 9:14

Yea, though they bring forth, yet will I slay even the beloved fruit of their womb. -- Hosea 9:16

Samaria shall become desolate; for she hath rebelled against her God: they shall fall by the sword: their infants shall be dashed in pieces, and their women with child shall be ripped up. -- Hosea 13:16

........God sometimes kills newborn babies to punish their parents.
Because by this deed thou hast given great occasion to the enemies of the LORD to blaspheme, the child also that is born unto thee shall surely die. -- 2 Samuel 12:14

........God sometimes causes abortions by cursing unfaithful wives.
The priest shall say unto the woman, The LORD make thee a curse and an oath among thy people, when the LORD doth make thy thigh to rot, and thy belly to swell. And this water that causeth the curse shall go into thy bowels, to make thy belly to swell, and thy thigh to rot: And the woman shall say, Amen, amen. ...
And when he hath made her to drink the water, then it shall come to pass, that, if she be defiled, and have done trespass against her husband, that the water that causeth the curse shall enter into her, and become bitter, and her belly shall swell, and her thigh shall rot: and the woman shall be a curse among her people. And if the woman be not defiled, but be clean; then she shall be free, and shall conceive seed. -- Numbers 5:21-21, 27-28

........God's law sometimes requires the execution (by burning to death) of pregnant women.
Tamar thy daughter in law hath played the harlot; and also, behold, she is with child by whoredom. And Judah said, Bring her forth, and let her be burnt. -- Genesis 38:24

wolfdancer
03-25-2010, 04:31 PM
just 3 shekels for the female, while the male commands 5?
What does N.O.W. have to say about this?

Qtec
03-25-2010, 10:39 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Sure it is.

eg8r </div></div>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Man: Is this the right room for an argument?

Other Man:(John Cleese) I've told you once.

Man: No you haven't!

Other Man: Yes I have.

M: When?

O: Just now.

M: No you didn't!

O: Yes I did!

M: You didn't!

O: I did!

M: You didn't!

O: I'm telling you, I did!

M: You did not!

O: Oh I'm sorry, is this a five minute argument, or the full half hour?

M: Ah! (taking out his wallet and paying) Just the five minutes.

O: Just the five minutes. Thank you.

O: Anyway, I did.

M: You most certainly did not!

O: Now let's get one thing quite clear: I most definitely told you!

M: Oh no you didn't!

O: Oh yes I did!

M: Oh no you didn't!

O: Oh yes I did!

M: Oh no you didn't!

O: Oh yes I did!

M: Oh no you didn't!

O: Oh yes I did!

M: Oh no you didn't!

O: Oh yes I did!

M: Oh no you didn't!

O: Oh yes I did!

M: No you DIDN'T!

O: Oh yes I did!

M: No you DIDN'T!

O: Oh yes I did!

M: No you DIDN'T!

O: Oh yes I did!

M: <span style='font-size: 20pt'>Oh look, this isn't an argument</span>!

(pause)

O: Yes it is!

M: No it isn't!

(pause)

M:<span style='font-size: 20pt'> It's just contradiction!</span>

O: No it isn't!

M: It IS!

O: It is NOT!

M: You just contradicted me!

O: No I didn't!

M: You DID!

O: No no no!

M: You did just then!

O: Nonsense!

M: (exasperated) Oh, this is futile!!

(pause)

O: No it isn't!

M: Yes it is!

(pause)

M: I came here for a good argument!

O: AH, no you didn't, you came here for an argument!

<span style='font-size: 20pt'>M: An argument isn't just contradiction.

O: Well! it CAN be!

M: No it can't!

M: <u>An argument is a connected series of statements intended to establish a proposition.</u></span>

O: No it isn't!

M: Yes it is! 'tisn't just contradiction.

O: Look, if I *argue* with you, I must take up a contrary position!

M: Yes but it isn't just saying 'no it isn't'.

O: Yes it is!

M: No it isn't!

O: Yes it is!

M: No it isn't!

O: Yes it is!

M: No it ISN'T! <span style='font-size: 20pt'>Argument is an intellectual process. Contradiction is just the automatic gainsaying of anything the other person says.

O: It is NOT!</span>

M: It is!

O: Not at all!

M: It is!

(The Arguer hits a bell on his desk and stops.)

O: Thank you, that's it.

M: (stunned) What?

O: That's it. Good morning.

M: But I was just getting interested!

O: I'm sorry, the five minutes is up. </div></div>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Sure it is.

eg8r </div></div>

LOL

Q

Gayle in MD
03-26-2010, 02:35 AM
<span style="color: #000066">BWA HA HA HA! Excellent. Exactly what it's like trying to communicate with the right!

That was great. Thanks for the laugh... </span> /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/laugh.gif

wolfdancer
03-26-2010, 03:03 AM
Good one, Q !!!

eg8r
03-26-2010, 03:08 PM
What idiot would argue that a fetus is not a baby? Only our village idiot qtip. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/frown.gif

eg8r