I Want You to Eat a Taco, Drink a Beer, and Fund Abortion


The Taco or Beer Challenge couldn’t be simpler: You eat a taco and/or drink a beer, and you donate to an abortion fund. The only ice you’ll need for this challenge is the ice in your cooler, or maybe the ice in your water if you get a particularly spicy taco.

Everybody stays dry—ideally—and somebody gets help paying for a legal abortion.

I started the Taco or Beer Challenge on Monday as something of a Twitter joke, after hearing about the “ice bucket challenge” that’s been growing in popularity as celebrities and plebes alike film themselves dumping buckets of ice-cold water on themselves, sometimes to hilarious effect, in support of funding ALS research. (Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, sometimes referred to as Lou Gehrig’s Disease, is, according to the ALS Association, “a progressive neurodegenerative disease that affects nerve cells in the brain and the spinal cord.”)

What do ice buckets have to do with ALS? I don’t know. What do tacos and beer have to do with abortion? I don’t know that either.

What I do know is that eating tacos and drinking beer is more pleasurable than getting doused with ice water, and that lawmakers around the country are passing increasingly restrictive anti-abortion access laws. Which means abortion funds are now more necessary than ever as legal abortion becomes harder than ever to access—especially for those of us who don’t live in major urban centers.

Tacos and beer, of course, remain as vital to our human happiness as they ever were. The solution is clear: Eat tacos, drink beer, and donate to abortion funds.

Because abortion stigma is real, I know it can be hard to make that first abortion fund donation. It’s one thing to support abortion in theory, and a whole other thing to actually help pay for someone else’s—a total stranger’s, most likely—abortion. There’s a strong cultural narrative that tells us people who get abortions are bad, irresponsible, or cruel. That they are undeserving of care and understanding. That they are confused or heartless.

That narrative fucking sucks. Abortion is common. Abortion is normal. And abortion is safest when it is legal and accessible—something abortion funds help to ensure in an increasingly hostile political climate. There’s nothing shameful about having an abortion, and nothing shameful about funding abortion. It’s so not-shameful, in fact, that you can be the kind of regular ol’ human being who eats a taco or drinks a beer and funds abortion.

If you’ve donated to an abortion fund before, you might already have a favorite. If you haven’t, there’s probably one in your state, unless you live in Utah, in which case you can really step up the Taco or Beer Challenge by challenging yourself to start an abortion fund. If you’d rather give outside the United States, you can do that too. When you take the challenge, be sure to take a photo or a video of yourself and mention where you donated, and if you post your challenge on Twitter, be sure to tag it #TacoOrBeerChallenge.

So that’s all you have to do. Eat a taco and/or drink a beer—or a margarita, or a glass of Franzia, or a ginger ale, or a refreshing mineral water, hell, I don’t care what you drink, that’s how easy the Taco or Beer Challenge is. The Taco or Beer Challenge is about doing what’s right for your own taco and beverage needs, just like having an abortion—or not—is about doing what’s right for yourself and your family.

The only way to fail the Taco or Beer Challenge is to not donate to an abortion fund. I believe in tacos, I believe in beer, and I believe in you.

Like this story? Your $10 tax-deductible contribution helps support our research, reporting, and analysis.

Follow Andrea Grimes on twitter: @andreagrimes

  • Brad

    Andrea, I guess I failed your challenge. I ate a taco, drank a beer but then I laughed hysterically at your idiotic column. Nice try sweetie, but a major fail.

    • http://www.AweTalks.org Kyle Pate

      Lol says Redskins man.

    • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

      I think it is a fabulous idea.

    • Ella Warnock

      Well, you tried, and that’s what’s important.

    • Arekushieru

      Wow, a racist, patronizing male is a misogynist, as well. Whodathunkit?

  • Karl Hungus

    Murdering babies is hilarious!!!! LOL.

    • Jennifer Starr

      Only no one’s talking about murdering babies.

      • Howzah123

        Abortion = Murder

        Genetically at conception that new life created is human

        • Cactus_Wren

          So is my pancreas.

          Babies are born.

          • Arekushieru

            AND your placenta! Which is actually what gets ‘killed’ during an abortion. But these people don’t seem to realize that you can be pregnant without a fetus present.

        • Jennifer Starr

          No, it really isn’t. All children have been born.

        • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

          Abortion is legal.
          Murder is illegal.
          That which is legal cannot also be illegal.
          Therefore abortion is not murder.
          It is worth noting that abortion was not murder when it was illegal.
          Refute me. I will wait.
          Flagged and downvoted because I am sick of this hoary lie you forced birth cultists tell over and over.

          • Cactus_Wren

            Murder is defined as the unlawful killing of a person with malice aforethought. There are three separate points there, each of which has to be met:

            Murder is unlawful. Abortion is lawful. Therefore abortion is not murder.

            Murder is the killing of a person. Abortion kills no person. Therefore abortion is not murder.

            Murder requires malice aforethought. Abortion involves no malice. Therefore abortion is not murder, and Howzah is 0 for 3. B-)

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            Well said. Thank you.

          • fidobite

            @Cactus_Wren…Good luck with that reasoning when you’re face to face with God. I will pray you come to your senses before you kick.

          • Cactus_Wren

            God who?

          • fidobite

            God help you, Cactus_Wren, and pray for His forgiveness. I’ll pray for all of you here defending baby murder to see the wickedness of your thinking.

          • expect_resistance

            I pray to Goddess you keep your theology out of women’s uteruses.

          • P. McCoy

            You never answered my inquiry about how voting republican with its draconian policies against various groups make you a murderer- you’d better getn your OWN answers in that regard ready for YOUR maker!

          • lady_black

            Jehovah is a pro-abort.

          • Arekushieru

            According to GOD abortion is not murder. And God has also said that if a man-made law conflicts with a God-made law, only THEN can you disobey man’s law. So, being Pro-Life disobeys God. Gotcha.

          • SuperLogic

            You can split hairs, but killing is still illegal. What abortion comes down to is the definition of what is a person, and has human rights. Oddly enough women and blacks were until recently not considered persons.

          • conversate

            Killing is not illegal. War. Death penalty. Self defense.

            Unjust killing is illegal. Abortion is not unjust killing as the prenate has no right to the pregnant person’s body.

          • SuperLogic

            Well, glad to see that you admitted that abortion is killing. And you can only kill something which is living. And that’s the point, how is a baby or pregnancy a war, a death penalty or self defense? It’s “an inconvenience”. Try killing someone because they are “an inconvenience” and see how that excuse flies with the courts.

            If a hotel gives a person a key to a room, they are in affect giving their permission to occupy the room. By allowing pregnancy, they are in affect giving permission to occupy the womb.

            Your argument is ridiculous.

          • goatini

            //an inconvenience//

            Thanks for the reminder that forced-birthers see almost a year of a highly risky and dangerous medical condition, followed by at least 18 years of one of the most challenging responsibilities a person can ever take on, as equivalent to “an inconvenience”, if someone elects to not take this massive undertaking on at any particular time.

          • SuperLogic

            Forced birther? Really? Did I force you to get pregnant? How about the baby? I don’t seem to recall that. Maybe, how about taking responsibility for your own actions?? Easy,… no forced pregnancy,… no forced birthing. Pretty easy concept to get, right?

          • Suba gunawardana

            If it’s fine for you to kill innocent individuals for your necessity and convenience, you have no right to oppose others killing innocent individuals for their necessity & convenience. What’s good for the goose is good for the gander.

          • SuperLogic

            What unintelligible drivel are you rambling about?? What innocent individuals have I been killing for my necessity and convenience?? You might want to lay off the drugs.

          • conversate

            Do you eat meat? Vegetables? Do you drive a car? Do you brush your teeth?

            All of those activities kill innocent life, bucko.

          • SuperLogic

            Wow, lays off the drugs, it’s killing your brain cells. First off, since when are animals or vegetables “Individuals”?? And haven’t killed anyone driving a car or brushing my teeth yet. Your comments are just mind boggling! Anyway, enough of this nonsense. It’s a waste of my time. Comparing brushing teeth to abortions??? Are you serious???

          • conversate

            Well, you consider a zygote to be an ‘individual’ yes? A zygote is literally just a clump of DNA surrounded by a cytoplasm.

            If a zygote is an individual, then so is a pig, which is at least sentient, and even a single bacterium.

          • Suba gunawardana

            Exactly what conversate said below. By simply choosing to live, you choose to kill millions of innocent individuals daily for your necessity & convenience. Why are THEIR lives less important to you than that of a fetus in someone else’s body?

          • conversate

            If someone inserts themself into your body, drills into your arteries, suppresses your immune system, takes nutrients from your blood, calcium from your bones, infuses your body with addictive hormones and injects toxic biowastes into your blood for your liver and kidneys to process, and then puts you through intense pain for 6-72 hours and shoves a very large object through a very tiny hole would you consider it be a ‘minor inconvenience’?

            I mean, you’d let someone do all of the above if they needed to do it for their survival, yeah?

          • conversate

            And your nym is meant to be ironic, right?

          • SuperLogic

            Maybe you should try to hold a logical conversation, where your posts are based on sound reasoning, and you “might” be able to talk! :oP

          • conversate

            So far you haven’t been able to refute a single thing I have said. You just repeat vapid lies.

          • Suba gunawardana

            That argument would be valid only if killing was absolutely utterly illegal & unacceptable under ANY circumstance. Obviously it’s not. There are SO MANY excretions to the concept “killing is wrong” it’s not even funny.

            Human life requires and depends on killing. No human can exist without killing (directly or indirectly). Killing is the norm, not the exception. So if you want to exempt a certain group from being killed, you have to come up with a better argument than “killing is illegal”.

          • SuperLogic

            “Human life requires and depends on killing. No human can exist without killing” Seriously??? Unless you are talking about the “killing of plants” (or even animals) in your definition of killing (which is obvious that is not what we are talking about), that statement is ridiculous.

          • fidobite

            Keep trying Plum…rationalize murdering a child in the womb. God is not smiling. Good luck when your time is up.

          • goatini

            Yeah, those bullying threats on behalf of your imaginary friend are really, really persuasive, not.

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            So you cannot refute me. You just LIE for shitz and giggles.
            God is not your bullyboy. God loves absolutely. Everybody goes to heaven.

          • Arekushieru

            Why do you rationalize ACTUALLY murdering actual PERSONS (women).

          • SuperLogic

            So, if for whatever reason, killing was taken off the law books, that would make it legal, and not murder? Murder is not dependent on whether it is technically legal or not. We all still know killing is murder and immoral whether it is “legal” or not. Killing of the Jews was legal in Nazi Germany, yet no one in their right mind would say it was moral and not murder. In fact all those who were involved were later convicted. Your reasoning is absurd.

          • conversate

            So someone can take your kidney while shoving large objects into your body, causing your great pain, and if you kill in order to escape you are a ‘murderer’, is that right?

          • SuperLogic

            “Someone can take your kidney while shoving large objects into your body” What are you rambling about??? The baby grows it’s own kidney,… lungs, heart, etc, etc, it doesn’t TAKE anything. And may I remind you, YOU were the one that put the baby there in the first place, it didn’t just suddenly show up on it’s own. Didn’t they teach you any of this in school??

            Your posts are becoming nonsense rambling!

          • conversate

            Again, you’re incredibly ignorant.

            If the unborn human already has all it’s own organs, then kindly explain to the class why gestation is even necessary?

            Why can’t it just be removed at the zygotic stage and left to develop in a petri dish if it doesn’t need the woman’s body for anything, which is what you are saying, and presenting as fact.

            I’ll wait.

          • SuperLogic

            You obviously don’t know the difference between “rent” and “buy” either. :oP The fetus doesn’t TAKE anything, in the same way it doesn’t TAKE all the womens organs when it breast feeds after it’s born. Your rationalization is absolutely mind boggling.

          • thedoorisajar

            If it doesn’t take anything then why does it need to gestate for 10 months? Why must it drill into a maternal blood vessel?

            Can you explain that, please

          • SuperLogic

            Are you seriously that ignorant? If you drink milk from a cow, are you “taking” all its organs?? Do you seriously not understand the difference between “taking” and “using”?? It is being nourished in a protected environment during that time. The mother keeps her organs. Go read some books and educate yourself.

          • thedoorisajar

            So if someone was to walk up to you, stick a needle in your arm, and take every nutrient from your blood, organs and bones, and use it for their own needs, you would consider that to be ‘giving’?

            Would you also find it acceptable if that same person suppressed your immune system (making you more susceptible to illness), dumped toxic biowastes into your body (for your kidney and liver to process) and infused your body with addictive hormones.

            Would you consider all of the above to be ‘giving’ on your part? yes or no

          • SuperLogic

            Using your example…. then stop sticking the needle into your own arm if you don’t approve. Stop blaming it on the other person, when your the one that stuck the needle into your own arm in the first place. Seriously, what about that is so difficult for you to understand?? Is pregnancy something that you’ve just figured out or do you not understand that this has been happening since the start of man?? And do you not understand that if you end pregnancies, this will also end the existence of people?? Seriously, were you born yesterday?

          • thedoorisajar

            Oh, so by that logic, if you walk into a dangerous neighbourhood where people are liable to steal your bodily resources, you should be forced to undergo this assault because you asked for it?

            Tell me, do you also blame women for their own rapes, because they wore too short a skirt?

            Also, people have been ending pregnancies since the dawn of man, idiot. And of the 100 billion humans that have ever lived, close to 1 billion women have died from pregnancy over that time. Maternal mortality is a real thing. Just because enough humans have survived to carry on does NOT mean that pregnancy is safe.

            Also, the human race is in no danger of decline, in fact, there are so many of us that we are destroying the very environment that enables us to survive,

            Did you know that species go extinct when their population grows so large that their environment can no longer support them?

          • SuperLogic

            No…. not by that logic. You are talking about more than one issue now. Using YOUR previous example, rape is like someone else sticking the needle in your arm without your permission. The issue at hand is about choosing to abort based on personal choice, or like sticking the needle in your own arm. Rape accounts for about 1% of abortions, and about 6% due to health. The other approx 93% are a result of personal choice. You are trying to put words in my mouth that just aren’t accurate, and that I didn’t say or imply! You are going off on wild tangents.

            Here’s a little factoid for you. Did you know in order to sustain our lifestyle, it is based on a pyramid, with many people at a young age, and the pyramid getting smaller as the population ages? So that those at the bottom will support those at the top that can’t support themselves. ie Health care, social services, etc. Did you know, that for the first time in the history of the US, (and probably Canada) that it now looks more like a barrel, due to people not having enough kids? Abortion is now killing off 1 in 3 of our babies. So as a nation we aren’t having enough children to sustain our lifestyle. And if it continues, it will continue to get worse. Which is why we HAVE TO bring in more immigrants to keep up the population. And in severe cases like China, (which is happening to a lesser extent here), there are fewer females, since societies value men over women which is the reason that girl babies are killed far more frequently because of sex selective abortions. But ignoring reality and the consequences is so much more simple isn’t it? Much nicer to live in a utopian fantasy bubble isn’t it?

          • thedoorisajar

            Actually, you are trying to say that women *deserve* the ‘taking’ that the prenate does to survive should they either choose, or not choose, pregnancy.

            So basically, you believe that it’s a woman’s duty to die from pregnancy because she ‘put it there’ right? Yeah, that’s your logic.

            The fact is, unborn humans survive by drilling into the woman’s blood vessel, extracting nutrients from her body (at great risk to her health) and injecting toxic biowastes into her blood for her kidney and liver to process. The reason, dumbass, that non-viable embryos cannot survive outside of the uterus is because they cannot live without the woman’s organs breathing for it, processing nutrients and wastes for it. Pregnancy IS the use of the woman’s organs – and I sincerely doubt that you would let someone use your organs temporarily in order to preserve their own lives.

            Did you know in order to sustain our lifestyle, it is based on a
            pyramid, with many people at a young age, and the pyramid getting smaller as the population ages?

            Oh, so you’re a whiny little shit who wants more babies to be born so he can continue to live large. You basically want more people to be born so that you can EXPLOIT them. How selfish you are.

          • SuperLogic

            Let’s be honest here, about 800 women die a year in the US from pregnancy. While extremely tragic, let’s keep it in perspective, 34,000 a year die in motor vehicle accidents, and 577,000 die from cancer every year. Your nonsense that “you believe it’s a woman’s duty to die from pregnancy because she put it there” is absolute nonsense. That’s like saying I believe people should die because I disagreeing with people that think we should get rid of cars. Your statement is absolutely ridiculous.

            AGAIN…. if you don’t want to die from pregnancy…. DON’T GET PREGNANT!!! SIMPLE! If you want to see DUMBASS, go look in the mirror, FOOL!

            And that’s it for me, all you can do is call names, with absolutely ridiculous statements, that make no sense, and are just plain idiotic! You’re a whiny big shit, that doesn’t want to take responsibility for her own actions, and then kill your own mistakes. HOW SELFISH ARE YOU?????

          • thedoorisajar

            Right. You just confirmed my previous point.

            You believe that a woman deserves to die from pregnancy because she put herself in harms way.

            Kind of like how you deserve to die from a car accident if you get in a car, right?

            Your could not logic your way out of a wet paper bag.

          • Suba gunawardana

            How ignorant are you? Sex is not the same thing as pregnancy, and consent to sex does not mean consent to pregnancy.

            Pregnancy is one of the many possible CONSEQUENCES of sex. Engaging in a certain action does NOT automatically bind you to its consequences. If it did: If you play a sport & get injured, you would be prohibited from getting treatment for the injury; If a burglar walked in through the door you left open, you would be OBLIGATED to let him take what he wishes, and rape/attack you if he so wishes.

            And no, other people are NOT obligated to sacrifice anything for you to maintain your lifestyle, be it women, babies or immigrants. They are not your slaves.

          • SuperLogic

            This has been explained to you before, but obviously you are too dimwitted to comprehend it. Your examples are ridiculous. Such as your sports example, when you play sports, you understand the risks, you are allowed treatment of the injury, you aren’t allowed to kill the other person. Your example is absurd! And for you to compare consensual sex and pregnancy to burglary and rape shows how twisted your thinking is. It’s absolutely mind boggling how warped Pro-lifers thinking is that they compare the consensual sex and a baby, to forced rape and burglary. Just utterly BIZARRE is all I can say. I feel sorry for you, that you have such a dismal view of life!

          • Suba gunawardana

            As I explained to you then, if the “other person” involved in any situation INVADES/USES your body, you have every right to kill them.

            According to your logic if letting a penis into your vagina constitutes consent for a zef to use your body for the next 9 months, the exact same logic dictates that leaving your door open constitutes CONSENT for anyone to come in and take your stuff, or attack you. (You didn’t want the zef, neither did you want the burglar/rapist. They both came in due to YOUR actions, so tough! Remember, this is your logic, not mine.)

            You declaring something bizarre or absurd doesn’t make it so, it only shows your inability to grasp the simplest of concepts, YET AGAIN.

          • thedoorisajar

            If you injure someone in a car accident,you owe them the use of your body to preserve their life.

            You knew the risks when you got in the car.

          • thedoorisajar

            Your entire stance is that fertile women don’t have the right to life. Whereas fetuses and men do.

            Why do you hate women so much?

          • SuperLogic

            Seriously, you have the intelligence level of a gnat. It’s a complete waste of my time talking to you. Pregnancy is not a death sentence like you are implying, no more so then driving a car is a wishing death on someone. To say I hate women because they should take responsibility for a pregnancy they created is ABSURD! The question is, why do you hate babies so much that you ARE giving them a death sentence,…. GUARANTEED??

            Lets see…. 800 women dying during pregnancy a year, compared to 1 MILLION babies a year. Do the math fool!

            I’m done, my time is better spent talking to a brick.

          • thedoorisajar

            There is no knowing which women will die from pregnancy. This cannot be predicted. By forcing women to remain pregnant against their will, you are effectively denying *all* women the right to life.

            Your chances of dying if you are thrown out of an airplane are slim. Safer than dying from pregnancy, in fact. Does this mean that someone can forcibly eject you from a plane, and tell you not to worry, because the chances of you dying are low? No, they cannot, because only YOU can decide how much risk YOU will expose yourself too. No one else can make that decision.

            Do you understand?

          • SuperLogic

            Doofus, Your example is ridiculous. YOU’RE the one that decided to get on the plane and jump out of the plane,… now you want to get back into the plane, throw someone else out of the plane (without a parachute) and act like nothing ever happened!

          • thedoorisajar

            You should really take a Logic 101 course, kiddo.

            As I keep saying, *only* the person facing the risk can make the decision whether or not they will continue. If you choose to get on a plane that doesn’t give anyone the right to throw you out of that plane, does it? even if your chances of death and disability are low, and even if it’s to save a life.

          • Suba gunawardana

            Regardless of how much you rant & rave, scream, insult or name-call, NO INDIVIDUAL gets the legal right to use another person’s body without their consent. That’s the bottom line.

            So far you have failed to even COMPREHEND this simple concept, let alone bring a valid argument against it.

          • SuperLogic

            NO INDIVIDUAL has the right to KILL another person with or without their consent. THAT is the bottom line! (Good to see labelled it as an individual)

            So far you have failed to even COMPREHEND this simple concept, let alone bring a valid argument against it.

          • Suba gunawardana

            That’s where you are totally wrong. Haven’t we been through this before? As I explained to you then: Your statement would be correct ONLY if it were absolutely completely illegal & unacceptable to kill another person under ANY circumstance. Is it? Think about it.

            Now there’s no need to go round & round again. Think about all the situations in our society where killing is legal. Protecting your bodily autonomy IS one of them.

            BTW it’s rather pathetic when you can’t form your own sentence & have to copy mine verbatim.

          • SuperLogic

            Doesn’t matter how many times you repeat the same thing. You were just as wrong the first time you said it as the last.

            And no, bodily autonomy is not one of the reasons to kill another person, bodily HARM is. And you can’t claim bodily autonomy when you “gave permission” by your own very actions. That’s like giving the keys to your car to a stranger, and then screaming theft when he drives away. Are you really that slow?

            While abortion may be legal, doesn’t make it moral or right. Which is why it illegal in many parts of the world. And has been for almost the entire history of the US and Canada except the last 50 odd years.

            The reason to copy verbatim, is to demonstrate the absurdity of your comments, since you can’t figure that one out on your own.

            But you’re right, this is going in circles. Again, it’s very sad that you and all your pro-abortionists have such a dismal view of babies and life. Carry on with your killing spree.

          • Suba gunawardana

            You are unbelievably slow even for a forced-birther.

            What’s the difference between “bodily HARM” and violation of bodily autonomy? None. Ergo, you have a right to kill anyone who violates your bodily autonomy.

            As has been explained to you numerous times, it doesn’t MATTER if such violation was a direct result of your actions. Your own negligence (or stupidity) does NOT negate your right to protect your body.

            Here’s another example, TRY to comprehend: A woman voluntarily goes into a man’s home and he rapes her. According to YOUR logic, she is now OBLIGATED to let the rape go on because she “gave permission” by walking into his house.

            Well it doesn’t work that way. Going into his house was NOT implied consent for him to violate her bodily autonomy. If he tries to rape her she has every tight to kill him to protect her body.

            Exact same logic on abortion. Consenting to sex with a man is NOT implied consent for a zef to violate your body.

            ” Again, it’s very sad that you and all your pro-abortionists have such a dismal view of babies and life. Carry on with your killing spree.”

            WE are not in the business of killing other people’s zefs against their will, whereas YOU force unwanted children to miserable lives against the mothers’ will, thus actively promoting child abuse. And you are here trying to preach to others? Hilarious!

          • SuperLogic

            Seriously, you are an idiot. Going into a house does not mean she is obligated to being raped. Did I not say BODILY HARM?????????????????????????????????????? Just how stupid are you???? Going into someones house does not consent to sex. But consenting to unprotected sex there is a really good chance you will become pregnant, that is a likely result. And are you that dimwitted you don’t understand the difference between bodily autonomy, and bodily harm?? If you are asleep and someone cuts your hair while you are sleeping, they violated your bodily autonomy, but that doesn’t give you the right to shoot them. But if someone threatens you bodily harm, like rape, you can plead self defence. Is that really that hard a concept for you to grasp! SHeesh, again, my time is better spent talking to a brick!

          • thedoorisajar

            Pregnancy = bodily harm

            Birth = so painful it is akin to torture

          • Suba gunawardana

            What is rape? Someone invading/occupying/using your body without your consent.

            What is unwanted pregnancy? Someone invading/occupying/using your body without your consent.

            What’s the difference? Pregnancy lasts MUCH longer than rape. Other than that, they are both violations of bodily autonomy, AND incidents of bodily harm. DUH!

            In case you are too stupid to grasp who the “someone” is in each case: In rape, the someone is another juridical person, usually a man. In pregnancy, the someone is a zef, NOT a juridical person. (Not that it matters. Juridical person or not, no one has the right to violate your body).

          • thedoorisajar

            Uh, yeah, bodily autonomy DOES give you a right to kill someone if it is the ONLY means of escape.

            And a pre-viable embryo dies because of it’s disconnection from the woman’s blood supply/kidney/liver/lungs/pancreas etc. The woman’s organs are what keep it alive, and it is NOT entitled to them, no more than I am entitled to your organs to sustain my own life.

          • thedoorisajar

            Have you noticed that it’s actually more difficult to debate the intellectually challenged, because they don’t even understand the argument?

          • Suba gunawardana

            Yeah it is quite tiring having to spoon-feed them, and they make the usual crazies look like Rhodes scholars….

          • thedoorisajar

            You missed most of the fun with Simon Jm on SPL. Tim Griffy and I spent a whole month on him and his idiotic arguments. Simon is just smart enough to make an intelligent sounding argument – until you dig deeper and realise that it’s nothing but a load of contradictory bullshit.

          • Suba gunawardana

            I had a long argument with Simon Jm a while back but it got rather repetitive, somewhat like with myintx. At least he didn’t try to blame his lack of comprehension on the opponent. So far I only remember three people doing that, including this clown here.

          • thedoorisajar

            Oh, Simon did that to us when we refused to take his “moral duty” argument seriously.

            Apparently we were too dumb to understand his brilliance. Then he name dropped David Boonin.

          • Suba gunawardana

            LOL Apparently I DID miss all the fun….

          • thedoorisajar

            If you are not familiar with the argument I will explain it to you later. Its full of contradictions and is a mish mash of the responsibity objection and tort law

            He is going to write up a formal version and may even present it as a paid blog post on SPL. I can hardly wait

          • Suba gunawardana

            If he does post it please let me know… I do remember his “responsibility for putting someone in a dependent position” argument.

          • thedoorisajar

            Will do.

        • Shan

          Of course it’s human. I’m gonna stick my neck out here and say that I’m 100% certain no women ever had an abortion because she was worried that there was a star nosed mole up in there.

          http://wildsouth.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/star-nosed-mole.jpg

          • Whirlwitch

            Please collect a shiny new Internet at your convenience.

        • Ella Warnock

          Moar exclamation points and histrionics, plz. Thx.

        • lady_black

          So???

        • P. McCoy

          Cancer cells get generated too and are ‘human’ like the blastocyst- both are parasitic in nature, playing law of the jungle, survival of the fittest against the host body. But neither are people; to excise both is not murder!

      • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

        Karl Hungus is talking about murdering babies. Ya think he gets invited to many parties?

        • Jennifer Starr

          Somehow I doubt it.

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            Creepy old hog.

        • Karl Hungus

          3 pretty awesome ones you’d never be invited to over Labor Day so far.

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            I would bet $500.00 that folks run when they see you coming.

          • Karl Hungus

            Ok. You’re on. Come to Los Angeles and test out your thesis.

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            i am not at all interested in you. You skeeve me. Ho hum.

          • lady_black

            I would. I’d say “Ewww! There’s that guy who likes talking about murdering babies. Run!”

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            Or ‘Shoot!’

          • expect_resistance

            I’d invite Plum to my party.

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            And I promise to drink a bit too much and eat all the dip.

          • Shan

            Just don’t double-dip.

          • expect_resistance

            Hell yes! Seriously if you are ever in Minneapolis you are welcome to my house. I would love to hang out with you :)

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            Back at you. You are fun and smart. I like that in a person.

        • Ella Warnock

          Karl needs to call the poe-lees if he knows somebody murderin’ baybeez.

    • fiona64

      Really? Do you know of someone who is murdering babies? If so, I hope you contact your local law enforcement agency.

  • Cactus_Wren

    I don’t care much for tacos and don’t like beer, so I’ve had a tomato-and-avocado salad and a cup of tea and donated to the National Network of Abortion Funds!

    • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

      I like the way you think.

  • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

    I like this challenge better than the ice challenge. Ummmm. Tacos at Margarita’s.

    • Jennifer Starr

      I could definitely go for a margarita

      • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

        Margarita’s has Pineapple and Mango Margaritas.

        • Jennifer Starr

          Pineapple sounds nice, but I’m still a sucker for lime :)

          • lady_black

            My very FAVORITE drink is a Margarita. And no froo-froo Margarita. Lime only.

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            Lime is the best.

  • L-dan

    There will be no videos of horrible failuress as people forget that ice water is damn heavy and buckets are awkward. I’m all for this approach!

    I’m making burritos next week, so there’s not even the risk of sharp taco pieces causing lacerations. (and payday is next week, so that’s convenient).

    • epazote

      Try making soft shell tacos. Toss the tortilla directly on the flame, or heat in a cast iron skillet. Much tastier, and authentic than “tacos dorados” (fried)

  • elmarcito

    this girl is dumb… It’s not doing the challenge AND donating money… It’s doing the challenge OR donating money…. and drinking water DOES NOT help with spicy food… it makes it worse. Dumb ass.

    • Jennifer Starr

      Then don’t eat a spicy taco.

      • Shan

        Or drink some milk and eat a piece of bread afterward. Oy.

      • lady_black

        I’s true. Drink milk, eat a piece of buttered bread or drink an alcoholic beverage. Water spreads the capsasin around :)

    • Shan

      Oh, and just to show you how simple it is, I didn’t eat a taco or drink a beer. I had Indian food and some wine and didn’t do a selfie of any of it. Instead, I just donated money to iTrustWomen.org right here:

      http://itrustwomen.org/

      So pat yourself on the back for prompting me and making it easier for some random woman you don’t know or care about to have an abortion!

    • Arekushieru

      You just posted to a call a woman ‘dumb’, didn’t you? C’mon spill it, now, amirite? Misogynistic, ableist ignorant trash.

  • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

    i put this front and center on my blog. What a hoot. What a way to raise money for women in need of assistance. What a great way to stick it to the fetus freaks. They are quite annoyed.
    Another way to resist: http://www.vochoice.org/

    • fidobite

      Hi Plum, I’m a “fetus freak”. Yes, I defend the little ones in the womb. I simply can’t fathom how evil one would have to be to stand on your side of the fence…but then I can’t fathom nazis and isis either. Good luck when your final day comes. God is not smiling.

      • Ivy Mike

        You defend nothing. You have not, personally, stopped a single abortion in your entire life. I bet you’ve paid a few bills for a few preachers or priests in your time, though. Wonder how many of the recipients of your collection plate funding were molesting children?

        Don’t flatter yourself. You have never, ever, been even marginally effective at your chosen “crusade”. You’ve simply been a mark for longstanding con men.

        • fidobite

          God help you Ivy Mike…I certainly can’t.

          • Ivy Mike

            Your imaginary friend cannot help anyone. Fictional characters are like that.

            Don’t you think you’re a little old to still believe in Santa Claus?

            Oh, and who in the world do you imagine needs your “help”? Just how big is your ego, son?

            You fantasize that you are some brave defender of “life”. You imagine that your “wise ” counsel is “needed” by others. You harbor the delusion that you speak for an all-powerful deity.

            Do you have a superhero costume in your closet, too?

            Grow the fuck up, kid.

          • fidobite

            I’m praying double for you, Ivy Mike.

          • Suba gunawardana

            “I’m praying for you” translation: I have no rebuttal.

          • Ella Warnock

            Christianese for GFY.

          • fidobite

            Oh, I rebutted you Suba. What you do with it is up to you.

          • Suba gunawardana

            What rebuttal? Praying to a sadistic prick who never answers you is no rebuttal.

          • fidobite

            Bitterness gets you nowhere Suba…rebuttal is well above – 3 hrs ago.

          • Suba gunawardana

            I already rebutted that nonsense you posted.

            BTW why do you like the word “bitterness” so much? That seems to be your ONLY response to anything anyone says. By rebuttal I mean a LOGICAL answer to my points, not emotional drivel.

          • fidobite

            You’ve chosen to interpret it in the way you needed to to defend your conflicted mind. Your answer to evil is to try and defend it by attacking everything else as evil or claiming a rebuttal is “emotional drivel”. That’s a bitter response from a bitter guy and there is no logic outside of your own narrow framework that you are prepared to accept. Fair enough, I think I understand…seen it many times.

          • Suba gunawardana

            You calling something “evil” doesn’t make it so. If you call something evil you have to provide reasons why. So far I see absolutely no logical reasoning behind your objection to abortion.

            Your own god whom you “worship & pray to” commits abortion. So what’s YOUR objection to it? I’m listening.

          • Mindy McIndy

            Just like calling a zef a “baby” doesn’t make it so.

          • goatini

            One who posts from an exceedingly narrow framework doesn’t have a whole lot of room with which to judge this in others.

          • Nor

            Interesting how you are assigning emotions to other people.

            See also: shame, guilt, fear.

            Anything else you are trying to tell women they must feel or be other than self-hating shame-filled terrorized involuntary incubators to unwanted children?

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            You have rebutted no one. All you have done is shame, blame and lie. Disgusting.

          • Nor

            Well, that and it’s clearly meant as an insult. Passive aggression was Jesus’s favorite tool apparently.

          • Jennifer Starr

            Oooh. A double margarita?

          • Ella Warnock

            Damn, I wish!

          • Ivy Mike

            You pray all you want. I’ll THINK for you. You apparently need someone to.

          • fidobite

            Bitterness, man, bitterness. Conflicted…I understand. Seen these reactions frequently from those trying to defend the indefensible.

          • Suba gunawardana

            I see no response from you so far. There’s nothing “unjustifiable” about abortion, considering even your own god loves it so.

          • fidobite

            Baby murder…there’s just nothing “unjustifiable” about it. Okay, got it. Perfectly logical.

          • Suba gunawardana

            No rebuttal again I see. YOUR GOD commits & approves of abortion. If it’s ok for him, why is it wrong for anybody else?

            What authority does a god-worshipper such as you have to go against your god?

          • Arekushieru

            Abortion doesn’t involve babies and is not murder. Since abortion is legal and murder is not, the two are mutually exclusive.

          • Nor

            You justified it yourself, when the life of the mother is in danger.

            Do you also allow exceptions for victims of rape and incest? Oh, how kind you must be. Pat yourself on the back.

          • Arekushieru

            Self projection much? Claiming someone is bitter does not make them so, but it usually is used as a cover for someone ELSE’ bitterness.

          • fiona64


            defend the indefensible.

            You’re the one defending the indefensible. You defend enslavement of women.

          • P. McCoy

            You’re projecting-you can’t effectively argue your opinions so projecting and name calling is all you can do. Your offers to pray sound condescending.

          • Nor

            Are you also anti-birth control? Cause you should be, apparently.

          • Nor

            People don’t like talking to you because you are incapable of independent thought, repetitive, and tone-deaf. You also shoe-horn yourself into conversations where you aren’t wanted. You see these reactions frequently because people are frustrated at your irrelevance, and how it reflects a mindless political view that may limit their own lives, or the lives of women who will suffer because of your lack of concern with their basic freedoms.

            Plus, religion is really really really really boring. Might want to pick a new shtick.

          • Ivy Mike

            Bitterness. You keep using that word. I don’t think you know what it means.

          • Nor

            Does the word “patronizing” mean anything to you sir? Because even the idea that your opinion matters on this subject is pretty patronizing.

          • catseye

            You’re projecting your OWN bitterness onto us. And pushing FORCED BIRTH is completely indefensible.

          • Nor

            Oh no, I’ll be bitter when I’m pregnant against my will and in jail because of people who vote like you do. Saving the bitterness for then.

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            God is not your bully boy.

          • fidobite

            Correct…but He will be the judge of all of us. Again, I’m irrelevant…only the Lord God matters.

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            God loves absolutely. There is nothing to be saved from. Everybody goes to heaven.

          • fidobite

            Well, not scriptural, but if that’s what you choose to believe then so be it. But are you inferring, as a corollary to your statement, that baby murder fits right into that warm and fuzzy philosophy??

            I suspect Jesus is frowning.

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            I can support my assertion with scripture. You are not impressive at Biblical exegesis thus far. Lying is a sin and you have been doing a great deal of that. The Bible does not support being anti abortion. The passages about the Sotah being a case in point. Biblical morality practiced today will get you arrested.

          • goatini

            But since safe, legal pregnancy termination is, again, LEGAL, and since all babies, ever, have already been born, I agree with you that you ARE “irrelevant”.

          • Nor

            I suspect Jesus really dislikes everything you are saying, and everything you represent.

          • Nor
          • Suba gunawardana

            How can god judge/punish others for the exact same things he does? Abortion, murder, torture etc. All these things should be fair game to anyone because, after all, GOD did it first.

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            Correct. We are made in God’s image it is said. Jehovah is a demon.

          • Nor

            For quite a number of people on the planet (the majority, by a lot), the “Lord God” means absolutely nothing at all.

          • Nor

            If you are irrelevant, why keep talking?

          • Ella Warnock

            Watch out, Mike, you’re about to get the Holy Spurt all over you. Maybe carry an umbrella until the danger has passed.

          • fidobite

            Oh Ella, grab your ‘brella – I’m gonna make a pitch to the Lord on your behalf too!

          • Ella Warnock

            How you waste your time is entirely up to you. I’ll have a taco and margarita in your honor – cheers!

          • fiona64

            Why do jerks like you always think that Jesus and/or God requires you for a mouthpiece?

            Jesus wouldn’t recognize his teachings in your mouth.

          • fidobite

            No need for your “f” words here Ivy Mike…let’s both grow up, okay? You appear to be getting somewhat frantic in your defense.

            Let’s look for a moment at this as purely a secular issue. No scientist will deny that, in fact, immediately after conception a fetus carries a full set of human DNA, which perhaps even you would admit qualifies it as a human being.

            If fetuses are human, abortion becomes a human rights violation and a civil rights violation. Would you contend that because a young fetus can’t survive on it’s own it then follows that it can killed without conscience?

            If not being able to survive on it’s own is the yardstick, then are you suggesting by extension that all the thousands of people in hospitals around the world who can’t survive without tubes and oxygen can be left to die without conscience?

            Perhaps without believing in God you’re comfortable being without a moral compass? I’m not making fun of your atheistic viewpoint I’m just trying to understand your position.

          • Ivy Mike

            Number one: i’ll use whatever words I like, thank you. If you want to play with the big kids, don’t get the vapors over a word. In most adult circles, son, “fuck” is used commonly, especially in the circles I roll in (mostly military). You gain zero respect from me by being a Church Lady.

            Second, DNA does not equal “person”. My snot carries human DNA. So does my sperm. Neither are human beings or persons. A human embryo carries human DNA, but it is not a person.

            What it is is a potential, not-present person. What you and your ilk would do is grant it superior rights to an actual, present, sentient person…the woman it resides in. Sorry, no sale. Despite your fetishizing, an embryo is not simply a small human being. It’s not magical. And it’s not a person until it’s born.

            I do love the way you invoke science, though, considering that religious fanatics like yourself deny science at every opportunity. Like that which shows that all humans were not “created” by some cosmic superhero, but instead evolved from other life forms by natural means.

          • fidobite

            My faults I would not deny. I am far from perfect and for that I apologize.

            Your reasoning defies argument even for an atheist. Not a person till it’s born? An embryo is most certainly a “small human being”…unless you desperately need not to believe it to support something as heinous as baby murder, hence my questioning your moral compass. What about the day before a child is born, when it could easily be taken by c-section? Really?!

            Btw, yes, your sperm contains DNA but only 23 chromosomes half of the human cell. Snot generally contains no internal organs so, yeah, no “person” there. So much for denying “science”. I’m, uh, married to a reproductive scientist that works at a fertility clinic. Yeah, hate that science….after all, only half of my family income relies on it.

            No need for the “kid” thing…I’m a 58 yr old male. I’ll stick with my “cosmic hero” and I will continue to pray for you and all the others that attempt to defend aborting babies. I do hope you eventually overcome your bitterness and take time to actually read the Bible with an open mind to understand the incidents you’ve pulled out of context.

            Good luck to you, Mike. Oh, and feel free to “f” it up all you need to, it’s a free country. And if you’ve served in the military I’d like to extend my heartfelt thanks for your service.

            – The Church Lady

          • conversate

            People have brains. Embryos do not.

          • fiona64

            You know, I am constantly amazed at how easy it is to be an anti-choice male. It’s very convenient for you to wave your big, misogynistic paw and pronounce that some woman you’ve never even met, whose circumstances you have no way of knowing, should be forced to gestate a pregnancy — wanted or unwanted. That she should have to risk life and limb to do so … and yes, it is risky. Far more risky than abortion, as a matter of fact. Pregnancy is NOT a state of wellness.

            But that doesn’t matter to you at all, since it’s not YOUR life or health being impacted by gestation. That’s pretty fucking convenient for YOU, from where I sit.

          • lady_black

            No. An embryo is a stage all viviparous vertebrate animals go through. It doesn’t mean a small human being.

          • goatini

            Well, it’s of some comfort to me to know that your spouse is loathed by a fair percentage of the forced-birth movement. You know, seeing as IVF is a mortal sin.

          • Suba gunawardana

            You know, the military service you just offered thanks for involves killing people. That’s fine with you, but killing a zef is not. What’s the logic in that?

          • Ge0ffrey

            The legitimate defense of persons and societies is not an exception to the prohibition against the murder of the innocent that constitutes intentional killing. The act of self-defense can have a double effect: the preservation of one’s own life; and the killing of the aggressor…. The one is intended, the other is not.

            Love toward oneself remains a fundamental principle of morality. Therefore it is legitimate to insist on respect for one’s own right to life. Someone who defends his life is not guilty of murder even if he is forced to deal his aggressor a lethal blow: If a man in self-defense uses more than necessary violence, it will be unlawful: whereas if he repels force with moderation, his defense will be lawful…. Nor is it necessary for salvation that a man omit the act of moderate self-defense to avoid killing the other man, since one is bound to take more care of one’s own life than of another’s.

            Legitimate defense can be not only a right but a grave duty for someone responsible for another’s life. Preserving the common good requires rendering the unjust aggressor unable to inflict harm. To this end, those holding legitimate authority have the right to repel by armed force aggressors against the civil community entrusted to their charge.

          • Suba gunawardana

            1. All killings in war are not self-defense. Millions of INNOCENT civilians are killed in war. If you support war, you support killing of the innocent. If you support killing of SOME innocent for our necessity, you have no logical reasoning to oppose the killing
            of other innocent individuals for the same reason. (The point I’ve made repeatedly and you kept avoiding)

            2. No individual has the right to invade/occupy/use the body of another person without their consent. When a zef does that, the person whose body is invaded has every right to kill the zef (“aggressor”in your words) to protect her body.

            “Love toward oneself remains a fundamental principle of morality.”

            Exactly. So you have NO RIGHT to prevent a woman from protecting her body.

            Do I have the right to use your body to sustain my life against your will? No. If I tried to do that, you have the right to kill me to protect your body. A pregnant woman has the EXACT same right to protect her body against the invading zef.

          • Ge0ffrey

            I do not support the killing of the innocent.

          • Suba gunawardana

            Yes you do. You just justified it by claiming “God said it’s fine”.

            As I pointed out then, god never opposed abortion either. Not only that, your god LOVES abortion, & performs millions of abortions himself. So just WHY do you keep disobeying your god?

          • Shan

            “Someone who defends his life is not guilty of murder even if he is forced to deal his aggressor a lethal blow”

            Does that count for pregnant women who know that they are 14 times more likely to die from giving birth than if they have an abortion?

          • Nor

            THOU SHALT NOT KILL. What’s ambiguous about that? I always wondered where Christians got off claiming that God wanted them to shoot poor people in other countries.

          • Arekushieru

            Actually, it’s thou shalt not murder. But, unfortunately, all the biblical fanatics tend to forget that God disobeyed His OWN law many times. Not exactly the best role model for Father of the year, now, is He?

          • Nor

            How fair is it for us to send our poor people to kill other poor people? Killing civilians with bombs from the sky? How not murderey does that feel to you?

          • Arekushieru

            I’m not sure if you misunderstood my point or not, since I can’t seem to find the gap that would explain such a misunderstanding, but neither can I then understand the reason for the way you worded your question? I was actually pointing out that God disobeyed His own laws, therefore, what they actually consider murder may not actually BE murder. And that killing does not even equate to murder even under God’s law? So, of course, what you asked would have the obvious response that it feels very ‘murderey’ to me…?

          • Nor

            Have you even seen our wars lately? Pretty clear that shit ain’t self defense.

          • fiona64

            More plagiarism from the Catechism, I see.

          • goatini

            First paragraph: Verbatim from the Catechism of the Catholic Church, Part 3, Section 2, Chapter 2, Article 5, Paragraph 2263.

            Second paragraph: Verbatim from the Catechism of the Catholic Church, Part 3, Section 2, Chapter 2, Article 5, Paragraph 2264.

            Third paragraph: Verbatim from the Catechism of the Catholic Church, Part 3, Section 2, Chapter 2, Article 5, Paragraph 2265.

          • Arekushieru

            Number one, a fetus is not innocent. Number two, its death is not intentional. As you people like to say, if you want to blame the death of a fetus on something, blame biology. You see, your ilk (as it is mainly composed of fundamentalist Catholics) likes to blame the ones not responsible for the creations of the problems. In God’s case, the one who created evil was God. However, humans are blamed for evil. In the pregnant woman’s case, the functions of her uterus, ovaries and ova are involuntary. fusion of egg and sperm, involuntary, process of conception (from the start of fertilization to implantation), involuntary, the requirement that makes the ‘product of conception’ dependent on a uterus to sustain its life, also involuntary. Yet, rather than blaming the creator (the way one’s genetic makeup is designed) you decide to make a pregnant woman the one case where ANY human must take responsibility for something that is completely out of their hands, not even by their design. For that very reason, it is MORE appropriate for a Pro-Choicer to wonder why an Anti-Choicer doesn’t just try to find a solution to the way our genetic makeup is designed rather than angsting over what women do with their bodies, than the ‘appropriateness’ of a Pro-‘Lifer’ telling a Pro-Choicer that a pregnant woman should just blame biology for the reason they decide to impose a nine-month, deadly, sapping and invasive sentence on them. Three, murder does not equal intentional killing. By YOUR logic (yet one that the majority of Pro-‘Lifers’ support), the death penalty would be murder, then.

            What about a woman’s right to life, then? It must be non-existent if you would grant a fetus a right to life that no one else has, based on the assumption that its inalienable under any and all circumstances. Otherwise, just like with all your boohooing over how the current rights granted to women must mean that the rights of the fetus are only granted arbitrarily because of its lack of status as a person, you, TOO, by your OWN logic would be granting an arbitrary right to life to a fetus. Yet, pregnancy is the third leading cause of death for women worldwide. It is ALWAYS life-threatening, because there is NOT a zero percent chance that a woman will NOT die during pregnancy, childbirth or delivery, therefore, by denying a woman an abortion, again, by your own logic, you are denying a woman an inalienable right to life by guaranteeing that a fetus has a right to exist at all costs EVEN though it DOES put the woman’s health AND life in danger. Hypocrites.

            Nope, it won’t be unlawful. A victim who is being raped may LAWFULLY use any method at their disposal, up to and INCLUDING the use of deadly force (even though it would be considered unnecessary force as cause and effect have two very different outcomes, basically, the former does not endanger one’s life, yet there is a very real possibility of same for the latter). Oops?

          • Nor

            Oh no, you can definitely clone a person out of any living cell in your body. Just because it’s illegal doesn’t mean it can’t be done. Snot’s a decent source. Shit’s better.

            Nice how your husband’s job, in addition to scoping out other ladies bits all day, only increases the number of kids on a planet that can’t feed the ones it’s got. Something something you are infertile by God’s will? God put that baby there, wait, no, it was my husband, playing God? Nice how God’s will only seems to apply to poor single moms and not rich insured upper middle class women trying to get knocked up with their first kid at 42. I mean, that pays the bills.

            Oh, and it gets better. You’re a 58 year old male? Antique and have never owned a uterus. Wow, waiting with baited breath for you to explain in what remote universe anyone ever thought your opinion on the subject had any weight.

            God definitely could use some better PR, I tell you. For fuck’s sake what a pathetic irrelevant representative of his (white, male?) “will”.

            (And does the husband thing mean you’re gay? Because the last thing any gay guy really need to concern himself with is abortion rights, I mean, come on. Try a little harder to make yourself even more irrelevant).

          • catseye

            Sounds like it got confused about which sock it was wearing on this thread. <|;-P

          • Nor

            We’ve come up with the technology to implant a uterus in every adult male. You gotta get one. It’s mandatory. For the next forty years, in addition to bleeding out your genitals on a regular basis, you’re going to be fertile and subject to pregnancy risk no matter what you do re: birth control short of surgical sterilization, which doctors won’t perform on you until you’ve been fertile for 20 years at least (or until you’ve had many children). Your choice is celibacy or taking on the risk of pregnancy. You also make 80 cents on the dollar at best and are far likelier to be on the bad side of the poverty line, and birth control costs are significant. You’ve got a 1/4 chance of being raped regardless. You have a greater than 50% chance of becoming pregnant unintentionally. You know the majority of the country does not share your beliefs regarding abortion, and definitely not your religious beliefs. In addition, there is a separation of Church and State written into the founding documents of the country.

            Flip a coin. If it’s heads, you got unintentionally pregnant. If it’s tails, you lucked out.

            How do you vote? Do you choose to restrict the rights of other adult human beings – all of them, men and women?

          • Nor

            Are you deliberately pretending to be stupid? No one is talking about abortion the day before birth. Not only is that illegal, but you’d never ever find a legal abortion practitioner to do it (your plan to boost the illegal abortion industry by restricting or eliminating legal abortion though is quite flawless. You’ll see a lot more extremely late term illegal abortions when abortion is restricted/illegal). Once a fetus is viable, say at 22 weeks which is what I believe is what is currently used by those seeking to restrict abortion, it will be cut out of the woman forced to bear it against her will as she is chained to a bed in four point restraints to keep her from escaping. That’s fair, right? That’s what you want to happen?

          • fiona64

            You know, you’ve informed us that you’re a 58-year-old Vietnam Vet, right?

            I can prove that’s a lie. Why? You would have been 17 when the conflict *ended.* You were sitting there in high school while the conflict was happening. Don’t try to wiggle your way out of it.

            No love,
            Someone whose dad was a POW while you were taking social studies and fapping to stolen copies of your older brother’s “Playboy” magazines

          • L-dan

            *applause* I just have nothing to add.

          • expect_resistance

            I don’t believe in your sky daddy.

          • fidobite

            Perfectly fine…I’m irrelevant. It’s what is in your heart that matters. When you’re lying in bed at night silently contemplating this issue, in the deep recesses of your mind you’ll know a fetus is a child.

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            There is no child until I make it out of my blood, flesh and pain. I will decide when and if to gestate any fertilized ovum to term. You will not decide for me.

          • fiona64

            in the deep recesses of your mind you’ll know a fetus is a child.

            Why are the anti-choice so annoyed by medical terminology?

            Children are *born.* The stages of development for ALL viviparous vertebrates are as follows (since apparently you were smoking behind the schoolhouse instead of attending biology class):

            In utero:
            zygote
            embryo
            fetus

            Ex utero:
            infant
            child
            adolescent/juvenile
            adult

          • goatini

            Why would an intelligent person become deliberately stupid and ignorant of facts and logic while in “silent contemplation”?

            It’s in those times of silent contemplation that I realize truisms such as “all fetus fetishists consider living, breathing female US citizens to be nothing more than livestock to be exploited”.

          • P. McCoy

            When you lie down, perhaps you will ontemplate on the facts that harassment of abortion providers and patients, stalking their
            families, copying down license plates, bombing an trashing clinics are acts of terror, thus supporting such acts makes you a DOMESTIC TERRORIST! I intend to fight on until your kind does hard decades of time in Federal Prison, in solitary confinement.

          • Nor

            No, but I’ll wonder if you are.

          • Ivy Mike

            “Perhaps without believing in God you’re comfortable being without a moral compass? I’m not making fun of your atheistic viewpoint I’m just trying to understand your position.”

            Wow, you are certainly presumptuous, in addition to all your other faults. Why do you think i lack a “moral compass” because I lack belief in your particular fairy tale?

            Read your precious bible again, kid. Particularly the Old Testament, where your god kills the entire world population because his fee-fees are hurt, and orders genocide on peoples he doesn’t like (including women and children). Where he orders Abraham to kill his own son. Where he orders slaves be taken, women stoned to death, and children killed for being disobedient.

            I contend that, if this creature existed, the only “moral” action would be to oppose it with all possible means. It would be a monster.

            Morals and ethics do not come from religion. Religion, in fact, perverts and destroys them. The very worst atrocities and crimes comitted by humans against other humans (and the rest of the biosphere) were perpetrated in the name of religion.

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            Scientists are still debating when a fetus becomes a human being. YOU ARE A LIAR. A fetus does not meet the definition of ‘human being.’
            http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/4078859

            However, the humanity of the fetus is irrelevant. No ‘person’ or ‘human being’ is entitled to even one drop of my blood though they may die. That is ancient right and ancient law. You want to create special rights for a fetus AT MY EXPENSE. No way, Jose.

          • fidobite

            Plum, you’re struggling with this, I can tell. You’re seriously asking government scientists if a fetus is a human?? You’re having quite an internal battle with this and your desperate to defend what inside you know to be a horrible lie. I understand and suspect that perhaps you have had a child aborted?

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            So many of your fetus freaks can read minds. Tell me, when did I lose my virginity? And who was my first lover? And when was my first child born?
            You should get a booth at the county fair.

          • fidobite

            Okay, I’ll accept “fetus freak” if you’ll accept “baby slayer”. Fair? And you seem reluctant to acknowledge one way or the other on whether you’ve had an abortion. Fair enough…not my business…just conjecture on my part. No booth at the county fair for me.

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            Nope. Baby is such a sweet colloquial word. My dog’s name was Baby. I called my 6ft 5inch SO my ‘baby.’ The word ‘baby’ can be used to describe anything at all. The word creates happy fuzzy feelings.

            What is in the womb is a ZEF = zygote embryo fetus. Grownups use grownup words to talk about medical/social issues that are important.

            Since you seem to desperately want to know something about my sexual/family life, I will tell you this. My Mother offered me an abortion (illegal) in 1961 when I became inconveniently pregnant while not married. I ‘chose life.’ That decision ranks as one of the stupidest decisions I made in my lifetime. The child did well. I am still suffering the after effects of that decision.

            If there are any Teens frequenting this board for information about sexuality and abortion, a good place to go and ask your questions about sex, STDs, and contraception is TeenWire. It is confidential. And you will get accurate nonjudgemental information.
            http://www.plannedparenthood.org/teens

          • Suba gunawardana

            Unlike you who freak over other people’s fetuses, WE do not go around slaying babies (or even fetuses). See the difference?

          • Arekushieru

            Btw, I’d bet that most Pro-Lifers have had more abortions than I have. Because I have had exactly ZERO.

          • catseye

            PLEASE _STOP_ calling these terrorists “pro-life”!!! They are PRO-FORCED-BIRTH.

          • conversate

            I use it as a shorthand. They call themselves ‘pro-life’ and when I want to make a point about them NOT being ‘pro-life’ I like to use the moniker. Chill.

          • Arekushieru

            Catseye, if you’ve read most of my comments you know that I either put quote marks around the term life in Pro-‘Life’ or I call them anti-choicers. I do not appreciate being given a warning simply because I forgot to do so ONCE. Just a heads up, though, so I would very much appreciate if you or anyone else wouldn’t make assumptions based on one comment, again.

          • conversate

            No shit. We modify the language based upon the point we are making.

          • fiona64

            If you have evidence that Plum is a “baby slayer,” I suggest you contact law enforcement. Infanticide is a crime.

          • goatini

            No, not “fair”. Fetus freaks are individuals that consider a fetus to be more important than, and superior to, the pregnant woman and citizens. Baby slayers commit homicide upon born infants and citizens.

          • P. McCoy

            Hey don’t forget about me ! 58, a virgin still, no abortions here miltantly pro choice, loves men.but respects LGBT people count ME in!

          • Arekushieru

            I, too, hold the V-Card, and I’m 38, P.!

          • almond_bubble_tea

            It’s amazing how some antichoice folks over at LAN thinks I have had had a child aborted due to my sarcastic posts over there. SMH.

          • goatini

            Same here. Not all defenders of civil rights and modern science have obtained pregnancy terminations. We just know what is moral and just.

          • Nor

            Modern science doesn’t require defense, and does not concern itself with morality or justice particularly much (where it regards the treatment of lab animals, yes. The treatment of humans, no).

            Women’s civil rights require that they have sovereign control of their own bodies. The same way even a corpse does.

          • catseye

            Those of us who have had abortions are grateful for the support of folks like you and Arekushieru.

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            Laughing. I know.
            One wonders how they account for all the prochoice men out there. Probably argue ‘you just want to abuse women.’
            The only arguments they have are shaming and lies. Facts and testimony be damned.

          • Arekushieru

            If a fetus WERE a human being that would be IRRELEVANT to abortion. However, if a fetus WERE a human being they could be charged with assault in an unwanted pregnancy. It IS scientists who can BEST determine if something is a human being or not.

          • lady_black

            A human fetus is definitely human. Human doesn’t necessarily equate to “person.”

          • goatini

            No wonder the radical theocrats are so anti-science – since to them, having a factual, logical, contextual understanding of scientific facts = “desperate internal battle with horrible lies”.

          • P. McCoy

            Maybe some females in your family or friends had an abortion too but called it a d and c. You wouldn’t bat an eyelash- yes it’s ‘abortion for me but not for THEE!’

          • Nor

            Pretty much all scientists are government scientists. There are a few in private industry – you know, the guys who brought us Viagra and that testosterone cream that keeps your dick from falling off in your old age or whatever. I’m sure you’re familiar. Such good works for the sake of humanity! They stopped making that malaria med though – turns out people in Africa couldn’t pony up the 0.02 cents it cost to make and deliver the pills.

            Well, I asked the scientists, and I asked the doctors, and they all, universally and without question, said the same thing – it’s not their job to determine that shit, but if it were, no, a fetus is not a child.

            Now, you can find an incompetent and unprofessional doctor who will say so, but that person is also obviously religious and unethical, and should be reported to their professional board for review.

            Hey fido, I’m willing to bet you went back and asked your grandma, and your great grandma, and all the old ladies, what it was like when abortion was still illegal, they’d curse you out ’til the end of their days if you so much as implied we should go back to that. Maybe they’d even think you might be sane enough to hear the truth, the actual stories of actual women who lived in those times. So far I guess they never trusted you. I hope they trusted your mom, and your sisters, and if they lived long enough to see them, your kids. Better your tender ignorance be preserved than for you to put the lives of the women you supposedly love at risk with your judgement and dangerous restrictions of their access to safe healthcare. From your comments here, they clearly chose wisely to keep you in the dark. I’m also certain no woman in your life has trusted you enough to tell you the truth. A pity I suppose. But safer for them by far.

          • fiona64

            No scientist will deny that, in fact, immediately after conception a
            fetus carries a full set of human DNA, which perhaps even you would
            admit qualifies it as a human being.

            No scientist will deny that a malignant tumor or a hydatidform mole carries a full set of human DNA, either. Does that make them human beings?

            Here’s the question I want to ask you, Fido, and it’s absolutely sincere: You talk a lot about the theoretical personhood of the embryo, conflating it with a born, sapient, sentient infant.

            Why is it that you erase the born, sapient, sentient WOMAN from your discussion? Is she merely the meat around the uterus to you?

          • Arekushieru

            And also, what about the full set of human DNA that an egg or sperm comes with? So, what was that Fido was saying about sperm and egg not being persons?

          • Nor

            Obviously yes. Women don’t count for much in the Bible or the conservative Christian churches either. It’s what makes them so darn appealing to old white men.

          • lady_black

            Saying human DNA denotes a human being is like saying a blueprint denotes a building.

          • goatini

            Fetuses are not persons, are not citizens, and have no rights.

          • P. McCoy

            Cancer has human dna and attacks the body too. Do you realize as you vote Republican, how many Middle Eastern, Latin American and inner city rural American babies and children YOU have murdered? Also, sadly because Schiavo did not have a clear and explicit advance directive available, she was one of the few whose feeding tube was removed. However, you forced birthers play dirty- advanced directives or not, verbal pleading by the woman or her family or representatives or not, your kind will not hesitate to violate a woman’s dead body, pained with sepsis body, a pleading body or tortured racked mind of a rape victim to get that “bayyyybee” out of her body-rights of the woman mean as nothing to you fetal idolators!

          • Nor

            My snot carries a full set of human DNA, as does most of the dust in my house. I’d be happy to send you a container of boogers if you’d promise to raise it to adulthood in a good Christian household.

            Yes, we let people die all the time for no reason – because it turns out for some reason it is illegal to harvest organs from the unwilling – even if those unwilling are already dead. Plenty of people die needlessly from want of a working kidney – if you’ve still got yours, you’re to blame for someone’s death right there. Hypocrite. You can’t even take blood from someone who doesn’t want to give it.

            You know what scares me about you? You seem to think you wouldn’t have any morals if you didn’t believe in God. Which I think means you are a barely controlled psychopath? You’d just go around murdering and raping and torturing if your belief in God didn’t hold you back?

          • Nor

            “If not being able to survive on it’s own is the yardstick, then are you suggesting by extension that all the thousands of people in hospitals around the world who can’t survive without tubes and oxygen can be left to die without conscience?”

            Interesting ethics there. By rights, we should allow them all to die, and take that money and use it to feed starving kids in Africa. Better use of funds. Save a lot more lives. But we’ve decided people here matter more. Jesus would be pissed.

          • Shan

            And also interesting ethics comparing pregnant women to life support machinery.

          • Nor

            Well at least we’re good for something in the conservative Christian worldview. I also believe we’re supposed to be living blow up dolls as well, ideally equally as silent.

            Maybe they’re anti-choice because their numbers are shrinking rapidly as women flee in droves and they need someone to be forced to stick around and breed up the numbers. Easier to trap young women into the faith if they are forced to have children they don’t want. Amish are big on that too.

          • Suba gunawardana

            Actually the starving kids in Africa (or anywhere) would not be a problem if the women there had enough access to contraception and abortion.

          • SuperLogic

            Or just food and water. :oP

          • fiona64

            Did you just seriously compare a woman to a mechanical *object*?

            That has got to be one of the two most misogynistic things I’ve ever seen on the entire internet. Seriously.

          • Jennifer Starr

            Which one?

          • fidobite

            That would be the One and Only…the one you have apparently rejected. I’ll pray for you too, Jennifer

          • Jennifer Starr

            The one and only who? There’s more than one.

          • lady_black

            Don’t pray for me. I don’t want your god to get the impression I’d have anything to do with you.

          • fidobite

            Too late, lady black…and you don’t have to even admit you’ve ever heard of me!

          • expect_resistance

            Heard of who? What the hell are you rambling on about?

          • expect_resistance

            You do realize there are many religions and you don’t get to claim superiority over all.

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            Jehovah is a proabort. Hosea 13:16.

          • Arekushieru

            Praying for others publicly is not acceptable in Jesus eyes. And how do YOU know that YOUR God is the One and Only, considering that’s what EVERY religion and their holy books say about themselves. What’s the one point that differs YOUR God from the rest? Especially when there is more support for my and Plum Dumpling’s God, than yours? Hmm?

          • fiona64

            No one wants or needs your prayers. We all know that “i’ll pray for you,” coming from someone like you, is the same as “go fuck yourself.”

            I’m not nearly as smarmy as you are, so I’ll just say it straight out: go fuck yourself.

            No love, someone who actually HAS read the Bible, in the original language, and who thinks that your use of Jesus as a weapon is disgusting.

            PS: You might want to re-read Matthew 6:6. Jesus says you’re not supposed to make a public spectacle of your prayer.

          • lady_black

            From where I stand, he isn’t the one who needs help. You are.

          • expect_resistance

            May Goddess help you to understand.

          • Nor

            If you’re Catholic – you do know the walls of the Vatican are covered in gold, right? There used to be gemstones studded in there too but people kept stealing them so now it’s just solid gold. In case you haven’t been, thought you might like to know. Looks very nice in a selfie, I’ll give it that. Nice mission statement they’ve got though, feed the hungry and heal the sick and all. Pity they’re so short on funds that children starve while priests walk through their palaces that are literally made out of money. You know, the parts that aren’t covered in priceless works of art.

      • Suba gunawardana

        My repeated question no fetus freak has ever answered: If your god loves fetuses, why doesn’t he stop abortion? Why does god promote abortion by placing fetuses in the uteri of women who don’t want children? More importantly, why does god perform millions of abortions himself in the form of miscarriage?

        Did you ever stop to think that god LOVES abortion, and you are disobeying him?

        • fidobite

          God gave man a free will, Suba. Why doesn’t He stop murder? Why doesn’t He stop war? Why doesn’t He deny miscarriage and all of the other unfortunate circumstances humans find themselves facing? Why doesn’t He stop people from thinking as you do? Your lack of belief in Him is the opening for evil to fill the void where morality is lacking.
          If you choose to twist reality by claiming God promotes abortion by placing fetuses in the uteri of women who don’t want children I would ask you why would a woman who doesn’t want children chooses to have intercourse without some form of birth control? If a person chooses to jump off a cliff onto the rocks below is it God’s fault that they die of injuries? You’re attempting to defend abortion by this line of reasoning?
          Suba, like the rest of the people that share your views on this blog I will vigorously pray for all of your souls. The God of Abraham and Isaac is a compassionate God – ask for His forgiveness and open your heart to His will. He will fill your soul and perhaps satisfy your longing for truth.

          • Ivy Mike

            Lots of nice, easy excuses there for an allegedly “all-powerful” god who does nothing. l

          • fidobite

            I’m very sorry for your bitterness – I wish I could say just the right thing to open your heart. I’m sorry if I’ve been annoying to you but I do appreciate your sticking to our back and forth on this subject Ivy Mike. I do enjoy looking at issues from all sides and trying to understand how people can sometimes come to such dramatically different conclusions.

            I would implore you to not judge Christianity by all of us imperfect Christians. We AREN’T any better than anyone else but we recognize, thankfully, there is a God that is perfect, all powerful and all loving. I pray that you will open your heart, man.

          • expect_resistance

            What bitterness? I see no bitterness? Sounds like projection on your part.

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            I am very sorry for your ignorance. Stop pretending all religious folks and Christians oppose abortion. That is a stone lie. Clergy were responsible in part for the legalization of abortion.
            http://womenshistory.about.com/od/abortionus/p/clergy_abortion.htm

            The Jews of the Biblical era knew about and practiced abortion as a tool of civil law and genocidal war. Hosea 13:16 and Numbers 5:11-31.

            Stop using the Bible and God as an excuse for your ignorance and hatred of women. Abortion and contraception are human rights.

          • fidobite

            See below.

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            See your ass. Ick.

          • Paul Wagner

            Saint Hildegard von Bingen in the 11th Century–canonized for being a healer–peddled contraception and abortion drugs. And she’s now a saint.

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            How interesting. I know her music. Beautiful. Got a quick source at hand?

          • Paul Wagner
          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            Thank you.

          • Suba gunawardana

            God is perfect? Then why does he allow the innocent to suffer? Why does god kill EVERY SINGLE living being without exception?

            And you pray to him for life? Hilarious!

          • fidobite

            God allows us an earthly life which will pass away for all. Those who accept him into their hearts by accepting Jesus Christ as their savior will live eternally with Him. It’s that simple. There is no “death” for believers, only leaving this mortal existence for an eternity with Him. This earthly life is but a prelude to a life eternal. I would be disappointed to think this short little stint on earth was all there was for me, my family and all the rest of the worlds people who accept Him.

            I suggest you take time to read the Bible. Give it a chance to speak to your heart. Eternal life with God reaches beyond this earthly existence to which you are bound in the here and now. Hilarious?
            Well, exhilarating would, I suspect, be the better description. Think, if you can, much more expansively than you ever have before. Think beyond the difficulties and doubts you have in this petty life. And yes, pray to Him…there are answers for those that seek Him.

          • Suba gunawardana

            You want to spend eternity with the sadistic prick who created this earth with all its suffering? (Cancer, ebola, HIV, parkinsons, MS, just to mention a very FEW of your god’s torture devices). What kind of masochist are you?

            “God allows us an earthly life which will pass away for all.”

            Then why are you so worried about the “poor little baaybeeees” killed by abortion? Aren’t they just going to go back to god? Unless you are worried god might molest them. Which is certainly a legitimate concern :)

            “I suggest you take time to read the Bible.”

            I am asking you, the expert. If your belief is strong, you should be able to explain it ALL to a heathen like me all on your own :)

          • Max

            Suba ,your disgraceful ! No tolerance for anyone and anything other than your own agenda .your plying your evil with someone whom I can call a kindred spirit and yet you care not for anyone else’s opinion but your own .not only are you rude and abusive ,your a vile human being that’s trying to protect their conscience on your own
            Abortion history .who do you think your kidding? I’ve been watching you from cyber from afar you are disgraceful !

          • Suba gunawardana

            Can you post ANYTHING other than emotional drivel?

            There are plenty of points to address, let’s start with one. Do YOU want to spend eternity with the sadistic prick who created this earth with all its suffering?

            And speaking of tolerance, it’s not ME who goes around trying to punish women for having sex.

          • fiona64

            I suggest you take time to read the Bible.

            How much of it have you read in the original language?

            None?

            Yeah, that’s about what I thought.

          • Nor

            It doesn’t even matter if they have. Even in the original language, there are so many different versions – it was highly regional and varied a lot. The stories are all cribbed out of other religious faiths, just altered slightly or not at all. Did you know that 666 isn’t even the number of the Beast, and that Jesus had a wife? Well, there are other versions of the Bible, from way back, that say that. So there was heavy editing and variation from the beginning. There is no one bible, and there never has been.

          • catseye

            Assuming he actually existed, if Jesus was an ordained rabbi, he would have been _required_ to have a wife.

          • goatini

            He did – Rebbetzin Mary of Magdala.

          • catseye

            He did indeed.

          • Max

            You sound like an idiot .been watching you as well .if this poor girl your abusing on this blog got a whiff of your agenda ,she would be gone .not me though .your a real ass

          • conversate

            Coherent arguments only, Max.

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            He has not even read Isaiah in English. And Isaiah is a fooking giant of a prophet

          • lady_black

            Eternal life. If you believe the Bible, that’s the first lie ever told.

          • Max

            Another blind idiot

          • goatini

            The “bible” is rife with contradictions, and consists only of some man’s approved translations of whatever documents some men allowed to be included.

            http://www.amazon.com/Jesus-Interrupted-Revealing-Hidden-Contradictions-ebook/dp/B001TKD4XA/ref=sr_1_2?s=digital-text&ie=UTF8&qid=1408827277&sr=1-2&keywords=bible+contradictions

          • Max

            You are so ignorant of the bible it’s not funny! You will never understand because humility us the key .look it up sister !

          • Arekushieru

            No, you are ignorant. And you have shown your lack of humility to all and sundry. But that’s self-projection for ya.

          • Nor

            The only thing the Bible says about abortion is to give a recipe for how to cause it.

          • Nor

            My news to you – yes, this short little stint on earth is all you’ll ever have, all anyone ever has. One way in which you could make that news more palatable is by making an effort not to hurt other people during your time here. One way to do that is to allow them control over their own bodies and minds.

            I suggest you take time to travel to other countries, experience other cultures and other religions, and see what exactly it is you are talking about when you want to promote illegal abortion by limiting legal abortion. I want you to go to Uganda, Kenya, those third world countries that are living according to your god’s will and I want you to watch women die.

            Here’s a handy map of those countries that choose to obey your god’s supposed (imaginary, as the Bible says nothing against abortion) law:

            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_law#mediaviewer/File:Abortion_Laws.svg

          • Paul Wagner

            What if Christianity is wrong and Hinduism is right?

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            You need to STFU. Or I need to stop reading you. You have outright lied several times on this board. Nobody buys your moral lectures because you are a liar.

          • catseye

            “If g-d is willing to prevent evil but not able, he is not all-powerful; if he is able but not willing, he is malevolent; if he is able and willing, why is there evil, if he is neither willing nor able, why call him g-d?”

          • LBZ

            Most succinct query to inevitably lead to a direct conclusion. Well said catseye!

          • catseye

            I forget who said it, but it’s a quote. I can’t take credit for its brilliance.

          • Robb Nunya

            Why does someone have to be evil to not be willing to meddle in the affairs of others? Free will is a thing you know. And it’s God, not g_d. Or should I call you c_ts_y_? How ridiculous! You don’t have to support or believe in something to type it out. I don’t invoke Ze_s very often, but I don’t feel the need to call him anything other than Zeus.

            But back to my point: A person’s choice is the most important part of that person. If God compelled only good choices, what would they be worth? Evil exists to give people a choice. I assume that the Garden of Eden story, while allegorical, was also intentional.

          • thedoorisajar

            A benevolent all loving God would not permit innocent children to be tortured. Not by other people, and especially not by nature – disease and natural disasters.

            There is no justification for inflicting tay Sachs or leukemia on a baby

          • Robb Nunya

            A benevolent and loving God would not meddle after creating. That’s a far greater evil than disease, natural disaster, and torture all rolled into one. It would completely negate the concept of free will. I’m certain that you’d be much happier having your parents move in and dictate your every move. After all, they’re older and wiser than you are, and you really should obey them in everything. You’ll be such a complete, well adjusted adult after 50 years of obedience, won’t you? Don’t forget to lock yourself into your house and never ever EVER go anywhere. After all, that’s the best way to avoid bad things happening, right?

            This is the same thing you’re saying. You’re pissed because there’s risk int he world, and bad thing happen. I say they have to happen, or we wouldn’t be complete humans.

            And God isn’t inflicting anything. He’s allowing the world to move along. HUGE difference, that you completely fail to understand.

          • thedoorisajar

            If God was:

            1) all loving

            2) perfect

            3) benevolent

            He would not cause innocent children to suffer. Free will has nothing to do with natural disasters. There is NO justification for giving a baby leukemia or killing that child with an earthquake.

          • Suba gunawardana

            What about the innocent defenseless VICTIMS of humankind (animals, children, the disabled)? Why doesn’t your god ever step up to help them when they are harmed by the so-called free will of able-minded humans?

            That’s tantamount to a parent standing by doing nothing while his older children rape & torture his younger children for years & slowly kill them. If a human parent did that, human law will punish them harshly (and rightly so). Why does your god get to shirk his parental duty?

          • Robb Nunya

            God isn’t interventionist. Why don’t YOU step up and help them out?

            There’s a huge difference between allowing something to happen and making something happen. God doesn’t go out of his way to cause suffering of innocents. But he allows it to happen.

            I guess I have to use smaller words with you: Again, he doesn’t step in to stop evil people because evil is an integral part of the choice between good and evil.

            Think of it this way: The US Government has pretty much assured the larger banks that they’ll be bailed out if anything goes really wrong. This gives those bankers a lot of opportunity to misbehave, and make bad financial decisions, which they do far too often. If there’s no consequence, and no risk, there’s no chance for growth or for people to step up and do the right thing.

            The same goes for life. If God came down every 5 seconds to right every wrong, then free will would be absolutely worthless.

          • Suba gunawardana

            1. God just allows horrors to happen to the totally innocent (when he has the power to stop it)? Then how can he be LOVING?

            2. “God doesn’t go out of his way to cause suffering of innocents.” Really? What about pathogens (parasites, viruses, disease-casuing bacteria); cancer, genetic disease, natural disasters? What about animals tearing each other up in the wild? What about animals (or humans) slowly eaten up from the inside by parasites? Did humans create any of these? NO. These are your god’s torture devices.

            3. You are likening god to the US government. So are you admitting that god, like the government, is neither loving nor all-powerful?

          • Suba gunawardana

            “Evil exists to give people a choice”

            Why does that “choice” come at the expense of perpetual suffering to the innocent and defenseless? Why would a loving & powerful god allow the innocent to suffer for ANY reason?

            “Giving people a choice” is not a good enough reason to cause suffering to a totally different set of individuals who did nothing to deserve that suffering, and a “powerful & loving” god can very well design a different way to give people their choice without harming the innocent.

          • Arekushieru

            That is how Jewish people refer to God, Robb. Are you anti-Semitic, as well as a sadistic misogynist?

            God, going by your OWN logic, does not need to compel only good choices in order for people to do good. And this does not answer Suba’s or Catseye’s questions.

          • Robb Nunya

            I’m neither sadistic, a misogynist, nor Anti-Semitic. You, on the other hand might just be. And yes, it does. Sorry you aren’t smart enough to unsderstand. I guess I’ll dumb it down:

            As soon as God begins to take control over situations, free will goes out the door. Creator does not equate to controller. If you control everything, what’s the point in free will? If you don’t allow bad things to happen, what worth is there in the good?

            You’re like a child who only wants to eat candy and are angry with your parents when they feed you Brussels sprouts.

          • Arekushieru

            It’s too bad that even simple conversations are beyond you, but to then turn and project that self-incapability on me, is beyond the pale. No Pro-Choicer is a misogynist All anti-choicers are, however. YOU are anti-Semitic for complaining about a spelling of God that is used by SEMITIC people. Since I haven’t complained, I’m not. Oops. And, below, I’ll show you exactly how it is that YOU are the sadistic one, not I.

            Seriously, are you really THIS obtuse. I already freaking SAID that God doesn’t have to compel or have control over ANY single situation in order to do good. Next time please go back and READ. The only reason that you think good is not worth anything absent of evil is simply because your so-called ‘morality’ would not survive without some sort of evil checks and balances in place. Therefore, it is something YOU want to impose on everyone ELSE, despite the fact that they don’t NEED those kind of crutches to support their morality. Therefore, the one who is SADISTIC is YOU. So, I was completely right and you were completely wrong.

            I’ll repeat your last statement right back atcha, ignoramus.

          • catseye

            Sorry, but if you believe in forced birth, you absolutely ARE a misogynist.

          • Robb Nunya

            And you’re a misandrist and a baby killer. See? I can sling insults as well.

            If I don’t support your murderous intent, I’m against women? Hah! A little over half of the babies you’re killing ARE women, you brain-dead idiot. See my other post to understand a little more about me, you uncaring misandrist murderer.

          • eroteme

            Embryos are not women. Neither are they babies. And you would deny their right to bodily autonomy once they reach reproductive age.

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            No way. She sounds like an intelligent woman not buying a bunch of religious crapola from an annoying person who addresses others parentally. You suck.

          • Robb Nunya

            You, on the other hand, sound like a troll who hasn’t had its Kibble. You’ve gone from suck to blow, Mega Maid.

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            Oh no. I am into suck and blow on the sweet spot. But never for you. You skeeve me.

          • Robb Nunya

            I wouldn’t let you touch me with Angelina Jolie’s lips, so we’re in accord.

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            Who asked you? Who began the sexual innuendo? You are a sexpig and you skeeve me. I see no point in continued conversation.

          • Robb Nunya

            You began the innuendo. Please try to control yourself. You’re a skank and a sleeze, and you’re about as disgusting as they get. Buh bye. Too bad your parents didn’t choose the abortion option for you. Then you could have cashed the check your mouth is writing.

          • eroteme

            What’s wrong with being a skank? Do you also look down on men who have lots of sex? Or is your vitriolic hatred only reserved for women?

          • Robb Nunya

            No, I look down on hypocrites and imbeciles.

          • eroteme

            Then you must hate looking in the mirror

          • catseye

            Aww, thank you, Plum! (Blush)

          • catseye

            Then why do you support forced birth?

          • Robb Nunya

            Who says I do?

            But on the other hand, why do you support killing a being who’s coded with unique DNA, thus is an individual from the moment the sperm and egg are merged? #devilsadvocate

            Honestly, id you want to know my personal beliefs, I take the Hillary approach, and would much rather get rid of the need for abortion as a contraceptive. I support abortion in the case of medical necessity to prevent massive harm to the mother, and I feel that the best answer I can come up with as to when the baby inside of her is a baby is when higher brain function kicks in. As far as I can see, most people put that at about week 20. I also support taking someone off of life support when higher brain functions stop. They aren’t there any more as far as I’m concerned.

            But I’m troubled because there’s really no hard-fast rule that says that’s exactly where it begins. And any woman who wants to say “It’s my body” is lying, unless she’s cloned that life inside of her. The DNA says otherwise. So while I DO lean toward the right to life, I’m by no means someone who supports “forced birth” as you so in glibly put it. It’s not just Goo, as Sarah Silverman put it, and the minute you merge the two cells into something unique, you introduce a new life into the world. Sorry if that’s inconvenient for you, but the rights of the life inside of you also need to be weighed, at least to some extent. I really disapprove of the partial-birth abortions, and late-term abortions, but grudgingly keep my mouth shut about the pre-20 week stuff.

            You? You don’t sound concerned one bit about the life inside. That makes you a little less of a caring person in my eyes, so go fuck yourself.

          • eroteme

            Whether or not an unborn human is a person or not is irrelevant. There is no right to occupy the body of another without explicit and ongoing consent

          • Robb Nunya

            Bullshit. If it’s a person inside of you, it has the right to live. You never have the right to initiate violence against another human.

            You sound just like a Nazi saying that Jews don’t have a right to occupy the nation of Germany without explicit and ongoing consent. Sorry to Godwin this, but your attitude is monstrous.

          • eroteme

            Really? So if someone is raping you, their right to life overrides your right to protect your body?

          • Paul Wagner

            If that “person inside of you” is killing you, who deserves to live more–you, or the “person inside of you”. You would rather see women die just so they can be forced to have babies that are killing them. And in most such instances, the baby usually winds up being stillborn anyway. So that’s a two-fer for you. You get rid of a defective brood mare as well. Because that’s what women are to you–brood mares and nothing more who have to be held down and forced to give birth against their will. Who’s the “monster” again?

          • P. McCoy

            Anyone can be vulgar; it takes wit to make one’s point without lowering one’s self to profanities. Your mental deficiencies explain clearly to me why you don’t realize that a parasitic fetus is as much of a “human being” as a cancer cell. No one can be forced to become a host body for a parasite.

          • Robb Nunya

            AH yes… my deficiencies.

            said by someone who compares a something that will, under normal circumstances, become a person to something, under normal circumstances, will kill a person.

            You aren’t very smart, are you? You might want to descend into vulgarity because your points are pathetic.

            And I’m glad to see that you think of children as parasites. I’m certain that you’re an Amnesty International supporter though, aren’t you? I’ll let the irony sink in for anyone bored enough to still be reading this thread, since I’m certain it’s lost on the likes of you.

          • eroteme

            Under normal circumstances, 70% of embryos spontaneously abort.

          • Robb Nunya

            Good for them. Do they want a cookie?

          • eroteme

            Please try to reply intelligently, if possible.

          • P. McCoy

            Children do NOT have a parasitic relationship with a host body- sadly, sick children (born ones) may have to depend on machines to survive, but not a single, unique machine. The blastocyst, zygote, embryo, etc; is in a parasitic relationship- basic biology. Oh, Amnesty International? I’m not a card carrying member ( are you attempting to channel Mc Carthy, by chance?). What problems do you have against denouncing rapes in war time, torture, child soldiers, et al? Against protesting about hunting whales, trapping dolphins and hunting baby seals- bingo! Because Amnesty will not aid nor abet you forced birthers in your acts of terrorism, you hate animals too! I suppose one had better have the SPCA keep an eye on you.

            By the way, do you realize that pregnancies KILL women? Even in the good ol’ U S of A? Simply because you forced birthers tend to vote Tea Party, Libertarian and Republican – those groups who habitually slash bills and cut healthcare benefits because to them those that need them should have “kept their legs closed, then wouldn’t have need of those monies”; it’s never about advice to keeping your ” johnson inside your pants” ( hey that prevents pregnancy TOO, but isn’t as fun for you!). So yes, that parasite Can and Does kill. Abortion, is self preservation and self preservation is the First law of survival. Not going to apologize for being unwilling as a woman to throw my life away for a fetus- I refuse to embrace misogynistic ‘Christian fundamentalist nor the masochistic (I gotta carry my cross and wail about it for decades) Catholic church cults. Pro choice means if you want your women folk to be lemmings and swallow that hula boola, feel free to convince them to; however, you will be resisted as the implacable terrorist that you truly are, along with being an irrational Taliban like freak, from imposing your theolgical fascism onto ME! Farewell..

          • Robb Nunya

            A child has a parasitic relationship on it’s parents until about the age of 10, when it can somewhat fend for itself.

            Wow… pregnancies kill women. So do cars. Should we stop driving?

            Wanna know a secret? I’m OK with terminating a pregnancy in the case where a doctor decides that the mother’s life is in jeopardy. In fact, I’m OK with abortions as long as we know it isn’t yet a person.

            What I’m not is an inconsistent boob like you. I mentioned Amnesty, because of their “No executions” stance. You’re morally inconsistent in that you’ll kill an innocent life, while defending a murderer.

            I’m not talking about theology, either you dolt. I’m talking about the basic fact that you can’t tell me when that zygote becomes a person. As a person, the baby has the right to not be murdered.

            So, smart guy, when is that? Give me the exact time where the “goo” inside of the woman is a person. Don’t bring your broken understanding of theology into this. Use your head and tell me the answer.

            Because until you can answer that question with 100% assurance, you’ve failed on a moral level that astounds me.

            Face it, you’ve failed on a moral an intellectual level. If you have a shred of intellectual honesty, you’ll agree with me. I’m NOT a forced birther by any means, so thanks for trying so pathetically to paint me with that brush.

          • eroteme
          • P. McCoy

            Wow you know five and six year olds existing via a placenta? You need to get on television! Fetuses are neither children, nor innocent-a non.sentient entity can’t be innocent, but it can be malevolent. As for executions, well racism and classism (remember O.J.Simpson’s wealth is an anomaly in our penal system) puts people of color, the innocent or mentally challenged to death or falsely deprives them of liberty (hey, the Central Park case?). But all you can do is call your opponent names because rabid ravings don’t win arguments. Farewell!

          • Suba gunawardana

            Cars can kill, and knowing that, some people choose to drive. Just because some do, should others be FORCED to drive?

            Pregnancies can kill, and knowing that, some people choose to carry pregnancies. Does that mean others should be FORCED to do it against their will?

            But that’s not even the point. Bottom line is that: No individual (person or not) has a right to use another person’s body without their consent. No person is obligated to keep anyone else alive AT THE EXPENSE of their own body. Very simple.

          • Paul Wagner

            The legal standard has ALWAYS been Viability–that is, the ability to survive without assistance outside the womb. You can grow an embryo in a test tube, but it MUST be implanted for it to become a baby. Otherwise you get no baby.

          • Jennifer Starr

            You don’t know much about other religions, do you, Robb?

            http://www.beliefnet.com/Faiths/Judaism/2003/11/Orthodox-Orthography-Why-No-O-In-G-D.aspx

          • Robb Nunya

            I don’t know that much about Judaism. I respect their beliefs, but honestly don’t have a lot of contact with them due to geography. I honestly vaguely remember seeing the G_d thing somewhere, but seeing as how it wasn’t the 1st thing that popped into my head when I saw how that person typed it, and assuming that person was an atheist, no, it didn’t come to the fore.

          • L-dan

            I will stop judging Christianity when its followers stop trying to push their mythology on the rest of us.

            I’m happy you’ve found something that you feel makes your life better, but you really have zero basis for the belief that the Bible is somehow the one correct version of things while all the other religions of the world got it wrong somehow. With such a shaky basis, there’s no reason anyone else should be required to join that belief and it’s incredibly annoying for those of us not in your fold to be lectured too based upon a bunch of beliefs we don’t share.

            Closer to the topic at hand, a fetus is not an infant, so infanticide is hardly the correct term. The vast majority of abortions take place before 13 weeks and all of them are well before full term, so all the blather about moments before birth is a sentimental smokescreen designed to fuzz out the difference between a sentient being with thoughts and feelings and the capacity to care about life and death, and a developing fetus with none of those things. I defend the rights and lives of actual people while you’re fetishizing your ‘little ones’.

          • goatini

            Men made “God” in their own image.

          • Nor

            I beg to differ. God had a ballsack first, then he made everyone else have ballsacks (well, everyone that mattered anyway). What God is doing with his testicles is clearly beyond our mortal ken, but since he’s only had sex with one girl it’s clear they’re largely decorative, or perhaps purely for pleasure. I personally find the Bible really lacking in it’s failure to explain why God has balls, and I demand an explanation. Any Christians willing to explain?

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            You are evil. i like that in a person.

          • Nor

            One of the ways Christians can help reduce bitterness in the hearts of others is by doing things like leading by example – voting Democratic to increase financial support to poor parents, pushing for free birth control for everyone from middle school on, and promoting sex ed starting in 3rd grade (at least that early). If you aren’t doing that, no one is going to believe you when you say you’re in it for the children.

          • SuperLogic

            If God got rid of all those who did evil, there would be no one left.

          • Nor

            Then why are you here policing everyone else about this one specific thing? Your life must be infinitely busy, going around doing God’s work by anonymously nagging on the internet.

          • SuperLogic

            ” Your life must be infinitely busy, going around doing God’s work by anonymously nagging on the internet.” You mean like you are doing?? Kinda like that? So only people with YOUR view are allowed to comment?? The point is why doesn’t God stop all evil? If the police threw everyone in jail that committed ANY sort of little crime, everyone would be in jail. Does that mean we shouldn’t stop any evil? Your point is ridiculous, short sighted and intolerant!

          • Nor

            Oh no, the God bots manage to piss all over every thread that tries to defend women’s rights. Them and the MRAs, hopefully the same group of people, as the numbers of both are declining. Weird how they aren’t interested in actually helping, only browbeating us poor stupid women, who for some reason aren’t interested in their archaic abusive religion.

            God could easily stop all evil, without God jail, and immediately. If he exists, he’s omnipotent, so it would be nothing to him, he could do it right now. He doesn’t, I’ve heard Christians say that’s because he wants people to struggle, there is no point in life without struggling, that life is a test, and if you pass, you go to heaven instead of hell. Which is awfully cruel, truly. Have you seen the kind of true horror that exists in this world, in person? Just to make the computer or phone you are typing on, adults and children suffered and died to get the materials to make this thing. Where is your concern for them? God won’t help them. Nothing will help them. You won’t help them. But you’ll cheaply and anonymously rant at some other first world asshats here, thinking you are doing good. Nice job, Christian soldier. Way to live in light and all that crap.

          • SuperLogic

            The hypocritical irony is, you rant about “God not stopping pain and suffering for the computers or phones you are typing on, and how adults and children suffered and died to get the materials to make this thing”, yet YOU have the phone and computers you rant about. What utter hypocrisy!! You expect God to stop it, yet you do absolutely nothing, and actually contribute to it, and then have the gall to mock God. Go look in the mirror! And then you go on to criticize how “you’ll cheaply and anonymously rant”, really? Unlike you?? Wow, how do you not feel utterly embarrassed to be such a hypocrite? Or are you just too feeble minded to get that??

            And as to your other point, “Weird how they aren’t interested in actually helping, only browbeating us poor stupid women”. Who do you think runs the majority of emergency womens shelters?? I’ll give you 3 guesses, and the first 2 don’t count. Who do you think runs the majority of homeless shelters, and crises pregnancy centers?? You obviously don’t have a clue, but that gets in the way of your ideological rant, doesn’t it. A womens “choice” doesn’t take precedence over the human right to life. There were usually MANY choices she could have made beforehand. You want your freedom of choice to do anything you want, than you blame God for the evil that results from those choices. What utter hypocrisy!

          • conversate

            A womens “choice” doesn’t take precedence over the human right to life.

            yes, it does.

            an unborn human has no more right to a pregnant person’s body than I have to your body, sweetcheeks

            There were usually MANY choices she could have made beforehand

            s1ut shamer

          • SuperLogic

            A womens “choice” doesn’t take precedence over the human right to live. – Yes it does.

            Again, by allowing herself to get pregnant, she has given life, and the “keys to the womb”, that persons life takes precedence over her “inconvenience”. Only in abortion do we expect choice and inconvenience to take precedence over someone elses life.

            S1ut shamer? Those are your words, not mine. How about taking responsibility for YOUR own actions, instead of killing YOUR mistakes, instead of making someone else pay with their life for YOUR actions? See, here’s how it works, you drive through a red light, and kill someone, you’ll get punished for what you did. How simple of a concept is that? Obviously for someone like yourself, very difficult.

          • goatini

            //you’ll get punished for what you did. How simple of a concept is that? //

            Clearly asserting that pregnancy is a “punishment”. That’s the key point of slut-shaming: females exercising personal and sexual agency are sluts, who deserve to be punished by mandatory gestational slavery.

          • SuperLogic

            Oh geez, try to keep up. I wasn’t referring to pregnancy as punishment. I was saying that IF YOU KILL another human as in drunk driving, you will get punished, yet she expects to get away with killing an unborn baby due to “choice”. Try to follow along. :oP

          • fiona64

            Seems like you are the one who thinks pregnancy is punishment.

            Nope, that’s all on you. Do these words look familiar?

            How about taking responsibility for YOUR own actions, instead of killing
            YOUR mistakes, instead of making someone else pay with their life for
            YOUR actions? See, here’s how it works, you drive through a red
            light, and kill someone, you’ll get punished for what you did. How
            simple of a concept is that?

            They are your words, Junior. You’re the one who says pregnancy is a punishment.

          • SuperLogic

            Go back to sleep, you are making yourself look foolish.

          • fiona64

            The only one looking foolish here is you, dimwit …

          • conversate

            So you are comparing non-procreative sex (if female) to drunk driving?

            Yeah, you clearly consider forced birth to be a punishment for dirty s1uts.

            Do you offer a rape exception?

          • Cathy Young

            pedestrian= alive sentient being…embryo….not so much

          • SuperLogic

            Is “sentient” the word of the day or something?? Or all of you just talking parrots of one another? So let me get this straight, sentient determines person hood? Who’s definition of human or personhood is that? So a person that is in a coma, or knocked unconscious, sedated or even asleep no longer is a person, and it would therefore be moral to kill him? Seems to be an major error in your reasoning. Oddly enough, babies in the womb are found to feel pain in as little as 21 weeks (that they know of), and actually have been known to survive outside of the womb. And another little tidbit of info, women were not considered persons until fairly recently under the law. Gee, might want to be careful how YOU define a person.

          • conversate

            Do you even know what sentience is? Or sapience?

            Care to explain to the class, so we know that you have a clue.

          • conversate

            Oh, about the pain thing, no, you’re wrong. Fetuses can’t feel pain, at all.

            http://www.cell.com/current-biology/abstract/S0960-9822%2811%2900885-2

            Highlights

            The human brain may discriminate touch from pain from 35–37 weeks gestation
            Before 35–37 weeks, touch and noxious lance evoke nonspecific neuronal bursts
            After 35–37 weeks, touch and noxious lance evoke modality-specific potentials

            Summary

            When and how infants begin to discriminate noxious from innocuous stimuli is a fundamental question in neuroscience [ 1 ]. However, little is known about the development of the necessary cortical somatosensory functional prerequisites in the intact human brain. Recent studies of developing brain networks have emphasized the importance of transient spontaneous and evoked neuronal bursting activity in the formation of functional circuits [ 2, 3 ]. These neuronal bursts are present during development and precede the onset of sensory functions [ 4, 5 ]. Their disappearance and the emergence of more adult-like activity are therefore thought to signal the maturation of functional brain circuitry [ 2, 4 ]. Here we show the changing patterns of neuronal activity that underlie the onset of nociception and touch discrimination in the preterm infant. We have conducted noninvasive electroencephalogram (EEG) recording of the brain neuronal activity in response to time-locked touches and clinically essential noxious lances of the heel in infants aged 28–45 weeks gestation. We show a transition in brain response following tactile and noxious stimulation from nonspecific, evenly dispersed neuronal bursts to modality-specific, localized, evoked potentials. The results suggest that specific neural circuits necessary for discrimination between touch and nociception emerge from 35–37 weeks gestation in the human brain.

          • Suba gunawardana

            How clueless can you be? To copy & paste my response to another forced-birther:

            Non-sentience per se is not a REASON to kill, neither is sentience
            alone a reason NOT to kill. Once killing is justified for other reasons,
            sentience (or lack thereof) is important only in determining the METHOD of death.

            For a zef that’s non-sentient, how it’s killed doesn’t matter. For born humans or animals who can FEEL, it is very important to choose a quick & painless method of death.

          • conversate

            As i said earlier, ‘superlogic’ *has* to be ironic…right?

          • Suba gunawardana

            Yeah the only way that name can ever appropriate is for irony.

          • Arekushieru

            Very FEW if any ‘babies’ survived at 21 weeks. The only reason those few would have made it is because of their treatment at state of the art medical facilities. Not everyone has the wherewithal to purchase such treatment.

            And another little tidbit of info. Anyone who considers women non-persons has also only ever been a forced-birther. Case in point. Female slaves were not considered persons. Slave-owners were forced birthers. There’s your little history lesson for the day!

          • fiona64

            Someone doesn’t know what sentience is …

          • Arekushieru

            DO try to effing keep up. FORCED gestation is slavery. Just like FORCED sex is RAPE. There’s a REASON why we call ourselves Pro-CHOICE (because it’s, y’know, the opposite of FORCE?) and there’s a REASON that not all sex is called rape just like not all gestations are called slavery. Oops, more evidence of the misnomer of your name.

          • SuperLogic

            So who forced you to get pregnant?? Take responsibility for your actions! Pretty simple!

          • Arekushieru

            Hey, keep proving your misogyny. So, how am I responsible for my genetic makeup now, even though no one else is responsible for their own? By forcing me to remain pregnant because I enjoyed a night of sex the way my male counterpart may do without impunity IS misogyny, little boy. Also, having an abortion IS being responsible. Oi.

          • Arekushieru

            Btw, Pro-‘Lifers’ have had more abortions than I have, because I have had exactly none.

          • fiona64

            Again, by allowing herself to get pregnant,

            Looks like another one flunked biology class …

          • SuperLogic

            Unless it was forced on her…. yes. Go back to sleep, you are making yourself look foolish!

          • conversate

            So you support abortion in the case of rape yes?

          • Arekushieru

            No, YOU are, and you will see why in one of my most recent replies.

          • Suba gunawardana

            So if you voluntarily play a sport and get injured, you are not allowed to get treatment for the injury because “No one forced you to play”?

            If you get food poisoning from something that you ate voluntarily (i.e. not forced down your throat) you are supposed to die from that treatable illness?

          • fiona64

            You were homeschooled, weren’t you?

          • conversate

            Nope. The ‘right to life’ does not include the positive right to use the body of another as life support.

            No person has that right – I can’t use your body to keep myeslf alive,and neither can an unborn human.

            Do you permit abortion in the case of rape? Yes or no?

          • Arekushieru

            A woman does not ‘allow’ herself to get pregnant. If women could control pregnancy, there would be no infertile women and no women with unplanned pregnancies. Oops. Nope, only in forced gestation do we expect the ‘inconvenience’ of life-saving to take precedence over someone else’ bodily autonomy. See, abortion IS a life saving procedure, since there is NOT a 0% chance that a woman will die from pregnancy. And, well, you just called a risky and life-threatening medical condition merely ‘inconvenient’.

            Yes, you are a slut-shamer. Woman and man enjoy consensual sex. Woman gets pregnant. Man remains the same. Woman is prevented from having an abortion. Man goes on his merry way. Woman is told if she didn’t want to be pregnant she should have kept her legs closed, or, at least, abstained from sex. Man is treated as stud, or, at least, doesn’t experience any enforced consequences from the encounter. See, when you treat one sex differently from the other, and that treatment has something do with SEX, you are not only a misogynist but a slut-shamer.

            Having an abortion IS taking responsibility. Or, and I hold no hope of actually having a fetus freak answer this question at this point in time, do you believe that an impoverished single mother who is carrying a HIGHLY risky and dangerous pregnancy to term, not only risking her own life and health, but the life and health of her EXISTING children and potentially leaving them motherless, is being responsible?

            Abortion doesn’t involve killing.

            Two, no three, problems with your analogy. 1) The actual analogy is that even if the person CAUSED the accident and sustained either minor or life-threatening injuries while putting the other person involved in the crash in harm’s way, they can STILL receive medical treatment for their injuries. 2) The other person is not directly using a part of your body against your will, so the argument actually falls apart completely and 3) Both a man and woman can cause the accident. With pregnancy only the WOMAN is involved. OOOPPPPSSS!!!!

          • Nor

            It ain’t me that’s the hypocrite bub. I’m well aware of, and vocal about, what a shitty human being merely living in this country makes me.

            I don’t think you’ve ever left the Bible Belt. Maybe you should give that a try first.

            Crisis Pregnancy Centers are hardly something to be proud of.

            What is your solution, pregnancy jail? Because that’s what I hear you proposing. Luckily, it’s already a reality in some states. Your dream come true!!!

            God is why evil exists, according to your Bible. He chose to create it. It is from him and of him, as are all things. According to that book you like. Try reading it.

          • SuperLogic

            “It ain’t me that’s the hypocrite bub” You’re ranting about the evils of phones and computers, yet you have them, so YES that makes you a hypocrite! Might want to go look that up so you know what the word means. Let me help you out… it means saying one thing and doing something opposite.

            You sure make a lot of assumptions, actually never lived in the Bible belt, but sounds like it might do you some good… or maybe not.

            “What is your solution, pregnancy jail? Because that’s what I hear you proposing.” Really? Where did I state that? You must be hearing things, or putting words in my mouth. How about we just do away with legalized abortion? There are other solutions, like adoptions. Or just taking responsibility for your own actions.

            You may want to try reading the Bible… again, it may do you some good. Evil only exists because good exists, if there were no evil their would be no good (or freewill). In the same way that there is heat only because there is cold as well. Cold is only the absence of heat. In the same way evil is only the absence of good. The way the world is now, wasn’t God’s plan, it was because of human choice and evil.

          • Arekushieru

            NOR isn’t saying anything about the evils of phones and computers. Seriously, get a f^(*!ng clue! She’s saying that if YOU are REALLY all about life, INCLUDING the born as well as the unborn, you will do something about the sweatshops where the phones and computers you use, to harass GROWN WOMEN over your precious fetuses, are made, because they typically employ underage CHILDREN. Therefore, if SHE isn’t saying anything about how precious all life is, SHE is not the one doing something opposite of what she claims, now IS she?

            Again, the scenario she mentioned HAS happened. Adoption is a solution for an unwanted CHILD, not an unwanted pregnancy. And, again, abortion IS being responsible.

            So why did God stick a tree in the middle of Eden knowing that his creations would disobey Him? It CLEARLY seems as if He is the first One to offer temptation NOT Satan. Also, not accepting responsibility for your actions is a terrible way to role model your responsibilities as a ‘Father’.

          • fiona64

            There are other solutions, like adoptions.

            Adoption is an alternative to parenting, not an alternative to pregnancy.

            There are currently in excess of 100K children available for adoption in the US alone. http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/resource/afcars-report-20 The majority of those children will “age out” of the system without ever having been adopted. Yet, you would cheerfully enslave women to their biology in order to add more children to the warehouse?

            Really?

            What a sick fuck you are.

          • Nor

            Hey, I need a kidney, a liver, a lung and an eye stat. You have no choice, I need them to live and I’m taking them. You selfish monster, how dare you have kept these organs to yourself all this time! I don’t care if it shortens your lifespan, risks your life and wellbeing, and maims you. Pregnancy does all that too, and do we complain when we are chained to a hospital bed in a jail and forced to bear children against our will??? We certainly do not! Because even athiests are good Christian women in this country, or at least forced to behave like them, by law. Jesus said so.

          • SuperLogic

            Really? The huge majority of mothers I know live long lives, probably on average outliving their single counterparts. Your post is nonsense. Abortion causes death and huge health risks as well since you haven’t heard. “Hey, I need a kidney, a liver, a lung and an eye stat” Say what?? The baby grows those on it’s own within weeks, it’s not taking any of those away from it’s mother.

            “Chained to a hospital bed in a jail and forced to bear children against your will???” “Even atheists are good Christian women” What are you rambling about???

            Your posts are getting to be rambling nonsense.

          • fiona64

            The baby grows those on it’s own within weeks, it’s not taking any of those away from it’s mother.

            You *definitely* failed biology class. The zygote drills into a blood vessel and takes nourishment directly from the pregnant woman’s body … at her expense. Pregnancy is NOT a state of wellness (in fact, my pregnancy nearly killed me). You appear to think that women are nothing but containers for fetii.

          • conversate

            Pregnancy shortens women’s lives:

            http://www.cnn.com/2011/11/01/health/multiple-pregnancies-mother/

            It also does this:

            Normal, frequent or expectable temporary side effects of pregnancy:

            exhaustion (weariness common from first weeks)
            altered appetite and senses of taste and smell
            nausea and vomiting (50% of women, first trimester)
            heartburn and indigestion
            constipation
            weight gain
            dizziness and light-headedness
            bloating, swelling, fluid retention
            hemmorhoids
            abdominal cramps
            yeast infections
            congested, bloody nose
            acne and mild skin disorders
            skin discoloration (chloasma, face and abdomen)
            mild to severe backache and strain
            increased headaches
            difficulty sleeping, and discomfort while sleeping
            increased urination and incontinence
            bleeding gums
            pica
            breast pain and discharge
            swelling of joints, leg cramps, joint pain
            difficulty sitting, standing in later pregnancy
            inability to take regular medications
            shortness of breath
            higher blood pressure
            hair loss
            tendency to anemia
            curtailment of ability to participate in some sports and activities
            infection including from serious and potentially fatal disease
            (pregnant women are immune suppressed compared with non-pregnant women, and are more susceptible to fungal and certain other diseases)
            extreme pain on delivery
            hormonal mood changes, including normal post-partum depression
            continued post-partum exhaustion and recovery period (exacerbated if a c-section — major surgery — is required, sometimes taking up to a full year to fully recover)

            Normal, expectable, or frequent PERMANENT side effects of pregnancy:

            stretch marks (worse in younger women)
            loose skin
            permanent weight gain or redistribution
            abdominal and vaginal muscle weakness
            pelvic floor disorder (occurring in as many as 35% of middle-aged former child-bearers and 50% of elderly former child-bearers, associated with urinary and rectal incontinence, discomfort and reduced quality of life — aka prolapsed utuerus, the malady sometimes badly fixed by the transvaginal mesh)
            changes to breasts
            varicose veins
            scarring from episiotomy or c-section
            other permanent aesthetic changes to the body (all of these are downplayed by women, because the culture values youth and beauty)
            increased proclivity for hemmorhoids
            loss of dental and bone calcium (cavities and osteoporosis)
            higher lifetime risk of developing Altzheimer’s
            newer research indicates microchimeric cells, other bi-directional exchanges of DNA, chromosomes, and other bodily material between fetus and mother (including with “unrelated” gestational surrogates)

            Occasional complications and side effects:

            complications of episiotomy
            spousal/partner abuse
            hyperemesis gravidarum
            temporary and permanent injury to back
            severe scarring requiring later surgery
            (especially after additional pregnancies)
            dropped (prolapsed) uterus (especially after additional pregnancies, and other pelvic floor weaknesses — 11% of women, including cystocele, rectocele, and enterocele)
            pre-eclampsia (edema and hypertension, the most common complication of pregnancy, associated with eclampsia, and affecting 7 – 10% of pregnancies)
            eclampsia (convulsions, coma during pregnancy or labor, high risk of death)
            gestational diabetes
            placenta previa
            anemia (which can be life-threatening)
            thrombocytopenic purpura
            severe cramping
            embolism (blood clots)
            medical disability requiring full bed rest (frequently ordered during part of many pregnancies varying from days to months for health of either mother or baby)
            diastasis recti, also torn abdominal muscles
            mitral valve stenosis (most common cardiac complication)
            serious infection and disease (e.g. increased risk of tuberculosis)
            hormonal imbalance
            ectopic pregnancy (risk of death)
            broken bones (ribcage, “tail bone”)
            hemorrhage and
            numerous other complications of delivery
            refractory gastroesophageal reflux disease
            aggravation of pre-pregnancy diseases and conditions (e.g. epilepsy is present in .5% of pregnant women, and the pregnancy alters drug metabolism and treatment prospects all the while it increases the number and frequency of seizures)
            severe post-partum depression and psychosis
            research now indicates a possible link between ovarian cancer and female fertility treatments, including “egg harvesting” from infertile women and donors
            research also now indicates correlations between lower breast cancer survival rates and proximity in time to onset of cancer of last pregnancy
            research also indicates a correlation between having six or more pregnancies and a risk of coronary and cardiovascular disease

            Less common (but serious) complications:

            peripartum cardiomyopathy
            cardiopulmonary arrest
            magnesium toxicity
            severe hypoxemia/acidosis
            massive embolism
            increased intracranial pressure, brainstem infarction
            molar pregnancy, gestational trophoblastic disease
            (like a pregnancy-induced cancer)
            malignant arrhythmia
            circulatory collapse
            placental abruption
            obstetric fistula

            More permanent side effects:

            future infertility
            permanent disability
            death.

          • Arekushieru

            Nope, just because your screen name is a misnomer doesn’t mean you can pass on the blame for not understanding PURE logic. Your Christian theocracy would have ALL women acting like what they consider good Christian women, atheists included. OBVIOUSLY that is what she meant. If you want to debate this issue so badly and prove what a good little pro-‘lifer’ you are, it would BEHOOVE you to acquaint yourself with some very real consequences enacted by anti-choice legislation. Because what NOR said WAS one such issue.

            Abortion is at LEAST fifteen times safer than pregnancy. SFS.

          • Suba gunawardana

            “You expect God to stop it, yet you do absolutely nothing”

            Why should we? God has all the power, duh!

            If god is all-powerful, he CAN relieve all the suffering in one fell
            swoop. Why should mere mortals have to do it in slow painful steps? So god can watch the innocent suffer & jack off?

            Wasn’t it god who allegedly created the world this way, where all living beings have to EAT other living beings just to survive? How would any mere mortal fight against that, and how would any amount of fighting relieve the fundamental suffering your GOD created?

            Who runs women’s shelters? Women, usually ones who have been through abuse before.
            Crisis pregnancy centers are in the business of forcing women to give birth, and are of course run by lying conniving religious nuts.

            “A womens “choice” doesn’t take precedence over the human right to life.”

            A woman’s right to protect her body takes precedent over any purported “right to life” anyone invading her body. No individual has the right to occupy/use another person’s body without their consent.

          • SuperLogic

            Right, so you want choice, then you expect God to not allow anything you disagree with. You want the choice to kill an unborn baby, yet God is suppose to end suffering of innocents? So which is it? You’re talking out of both sides of your mouth.

            So, if you willingly gave your house keys to someone, and then you find that person inside your house, he invaded your house and has no right being there hey? So you would have the right to shoot him? Does it surprise you that when you have sex, that a baby could show up?? This has been happening since the start of the world, and this still takes you by surprise??

          • Suba gunawardana

            Why do humans need choice? To get some relief from the suffering your god inflicts upon them. Tell god to stop the cruelty, and there’d be no more NEED for choice.

            Tell god to place zefs ONLY in the uteri of women who WANT them, and there will be no NEED for abortions, Duh! While you are at it, tell god to stop performing millions of abortions himself in the form of miscarriage, causing absolutely misery to women who WANTED those babies. Once again, choice is needed only because your god is a sadistic prick.

            Oh BTW, the fact that your actions may have led to an invasion does NOT negate your right to protect your body. If you let a rapist into your house, that does NOT give him a right to rape you. If he tries to rape you, you absolutely have the right to shoot him. Same thing with a fetal invader.

          • Arekushieru

            Does it surprise you might have an accident when you consent to driving? Does that mean you can no longer receive medical treatment? No? Thought not.

          • SuperLogic

            Does it mean I can kill the other person for my accident?? No? Thought not.

            What an absurd comparison! DOH!

          • Suba gunawardana

            If the “other person” (in the accident or any situation) invaded/occupied/used your body, you absolutely have the right to kill them to get them off your body.

          • fiona64

            Crisis pregnancy centers don’t do shit.

            The majority of homeless shelters are operated by *cities,* with assistance from HUD grants. https://www.hudexchange.info/homelessness-assistance

            If I were you, sugarplum, I wouldn’t ask questions like you did; you might find that some people know the answers. And that the answers prove you wrong.

          • Arekushieru

            And why do you think the homeless and female victims of violence should be forced to rely on unstable funding while their upper class peers can enjoy a life of ease without fear of having the rug pulled out from under their feet because YOUR political counterparts in Government slashed funding for social programs like TANF, WIC and SNAP. Crisis pregnancy centers? Offer FAR less help than Planned Parenthood. Planned Parenthood offers cancer screenings, birth control, comprehensive sex ed (which prevent MORE abortions than any anti-choicer ever has), wellness checkups, among a WHOLE host of other things. CPCs? Offer a few bits and pieces of furniture, some diapers, maybe some clothing, minimal financial assistance, ALL while stigmatizing and shaming young pregnant teen girls for not relinquishing their child to a good, worthy, white Christian couple as the good little piece of livestock they needed her to be.

            Actually, yes, a woman’s choice DOES take precedence. EVERYONE has the right to determine who uses their body and when and how it is used via explicit, informed and ONGOING consent, regardless of level of dependency, ‘innocence’, intent, personhood status, genotype, biology, etc….. Punishment = tools used for behaviour modification. If you DON’T expect a woman to either refrain from non-procreative sex OR gestate a fetus to full term in an unplanned pregnancy after recreational sex, what do you EXPECT to happen by making abortion illegal? Again, prove that your screen name is NOT a misnomer. If those are all things that you expect to happen, and happen just because you are enforcing a biological mandate solely applicable to the female genotype, you ARE both punishing women and a misogynist. Oops.

          • conversate

            Here’s an idea, why don’t you go out and donate some of your bone marrow, or even blood. Work a second job and donate the money to save lives. Mortgage your house to pay for surgery to save the life of a child.

            But no, you won’t do that. You’re too selfish. You go onto the internet to feel self-righteous and s1ut shame women. Being pro-life is easy, it doesn’t require any effort, and you get to shake your finger at women and act all superior. But we are on to you and your bullshit, kiddo.

          • SuperLogic

            Say what?? You have no clue who I am, or what I do. Quite the judgmental and presumptuous attitude you have. You are making a whole lot of assumptions based on absolutely nothing. Not sure what donating bone marrow or blood has to do with opposing abortion?? Do I have to donate bone marrow to oppose drunk driving?? So, have you donated bone marrow and mortgaged your house because you oppose drunk driving or trafficking?? My guess is I donate far more to charity than you do. You point your fingers at others, yet I bet you do absolutely zilch yourself kiddo!

          • fiona64

            Not sure what donating bone marrow or blood has to do with opposing abortion?

            That’s an easy one to answer, sweetie. You are demanding that women donate their organs to a zygote … while you simultaneously do NOTHING to help born individuals in need.

            My guess is I donate far more to charity than you do.

            My guess it that you’re a liar.

          • SuperLogic

            They are not DONATING their organs to anything. After the pregnancy, they have ALL the organs that they started with. Seriously, did you not learn any of this in school? And again… “you claim I do NOTHING to help born individuals in need” And you base this on?? In your words… NOTHING! Interestingly enough, you don’t bother to answer my questions, so my guess is, that YOU do nothing! Easy to point fingers, but 4 of them are pointed right back at you. Well, I’m tired of this unintelligible drivel that you are rambling about. You make wildly basely assumptions based on NOTHING. And your arguments are based entirely on emotion rather than logical reasoning. And I can see your disdain for life, especially those most vulnerable, which is rather sad. A mother should be the most trusted and safe places to be, and because of individuals like you it has become the most dangerous of places to be in the life of a person. 1 out of 3 babies now die by the hands of their mothers. Sad reflection of society.

          • conversate

            They may have all their ogans, they may not. It depends if the fetus 1) kills them 2) causes organ failure

            The fetus also damages the organs, and wears out women’s bodies to the point that they die young:

            http://www.cnn.com/2011/11/01/health/multiple-pregnancies-mother/

            Obstetric fistulas are nothing to laugh about either:

            http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2010/dec/10/torn-apart-by-childbirth

            You really are ignorant, arent you?

          • Max

            No you are ignorant!

          • conversate

            Prove me wrong.

          • Max

            That’s unnecessary . You seem to have already done that. The Guardian? CNN? Lol

          • fiona64

            Then cough up your sources proving her wrong, Max. We’ll wait. No, really, we will.

          • Suba gunawardana

            Your inability to grasp a point (which I have noticed about ten times now) does not make the other person’s point illogical. The problem is with YOU. Even for forced-birthers, I’ve met only two others who tried to blame their own denseness on the opponent.

            Anyway, here’s a simple but all-encompassing question: How does the life of an unwanted zef supersede the life, safety & well-being of ALL other individuals, including the woman carrying said zef; the unwanted child said zef would become if forced to be born; and the millions of living breathing sentient non-humans who would be actively killed to sustain the life of the new unwanted human?

          • Max

            On to you suba . No rational ! An idiot

          • Suba gunawardana

            LOL Who’s been hitting the bottle? Superlogic looks sane next to you.

            Care to attempt a rebuttal? I could use a good laugh.

          • Arekushieru

            Oh, really? Then, pray tell, to WHAT is the placenta and the umbilical cord attached? To some inner space black hole? Please tell me more about your knowledge of biology, I could use a good laugh.

            It is YOUR responsibility to put your money where your mouth is. Since WE are not the ones claiming that the right to life supersedes the right to bodily autonomy the onus is on YOU to uphold that, NOT us. You have NO idea what hypocrisy means, do you? See, what Nor was saying, was that YOU don’t support born children. As a Pro-Choicer Nor obviously does. So, again, the onus is on YOU, not us. YOU are the hypocrite NOT Nor.

            Based entirely on emotional drivel? There’s just NO pleasing you people, is there? Either we’re too coldhearted and rational or we’re too emotional. Seriously, make up your effing minds.

            A fetus is not vulnerable. It suppresses a woman’s immune system, draws bodily resources from her that could very well kill her, if she didn’t replenish them, etc…. It also directs the process of conception that lead to pregnancy, the third leading cause of death worldwide for women. You know who IS vulnerable, however? The WOMAN.

            The maternal host is not a mother. Nor is she simply a container or incubator for the contents of her uterus. Yeah, we see how much you value BORN life, more specifically, the life of the pregnant WOMAN.

            A fetus is not a person.

            1 out of three? Then that means that 2/3rds of all babies are BORN. Whom, certainly outnumbers those that are aborted. Oops.

          • SuperLogic

            Like I said,… not even worth my time to explain. Unintelligible gibberish!

          • fiona64

            In other words, you’ve got nothing … which we all knew.

          • Arekushieru

            Yeah, because, despite your name, logic and facts and science have LONG bypassed you to reside in someone more worthy of them. Misogynistic hypocrites… are not worthy of them.

          • fiona64

            They are not DONATING their organs to anything.

            You have no idea how pregnancy works, do you?

            No love, a woman whose wanted pregnancy nearly killed her and who will NOT go through that again

          • P. McCoy

            Hey who is feeding, breathing, excreting for that ‘unborn’? Whose skeletal mass does that ‘bayyyybee’ steals from to create and expand its own skeleton if the woman (host body) does not take enough suppliments or consumes enough calcium to prevent the ‘unborn’ from stealing from the host body- do you think it’s the tooth fairy? Bible reading is fine, but.don’t rely on 3000 years old theology to discuss 21st century science!

          • conversate

            Actually, if you are demanding that other people’s bodies be used, and that those persons be forced to risk life and limb, then you are a hypocrite if you demand sacrifice from others, but don’t get off your fat ass and do the same.

            Are you a hypocrite?

          • conversate

            A perfect god would not have created evil, as a perfect god would not permit the suffering of innocents. There is absolutely zero justification for a perfect, all benevolent all loving god to cause unnecessary suffering.

          • Nor

            No no, God wants us to be good, so he gave us evil as a choice so we would have the chance to fail. For some reason.

          • Shan

            “For some reason.”

            Heaven is too small?

          • SuperLogic

            Really? And how do you allow free will and choice without suffering and evil? You want the choice to kill and cause unnecessary suffering to innocent pre-born babies, and then you claim God should not allow it. So which is it?

          • conversate

            Embryos can’t suffer, they are mindless. They are non-sentient and non-sapient. They aren’t even aware they exist, unlike say a cow, which you have no trouble eating once it’s been tortured to death in a slaughterhouse.

            Again, you are ignorant as all hell. You should be embarrassed.

          • Suba gunawardana

            Simple. Let able-minded humans exercise free will only amongst themselves, and NOT let them victimize/torture the innocent & defenseless. Make the innocent & defenseless EXEMPT from human cruelty. Your “almighty” god couldn’t figure out that little bit of common sense? What kind of idiot is he?

            BYW zefs don’t “suffer”. They are not sentient.

            Death is not the same as suffering. If it were, your god causes more suffering than anyone else, since he kills EVERY SINGLE living being without exception.

          • Arekushieru

            Fetuses don’t have the capacity to be innocent or guilty. Neither are they ‘babies’.

            A perfect God would have made all of us fetuses, because we would not suffer, then. See, your God is not perfect.

          • SuperLogic

            What in blue blazes are you rambling about?? We all WERE fetuses at one point in our lives?!?!

            It is impossible to carry on an intelligent conversation with Pro-Abortionists. You ramble on about some non-intelligent psycho gibberish, based entirely on emotion rather than sound reasoning. So it’s not even worth the bother.

          • fiona64

            So much existential angst among the anti-choice!

            Most people outgrow that at age 12 or so …

            You ramble on about some non-intelligent psycho gibberish, based entirely on emotion

            You mean, the way you and your fellow anti-choicers do when you attribute fetii with the ability to “suffer”? Argument from pathos is nothing *but* emotion.

          • Arekushieru

            Oi, you cannot extrapolate, either as well as lacking reading comprehension. OBVIOUSLY, I was not simply referring to the fetuses we ONCE were, but being fetuses all the effing time. I am not a Pro-Abortionist. If I WERE, I would have wanted my Pro-CHOICE mother to have an abortion when she was pregnant with me. I did not, because I love my mother and did not want her to be FORCED into anything against her wishes. So, a triple-threat. No logic, no extrapolation abilities and no reading comprehension. Oi, we’ve got a live on on our hands, everyone!

          • Suba gunawardana

            And what’s wrong with that? Then there would be no more suffering. The only apparent reason your god keeps the world going is so he can enjoy watching the innocent & defenseless suffer.

          • SuperLogic

            Right…. kill to end suffering…. makes sense. LOL :oP
            I nominate your post stupid comment of the week!

          • conversate

            Yep. In places where children are unwanted, and where there is *too* much human life, that life becomes devalued, and people abuse one another and commit infanticide. Prior to abortion, infanticide was what people did to control birth rates:

            http://www.infanticide.org/history.htm

            Do you like it when babies are smothered to death or left out in a field to starve? This is still quite common in countries such as India and China with large rural populations that can’t afford to feed endless #s of unwanted children.

          • Suba gunawardana

            Calling something “stupid” without providing reason screams you have no argument.

            Killing to end suffering, i.e. euthanasia, is a widely accepted concept in our society. But that’s not exactly what we were talking about. The point was that: Humankind causes suffering to all around them. Getting rid of humankind would most of the world’s suffering. If your god had an ounce of intelligence or compassion, he wouldn’t have “created the world” this way in the first place.

            If you disagree, provide a valid rebuttal instead of emotional drivel.

          • Max

            I’m with you !

          • Arekushieru

            Rather than forcing one to be born only to endure suffering before they are killed or have a life of pleasure meet an untimely end? Yeah, that’s what YOU people would do. SOOO compassionate.

          • SuperLogic

            Hey Einstein…. how about you end the suffering, instead of killing? DOH!

          • Suba gunawardana

            Killing IS a way to end suffering, DOH!

          • thedoorisajar

            Embryos can’t suffer. They won’t even miss not existing, because they have NO SELF.

            Suffering is created by imposing existence on them by being born.

          • SuperLogic

            “Suffering is created by imposing existence on them by being born.”

            Very sad, and disturbing that you (and all the other pro-abortionists) have such a dismal outlook on life.

            Ever seen an abortion? Have you seen how they thrash around inside the womb trying to avoid having their limbs ripped off their body? Or seen how they scream? No, of course you haven’t, or you wouldn’t spout such nonsense.

          • thedoorisajar

            Yes, forcing life on someone without their consent IS to impose suffering. A boy was recently beaten to death, after suffering years of being repeatedly beaten, starved and made to eat feces by his ‘loving’ parents. His life was misery. He should never have been born.

            And this is what an abortion looks like, you ignoramus.

            http://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_ls6w7phG8f1qi68z9.jpg

            Prenates are neither sentient nor conscious, so they are incapable of feeling pain or even being aware of what is going on around them. The Silent Scream is a hoax, honey.

          • Suba gunawardana

            As has been pointed out to you repeatedly, abortion does NOT involve the kind of pain you claim it does.

            More importantly: Even if abortion DID involve pain to the fetus, how on earth could that be any worse than being beaten/starved/raped on a daily basis as an unwanted child?

            You think the “pain” of abortion is bad but a lifetime of torture is GOOD? How do you explain that contradiction?

          • P. McCoy

            You mean that fakery the silent scream? Can’t fool all of the people all of the time. As for the rest, naturally a parasite is going to thrash about when the host body wants to end the parasite’s meal ticket.Last of all, unless you have a medical constitution, ALL surgical procedures will appear to be gruesome and stomach turning. Sentient women should always come before non.sentient entities, especially when you hypocritical forced birthers care nothing about suffering children-born human beings!

          • eroteme

            SuperLogic can’t logic.

          • Arekushieru

            How about YOU put your money where your mouth is, freak? YOU are the ones who want to create more people to suffer, so the onus is on YOU to end their suffering. Besides, I wasn’t talking about, as LBZ said, above, suggested killing vs feeding, I was talking about your attempts to disguise your apparent lack of compassion as something noble and/or honourable. Reading comprehension. Not antis strong suit, is it? Even those who call themselves SUPERLogic.

          • Arekushieru

            Btw, your screenname? A misnomer.

          • LBZ

            Ahh, but I think you’re missing a point Suba brings up of which I’m certain. Life is very, very hard for many. And it is very, very unfair.But bring on religion, those who suffer, starve, and are abused put up with it and behave. Don’t kill, don’t steal, don’t lie and KEEP ON WORKING. The promise of such docility was eternal life in the clouds. Opiate for the masses indeed.

          • SuperLogic

            So, wouldn’t the answer be to end the suffering? Is the answer to kill anything that suffers? So, if someones hungry, we shoot them? How about we feed them instead?? Why is that so hard to understand?

          • Suba gunawardana

            Can’t you remember your own words? Your original comment was about GOD killing everyone who did evil. BTW you never addressed my rebuttal.

            “So, wouldn’t the answer be to end the suffering?”

            Yes. Why doesn’t your “all-powerful & all-loving” god lift a finger to end the suffering he created?

          • SuperLogic

            I don’t answer your questions because it’s a waste of my time, as your comments are a lot of unintelligible nonsense, like in this case where YOU can’t even remember what I said, as I said “IF God killed all persons that are evil, there would be no one left” Go back to sleep, you are making yourself look foolish!

          • thedoorisajar

            You did not answer because you can’t debate your way out of a paper bag

          • Suba gunawardana

            LOL exactly how did I misquote you?

            As I said before, YOUR inability to grasp points does not make other people’s posts “unintelligible”. (Unintelligible to you maybe, not to normal people.)

            If you can’t debate why are you here? Are you a masochist?

          • thedoorisajar

            The answer is not to create more people. Embryos are not people. They are insensate tissue.

          • LBZ

            I don’t think I made myself clear… By distracting suffering people with the fairy tale about a big guy up in the sky and the promise of paradise as long as they follow rules written by a variety of men, they toil til they drop and behave so they can have a pair of wings in heaven. I have no clue how you could interpret what I wrote to suggested killing vs feeding. Religion and its lies take advantage of people.It’s the biggest frikkin carrot fraud ever committed, and it’s been happening for thousands of years.

            More clear now, SuperLogic?.

          • expect_resistance

            Who says God is a he?

          • fidobite

            Well, lets refer to God as a She if it helps your self-esteem. I’m certainly comfortable with that. She most certainly would frown on baby killing don’t you think?

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            No. I do not think that. God has no problem with death and evil. God created death and evil. It is all God.

          • Arekushieru

            Nope, MY God (yep, you read that RIGHT, I am a Christian) is not a misogynist. He/She would support women having the SAME rights as everyone else, unlike you. Referring to God as a She has nothing to do with ‘self-esteem’. Fetuses aren’t babies. If you want humans to accept responsibility for their actions first you must get GOD to accept responsibility for His/Her actions. After all, isn’t that what a TRUE Father does? Model actions for His children to follow? Oops?

          • fiona64

            Well, you have cited the Bible as your authority, so let’s take a gander.

            Numbers 5:11-30 (or thereabouts) has a woman being required to consume an abortifacient because she’s suspected of adultery.

            Psalm 137:9 celebrates seizing infants and smashing their heads against rocks.

            Hosea 13:16 celebrates pregnant women being sliced open and, again, infants having their heads dashed against rocks.

            Really, do you want me to continue? Because I can do this for a good long while.

          • Trollface McGee

            Hmm… he also has a thing for stoning.. I’m sensing a pattern here.
            God – amateur geologist and professional serial killer.

          • expect_resistance

            I don’t have a self esteem problem but it sounds like you have some issues. My Goddess is pro-choice.

          • Nor

            Nope. A female god would get it. Especially a female god that killed as many babies as the male Bible god did, in the bible.

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            These are the rules that Jesus followed. I will stick with Jesus.

            “Jewish law not only permits, but in some circumstances requires abortion. Where the mother’s life is in jeopardy because of the unborn child, abortion is mandatory.

            An unborn child has the status of “potential human life” until the majority of the body has emerged from the mother. Potential human life is valuable, and may not be terminated casually, but it does not have as much value as a life in existence. The Talmud makes no bones about this: it says quite bluntly that if the fetus threatens the life of the mother, you cut it up within her body and remove it limb by limb if necessary, because its life is not as valuable as hers. But once the greater part of the body has emerged, you cannot take its life to save the mother’s, because you cannot choose between one human life and another.” – Judaism 101.

          • fidobite

            Plum, Jews are not Christians. Jesus was God incarnate on earth but rejected by the Jews as such. Jewish history is replete with their childlike violations of God’s commands, and their suffering for it. Christians live by the New Covenant – the acceptance of Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior. You’re most certainly welcome to live by Jewish law if that be your choice, but it is not Christian.

            Seriously, do you abide by the concept that a child is not a child when it’s 10 inches up the birth canal?? Certainly when one or both of the lives are at risk a medical expert is going to have to decide how or if it’s possible to save one, the other or both in an emergency. Plum, this has nothing to do with willfully deciding to end a baby’s life as a matter of convenience.

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            Correct. Christians are Jews.
            As I said, I follow the same rules Jesus followed.

          • fidobite

            ??? Christians are not Jews. Jesus was born into a Jewish home and raised in the Jewish tradition but He brought the New Covenant to the world – Christianity. He was God in the flesh and denied as such by those that clung to the traditional Jewish faith. You’re confused and you’re tripping a bit over your confusion, but it is understandable.

            As the central figure of the New Covenant Christian religion and, indeed, as God in the flesh, do you believe Jesus would have smiled on the killing of a fetus for convenience sake? What do you suppose his response would be if you walked up to Jesus and said, “Jesus, my partner and I decided a couple of months ago to have sexual relations but we didn’t really consider the chance of a pregnancy resulting. However, now that I’m with child, I was wondering if you’d mind if we just had the child removed from the womb and disposed of? You see it’s really inconvenient for me to take time to raise a child right now and, well, handing a newborn child over for adoption is just not really my style.” ??

            Walk with Jesus. You know what He would say.

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            I already posted the rules Jesus followed. They are not your rules. Stop lying and then calling yourself religious. It is so offensive.

          • fidobite

            Truly your reasoning is so contorted I suspect it must be physically painful for you. You’ve stated nothing about rules Jesus followed. You’re laughably trying to justify the unjustifiable. Baby murder is baby murder and you know Jesus would not approve. I rest my case with you, Plum. Good luck with the rest of your life – I will pray for you.

          • Suba gunawardana

            Repeating words doesn’t make a rebuttal. As I asked over ten times, WHY is it unjustifiable? “Because I say so” doesn’t count.

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            Once again, I post the rules that Jesus followed:

            “Jewish law not only permits, but in some circumstances requires abortion. Where the mother’s life is in jeopardy because of the unborn child, abortion is mandatory.

            An unborn child has the status of “potential human life” until the majority of the body has emerged from the mother. Potential human life is valuable, and may not be terminated casually, but it does not have as much value as a life in existence. The Talmud makes no bones about this: it says quite bluntly that if the fetus threatens the life of the mother, you cut it up within her body and remove it limb by limb if necessary, because its life is not as valuable as hers. But once the greater part of the body has emerged, you cannot take its life to save the mother’s, because you cannot choose between one human life and another.” – Judaism 101.

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            Quote: Truly your reasoning is so contorted I suspect it must be physically painful for you.
            ………..
            I wish you what you wish me.

          • lady_black

            Nobody but you is talking about baby murder.

          • goatini

            Baby murder should most definitely be prosecuted. And safe, legal pregnancy termination is, again, LEGAL.

          • Nor

            Weird how Jesus was alive for what, 31 years, and never once said a single thing about abortion, something that definitely existed in his time (stone age tribes in the Amazon have the ability to do it, we lost our herb lore during the Victorian era due to the removal of women from the health care field so our history of women always having had access to abortion throughout time have been largely erased). Seems like he just didn’t think it was an issue of importance. Jesus didn’t care, why do you?

          • Arekushieru

            So, you have other Gods before God? Wow, you should repent before you arrive at the pearly gates. Jesus WAS a Jew, Both in belief and birth of the times. So, what Jesus said to the Jews is HIGHLY relevant. Also, Jesus never said that he came to do away with what came before, but that he merely came to fulfill those promises. There’s a lot of promises I bet that you are failing to fulfill, right now. Finally, Jesus, unlike you, was a feminist.

          • fiona64

            Jesus was born into a Jewish home and raised in the Jewish tradition but
            He brought the New Covenant to the world – Christianity.

            Nope. Remember Matthew 5:17? Jesus said he did NOT come to abolish the old law.

            You seem to be confusing Jesus with Saul of Tarsus.

          • lady_black

            Jesus was a Jew his entire life. Start to finish. Deal with it. Jesus wasn’t a Christian.

          • goatini

            Yeshua, as a Rabbi, surely knew of pessaries and plant remedies. Or perhaps he referred those requests to his wise woman wife and partner, Mary of Magdala.

          • Nor

            He also wasn’t white. Jesus would cite Jewish law, ’cause he’s a Jew.

            Was Jesus pro or anti-slavery? Because that’s the topic at hand, as you know.

          • Nor

            Right. I do. He’d be against increasing illegal abortions. You are for increasing illegal abortions. Wait. You mean Jesus doesn’t say whatever I imagine him to say? He only says whatever you imagine him to say? I don’t like this game Mommy.

          • Nor

            “Jesus was a radical, non-violent revolutionary who hung around with lepers, hookers and crooks; wasn’t American and never spoke English; was anti-wealth, anti-death penalty, anti-public prayer (M 6:5), but was never anti-gay; never mentioned abortion or birth control; never called the poor ‘lazy’; never justified torture; never fought for tax cuts for the wealthiest Nazarenes; never asked a leper for a co-pay; and was a long-haired, brown-skinned, homeless, community-organizing, anti-slut-shaming, Middle Eastern Jew.”

            -John Fugelsang

          • Nor

            So in order to understand Jesus better, how much time have you spent in temple? You know any rabbis?

          • fiona64

            You cited the Bible, sweetie. Whether you like it or not, Jesus was Jewish.

            Seriously, do you abide by the concept that a child is not a child when it’s 10 inches up the birth canal?

            You have a very bizarre concept about the length of a woman’s vagina.

          • goatini

            I think it has more to do with his estimate of “10 inches”.

          • fiona64

            That occurred to me as well.

          • Nor

            Perhaps it’s a subtle dick brag?

          • Nor

            He’s never even seen one. You can understand how he might be confused as to the details.

          • lady_black

            Jesus was born Jewish and spent his entire life as Jewish. The iconic “Last Supper” was a Passover Seder. Abortion has a history that predates the first century world of Jesus. He is never quoted as saying a word against it. Nobody’s “birth canal” is ten inches long, and there are NO “children” in wombs.

          • goatini

            //Jewish history is replete with their childlike violations of God’s commands, and their suffering for it.//

            Sounds a bit anti-Semitic to me.

          • goatini

            //up the birth canal//

            It’s a vagina, not a waterway in Venice.

          • Shan

            How INconvenient would pregnancy and potential birth have to be and exactly who should get to decide whether a woman who wants to have an abortion is experiencing it?

          • P. McCoy

            When something depends on my body 100% for survival unto the point that it will take from Mine to my detriment (example: the ‘unborn baby’ will leech the calcium from my skeleton to form and reinforce its own unless I saturate my body via consumption of pills, liquids or foods that put extra calcium in my body to prevent this-the zygote, fetus, whatever is in a parasitical relationship with its host body-parasite does not equal personhood) then my physicality trumps theirs, just like my cat’s physicality trumps that of a flea. As for afterbirth, the child can be cared for by anyone it ceases to have a parasitic relationship. Instead of hurling inflammatory untruth as murderer, Moloch worshippers or worse excusing rapists, why not help real children in the
            real world. Oh, your attemps to convert sound condescending.

          • Suba gunawardana

            Exactly! Why doesn’t an “all-powerful and all-loving” god stop all this suffering when he CAN? Obviously you are worshiping & praying to a sadistic prick. Good luck with that!

            BTW isn’t your god “all-knowing”? Why do you need to pray at all?
            And if prayer works, why don’t you pray for him to stop abortion?

            Have you ever considered why the prayers of millions of fetus freaks through the ages have NOT been answered, and god still merrily performs abortions?

          • fidobite

            Perhaps a better question is why didn’t God create the world devoid of evil? That was His choice. I pray everyday for Him to stop abortion. I know he takes those lost souls to Himself but it is heartbreaking to think humans can be so callous.

            God didn’t need to create us at all and He certainly didn’t have to allow any of us to deny Him. He asks in the scriptures that we pray to Him. He gives you the choice to deny Him as you seem to have done. I don’t know why He doesn’t make you believe, or why He made you and me at all. He chose to and He has allowed us a free will and to question every act of His that we choose to question.

            I would be interested to know what it is that you have substituted for God as your foundation. Do you have a belief in something beyond your rejection of God? Do you “believe” in something greater than yourself, a “creator” or a source as your reference point? How would you explain evil in the world? What is it that would allow yourself to believe that removing a child from the womb and destroying it is an acceptable thing to do? Is it purely the pragmatic belief that it is simply a choice of convenience?

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            ‘Perhaps a better question is why didn’t God create the world devoid of evil? That was His choice.’
            ……………
            ‘I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.’ Isaiah 45:7.
            if God creates and is responsible for evil, then teaching Sin is an egregious lie. Essentially, God is abortion. Oops.

          • Ella Warnock

            Out of context!

            Whoo, first one in! ::fist pump::

          • catseye

            It would seem he _could_ do away with evil and will not; therefore he is malevolent.

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            That is a conclusion some reach. Personally, I like this answer. When asked on his deathbed if he could see God, the Rabbi replied “All I can see is the Divine Nothingness that gives life the the world.”

          • Suba gunawardana

            If god chose to create evil & suffering, just WHY do you worship
            this sadistic prick again? And if god chooses abortion, why do you
            engage in the futile exercise of praying for him to stop? Isn’t it “his
            choice”?

            “God didn’t need to create us at all”

            Exaclty. So the only reason he created this world was for his sadistic pleasure. To watch the innocent suffer & jack off. Why do you worship this creature again?

            “He asks in the scriptures that we pray to Him.”

            So does every politician. Why do you have do what some a-hole asks you to do? Don’t you have a mind of your own?

            “I would be interested to know what it is that you have substituted for God as your foundation.”

            I don’t “believe in” anything. I see reality as it is, i.e. this world is
            a torture chamber where the powerful run roughshod over the weak, and if we don’t help the needy & defenseless (and protect them from religious nuts like you), no one would.

            “What is it that would allow yourself to believe that removing a child from the womb and destroying it is an acceptable thing to do?”

            I don’t go around removing other women’s fetuses from their wombs. The choice is hers & hers alone. It is YOU who poke your nose into other people’s business where it doesn’t belong.

          • Arekushieru

            Pregnancy is NOT merely convenience, a$$hole. It is the THIRD leading cause of death for women, WORLDWIDE. If God didn’t know that, then why would He/She use increased pangs of childbirth as punishment for the ‘sins’ of Eve??? What would make YOU believe that removing a rapist from your body, even if you kill them is an acceptable thing? Oh, right, you already do, because rape can affect BOTH men and women. Since pregnancy only affects women, who cares, right? Hypocritical misogynist.

          • Nor

            Apparently God likes to kill pregnant women. Religious conservatives are clearly just interested in helping him out with that by increasing the numbers of lethal illegal abortions. God likes those too I guess.

          • fiona64

            Is it purely the pragmatic belief that it is simply a choice of convenience?

            The fact that you dismiss a medical condition that is potentially life-threatening for every woman who becomes pregnant as “mere inconvenience” speaks volumes about you. Abortion is 14 times *safer* than gestation and delivery. http://health.usnews.com/health-news/family-health/womens-health/articles/2012/01/23/abortion-safer-for-women-than-childbirth-study-claims

            My wanted pregnancy nearly killed me, and I will NOT go through that again. Should my tubal ligation fail, an abortion will be scheduled the second the stick turns blue.

          • goatini

            America is not a theocracy, and theism is not a requirement for citizenship.

            Do you agree with this theory of an “act of God” (NB: trigger rape warning)?

            “Children conceived in rape really are conceived in the mind of God not the loins of man.”

          • Mindy McIndy

            I have severe health issues that would kill me if I ever found myself pregnant. Carrying to term would literally KILL ME. Would my abortion be immoral in your eyes?

          • Nor

            Because there are a lot better religions in the world? Or even better, no religion at all.

          • Nor

            Well, we used to leave them on the mountainsides to die, or drown them in sacks, or just dump them in the local sewer. But now, we have the technology to end things so early that there is no pain, no awareness, which seems more humane to me. But hey, feel free to bring back the old ways if you like. I’ve always been fond of the Victorian era baby drop boxes they used to have, like returning books to the library, but those had a 10% survival rate after the first month, which is clearly a problem.

          • conversate

            Rates of infanticide drop with legal abortion:

            http://www.infanticide.org/history.htm

          • Nor

            Well, it’s clearly because it’s good for us to suffer. You could make a very good case to this effect – personal experience of pain teaches us empathy. Unfortunately many of the conservative Christian community have decided to ignore this and decided they can judge without personal experience, even when they clearly lack understanding and empathy. Not only can they judge, but they can take away other people’s legal rights to their own bodies, which is a remarkable power that I had thought died out after the Civil War. In their defense though, the Bible is strongly pro-slavery and anti-woman, so I guess we’re only getting our due.

          • fidobite

            Sent via the Samsung GALAXY S®4, an AT&T 4G LTE smartphone

            ——– Original message ——–From: Disqus Date:08/22/2014 10:04 PM (GMT-07:00) To: zx10man@gmail.com Subject: Re: New comment posted on I Want You to Eat a Taco, Drink a Beer, and Fund Abortion Settings

            A new comment was posted on RH Reality Check

            Suba gunawardana
            Exactly! Why doesn’t an “all-powerful and all-loving” god stop all this suffering when he CAN? Obviously you are worshiping & praying to a sadistic prick. Good luck with that! BTW isn’t your god “all-knowing”? Why do you need to pray at all?
            And if prayer works, why don’t you pray for him to stop abortion?
            Have you ever considered why the prayers of millions of fetus freaks through the ages have NOT been answered, and god still merrily performs abortions? 12:04 a.m., Saturday Aug. 23

            Reply to Suba gunawardana

            Suba gunawardana’s comment is in reply to fidobite:

            God gave man a free will, Suba. Why doesn’t He stop murder? Why doesn’t He stop war? Why doesn’t He deny miscarriage … Read more
            You’re receiving this message because you’re signed up to receive notifications about replies to fidobite.
            You can unsubscribe from emails about replies to fidobite by replying to this email with “unsubscribe” or reduce the rate with which these emails are sent by adjusting your notification settings.

          • conversate

            Idiot.

          • Suba gunawardana

            Your point?

          • fiona64

            I would ask you why would a woman who doesn’t want children chooses to have intercourse without some form of birth control?

            Is anyone really this great a simpleton? All forms of contraception, including surgical sterilization, have known failure rates.

            Furthermore, more than half of women who sought abortions *were* using contraception when they conceived. Among the cohort who were not were those whose wanted pregnancies went wrong.

            Oh, and 61 percent of women who seek abortions already have one or more children. I think that they know their circumstances better than YOU do, wouldn’t you agree?

            Source: http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/fb_induced_abortion.html

          • goatini

            America is not a theocracy.

            And you’re beginning to remind me of a certain rapists’ rights nutter I’ve seen out on the Internet. Here’s one of her quotes, that seems like something you would defend (NB: rape trigger warning):

            “Rape is of men. Where God places a baby after intercourse is HIS CHOICE!”

          • Nor

            Well, that’s the result of either some breathtakingly ineffective sex ed, or proof that God is Satan.

          • Nor

            “God gave man a free will, Suba. Why doesn’t He stop murder? Why doesn’t He stop war? Why doesn’t He deny miscarriage and all of the other unfortunate circumstances humans find themselves facing? Why doesn’t He stop people from thinking as you do? Your lack of belief in Him is the opening for evil to fill the void where morality is lacking.”

            Probably because He’s imaginary.

          • Paul Wagner

            When God lets a blastocyst live on its own without a womb, then I’ll think differently.

          • Max

            You will find these very confused souls on this blog .your are right .they are to be pitied .SAD SAD SAD

          • http://www.silverstatehope.org/ Hope

            Not everyone who has an abortion does so because she does not “want” the fetus in her uterus. In fact, most women *do* – but timing and circumstances are everything. 800 American women a year DIE as a result of childbirth. A Quarter of a Million more will have serious, long term health consequences (organ failure, the need for organ transplant, strokes, metabolic conditions like diabetes, going blind or deaf – pregnancy is DANGEROUS – and its 3 times more so for women of color ). Most women who have abortions are already mothers. Demanding that woman be forced carry a pregnancy that could kill or seriously harm her – is the same as demanding she be held in slavery until the end of the pregnancy (the 13th Amendment prohibits this). Since 1 in 3 American women will have an abortion – every time you step into a room with 4 women, realize that you are shaming someone into silence for making a choice she would rather not have had to make in the first place. Realize she did not get there alone – so shaming only women is disingenuous at least and misogynistic at worst. You shame the women in your own family, You shame your daughters, sisters, and even your mothers (who have the right not to tell you what they did or did not do with their own bodies). Its depressing to think that God intends stop a practice that has gone on since the dawn of womankind by asking men (and some women) to shame the people they love rather than helping make the world a better place (with education, birth control, decent workplace maternity laws, food subsidies, rent subsidies, free daycare, headstart, etc). So far the most proven (realistic) method for reducing the number of abortions is comprehensive sex ed and inexpensive/easy to access birth control. http://www.silverstatehope.org

        • juanmeden

          The real question is, why does God allow ugly, soulless ghouls like you to exist? You’re a blight on humanity.

          • fiona64

            How pro-life of you, Juan. And how many pregnancies will you be gestating, again?

          • Arekushieru

            Appearance-shaming, again? Looksist, misogynist.

          • Suba gunawardana

            LOL what makes you an expert on my looks or “soul”? And exactly what makes me a “blight on humanity”? As you should know, you declaring something doesn’t make it so.

            BTW if your god loves you, why DOES he allow people you hate to exist? Apparently he doesn’t love you at all…

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            God loves absolutely. Even a sick freak like you is going to heaven. Everybody goes to heaven.

          • Nor

            Oh dear. New agey conservatism. Not everybody goes to heaven. That’s the point. That’s why you are supposed to spend your entire life in terror of God’s judgement. That’s the whip hand that’s supposed to make you behave.

            The Jews believe everybody goes to Heaven, after paying penance in Hell. Christians don’t believe that. The Bible doesn’t say that. You suffer on this earth until you die and, for the vast majority, you end up in Hell regardless. There is no escape.

          • Arekushieru

            Y’know, Nor, I am a Christian, and I don’t believe in Hell, for one very good reason, something someone (a Jehovah’s Witness, if you can believe it) once read to me from the bible (because I don’t read it, myself). The example was that of an individual or group being burned alive due to committing some sin or another. However, this was the part that caught my attention: It then goes on to say “a thought that had NEVER even entered into God’s head” or something to that effect in relation to the horrifying torture displayed in that excerpt. It lead me to do some more reading on Hell and how it got introduced into the bible. Apparently, Hell was originally the realm of Hela’s, a Norse goddess. When people ran into trouble identifying the many layers of Gehenna they mislabeled some and ignored others. Purgatory is what became known as Hell, I believe. But, in ancient scripture, Purgatory merely referred to the graves that were believed to be the gateway to the next world, I think. What all of this means however is that Hell, in its contemporary form, never even existed in the Bible!

      • lady_black

        You don’t defend shyte. You can’t. But I’ll tell you what. Here’s how you can help. Write a big check to Planned Parenthood. Vote for those who will guarantee fact-based sex education. And don’t vote for politicians that want to balance the budget on the backs of poor women.

      • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

        Which god? Jehovah is a proabort. Hosea 13:16. Abortion is a sacrament.

      • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

        You come anywhere near my children to ‘defend’ them and I will introduce you to Mr. Smith and Mr. Wesson. Forced birth cultists like you are both crazy and dangerous. So many phony Christians, so few lions.

        • Ge0ffrey

          So you’re a gun nut?

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            So you’re a bedwetter?

          • goatini

            You have a problem with Second Amendment rights?

      • Arekushieru

        Nope, you are the ones who stand on the side of Hitler and ISIS. You are misogynists, like ISIS and you are anti-choice like Hitler. Too bad you are such a hypocrite, eh?

        • Ge0ffrey

          What about the choice of the unborn woman?

          • conversate

            It isn’t sentient. It has no choice.

          • Ge0ffrey

            Have you ever witnessed a film of an unborn child trying to avoid getting its spine snipped?

          • conversate

            Those videos are fake. Fetuses are not conscious in utero.

            And the majority of abortions happen at the embryonic stage – on mindless tissue.

          • Ge0ffrey

            So you might be against some abortions — patial birth abortions, for example.

          • conversate

            Partial birth abortions are illegal. Late term abortions are recommended for medical emergency.

            Women don’t choose abortion at 30 weeks on a whim, kiddo.

          • Ge0ffrey

            What is the percentage of women who abort as a means of birth control?

          • Shan

            100%. Pregnant woman have abortions when they can’t or don’t want to give birth.

          • Ge0ffrey

            You apparently answer for all women who abort. Let me answer for the unbornd child: “Don’t kill me, mother.”

          • conversate

            You assume that every prenate would choose to be born. You would be wrong.

          • Ge0ffrey

            All living things struggle to live, from the smallest single celled plant or animal to the most complex…with the exception of the nihilist intellectual, and members of planned parenthood. Life itself speaks for itself. It’s not an idea.

          • Suba gunawardana

            So as I asked before: Should people stop killing animals and plants?

          • fiona64

            So much existential angst among the anti-choice! Most people outgrow that at about age 12.

          • conversate

            Bafflegab.

            Try saying something substantial. honey.

          • Arekushieru

            Sorry, but Planned Parenthood offers more life and health-saving services than CPCs or Pro-‘Life’ would ever believe necessary to offer. Oops.

          • Nor

            Life is doing a fantastically shitty job at proving itself valuable or even marginally redeeming. You, for example.

          • Shan

            How do you do that? Do you move the wee embryo’s mouth like a puppeteer? You realize where you have to stick your hand to do that, right?

          • Ge0ffrey

            How do you speak for all women who abort?

          • Jennifer Starr

            We don’t. We say that the decision to end or continue a pregnancy should be theirs.

          • goatini

            Each woman who chooses to exercise her civil, human and Constitutional rights to avail herself of a safe, legal minor outpatient medical procedure with an exceedingly high safely profile SPEAKS FOR HERSELF.

          • Shan

            Uh, because every woman who has an abortion does it to end a pregnancy and ending a pregnancy will stop a birth, hence why, to answer your question again, 100% of them are using it as birth control. I’m not speaking “for” anybody. It’s very simple logic.

          • Arekushieru

            We’re not. We’re asking that they be given the right to speak for themselves. Oops.

          • Nor

            How do you speak for every fetus that dies?

          • Suba gunawardana

            If I were the fetus whose only option was being born to a mother who doesn’t want me, I would be screaming “kill me now!”

          • Ge0ffrey

            There are so many people who have been born into the most terrible circumstances who have witnessed for life.

          • Suba gunawardana

            And there are MORE who kill themselves, attempt suicide, kill others, or live unproductive lives of crime & drug abuse. The fact that SOME beat the odds does not justify condemning others to a horrible fate

          • Nor

            What does “witnessed for life” mean? It’s a meaningless phrase to normal English speakers.

          • lady_black

            Yeah. That’s YOUR thought, not that of “the unbornd child.”

          • P. McCoy

            Agreed, lady and if it could.comprehend I would reply: I am not your mother, self preservation is the first law of survival and every child a WANTED child!

          • goatini

            Geez, is this one of those creepers that stalks and harasses innocent patients at medical facilities, screaming to try and inflict false blame, false shame, and false guilt upon innocent citizens?

            “The Screamers” are one of the types of stalkers described here:

            http://everysaturdaymorning.net/2011/10/26/pick-an-anti-part-2/

          • Nor

            As the child of an abusive insane alcoholic mother, I beg to differ.

          • fiona64

            What is the percentage of men who will ever risk their life and health by gestating a pregnancy?

          • lady_black

            I would say 100%, since they will not be giving birth.

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            More than seven in 10 U.S. women obtaining an abortion report a religious affiliation (37% protestant, 28% Catholic and 7% other), and 25% attend religious services at least once a month.[38] The abortion rate for protestant women is 15 per 1,000 women, while Catholic women have a slightly higher rate, 22 per 1,000.[32]

          • Nor

            You mean the ones who don’t get free birth control at every corner store, grocery store, doctors office and middle school?

            Apparently it’s 1/3 of women. That upset you?

          • goatini

            But since there is no such thing as an so-called “partial birth abortion”, you would continue to be full of the same BS with which you have polluted these messages.

            Intact dilation and extraction WAS (1) the best, safest way to perform a tragic late-term legal termination, and (2) a compassionate method that allowed the grieving parent(s) and family to view and mourn the tragically lost fetus, intact. This procedure was performed ONLY in safe, legal late-term terminations, ONLY in the very, very few cases of tragic later-term fetal diagnoses. But due to batshit insane gynoticians and their radical theocratic misogynist followers, this compassionate and medically superior method was branded something that it most emphatically is and was NOT – so that the GOTP could score some Red Meat points with the slavering knuckle-dragging RWNJs.

            These are facts.

          • Ge0ffrey

            There is no “superior method” for killing an unborn child. What an outrageous statement.

          • goatini

            So, it is preferable to you that when a pregnant woman receives a tragic fetal diagnosis, her only options should be to (1) carry the doomed fetus until “natural birth”, no matter the risk to her own health (physical AND mental); or (2) undergo a far more risky procedure than intact D&X, with significantly increased chances for infection and complications, that does not provide an intact fetus for the family to mourn?

            THAT is what is “outrageous”. You do not care one iota for the pregnant woman or for her family in such a tragedy. These late-term terminations occur ONLY in the very, very few cases of tragic later-term fetal diagnoses. You haven’t a shred of actual compassion for actual persons.

          • Shan

            I shouldn’t think the method would matter to the fetus anyway, considering that from 20wks on, it’s given an injection to stop its heart. Which pretty much makes all the 20wk bans based on the mistaken idea that the fetus can feel pain at 20wks pretty much moot.

            http://www.drhern.com/en/abortion-services/second-trimester-abortion.html

          • Ge0ffrey

            This is my position:

            Operations, treatments, and medications that have as their direct purpose the cure of a proportionately serious pathological condition of a pregnant woman are permitted when they cannot be safely postponed until the unborn child is viable, even if they will result in the death of the unborn child.

            It may be a serious question of health, sometimes of life or death, for the mother; it may be the burden represented by an additional child, especially if there are good reasons to fear that the child will be abnormal or retarded; it may be the importance attributed in different classes of society to considerations of honor or dishonor, of loss of social standing, and so forth. However, none of these reasons can ever objectively confer the right to dispose of another’s life, even when that life is only beginning. Life is too fundamental a value to be weighed against even very serious disadvantages

          • Ivy Mike

            Well, there it is, ladies…once a blastocyst exists within you, you become a third-class citizen at best, fit only to gestate “new life”. Any rights you thought you had are subservient to those of that blastocyst.

            Any hopes, dreams, family, plans, or health you might have entertained or enjoyed? Worthless, non-existant.

            So sayeth those who listen to the ravings of the world’s largest organization of pedophiles.

          • Ge0ffrey

            You, on the other hand, prefer a woman whom you can use as a vessel for your pleasure with no consequence or responsibility.

          • fiona64

            I know that this is a scary thought, but bear with me.

            Just because no one wants to f*ck *you* doesn’t mean that the rest of the world has to be celibate. Nor does it mean that sex is solely for procreation.

            I’m glad to have rectified this gap in your education.

          • goatini

            Women are also fond of pleasure with no consequence or responsibility. In other words, sex without fear of unwanted parenthood at that particular moment in time. If you think all of your sexual acts should be procreative, more power to you – I have no desire to interfere with your sex life.

          • Nor

            He’s probably never seen a woman experience pleasure from having sex with him. One can understand his confusion on the subject.

          • fiona64

            I don’t think he’s ever *been with* a woman.

          • Jennifer Starr

            How so?

          • Suba gunawardana

            A woman is not an inanimate object. There’s your very basic mistake.

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            No thank you.
            I will have hot earth shaking thigh melting sex.
            I will use contraception.
            If I become pregnant, I will gestate or abort as I see fit.
            Not as YOU see fit. Not as the RCC sees fit.
            Signed, a baptized and confirmed Roman Catholic woman.

          • Nor

            Excellent point. No one brings up the male half of this equation. Mandatory sperm banking and vasectomies for all males beyond the age of 12 will solve this problem overnight. Abortions will be almost eliminated, except to save the life of the mother in case of complication. Problem solved.

          • Ivy Mike

            Oh, do you know me or something? Have we met at some point? Because you seem to know so much about me.

            Or, you are simply yet another presumptuous religious cultist who thinks he can shove people into nice little cubbyholes depending on their opinions. Much easier to both dehumanize them and dismiss them that way.

            So, Fr. Torquemada, explain what’s actually wrong with having sex for fun. And please, don’t paste your cult’s bullshit again…those of us who are not members really don’t care what that batch of pedos has to say about anything sexual.

            Once you’re done there, you can really impress me if you can make a logical, reasoned case why your cult’s millennia-old Middle Eastern tribal laws should be used as a basis for OUR laws in the present century, and why such superstitious claptrap should be given any consideration at all, especially since its promoters’ history of evil hipocrysy renders their opinions on these matters irrellevant.

          • Shan

            So does that mean you think all abortions (other than the ones you outlined) should be illegal?

          • Jennifer Starr

            Very glib and easy to say, isn’t it– when you know you’ll never have to deal with an unwanted or dangerous pregnancy.

          • goatini

            And all said by Roman Catholic clergy (it was all a copy pasta job of Vatican boys-club twaddle), so we’re doubly assured that it was all very glib and easy to say by its original authors, as well.

          • goatini

            Let’s review:

            You said “none of these reasons”, of which one reason was “death, for the mother”, “can ever objectively confer the right to dispose of another’s life, even when that life is only beginning”.

            And so, in your opinion, the death of the mother is nothing more than a “serious disadvantage” when compared to the overwhelmingly superior “fundamental value” of the fetus.

            Again – THAT is what is “outrageous”. You do not care one iota for the pregnant woman or for her family in such a tragedy, and you’ve made that even MORE abundantly clear.

          • Ge0ffrey

            This is what I wrote:

            Operations, treatments, and medications that have as their direct purpose the cure of a proportionately serious pathological condition of a pregnant woman are permitted when they cannot be safely postponed until the unborn child is viable, even if they will result in the death of the unborn child.

          • goatini

            Let’s start here to invalidate what you misguidedly think is a “disclaimer”:

            //are permitted when they cannot be safely postponed until the unborn child is viable//

            First, get it straight that it’s a fetus, and not an “unborn child”, since no such entity exists. Moving on, it’s a fact that the fetus in the vast majority of these late-term tragic cases is never going to actually be “viable”, in the real sense of being able to successfully survive and be healthy after a late or full term birth.

            The above weasel words of yours that I quoted are EXACTLY how Catholic hospitals simply let women die. If there’s a fetal heartbeat, but the fetus is completely in fact unviable, women have been left to die – or, if they are lucky, saved by a Church-prohibited act done by a compassionate health care professional. For examples, see: Sr Margaret McBride and Bp Thomas Olmstead; also see Savita Halappanavar; also see physician testimony to the NIH: “This woman is dying before our eyes. I went in to examine her, and I was able to find the umbilical cord through the membranes and just snapped the umbilical cord and so that I could put the ultrasound—“Oh look. No heartbeat. Let’s go.” She was so sick she was in the [intensive care unit] for about 10 days and very nearly died… . (from “When There’s A Heartbeat: Miscarriage Management in Catholic Hospitals” – http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2636458/)

            And now, this is what you wrote that follows your impotent fake “disclaimer”:

            //It may be a serious question of health, sometimes of life or death, for the mother… However, none of these reasons can ever objectively confer the right to dispose of another’s life, even when that life is only beginning. Life is too fundamental a value to be weighed against even very serious disadvantages.//

            You’re not fooling anyone here. Your “premise” includes conditions that in no way protect the actual patient here – the WOMAN.

          • Nor

            Pregnancy itself is a dangerous condition. How many women have to suffer maiming or death due to forced pregnancy before you generously decide perhaps it should be something that can only be engaged in willingly?

            And it sounds like you are all for forcing victims of rape and incest to remain pregnant. Is that correct?

          • fiona64

            Actually, it’s what someone else wrote and you plagiarized.

          • goatini

            First, get it straight that it’s a fetus, and not an “unborn child”, since no such entity exists. Moving on, it’s a fact that the fetus in the vast majority of these late-term tragic cases is never going to actually be “viable”, in the real sense of being able to successfully survive and be healthy enough to have a fair chance at recovery after a late or full term birth.

            The above weasel words of yours that I quoted are EXACTLY how Catholic hospitals simply let women die. If there’s a fetal heartbeat, but the fetus is completely in fact unviable, women have been left to die – or, if they are lucky, saved by a Church-prohibited act done by a compassionate health care professional. For examples, see: Sr Margaret McBride and Bp Thomas Olmstead; also see Savita Halappanavar; also see physician testimony to the NIH: “This woman is dying before our eyes. I went in to examine her, and I was able to find the umbilical cord through the membranes and just snapped the umbilical cord and so that I could put the ultrasound—“Oh look. No heartbeat. Let’s go.” She was so sick she was in the [intensive care unit] for about 10 days and very nearly died… . (from “When There’s A Heartbeat: Miscarriage Management in Catholic Hospitals” – http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pm

            You’re not fooling anyone here. Your “premise” includes conditions that in no way protect the physical and mental health of the actual patient here – the WOMAN.

          • fiona64

            Shorter Geoffrey: women are nothing but EasyBake Ovens whose job is to churn out infants. And if they die, well, tough nuts.

            You’re disgusting.

          • goatini

            I also need to point out the unconscionable, and the incomprehensible, in the rest of the “position”. I’ll start with the unconscionable:

            //it may be the burden represented by an additional child//

            These are not late-term terminations. And this decision is not up to anyone else but the pregnant woman. A significant number of safe, legal terminations performed for this reason result in the woman happily and willingly bearing more children at a time in her life when she is more prepared to do so. And again, this decision is not up to anyone else but the pregnant woman.

            //especially if there are good reasons to fear that the child will be abnormal or retarded//

            Some of these terminations can be later-term terminations, especially if accurate diagnostics and testing cannot be successfully completed until later in the pregnancy. And regardless of anyone else’s personal feelings, this decision is not up to anyone else but the pregnant woman. This topic invariably is fraught with forced-birther propaganda about cute very high-achieving Down toddlers, and adorable very high-achieving Down students – and also, unfortunately, heaps of concocted false anecdata of the “my sister’s friend’s niece was told that the fetus had (insert defect &/or anomaly here), but it was born perfectly healthy, so doctors are often wrong” type. A more accurate picture of these family tragedies can be found at http://www.aheartbreakingchoice.com/Stories/Stories.aspx. Again, this decision is not up to anyone else but the pregnant woman, and it’s abusive and insulting to attempt to interfere with family tragedies that are none of your business.

            And finally, the incomprehensible:

            //it may be the importance attributed in different classes of society to considerations of honor or dishonor, of loss of social standing, and so forth.//

            I have no idea what this is supposed to mean. I’m assuming it is maybe referring to some kind of ethnic custom, but am unsure of whether it is about patriarchal misogynist male-dominated cultures and female fetuses being terminated because they are worthless in a misogynist society (which says everything about the MALES in such a society); or about wanting to force violent felony sexual assault victims to gestate the mentally ill criminal’s damaged DNA to term; or about something else that I’m just not getting here.

          • Suba gunawardana

            Your “position” is not backed up by logic or reason. “Life is too fundamental a value to be weighed against even very serious disadvantages”

            You have yet to address my repeated question: If it’s perfectly OK for you to take the lives of animals against their will to for your necessity/convenience, what right do you have to oppose a woman taking the life of a fetus for her own necessity/convenience?

          • Ge0ffrey

            Once again, you need to take up your argument on a vegetarian website.

          • goatini

            Based on your “position”, I’d advise you to take up your argument on the National Catholic Register.

          • Suba gunawardana

            Once again, food is NOT the only reason animals are killed. What’s your position on animals killed for reasons OTHER THAN food?

            Remember, plants are “unique” living beings too. What about the plants you kill for your necessity and convenience?

            If it’s fine for you to kill some innocent living beings for YOUR convenience, why can’t someone else kill for their convenience?

            The more you avoid this question, the weaker your “position” becomes.

          • Ge0ffrey

            Animals are God’s creatures. He surrounds them with his providential care. By their mere existence they bless him and give him glory. Thus men owe them kindness. We should recall the gentleness with which saints like St. Francis of Assisi or St. Philip Neri treated animals.

            God entrusted animals to the stewardship of those whom he created in his own image. Hence it is legitimate to use animals for food and clothing. They may be domesticated to help man in his work and leisure. Medical and scientific experimentation on animals is a morally acceptable practice, if it remains within reasonable limits and contributes to caring for or saving human
            lives.

            It is contrary to human dignity to cause animals to suffer or die
            needlessly. It is likewise unworthy to spend money on them that should as a priority go to the relief of human misery. One can love animals; one should not direct to them the affection due only to persons.

          • Jennifer Starr

            Are you an actual person or simply a robot who copies and pastes from the Cathechism? Do you actually have any ideas of your own?

          • goatini

            I just also posted that he’s a Catechism-bot.

          • goatini

            Please stop insulting us by cutting and pasting parts of the Catechism.

            Paragraph 1:
            Directly verbatim from the Catechism of the Catholic Church, Part 3, Section 2, Chapter 2, Article 7, Paragraph 2416.

            Paragraph 2:
            Directly verbatim from the Catechism of the Catholic Church, Part 3, Section 2, Chapter 2, Article 7, Paragraph 2402.

            Paragraph 3:
            Directly verbatim from the Catechism of the Catholic Church, Part 3, Section 2, Chapter 2, Article 7, Paragraph 2418.

          • Ge0ffrey

            Of course it is. And? I can’t make a better argument.

          • goatini

            That doesn’t say very much for your “argument”.

          • Ge0ffrey

            Why not?

          • goatini

            I could start with sensus fidelium.

          • Ge0ffrey

            You mean you get to make it up as you go along? If it feels right, do it?

          • goatini

            Not at all. In fact, sensus fidelium is the topic for the 2015 convention of the Catholic Theological Society of America.

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            Yes indeed. That is Ratzinger’s advice.
            “Over the pope as the expression of the binding claim of ecclesiastical authority there still stands one’s own conscience, which must be obeyed before all else, if necessary even against the requirement of ecclesiastical authority. Conscience confronts [the individual] with a supreme and ultimate tribunal, and one which in the last resort is beyond the claim of external social groups, even of the official church.”
            (Pope Benedict XVI [then Archbishop Joseph Ratzinger], “Commentary on the Documents of Vatican II”, ed. Vorgrimler, 1968, on Gaudium et spes, part 1, chapter 1.)

          • Ge0ffrey

            This is not Cardinal Ratzinger giving you permission to have an abortion. This is Cardinal Ratzinger reminding you that you, Plumb Dumpling, bear the ultimate responsibility and consequence for each free will choice that you make. You either say yes to God, or no. That mass of cells gestating in a mother’s womb is a child of God made in the image and likeness of God.

          • Suba gunawardana

            So Geoffrey, what exactly IS the consequence of choosing abortion?

            Also, if that mass of cells is a “child of god”, why doesn’t god protect his child as any good parent should?

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            “This is not Cardinal Ratzinger giving you permission to have an abortion.”
            ………
            Where did I say that? You said that. You argue by misquotation. How tacky.

          • goatini

            “God” hasn’t a thing to do with it.

          • Suba gunawardana

            Because you STILL haven’t answered my question. You are all for killing the innocent when it’s convenient for YOU. So what’s wrong with someone else killing the innocent when it’s convenient for them?

          • Jennifer Starr

            Kind of sad to admit that you have no actual ideas of your own. And I trust you do realize that not all of us follow your religion of choice.

          • Ge0ffrey

            And yours are all original?

          • goatini

            We read, discern, and communicate in our own voices, except where specifically noted. Some discernment might do you well.

          • Jennifer Starr

            They’re not copied and pasted, if that’s what you’re asking. And if I do happen to copy and paste I have the decency to list the source. Are you capable of paraphrasing, perhaps? Putting something into your own words? Or is that too difficult or blasphemous or something?

          • Ge0ffrey

            Very few of mine were copied and pasted; only those in which I could not make a better argument.

          • Jennifer Starr

            And would you be capable of putting those in your own words?

          • Ge0ffrey

            Yes, if I weren’t having multiple discussions and had the time. I’m out of time now. I stand where I stand. Abortion is the killing of an unborn child.

          • Jennifer Starr

            If you comprehend the source material, putting it in your own words shouldn’t be time consuming. If you copy and paste something that is not your original work, you need to list the source.

          • Suba gunawardana

            That would be a valid argument ONLY if you were opposed to killing the innocent under any and all circumstances. Since you are not, you have no justification for opposing abortion while condoning OTHER killings of the innocent.

            Also there’s no such thing as an “unborn child”

          • Shan

            ” Abortion is the killing of an unborn child.”

            So? It’s not the killing of an unborn toaster. Everybody knows that already.

          • goatini

            No, it isn’t. No such thing as an “unborn child”, since you are not an “undead corpse”, and all children, ever, have already been born. Since your cut and paste “debate” has been exposed, you’ve done nothing but post deliberately ignorant falsehoods to defend your indefensible position.

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            No thank you. I will stick with the rules that Jesus Christ followed. The RCC can stick their ‘reasoning’ up the Pope’s cloaca. And I am a Catholic.

            Jewish law not only permits, but in some circumstances requires abortion. Where the mother’s life is in jeopardy because of the unborn child, abortion is mandatory.

            An unborn child has the status of “potential human life” until the majority of the body has emerged from the mother. Potential human life is valuable, and may not be terminated casually, but it does not have as much value as a life in existence. The Talmud makes no bones about this: it says quite bluntly that if the fetus threatens the life of the mother, you cut it up within her body and remove it limb by limb if necessary, because its life is not as valuable as hers. But once the greater part of the body has emerged, you cannot take its life to save the mother’s, because you cannot choose between one human life and another.

          • fiona64

            Liar.

            None of this changes the fact that you took someone else’s work and tried to pretend it was your own.

            You’re one of those idiots who bought term papers to get through school, aren’t you?

          • Suba gunawardana

            Copying and pasting without giving credit to the source is what? Plagiarism.

          • Ge0ffrey

            Abortion is the killing of an unborn child. That is a fact.

          • Jennifer Starr

            And what does that have to do with plagiarism?

          • Suba gunawardana

            Abortion has nothing to do with plagiarism.

            Anyway, here’s a copy & paste of MY prior response to you: Once again, so what? You are all for killing the innocent when it’s convenient for YOU. So what’s wrong with someone else killing the innocent when it’s convenient for them?

            BTW “unborn child” is an oxymoron.

          • goatini

            Of course it isn’t, and you’re trying to change the subject, which is your cut and paste “debating” at the present time.

          • Nor

            Illegal abortion is the needless killing of an adult woman. That is a fact.

          • Arekushieru

            Nope. Abortion doesn’t involve killing. The cause of death for (what kills) a fetus is incompatibility with life upon separation from the uterus. It’s not the WOMAN’S fault that the fetus is life-dependent upon her uterus. If you dare claim she is you are setting a precedent for taking biological responsibility that need not be undertaken by ANYONE else. A fetus is not a child. Abortion does not involve children unless you are talking about maternal hosts as young as Lina Medina.

          • fiona64

            Nope. It’s the termination of a pregnancy. The embryo dies due to secondary effect.

          • conversate

            Hey Fiona, earthquake where you are?

          • goatini

            Felt it on the coastside

          • fiona64

            Yep. That sucker woke me up, and I didn’t get back to sleep until more than 12 hours later. All’s well at our house, though. Thank you for asking!

          • Jennifer Starr

            So glad that all is well

          • Suba gunawardana

            Glad you are OK…

          • Nor

            Then don’t get an abortion GeOffrey. But the instant you act to restrict that right from others is the instant you sign up to kill women needlessly, a 100% preventable harm. Just make sure you have that firmly in your mind.

          • Arekushieru

            How do you expect us to come up with original material when we are simply RESPONDING to what appear to be very UNORIGINAL material? Oops?

          • fiona64

            If I quote someone else, I give them credit. You are trying to claim these concepts are your own. That makes you a plagiarist … and a liar.

            Be sure to cite that during your next confession.

          • lady_black

            You may not present verbatim, the ideas of others as your own. That is plagiarism (theft). You have stolen someone else’s intellectual property. If you wish to use the thoughts of others, you must put it in quotation marks, and give credit to the author. You may use the ideas you read, expressed in your own words without quotation marks, even so, you must cite where you got the information if you yourself aren’t an expert in the field. You are a thief, plain and simple.

          • lady_black

            The you HAVE no “argument.”

          • fiona64

            At least have the courtesy to cite your fucking *sources,* instead of being a plagiarist.

          • Suba gunawardana

            Your only answer seems to be “God said it’s OK to kill animals, so it’s fine.” So let’s go with that logic.

            Your god NEVER said “abortion is wrong”. If god is against abortion, why does he never stop it? Why does he place so many zefs in the uteri of women who don’t want them? Why does god perform billions of abortions himself, in the form of miscarriage?

            Your god LOVES abortion. “God said so” doesn’t work. So again, what’s your reasoning for opposing abortion?

          • lady_black

            What your “god” thinks means less to me than what YOU think, which is to say, not a bit.

          • fiona64

            It is likewise unworthy to spend money on them that should as a priority go to the relief of human misery. One can love animals; one should not direct to them the affection due only to persons.

            You are cordially invited to suck it. I decide where my affection goes.

            All the hatred, a shelter volunteer who sees the results of animal cruelty every day. Cruelty which YOU just excused with your remarks.

          • conversate

            Plagiarist.

          • Nor

            Then I’m pretty sure you can’t eat any meat in this country that you haven’t raised yourself, or seen raised and slaughtered by a local farmer to your specs.

            I’d love to see some humane Christian meat on the market.

            I also like how you are much more concerned with the welfare of animals than you are that of women. I guess some things are just more important than others.

          • lady_black

            More plagiarism, no doubt.

          • goatini

            //This is my position://

            The first paragraph of the “position” is, verbatim, Directive 47 of the USCCB Guidelines for Catholic Healthcare Services.

            The second paragraph of the “position” is taken verbatim from Section IV, Paragraph 14 of the Vatican’s 1974 “Declaration On Procured Abortion”, published by the CDF, the successor to the Supreme Sacred Congregation of the Roman and Universal Inquisition.

            This information should clear things up for everyone here.

          • Shan

            “This information should clear things up for everyone here.”

            Ayup.

          • fiona64

            Aww, isn’t that cute? Geoffrey is a plagiarist.

          • cjvg

            Oops should have read a little further before I commented on saint George there

          • lady_black

            I get to decide what serious disadvantages I am willing to undergo. YOU get to mind your own fucking business, wanker.

          • Arekushieru

            Really? Then why can rape victims kill the perpetrators when they are raping them? Bodily integrity is presupposed by life. Or would you say that someone who is being raped wouldn’t be as bad as killing their rapist? If so, you are one disgusting, sick freak. If not, as I would gather is the case, from your OWN comments regarding the life of a fetus when the host’s own life is in danger and in immediate need of treatment, making clear that life is only a fundamental value under SOME circumstances, you are a freaking hypocritical misogynist. Would you presume to judge someone who is undergoing torture for killing themselves or killing the ones who torture them? If so, you are a soulless ghoul with not an ounce of compassion or mercy for anyone BUT yourself. If not, as I suspect is the case, again, from your OWN comments regarding animal welfare and the treatment of animals, why are you so opposed to women terminating pregnancies (which is ALL that abortion is about) in order to prevent the future suffering of the resultant child? Again, hypocrite, much?

          • Nor

            Wait wait wait. You would suffer a woman to live, knowing that her life has killed what you call her child??? Cruel sir, cruel.

          • cjvg

            Well I am not catholic so there goes that. Clearly your reasoning does nor apply to me since these are not my believes. However I’m perfectly ok with it if you choose not to have an abortion, after al that is why I’m pro choice!

          • lady_black

            Your position rules in YOUR life, and most certainly NOT in my life.

          • fiona64

            You know, the ignorance constant on display by the anti-choice is absolutely mind-boggling. Intact D&E was the safest way to deal with a doomed pregnancy, preserving the woman’s future fertility and allowing her some closure. Ghouls like you decided that it was too “icky” and managed to convince an idiot in the Oval Office of the same.

            You are NOT an OB/GYN; you do NOT get to opine on medical decisions and methodologies as though you WERE.

          • Ge0ffrey

            You know nothing about me or my personal experience.

          • goatini

            Nor you of ours.

          • Jennifer Starr

            We know that you’re not an OB/GYN

          • Shan

            If the personal experience of every woman having an abortion isn’t relevant to you, why should your personal experience of nothing related to any of that be relevant to anyone else?

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            We know you know nothing at all about medicine, science or human reproduction. You have made that obvious.

          • fiona64

            I think it’s a pretty safe be that your life has never been threatened by gestation, *Geoffrey.*

          • Nor

            Why not enlighten us?

          • cjvg

            If you are, you clearly did not go to an accredited medical school since your medical knowledge is severely lacking. This would mean you are not able to receive a license to practice medicine ergo you are NOT a doctor

          • lady_black

            We damn sure know you are NOT an OB/GYN.

          • lady_black

            Yeah, there really is. It’s the method safest for the mother, depending on circumstance.

          • Nor

            Yes there is. There is the legal vs. the illegal abortion. The latter kills women. Nice to know you are being very clear about your desire to watch more women die slow horrible deaths (sepsis ain’t a pretty way to go, it takes days, and painkiller are ineffective).

          • Arekushieru

            So, that means you think a doomed pregnancy is a superior method to killing a woman. Fetuses aren’t children.

          • Arekushieru

            So, that means you think a doomed pregnancy is a superior method to killing a woman. Fetuses aren’t children.

          • Nor

            Sure there is. The method that is least likely to kill the woman, and performed early enough to avoid ethical concerns. Which means free, legal, widely available, abortion and birth control available to all.
            The opposite of that is illegal abortion. Which you support.

          • Arekushieru

            Made up term. And YOUR ilk are the ones that made it illegal, not only putting a woman’s life and health at FURTHER risk, but ensuring that fetuses would not be removed intact, something you people supposedly so abhor.

          • Ge0ffrey

            I’m still waiting for you to produce evidence that the videos (whatever videos you think I’m referring to) are fake.

          • conversate
          • Ge0ffrey

            But is the video itself fake? (I’ve never seen The Silent Scream, BTW.)

          • conversate

            Yes. They sped it up and everything to give the wrong impression.

          • lady_black

            That particular video is fake, yes.

          • lady_black

            I don’t believe these “videos” you speak of are fake, I believe they don’t even exist.

          • fiona64

            Here’s a little hint: you are the one who made the positive assertion. The burden of proof is on *you.* Most of us learn this in high school debate class.

            So, cough up your “video of a fetus avoiding its spine being snipped.” I’ll wait.

          • cjvg

            For that to happen you must first produce these video’s you claim exist.

          • lady_black

            Produce it, and I’ll debunk it. But, you won’t produce anything, because no such thing exists. No “spines” are ever “snipped” in a safe, legal abortion.

          • Suba gunawardana

            All animals killed for human consumption (or any other reason) not only try to run off/ avoid being killed, but genuine fear shows in their eyes much of the time.

            Should people stop killing animals?

          • Ge0ffrey

            Everything we eat has given up its life so that we may live. Every meal is a sacrifice. (I hope you’re not thinking of eating unborn children. Are you?)

          • Suba gunawardana

            They don’t give up their life voluntarily. If it’s perfectly ok for you to take the lives of animals against their will to for your necessity/convenience, what right do you have to oppose a woman taking the life of a fetus for her own necessity/convenience?

          • Jennifer Starr

            Everything we eat has given up its life so that we may live.

            How so?

          • Nor

            Joffrey? Is that you?

          • Shan

            Do you really think they stick scissors up into a woman’s uterus during an abortion?

          • Nor

            The only time I’ve ever heard of that is with illegal abortions. Which GeOffrey wants to see a lot more of.

          • Jennifer Starr

            No, and neither have you.

          • fiona64

            Nope, and neither have you or anyone else.

          • goatini

            No. No such thing exists.

          • P. McCoy

            Have you seen a rape victim go on a hunger strike fighting to get an intruder out of her body? Nope only the non sentient fetus exploited in the hands of a sci fi filmmaker only matters to you.Well if my life physically or mentally was in danger that entity could twist away for eternity but it would get excised faster than you could say hoot gibson! Besides, it’s easy for you a malemto comment on something you will never experience in your OWN body!

          • lady_black

            No and neither have you. Post a link or be known as a liar.

          • Nor

            You couldn’t even get a several month old child to avoid getting it’s spine snipped. They’re kinda dumb and blind, if you haven’t noticed.

          • lady_black

            No capability for choice. No unborn women either.

          • goatini

            No such thing as an “unborn woman”. Women are legal adults.

          • Arekushieru

            There are no unborn ‘women’. Calling them women shows how much you think of ACTUAL women. Thanks for that. Tell me, if a woman was raping you, would you say HER choice is just as important as yours? No? Hypocrite.

        • Nor

          Hey, Hitler was conservative Christian just like you, and ISIS is also a conservative religious group. They share your opinions perfectly on this subject, I’m sure. Too bad you’re in with such awesome company, eh?

      • Shan

        How does one “defend the little ones in the womb”? Do you send guards? There’s hardly any ROOM for them up in there.

        • Nor

          Maybe if you keep a penis up there at all times a baby won’t come out? You know, like a cock cork? I am willing to sacrifice myself for this important scientific experiment. I’ll report back, for the good of womankind.

          fidobite et al would probably prefer if all of us just kept a dick in our mouths at all times. And one in either hand. That way we couldn’t type, speak, or vote. After I finish this experiment I’ll let you know how that one goes!

          • Shan

            LOL! COCK CORK!

          • conversate

            I like Nor.

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            Oh I like the way you think.

      • Nor

        Nazi’s and ISIS also both believe God is on their side too! Imagine the fun you guys will all have hashing it out at the gates of heaven!

      • Mike Rubin

        Good luck when YOUR final day comes. God abhors your sexual pathology. I have zero doubt that you also attack sex ed, contraception, “sodomy,” and gay marriage, and you upvote the endless comments on the Internet about “keeping your legs together” and “I shouldn’t have to pay for your fun.” You refer to “innocent babies” in reference to zygotes, embryos, and non-viable fetuses but your only use for those “innocent babies” is to use them as punishment for women who dare engage in non-procreational sex. (I am certain that you work actively both to ensure that no unwanted child goes unborn and that no unwanted child is given prenatal care or is fed, housed, clothed, educated, or cured of disease on your dead-souled, compassionless, self-absorbed, narcissistic, “not my brother’s keeper,” “I got mine,” anti-social-compact, cheapfizzuck objectivist dime, even though that makes YOU directly responsible for the births of all of those unwanted children.)

        For those listening carefully, it’s obvious that all Right to Lifer roads lead to the same place: A puritanical hatred of sexual pleasure — yours or theirs, in marriage or outside of it — that verges on outright mental illness. Mental illness needs treatment in therapy, not implementation in law.

        It’s because you all insist that everyone else be that way — and because it’s real living and breathing children who suffer when they are inflicted as punishment on people who don’t wan’t them, without you thugs taking responsibility for your so doing — that you Right to Lifers are degenerate phonies and the worst and most dangerous people alive today. God knows how much harm you intend to inflict on your beloved zygotes, embryos, and non-viable fetuses when their heads crown and why you insist their heads crown. God has reserved a special corner of hell, to which he has consigned you, all because you just don’t like all that icky sex.

        • conversate

          A puritanical hatred of sexual pleasure — yours or theirs, in marriage
          or outside of it — that verges on outright mental illness. Mental
          illness needs treatment in therapy, not implementation in law.

          Yes, and a pathological fear of death and the belief that they are special snowflakes. Bunch of narcissists who see women as slaves.

        • Shan

          Dayum, Son! Don’t hold back, say what you REALLY mean!

        • Ella Warnock

          Nicely said, Mike. And let’s not forget the existential angst: Wha, wha, what . . . if I never existed ? Like the big ol’ world wouldn’t have just gone right on turning.

      • Nor

        You donated a kidney yet? Hypocrisy is rampant it seems.

      • randomfactor

        Pretty simple to understand, Fidobite. We don’t hate women.

      • cjvg

        You know what the funny thing is, I can’t phantom how someone can be as cruel and inhumane as you, you completely deny that the women involved are actual living breathing human beings who can and do suffer from your cruelty

      • Max

        She is a total idiot ! Plum

      • Paul Wagner

        Saint Hildegard von Bingen–yes, a CATHOLIC SAINT–went around prescribing and mixing up abortion medicaments back in the 1100s. Chances are the Israelites of the Bible also had medicinal abortion and used it WITHOUT GUILT OR STIGMA. Learn history.

  • Unicorn Farm

    What’s a “leftist”. Someone who promotes lefthandedness?
    I keep seeing this word on right wing sites and it just seems… so……….. pointless and reactionary.

  • Ivy Mike

    Funny, I feel the same way about religious-right fanatics. I wonder which is closer to correct?

    Considering that ALL violence surrounding the abortion controversy has been perpetrated by religious-right fanatics, I think it’s me.

  • Ivy Mike

    Is that the best you’ve got? Pearl-clutching?

    Ever consider putting together a reasoned, evidence-based, non-emotional argument?

    • fidobite

      Ivy Mike, a baby is a human and no matter how “inconvenient” that child might be no one has a right to kill it. Your attempts to deny that are, yeah, simply “pearl-clutching” ghastly. God help you!

      • Jennifer Starr

        Killing babies is illegal. If you know of anyone who is killing babies, please inform the police.

      • Ivy Mike

        No one is talking about babies, kid. An embryo is not a baby.

        You have taken a human biology class at some point, right? In between the religious brainwashing?

        • fidobite

          My-o-my…how the mind twists and turns to justify the unjustifiable. Again, I’m going to pray for all of you here who persist with justifying baby murder. May God help you all come to your senses.

          • Suba gunawardana

            Who says it’s unjustifiable? Certainly not your god.

          • Ivy Mike

            Praying: talking to yourself and thinking you’re doing something.

          • lady_black

            You’re free to carry all the embryos and fetuses you want in your own uterus. You don’t get mine.

          • Ella Warnock

            Better yet, all pro-liars need to purchase their own smushie, plushie uterii to call their own. They can hug it and kiss it and call it George(ette)!

            http://www.ebay.com/itm/like/281418539240?lpid=82

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            Do not pray for me. God might think I hang out with you.

          • Nor

            You’ve clearly led a very sheltered life.

        • L-dan

          I really don’t think he has. I think he seriously thinks there’s a tiny wee baby that just needs to grow to the right size before it pops out.

          The only reason these mindless twits can consider a blastocyst to be an actual person is because it’s required in order for them to continue claiming abortion = murder. Nobody in their right mind would save a blastocyst…or a hundred of them…over a single toddler.

      • Suba gunawardana

        Are you claiming that it is absolutely completely wrong to kill any human under any circumstance?

      • lady_black

        Plain and simple, Fido… if it’s in my body, and I don’t want it there, OUT it goes!

      • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

        Every sentence in your post is a lie. Lying is a sin.

  • Jennifer Starr

    Don’t mince words, Lauren. Tell us how you really feel.

  • Jennifer Starr

    What is? Beer and tacos?

    • Mindy McIndy

      Can I opt for tequila and hummus instead? It’s easier on my gut.

      • Jennifer Starr

        Tequila and hummus sounds delicious :)

  • Justin Mattes-KC2GIK

    The money George Soros and others spen on DEFENDING arbotions they could provide actual abortiions for those who can;t afford them

    • Jennifer Starr

      Could they pay for your spelling lessons as well?

    • Nor

      Well, except then they couldn’t, because there’d be no place to have them. You get the logic? First the building and the doctors have to exist, then you can have the patients go there. Cart before the horse and all.

      • cjvg

        Should have read a little further down the board, I just finished making that point but you beat me to it!

    • cjvg

      If it is not defended then the right to have one will be taken away. How does that work out? Logic, it really is not as hard as you think. First step, actually look and think about what is happening and what you are about to say on it. You’ll look a lot smarter. Now do something about that spelling. There are spellcheck programs you can download, some are even free!

  • expect_resistance

    I’m eating a taco right now. Donations will be made later as well as beer post work. #TacoOrBeerChallenge

  • expect_resistance

    I iz laughing.

  • fidobite

    Tacos and beer for infanticide! Belch for baby murder! What a sick woman you are, Andrea, and all the rest of the supporters here. Simply nauseating.

    • Ivy Mike

      Awwww, does reality hurt that much?

    • Ella Warnock

      Here’s a paper bag. Do try to not get any on the carpet, thanks.

    • Jennifer Starr

      No one’s talking about infanticide or baby murder.

    • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

      Thank you, merciful God, for forty years and counting of safe and legal medical abortion and contraception. Praise your Holy Name.

    • conversate

      Embryos are not infants. Infants have functional brains

      • Ge0ffrey

        You would probably agree with Hitler, then, that the mentally deficient should be euthanized.

        • conversate

          Strawman fallacy, moron.

          • Ge0ffrey

            I always cheer up immensely if an attack is particularly wounding because I think, well, if they attack one personally, it means they have not a single political argument left.

            Margaret Thatcher

          • conversate

            Actually, you accused me of being just like Hitler.

            That = a personal attack, on top of being a straw man.

            Try again.

          • Ge0ffrey

            Mine was a perfrectly logical, valid argument:
            You believe the unborn should be killed because they don’t have functional brains.
            Hitler euthanized those without functional brains.
            Therefore, you agree with Hitler.

          • conversate

            No. They are non-sentient. They are incapable of consciousness. A disabled person still has a mind. An embryo is comparable to a beating heart cadaver – live body with ZERO higher brain function.

          • Ge0ffrey

            If the unborn child is non-sentient, why does it try to avoid getting its spine snipped? And, what’s more, why should I accept your premise that sentience or non-sentience determines whether or not an unborn child should be aborted. Of course, I don’t.

          • conversate

            http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn19089-24week-fetuses-cannot-feel-pain.html#.U_iq28vn-Ag

            Do you kill bacteria? Bacteria are non sentient. Why does non sentience = a right to life?

            If you kill bacteria this makes you a hypocrite.

            For that matter, do you eat meat? Cows are sentient. This makes you an even bigger hypocrite

          • Ge0ffrey

            You are engaged in circular argument (with yourself). You made “sentience” the criterion for abortion.

          • goatini

            Oh, honey, the only one here running in circles is you.

          • Jennifer Starr

            Most abortions take place in the first trimester. You know that, right?

          • Ge0ffrey

            How many in the second trimester? One? One thousand? One hundred thousand? How many in the third trimester? How many before partial birth abortion was banned? Do you know? (Do you care?)

          • Jennifer Starr

            Do you have an actual point?

          • Ge0ffrey

            Yes. Abortion is the killing of an unborn, innocent child.

          • Suba gunawardana

            Do you oppose killing the innocent under any and all circumstances? If not, you have no logical reason to oppose abortion alone.

          • Ge0ffrey

            Give me an example.

          • Suba gunawardana

            Remember my point that you keep avoiding?

            All animals and plants are innocent, and they DON’T give up their lives voluntarily to us.

            If it’s perfectly OK for you to take the lives of animals against their will to for your necessity/convenience, what right do you have to oppose a woman taking the life of a fetus for her own necessity/convenience?

          • Ge0ffrey

            We do not eat unborn children.

          • Jennifer Starr

            Don’t be obtuse.

          • Suba gunawardana

            1. Are you claiming that it’s perfectly OK to kill someone against their will as long as you eat them? So if cannibalism were made legal (as it is in certain tribal cultures) you would have no objection to people killing other people for food, regardless of their age?

            2. With the same principle, IF aborted fetuses were somehow used in food production (remember, there are so many starving people and animals in the world), would you have no objection to abortion?

            3. Now, food is NOT the only reason animals are killed. Do you oppose killing animals for any reason other than food?

          • Ge0ffrey

            This again is circular reasoning. You’re arguing with yourself. It is you, not I, who has compared abortion to killing animals for food. You yourself made this analogy. Read your own posts and answer your own post.
            Instead, let me state my position again clearly so that you can understand it. I’m against the killing of the unborn child.

          • Suba gunawardana

            What does it matter who made the analogy? The fact is BOTH involve killing of innocent individuals for our necessity and convenience. If one is perfectly acceptable to you, why not the other?

            If you are worth your salt it shouldn’t be this hard for you to address my simplified and itemized points.

            ” I’m against the killing of the unborn child.” WHY?

          • lady_black

            Then YOU gestate it.

          • lady_black

            So? I don’t eat flies, either. But I do kill them.

          • goatini

            Sure we do. I love caviar.

          • Nor

            Well, your body reabsorbs them, to an extent, if you are female. So yes, technically, you kinda eat them. You know, if they aren’t viable. Which is most of the time.

          • fiona64

            So, you don’t eat eggs? After all, that’s an “unborn” chicken.

          • Ge0ffrey

            It is not my argument, it is “conversate’s” argument that an unborn child could be aborted because it is not sentient. I argued that it appears to be sentient based on the unborn child’s reaction to snips. You must take up this argument w/ “conversate” because I am against abortion whether the child is sentient or not sentient.

          • Suba gunawardana

            OK, so my argument with you now is that: If you think it’s perfectly ok for us to kill other innocent individuals (animals and plants) for our necessity and convenience, why is it not ok for women to kill fetuses for their necessity & convenience?

            As I mentioned in my other response, food is NOT the only reason we kill animals & plants. Many of them are killed for mere convenience, even at whim. If that’s fine, why not the same logic for fetuses?

          • lady_black

            Movement is not an indication of sentience. You are anthropomorphizing the embryo.

          • Nor

            Snips? First of all, what the hell are you talking about? Late term illegal abortions? Because that’s not what we’re talking about. Increase free birth control and free early term abortions and you’ll see the illegal late term abortion rates nosedive (they are vanishingly small as it is). Are you also mistaking reflex for intelligence? Worms avoid “snips” too.

          • fiona64

            Of what is the pregnant woman guilty, if the embryo is “innocent”? And how can something that is non-conscious have a conscience and, thus, the capacity for guilt or innocence?

          • Nor

            She had sex, which apparently makes her a non-innocent. Men of course are allowed to have sex. Strangely not with each other, which is why we have this problem I imagine. Luckily, the Catholic Church is doing a great deal of work towards de-innocenting Catholic children. Evens the playing field I guess. Noble of them.

          • lady_black

            No. That isn’t the definition of abortion.

          • goatini

            Wrong. No such thing as an “unborn child” – you are not an “undead corpse”. All children, everywhere, have already been born. And a fetus, by necessity, cannot be “innocent” – innocence requires sentience in order to be present. Is a fetus that threatens the woman’s life “guilty”? Of course not. Therefore it cannot be “innocent”.

          • Mindy McIndy

            Pregnancy and childbirth would kill me. If I unfortunately found myself pregnant and had to abort to save my life, would you consider me a murderer?

          • Ge0ffrey

            No.

          • Mindy McIndy

            Why not? In your view, it is still a baby growing inside of me, so shouldn’t I just chance it as god’s will and give it a go?

          • Suba gunawardana

            Once again, so what? You are all for killing the innocent when it’s convenient for YOU. So what’s wrong with someone else killing the innocent when it’s convenient for them?

            BTW “unborn child” is an oxymoron.

          • Nor

            Illegal abortion kills women. Nice to know who you want dead.

          • fiona64

            Pregnancy kills and mains innocent *women* every day. But you’re okay with that, right?

          • Nor

            They only do 3rd trimester abortions if the mother is going to die.

            I assume you mean you are ok with forcing women to die?

          • Suba gunawardana

            Non-sentience per se is not a REASON to kill, neither is sentience alone a reason NOT to kill. Once killing is justified for other reasons, sentience (or lack thereof) is important in determining the METHOD of death.

            For a zef that’s non-sentient, how it’s killed doesn’t matter. For born humans or animals who can feel, it is very important to choose a quick & painless method of death.

          • Ge0ffrey

            Your argument is with “conversate” who made sentience the criterion for abortion. I’m 100% against abortion whether the unborn child is sentient or not sentient.

          • Suba gunawardana

            It was YOU who implied abortion is wrong because the fetus “cringes against the scissors” or something like that, i.e. implied abortion is wrong because fetus can feel pain.

            If you think it’s perfectly fine to kill animals who run & scream in pain, what’s wrong with killing a fetus EVEN IF it cringes (which it doesn’t BTW).

          • Ge0ffrey

            No, I was using “conversate’s” own argument about sentience. It does not matter to me whether the unborn child is or is not sentient. I’m against taking the life of an unborn child.

          • cjvg

            Maybe you should take a course in reading compression.

            The reasoning is that a woman is always sentient and aware and thus able to suffer, become injured or die when forced to gestate and give birth. When this is a voluntary choice then she is willing to assume those risks. If you are forcing her for your own personal beliefs you are immoral.

            You completely and hypocritically deny any and all respect for the life of the living breathing women who is most certainly sentient. And excuse this abhorrent behavior by claiming respect for a fetus who is non sentient and will not suffer at all.

            Legal abortion is only available until 20-24 weeks gestation. This is the point of viability and about two weeks before the fetal brain displays slight and intermittent signs of brain activity in the area that houses sentience. Clearly the only actual life that has the capability to suffer is the woman, however you conveniently and hypocritically erases her life from this equation.

            Where is you respect for the born life, why does she not count?!

          • lady_black

            You misquoted. The criterion for abortion is that a woman is not any longer willing to be pregnant.

          • lady_black

            What are you babbling about spine-snipping? That doesn’t happen in abortion, and an embryo or fetus doesn’t “try to avoid” anything. That would require forming a thought.

          • P. McCoy

            Why argue with a guy who believes in a sci fi film? Do you also think that “Umbert the unborn” is real too?

          • fiona64

            Your syllogism fails because both parts one and two are factually inaccurate.

          • Ge0ffrey

            Unfortunately, the parallel between Hitler’s actions and Margarat Sanger’s desire to rid the planet of the “dysgenic” population is all too true.

          • Suba gunawardana

            The fact that Sanger may have been racist does NOT take away from all the help she provided women with contraception. Certain actions of a person are not negated by other actions/beliefs of the same person.

          • Ge0ffrey

            The ends justify the means? Suba, come on!

          • lady_black

            There are no ends, nor means in Suba’s comment.

          • Suba gunawardana

            It’s YOU who imply ends justify the means, where you claim it’s fine to kill ANYONE as long as you eat them. BTW you still haven’t addressed that point.

          • fiona64

            I don’t think that phrase means what *you* think it does.

          • goatini

            Ms Sanger actually was very progressive and open for her time in her views and relationships with persons of different races and ethnicities – there is a vile lying propaganda site by one Diane Dew that has completely false “quotes” never written or uttered by Ms Sanger, in which specific “races/ethnicities” are cited. This seems to be the main source for these vicious lies.

          • fiona64

            Nope. Sources provided. You still fail.

          • lady_black

            The mentally deficient have functioning brains, so no.

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            No one but YOU believes that. You really are a grungy pervert.

          • cjvg

            Ok one more time with actual logic.
            No brain means no person involved.

            If you have to kill it it is alive and already born, if it is still living it clearly has a functional brain (even if it is not smart)

            No functional brain means no life possible (not for very long) involved and it will die naturally

          • Jennifer Starr

            You don’t know what a straw man actually means, do you?

        • Suba gunawardana

          As I said below, sentience (or lack thereof) is important only regarding the METHOD of death, NOT in deciding whether to kill or not. That should be decided based on different criteria.

        • fiona64

          Oh, sweetie. You’re so funny. Hitler was just as anti-choice as you. Forced birth for the “right” kind of women (look up Lebensborn on your own time) and forced abortion for the “wrong” kind of women.

          Oh, and in case you missed the memo? Embryos are not persons.

        • lady_black

          Embryos aren’t “mentally deficient.” They are mindless. I suggest a dictionary.

          • fiona64

            Are you kidding? When Geoffrey ‘devours a book,’ he’s actually eating the pages. This guy is clearly a idiot.

        • Mindy McIndy

          As someone who lost a great deal of her family in the Holocaust, your invocation of Hitler sickens me.

          • Ge0ffrey

            Unfortunately, you should read Margaret Sanger’s diaries. You know who she is? Founder of Planned Parenthood? Read what she had to say about the dysgenic populations, and her primary reason for promoting abortion. Perhaps then we could compare Hitler’s stated positions relative to Sanger’s.

          • goatini

            Obviously, you’ve never read anything actually written or spoken by Ms Sanger. And as the child of a survivor, your invocation of Hitler (who Ms Sanger also abhorred) sickens me, as well. My Father was planning to become a priest when he was imprisoned by the Germans. I keep his German missal at my desk.

            For factual information about Margaret Sanger:

            http://www.nyu.edu/projects/sanger/

          • Ge0ffrey
          • goatini

            LIE News is, simply, non-credible.

            And I knew even before I looked at the rest of the Amazon link that you were citing that yellow journalism screed of Angela Franks. I bought that years ago to see just how low an alleged “biographer” could go in (1) slanted, biased writing, and (2) overall substandard writing skills. Franks is an egregiously offensive flack for various forced-birth and misogynist anti-contraception tax-free $$$ Catholic fiefdoms.

            My taste in Catholic female theologians runs more towards Sr Elizabeth Johnson.

          • fiona64

            LieNews? What a fucking joke.

          • lady_black

            Of course Sanger didn’t promote abortion. At the time, abortion was illegal and dangerous. Sanger ABHORED abortion. So you can stop lying now.

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            Liar. Sanger was opposed to abortion.

          • fiona64

            You’re funny. Sanger opposed abortion. What she promoted was contraception. And why? Because she was sick of watching women die due to childbirth complications and maternal depletion syndrome.

            You actually ought to read Margaret Sanger’s papers (not just the out-of-context crap that Liar Rose and LieSiteSpews promote). You might learn something. In fact, I’ll make it easy for you: NYU has an archive. http://www.nyu.edu/projects/sanger/

        • Nor

          Whereas your motives are much more pure. You just want the sluts (i.e. women who have sex) to suffer as they die needlessly for a less than mortal sin.

  • Suba gunawardana

    Great idea!

  • capitolguy

    Interesting how you are cheered for your intolerance and hate for the ‘choice’ of life, but you and your hateful, anti-American comrades would lynch those who want our borders controlled. The hate and intolerance of the left never surprises me. The fact that you can encourage murder IS truly amazing.

    • Ivy Mike

      Well, since no one here has even mentioned their stance on the immigration issue, I’d say you are simply introducing an issue you’re similarly obsessed with, imagining that anyone who disagrees with you on one issue MUST disagree on another. It’s a pretty intellectually lazy way to think, often promoted by talkradio hosts.

      In any event, it’s those on YOUR side of BOTH issues who would send born, already-existing children to their deaths because you simply cannot stand the sight of brown-skinned people entering the country.

      Do you seriously imagine that your hatred for other peoples is not instantly obvious? Or, that your window-dressing of it hides the fact that is would send children to their deaths?

      Jesus. You lunatics are as stupid as you are hateful.

    • expect_resistance

      I think you need to relax and have a beer. And then a taco. Smile and lighten up a little; it’s Friday.

      • Ella Warnock

        Don’t forget the margaritas!

    • Jennifer Starr

      We support all reproductive choices, including the choice to carry the pregnancy and give birth.

      Have a taco and a margarita.

    • Nor

      Yes, forcing children to move back into warzones because they’re the wrong color or nationality is truly a Christian American value.

    • fiona64

      How “pro-life” of you. “To hell with born, sapient, sentient (brown) children who have escaped horrible lives; we have to save the (white) zygotes!” is all you’re about.

  • Ge0ffrey

    Mother Teresa on abortion:

    “What is taking place in America is a war against the child. And if we accept that the mother can kill her own child, how can we tell other people not to kill one another.”

    “Any country that accepts abortion, is not teaching its people to love, but to use any violence to get what it wants.”

    “It is a poverty to decide that a child must die so that you may live as you wish.”

    • conversate

      Mother Theresa caused great suffering in India. She is no hero.

      • Ge0ffrey

        Mother Teresa touched the untouchables.

        • conversate

          She killed them by denying them medical treatment and painkillers. She tortured them to death. She is hated in Calcutta.

          • Ge0ffrey

            I’m still waiting for you to produce evidence (beyond the scibblings of Christopher Hitchens) that she is “hated in Calcutta.”

          • conversate
          • Ge0ffrey

            These are nothing but rants, exactly as your screed is.

          • Jennifer Starr

            They’re facts. Sorry you don’t like them.

          • Ge0ffrey

            No, Jennifer. They’re not.

          • Jennifer Starr

            Yes, Geoffrey. They are.

          • Ge0ffrey

            It is intellectually dishonest to say that opinion pieces are fact.

          • fiona64

            Well, how about a nice, well-researched, non-fiction book? http://books.google.com/books?id=PTgJIjK67rEC

          • Ge0ffrey

            (See my comment above.)

          • fiona64

            Why am I unsurprised that you can’t handle facts? That’s fairly typical of the anti-choice.

          • Ge0ffrey

            Here are the facts: Mother Teresa established hospices and hospitals for the sick and dying. She started a new religious order, the Missionaries of Charity, which spread throughout the world. Today the Order still cares for the poorest of the poor, the sick and dying. Mother Theresa and her sisters went out into the streets and picked up the dying homeless to bring them to her hospice, and the sisters continue to do so. They clean them, feed them, pray with them, and serve them so that they spend their last days or hours in dignity. She and her Order treat those dying of AIDS, the lepers, the untouchables, those whom nobody else will love and care for.

          • Jennifer Starr

            She refused them painkillers because she thought there was some kind of ‘beauty’ in suffering and that it brought them closer to god. The medical care she provided was substandard because all the money that she took from people went to her and to fill the church coffers, not to improve the healthcare quality at these hospices. Those are the facts.

          • Ge0ffrey

            How do you know what Mother Teresa thought? Are you citing a text of Mother Teresa’s?

          • Jennifer Starr

            Do you deny that Catholics profess beauty in suffering?

          • Ge0ffrey

            Catholics don’t ask for suffering. There’s enough suffering in life w/o having to ask for it. Even Christ in the Garden of Gethsemene asked if the cup of suffering could be passed.

          • Suba gunawardana

            No they just push the suffering on others, particularly on innocent children who cannot escape.

          • cjvg

            Yes she is a quite well-known and documented quote of hers actually

          • fiona64

            As has already been cited for your edification, the “care” provided to those suffering individuals was far below standard. I’m sorry that you are unable to understand that.

            Mother Teresa’s belief about AIDS was that it was “God’s just punishment,” BTW.

            You’re just as sick as she was if you believe that to be the case.

          • fiona64

            It is intellectually dishonest to upvote your own posts.

          • goatini

            Great, so stop posting LIE Spews and Catechism crap, because those are nothing BUT opinion pieces.

          • lady_black

            Yes, they are, and upvoting yourself is bad form.

          • Ge0ffrey

            If I could vote twice for myself, I would.

          • fiona64

            That’s three times as many upvotes as you’d get otherwise.

            You’re pitiful.

          • fiona64

            You think the Lancet deals in fiction? What a frigging joke you are.

          • expect_resistance

            Because you say so? Sorry not buying the crap you’re selling.

          • conversate

            All of her behaviour has been documented. You are wrong. But hey, I am not surprised that you are in denial.

          • Everybodhi

            Haha. I love it when you trolls up vote yourselves.

          • fiona64

            And this one: http://www.patheos.com/blogs/daylightatheism/2008/05/mother-teresa/

            Quote:

            Volunteers such as Loudon, and Western doctors such as Robin Fox of the Lancet, wrote with shock of what they found in Teresa’s clinics. No tests were performed to determine the patients’ ailments. No modern medical equipment was available. Even people dying of cancer, suffering terrible agony, were given no painkillers other than aspirin. Needles were rinsed and reused, without proper sterilization. No one was ever sent tot he hospital, even people in clear need of emergency surgery or other treatment.

            Again, it is important to note that these conditions were not the unavoidable result of triage. Teresa’s organization routinely received multimillion-dollar donations which were squirreled away in bank accounts, while volunteers were told to beg donors for more
            money and plead extreme poverty and desperate need. The money she received could easily have built half a dozen fully equipped modern hospitals and clinics, but was never used for that purpose. No, this negligent and rudimentary care was deliberate – about which, see the next point. However, despite her praise for poverty, Teresa hypocritically sought out the most advanced care possible in the Westernworld when she herself was in need of it.

            Teresa considered converting the sick and the poor to be a higher priority than providing for their actual needs, and believed that human suffering was beneficial and even “beautiful”. The following quote from Teresa says it all:

            “I think it is very beautiful for the poor to accept their lot, to
            share it with the passion of Christ. I think the world is being much
            helped by the suffering of the poor people.”

            On another occasion, Teresa told a terminal cancer patient, who was dying in extreme pain, that he should consider himself fortunate: “You are suffering like Christ on the cross. So Jesus must be kissing you.” (She freely related his reply, which she seemed not to realize was meant as aputdown: “Then please tell him to stop kissing me.”)

          • Ge0ffrey

            You’re going to have to do better than citing an atheist website.

          • fiona64

            Oh, sweetie. Do you not what the Lancet is? They are citing an article from the Lancet in which such horrors are described.

            The Lancet is the UK’s version of the JAMA.

            Here’s the outline: http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736%2894%2991759-0/fulltext

            Here’s the original article, available for purchase, for your edification. You’re welcome. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0140673694917590

          • Ge0ffrey

            Why don’t you spend 35 pounds and cut and paste it in its entirety so that we can take a look.

          • fiona64

            Why don’t you go fuck yourself?

          • Nor

            Ask one of your friends who has institutional journal access. The public libraries have it around here, but I’m going to assume you are from a rural Republican state so your libraries are either censored or underfunded or both.

          • cjvg

            Why, because you don’t care anyway you are just like her!
            You think you have the right to force others to suffer the consequences of your “moral” believes!

            Of course it is always much better if other people suffer for your believes then when you yourself have to do so

            For instance your Theresa sought the best medical care and pain relief in the best private clinics available in the united states.
            No suffering with the masses in her own medical” ward!

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            Who is up voting this anus besides himself?

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            She is definitely hated here in PA by me. I hope several imps with large members are raping her in her every orifice in Hell. And the chief imp is riding her, pulling her hair and yelling ‘Whose your Daddy?” for eternity.

        • Jennifer Starr

          Mother Teresa lined both hers and the church’s pockets with $$$ while providing sub-standard medical care to the poor because she thought their suffering made them closer to god. Sick woman.

        • lady_black

          Mother Theresa was an evil woman.

          • Ge0ffrey

            How do you define evil?

          • Suba gunawardana

            Anyone who tortures children is evil. Witholding painkillers is, of course, torture,

          • lady_black

            Well, for one thing… spreading disease by re-using contaminated needles. That’s pretty evil. I have a cat that goes through a lot of needles because I do subcutaneous fluid supplementation on him every day to aid his failing kidneys. You know what hypodermic needles cost? $13.49 for a box of 100, retail. I don’t re-use needles on him. So your “Mother Theresa” treated human beings worse than I would treat an animal. I’m also a licensed nurse, and I would never withhold pain medication from a patient. I’ve woken doctors in the middle of the night multiple times to increase a patient’s morphine until I’m satisfied the patient is comfortable. These things don’t cost much (clean needles and generic concentrated morphine for oral administration). This woman took untold sums of money, and always had her hand out. She rendered unsafe and substandard care. What was she doing with all that money? She compared the suffering of Jesus to that she inflicted upon the dying. I have news for her. Jesus was TORTURED TO DEATH as a criminal against Rome. Jesus wouldn’t want this followers to treat other people this way. What was it he said? “What you do unto the least of these, you do unto me” (when asked by his disciples when they had fed him, clothed him, visited him in prison, etc.) Therefore this woman is torturing Jesus every time she tortures poor people with substandard care. I’m an atheist and do not believe in the divine, yet Jesus is my favorite philosopher. I like almost everything he had to say about politicians and the religious leaders of his day (and trust me, they haven’t changed one iota since then.) I do a better job of fulfilling what Jesus told his followers to do than your “Mother Theresa” and I’m not even a believer.

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            Eeezy peezy.

            I define evil, then, as the exercise of political power — that is, the imposition of one’s will upon others by overt or covert coercion — in order to avoid extending one’s self for the purpose of nurturing spiritual growth. Ordinary laziness is nonlove; evil is antilove.

            M. Scott Peck Psychiatrist & author

          • goatini

            Peck’s book, “People Of The Lie”, perfectly describes the amoral evil of the vicious hate-speaking fetus fetish freaks. I re-read it regularly as one reminder to keep speaking truth to theocratic power.

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            Agree. I re read the book as well.

        • Nor

          While denying them birth control and watching their children starve. Interesting way to help, no?

          • expect_resistance

            That sounds sadistic.

        • cjvg

          And what made them untouchables? Just another form of religion practiced by people like you who enjoy using their religion as an excuse to inflict misery on others.

          • goatini

            Good point.

          • cjvg

            Thank you.
            People like this guy just irritate the h*ll out of me. They attempt to glorify and excuse the misery and suffering caused by their own repressive religion by pointing out that their religion mitigates the misery caused by another repressive religion. Like two evils make a anything good?!

        • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

          So does Pope Frankie. BFD. I still want abortion and contraception to be free and legal.

    • Unicorn Farm

      Who gives a damn? Why should mother Theresa’s simpering pronouncement on abortion have any effect on women’s reproductive choices?

    • cjvg

      That figures, anti-choicer who is singing the praises of another monster that loved purposely inflicting pain on her patients because she felt that suffering was good for the soul.

      http://scienceblog.com/60730/mother-teresa-anything-but-a-saint/#o3JOzIxoJ2BpXuRx.97

      here is a nice quote on what kind of person she really was;
      “I think it is very beautiful for the poor to accept their lot, to share it with the passion of Christ. I think the world is being much helped by the suffering of the poor people.” -Mother Teresa is not saying that she is saddened by the suffering of the poor. She is saying that the suffering of the poor is “very beautiful.” She is not saying that she wants to see poverty and suffering ended. She is saying that the poor should simply “accept their lot” and “share it with the passion of Christ.”

      “she was a friend to the worst of the rich, taking misappropriated money from the atrocious Duvalier family in Haiti (whose rule she praised in return) and from Charles Keating of the Lincoln Savings and Loan. Where did that money, and all the other donations, go? The primitive hospice in Calcutta was as run down when she died as it always had been—she preferred California clinics when she got sick herself—and her order always refused to publish any audit. But we have her own claim that she opened 500 convents in more than a hundred countries, all bearing the name of her own order. Excuse me, but this is modesty and humility?”
      Bio on Theresa by C. Hitchens

      “Mother Teresa once recounted, with a bright smile, how she had told a terminally ill cancer patient, who was suffering from unbearable pain, that, “You are suffering like Christ on the cross. So Jesus must be kissing you.” Now, get that. According to Mother Teresa, Jesus, who, remember, is a moral ideal in her religion, expresses his “love” through tormenting the sick and the dying, while his father – God – gets his kicks from watching their suffering. This is pure sadism. And, unfortunately for the poor, Mother Teresa was ruthlessly intent on making God a very happy deity.'”
      Bio on Theresa by Robert White from Auckland University

      Nice “moral” example you are venerating there!

  • Joe Krozac

    AND for the first 1000 pro-abortionists who donate, receive a really special ‘extra’, your choice of burrito or taco made with the ground up remains of aborted fetuses, hey don’t say it’s gross, you people keep screaming that it’s “not a baby”, so put your money where your mouth is (LITERALLY), and instead of filling up the medical waste bins at your local Planned Parenthood Genocidal Clinic, just smirk away with a hearty ‘bon appetit’, perhaps pick up some fava beans too.

    • Jennifer Starr

      You typed that with one hand, didn’t you?

      • expect_resistance

        For sure.

    • fiona64

      You were fapping when you wrote that, weren’t you?

      You anti-choice lunatics have very disturbing fantasy lives.

      • expect_resistance

        They are divorced from reality.

    • expect_resistance

      Weak attempt at a sexist fairy tail. I’m having another taco for choice tonight. Cheers!

    • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

      I prefer fetus sauteed in EVO with capers and lemon. Yummy.

    • cjvg

      Ridiculous and so unimaginative. We don’t eat medical waste. For for the same reason we don’t eat amputated body parts, we also do not eat our menstrual blood. It is really sick the lengths you anti-choicers must go to in a pathetic attempt to somehow paint abortion as deplorable. So no thank you, these are your fantasies thankfully you do not also get the right to force those on us.

  • Shan

    So, since it’s Saturday night and we should be having some fun…Does anybody other than me think being enjoined to “eat a taco” is freaking HILARIOUS?

    • L-dan

      I agree with my upvote.

    • conversate

      I am hoping it was on purpose:p

  • Nor

    Yes, voting to support the aged, ill and poor while seeking to limit killing poor people in other countries is truly sick. How terrible we are, voting for housing for the homeless and better schools and all.

    • goatini

      The RWNJs are pro-fetus and anti-life.

  • goatini

    Concern troll is concerned.

    Oh, and:

    //pregnancy is not a life threatening//

    CDC Pregnancy Mortality Surveillance System:
    http://www.cdc.gov/reproductivehealth/maternalinfanthealth/pmss.html

    //incurable//
    Safe, legal pregnancy termination IS the cure for unwanted pregnancy.

    //and unavoidable//
    High estimate of the number of US women raped per year, according to the CDC: 1.3 million
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/soraya-chemaly/50-facts-rape_b_2019338.html

    //disease//
    http://www.womenshealth.gov/pregnancy/you-are-pregnant/pregnancy-complications.html

  • goatini

    Reading drivel like this makes me long for the days of Bill Buckley. At least conservatives could write and speak cogently and coherently back then.

  • fiona64

    “Late term abortions,” as you put it, are not available absent medical necessity. Just. So. You. Know.

    Furthermore, pregnancy is not a life threatening

    Yep, actually, it IS life-threatening. In fact, it is 14 times more dangerous than abortion. Citations have already been provided, so I won’t repeat them. Also, while I realize that anecdote =/= data … my pregnancy nearly killed me. So, Shelby, in summation, you have no idea what you’re talking about.

  • goatini

    I’m sure they don’t. Part of our aim in supporting female citizens’ rights and reproductive justice is to eliminate the false blame, false shame, and false guilt that radical misogynistic forced-birthers try to brainwash innocent female citizens with.

  • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

    Frederica Mathewes-Green:
    “No woman wants an abortion as she wants an ice cream cone or a Porsche. She wants an abortion as an animal caught in a trap wants to gnaw off its own leg.”

  • BellsNwhistles

    CMV infections are a good reason to seek health service. No fetus freaks need investigate the damage done, just consider what your response would be.

  • fiona64

    Physicians consider late-term as third trimester. The majority of fetal anomalies cannot even be *detected* prior to 20 weeks’ gestation. You do not get to decide how much medical or financial risk anyone takes but *you.*

    Also, obviously there is risk with childbirth. The odds of losing your
    life are quite a bit less than the odds of losing your life to ALS,
    cancer, or other DISEASES.

    Someone’s a little slow on the uptake: pregnancy is the third-leading cause of death among women world-wide. The US’ maternal mortality rate is #60 in the world, BTW, with countries like *Bulgaria* doing better at keeping pregnant women alive than we do.

    My wanted pregnancy almost killed me; I will not gestate another.

    Also, pregnancy for the most part, is preventable.

    All forms of contraception, up to and including surgical sterilization, have known failure rates. Just because no one wants to f*** you does not mean others must remain celibate on the off chance that they may become pregnant. Should my tubal ligation fail, there will be an abortion scheduled so fast that your stupid head will spin right off.

  • thedoorisajar

    If any of the regulars here would like to read David Boonin’s ‘A Defense of Abortion’, give me your email (preferably a throwaway one) and I will send you a link with download info.

    • Shan

      Can’t you post it here?

      • thedoorisajar

        No, I signed up with Dropbox and it’s coming directly from my hard drive.

      • thedoorisajar

        I can try to find a different method, if making a junk email for the purposes is too much of a hassle for you.

        One thing that I *could* do is just make a junk email on my own, and then hand out the l/p here…

    • cjvg

      cjvgmail@yahoo.com
      Thanks, appreciate it.

      • thedoorisajar

        Sent. Edit out your email now if you want ot keep it private

        • cjvg

          I did, thanks again. Not a big issue, this is an account that I keep for newspapers and onetime orders etc. Nothing major

          Like your new name, very apropos

    • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

      I read a review of the book. It is definitely a must read. My email = izzyidol@gmail.com.

      • thedoorisajar

        I sent the link to your other gmail account last week. The plumstchili one.

        • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

          Thank you. I did not see it. I cannot wait to read it.

      • thedoorisajar

        Hey Plum, which email should I use to contact you?

        Do you have an e-reader?

        I have a large collection of ebooks – everything from works on inequality, abortion, to classic fiction. In mobi, epub and pdf formats.

  • HaydenG

    Barbaric immoral practices like abortion have no place in the 21st century. Some day you monsters will be in prison where you belong.

    • thedoorisajar

      So, if a suicidal 9 year old rape victim aborts her pregnancy by taking a pill, how much time should the little s1ut spend in jail? Can you tell me?

      • HaydenG

        Nobody is going to put a 9 year old in prison for any crime you clown.

        • fiona64

          Rape victim. Did you see those two words? Rape victim. The child was raped, and she tried to kill herself. Where is your concern for *her*?

        • thedoorisajar

          Ok, a 15 year old? 18 year old? At what point should the suicidal rape victim go to jail for 1st degree murder for taking an abortion pill or simply trying to starve herself to death to avoid giving birth?

        • Suba gunawardana

          So you don’t mind underage girls having as many abortions as they like?

        • Dez

          But torturing a 9 year with a pregnancy is acceptable? Sure sounds like Afghanistan to me.

        • expect_resistance

          But you want females to go to prison for having an abortion.

        • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

          BS. 9 year olds do go to prison. Do the words ‘juvenile detention’ have meaning for you?

    • fiona64

      It’s so easy to be an anti-choice male, isn’t it, Hayden? You just wave your big stupid paw and opine on matters that will never affect your life and health.

      The monsters are the people who force 8-year-old rape victims to gestate, or who allow women to die rather than terminate a non-viable fetus to complete a miscarriage.

      You know, the people *you* support.

    • Suba gunawardana

      Tell me how it is “barbaric and immoral”. You claiming something doesn’t make it so.

    • Dez

      LOL. So 1 in 3 women who get an abortion will be in jail cells? Apparently leaving children motherless is “pro-life.” Do you not hear yourself?

    • expect_resistance

      According to you many women would be in prison. You must be paranoid thinking you are surrounded by murders.

      Women are NOT going back to the days before Roe. Get over it we are not going back!

    • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

      Nonsense.

      Anthropologically, Homo sapiens has three strategies for dealing with unwanted reproduction (births): contraception, abortion and infanticide. All three are practiced in every culture worldwide historically and currently.

      Those who restrict contraception and abortion make infanticide, child abandonment/abuse and maternal mortality inevitable. We have many in vitro examples of this but the one that troubles me the most at the moment is this example:
      http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new

      Illegal abortion and sepsis and hemorrhage in childbirth are the three leading causes of maternal death worldwide. Women have blood in the game. YOU do not. Abortion and contraception are human rights.

      Obviously I have thought a great deal more about this than you have. YOU do not occupy the moral high ground.

    • Shan

      Who exactly should go to prison and on what charge?

  • Jennifer Starr

    If you’re against abortion, perhaps you shouldn’t get one.

    • frabn

      I’m so hurt that you suggest I shouldn’t get one Jennifer. How dare you insinuate that I shouldn’t be allowed to get something that’s biologically impossible for me in the first place!

      You abortion extremists are every bit as bad as anti-abortion extremists. Both sides need to stfu and mind their own business.

      • thedoorisajar

        Please explain how protecting one’s bodily autonomy is “extreme”?

  • Shan

    And?

    • tinj

      She said she had no clue what ice had to do with ALS which is why she chose tacos/beer since it had no connection either. But in truth pouring ice water on you does have a connection

      • Shan

        Ah, okay. So, taco and/or beer challenge is still on! Sweet!

        I donated. Did you?

  • Lilithe

    The point of ice water is to attempt to create the numbed sensation a person with ALS experiences. I do not like the ALS ice bucket challenge, because it is a waste of water in a world where drought is becoming more common, and so many people die of a lack of clean water.

    However, for you to *pfft* off the connection is to not have looked very hard at the reason ice water is being used in these challenges, and I feel you are making light of a debilitating disease by laughing it off as such.

    • TwentyPoundGorilla

      To be fair, the point of the Taco Beer challenge is to simulate the effect of what got the abortee pregnant in the first place. Though I don’t get exactly where the Taco factors into the equation? Lack of creativity perhaps? It needed more syllables than just “the beer challenge”.

      • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

        Why don’t you take a flying fuck at a rolling doughnut.

        • TwentyPoundGorilla

          Your uninvited and unintelligible response only reinforces my point. Lack of creativity on all counts. Have a nice day baby killer.

  • Think. Reason. Vote.

    Every society in the entire world would be in a better state of affairs if abortion did not exist in a lawful way. Humanity has become centered on the “I”, “ME”, not on the “YOU and “THEY”. If humanity really wanted peace in the world, each one of us would be the place to begin that trend. The way we live our lives, is the example we give to others: our children, our friends, are co-workers, our neighbors, etc. The “ME” syndrome has caused the world millions of children who never were given the their voice to speak for the rights which we ourselves profess as our own. Courage is nearly obsolete in the world. Life is indeed a challenge, but what a beautiull challenge it can be if only we see it through the eyes of what is good, of what is mercy and compassion. Likely we have all heard that “in giving, we receive”–the world does this so little which is why it has lost its way.

    Genocide and hate persecutions have run rampant throughout many regions in the world for decades; Hitler and Stalin have been forgotten or never heard of by many, or most. And what is the focus of this blog? Beer and tacos to end Innocence, to end a life.

    Life itself isn’t valued for what it truly is: a gift.

    PRAY AMERICA. PRAY THAT HUMANITY WILL WAKE FROM ITS DARK SLUMBER.

    • thedoorisajar

      Abortion gives women control of their lives.

      Women are not gestational slaves.

    • Suba gunawardana

      -There ARE many societies where your dream HAS come true, and abortion is illegal. The Middle east, Papua New guinea, many of the dirt-poor countries in Africa overrun with starving kids. Exactly HOW are these places better that say, Scandinavia, France, Canada, NZ or even the US?

      -The biggest “Me Me Me” concept is to force YOUR OWN beliefs down other people’s throats, such as forcing women to give birth against their will.

      -How is ending a life (before it ever began) worse than letting those children suffer for a lifetime? Who steps up to care for these unwanted children when forced to be born? You? If not, what right do you have force innocent children into misery?

    • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

      Thank you, dear merciful God, for forty years and counting of safe legal medical contraception and abortion. Praise your Holy Name.

    • fiona64

      Every society in the entire world would be in a better state of affairs if abortion did not exist in a lawful way.

      Yes, because women dying of back-alley abortions is so much “better” for society. What kind of a dimwit thinks that making abortion illegal again will make it go away? It sure as hell didn’t go away during the 70 or so years it was illegal in the USA. It still goes on in countries where it is illegal today. It’s been going on since the beginning of recorded *history,* ferchrissakes.

    • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

      Liar. Childbirth and illegal abortion are leading causes of maternal death worldwide.

  • Think. Reason. Vote.

    Women have a great and beautiful dignity, if only those who support abortion knew this, they would fervently disagree and even abhor the idea of abortion. The role and true power of a woman is her femininity. Womanhood has been brought down in the name of “equality” for no better reason than to have them think they are the same as men.
    Our feminine nature holds the key to real fulfillment and lasting peace in the world but we have nearly obliterated that mission of ours through confusion of what is right and wrong.

    • thedoorisajar

      Anatomy is not destiny. Abortion frees women.

    • Suba gunawardana

      -Dignity means having the power to make your OWN decisions, and not being treated like a brood-mare.

      -Exactly how does an abortion negatively impact a woman’s femininity? Abortion does NOT involve male hormones, removal of female organs, or ANY kind of “masculinization” at all.

      -How does abortion make women “the same as men” ? Last I heard, NO MAN has ever had an abortion. Abortion is a FEMALE thing.

    • Jennifer Starr

      Motherhood is awesome, if it’s freely chosen. Womenhood does not have to mean motherhood. Not everyone wants a child,and we are more than our reproductive systems.

    • fiona64

      Motherhood is awesome if it is chosen.

      I was nearly killed by a wanted pregnancy. I will NOT gestate another. Period.

      My “feminine nature” is more than just being the meat around a uterus.

  • Think. Reason. Vote.

    How does it make them “free”?

    • Suba gunawardana

      By not being shackled with unwanted children. (It sets the children free too, from being stuck with a mother who doesn’t want them).

      P.S. You can hit “reply” to specific comments you wish to respond. The buttons are underneath each comment…

      • Think. Reason. Vote.

        I just saw your comment here Suba- I get lost sometimes on these blogs (where to reply), tganks!

        • Suba gunawardana

          Yes these sites take some getting used to…. :)

    • thedoorisajar

      Why don’t you learn to actually reply to comments instead of making a fresh new one.

      And it frees women from gestational slavery. Pregnancy is rough on the body, it violates a woman’s bodily autonomy if unwanted, and it also has the potential to maim, kill and injure.

      Do you think that women deserve to die from pregnancy? Do you think that they deserve vaginal tearing, diabetes, uterine prolapse and obstetric fistulas?

      Tell me, if a woman dies from pregnancy, how does that make her ‘free’ huh?

    • Ella Warnock

      Avoiding conception kept me free of kids I never wanted, so let’s not make it more complicated than it need be. I had other things to do, so I did them.

      Often it’s the lack of adherence to strict gender roles that’s more troubling than abortion alone. When you’re speaking of the ‘role and true power of a woman’ being her femininity, you’re really only referring to motherhood. In my half a century on this rock, I’ve found that femininity (and masculinity, as well) encompass so much more, and in sometimes quite unexpected – and delightful – ways.

      It’s been suggested to me a time or two, however, that I should at the very least be apologetic for making some of the herd a little too uncomfortable. No one ever suggested such a thing to my husband, of course. Wonder why that is?

  • Think. Reason. Vote.

    Your (Suba) commentary has anger in it. I am sorry that you are angry. The source of anger is often -if not always- rooted in a past unresolved misery; the only way to uproot anger is to face it head on and courageously distinguish the motive and its solution which is always peace. The life that these ‘unwanted’ children you speak of are sadly caused by the actions of their parents. Family has a deep meaning. Casual sexual relations is again playing the “ME” game, “Whatever I want” regardless of the outcome (an innocent child yearning for the embrace of its mother and the love of its father). Being a responsible human being takes courage and action. You yourself said:” what right do you have to force innocent children into misery” (by being born). You are exactly correct, they are innocence itself, discarded like a Kleenex tissue at every whim of the ones playing “god”.

    • thedoorisajar

      Nope, you’re still wrong, and Suba is not angry.

      Sex evolved for social bonding, and that includes promiscuity. Humans are rather like bonobos – we don’t just have sex for procreation, we have sex to strengthen in-group bonds. Nothing wrong with it.

      Religion has screwed with your mind. I feel sorry for you.

    • Suba gunawardana

      I am not angry, but very used to this emotional response from forced-birthers when they have no valid response to my questions.

      First, I would like you to stand behind your claim and point out exactly what part of my comments indicate “anger”.

      Second, when a child is unwanted it is obvious they would have a miserable life. Who in their right mind would force such children into life WITHOUT providing for them? Why would you knowingly commit such acts of cruelty to children?

      Playing god? Doesn’t your god perform millions of abortions himself in the form of miscarriage? What’s wrong with emulating god?

  • Think. Reason. Vote.

    Have a good night. It was interesting chatting with you. God bless you both.

    • Suba gunawardana

      I replied to you below, but one more thing. Do you object to killing the innocent under any and all circumstances?

  • Think. Reason. Vote.

    Yes. Every life is a gift and every life has something to offer. It isn’t God who causes wars, violence and death, it is mankind that makes these choices.
    When you wake up in the morning, do you choose what you want to do or does someone else choose for you?
    When someone does a kindness to you, is it you who feel grateful and voice a ‘thank you’, or does someone force you to say it?
    Life is beautiful in the mere ability to gaze at the wonders of nature and take in the accompanying mystery of the majesty seen in nature; a child surpasses this beauty and wonder. You as a human being surpass this wonder.
    Every beginning life is enough to create awe in a thinking mind and a caring heart. Love is not a feeling, it is a decision one takes to do something good for another. This love creates a bond between humanity, giving peace a place to flourish.

    • thedoorisajar

      Do you think that life is a gift to children who are raped and forced to eat feces and then beaten to death?

    • Suba gunawardana

      -If your stance is “Yes. Every life is a gift and every life has something to offer.” , then are you against killing animals or plants for any reason, including food? Remember, they are all innocent life too. If you think nothing of killing animals and plants for your necessity & convenience, you have no right to oppose other people killing other innocent life for their necessity & convenience.

      -Yes, I currently have the privilege of making my own choices, and you are trying to take that choice away from me and countless other women. More importantly, you are trying to FORCE miserable lives on innocent children who never asked for them.

      • Think. Reason. Vote.

        Suba,
        A person is not an animal or a plant regardless of their having life in them; this is the root cause of confusion on so many levels. This is why violence, crimes and genocides occur: life is not considered as being worth anything.
        Think: our freedom to choose is a gift in itself: if right and wrong do not have a place in a persons conscience to help make a good and right decision, society in general will decay. Every person’s choice will be of consequence to someone else. This is the world we live in today.

        • Suba gunawardana

          Are you saying that it’s perfectly OK to use/abuse/torture/kill animals (who can FEEL pain fear & distress)simply because they are not human, but wrong to kill a human zygote/embryo who can feel nothing and has no awareness?

          Our “freedom to choose” is something WE achieved, usually AT THE EXPENSE of non-humans, by taking their freedom away.

          What you propose right now, is to take freedom of choice AWAY from women, and force innocent children into misery, just to assuage your belief.

          “Every person’s choice will be of consequence to someone else.”

          There’s some truth to that. So what’s the logic behind your stance that it’s perfectly fine to take freedom away from children, women and animals/plants? In your opinion who exactly deserves freedom of choice?

        • Suba gunawardana

          Oops wrong place…

        • fiona64

          And a fetus is not a person. There you go!

    • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

      You can take a gift back to the store if you do not want it.
      Isaiah 45:7
      I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the Lord do all these things.

  • Think. Reason. Vote.

    Think: who perpetrates these hideous crimes? It is a human being doing this to another and worse yet, to a child.
    Who should be blamed for it? The child? Did the child’s parents know this would happen? Is the perpetrator innocent? Are his thoughts and actions good? Did someone force him to commit these crimes?
    They were all reasoned (amoral) by the one committing the crime and carried out by his own will.
    If you were to think or expect a crime to be committed against you in the future, would you end your life?
    Think. Every person needs another. We are made with a caring heart, and when we realize this, we also reason that GOODNESS must be exemplified in our own lives first so we can give it to others. Peace is costly. Every life has a beautiful purpose. Every person must try to live life with a responsible heart: Real love.

    • thedoorisajar

      What makes you think that an embryo is a child? it has no brain, dumbfuck

    • Suba gunawardana

      Child abuse happens, whether you like it or not. Children are abused every day, by their own “care-givers” who may be their biological/foster/adoptive parents, or whatever adult the child is thrown at when there’s no one to care for them. When a child is UNWANTED, the chances that they’d be neglected/abused are far greater than if they are wanted and loved.

      Those who knowingly throw more & more innocent children into this situation, particularly those who force other people’s unwanted children to life WITHOUT providing for them, are equally responsible for the abuse as the abusers themselves.

      P.S. Could you please reply directly to specific comments? It is hard to figure out whom you are addressing & to what point you are responding. Also there are many points you left unaddressed.

      • Think. Reason. Vote.

        I’m sorry- do you mind repeating what I didn’t respond to?
        Sincerity is hard to face for so many of us. I often find it hard to face my own weaknesses, yet am consciously aware that it is indeed something I need to put more work and attention toward because it is the right and morally good thing to do. We all have the choice to do what is right, no matter the cost. Why? Because we inherently know it might do some good to someone, somewhere.

        • Suba gunawardana

          Here’s a re-post of one of my responses you may not have seen:

          I am not angry, but very used to this emotional dodge-tactic from
          forced-birthers when they have no valid response to my questions.

          First, I would like you to stand behind your claim and point out exactly what part of my comments indicate “anger”.

          Second, when a child is unwanted it is obvious they would have a miserable life. Who in their right mind would force such children into life WITHOUT providing for them? Why would you knowingly commit such acts of cruelty to children?

          Playing god? Doesn’t your god perform millions of abortions himself in the form of miscarriage? What’s wrong with emulating god?

          • Think. Reason. Vote.

            Hi Suba,
            -My reference to your being angry is in taking on the defensive mode- you come across as though you are being persecuted by those who are speaking out in favor of the unborn, whose rights are dismissed completely and purposely.
            -An ‘unwanted child’ is only unwanted by those who are afraid of being responsible for their actions; there are many couples who cannot have children and adopt; these children are cherished.
            -The ‘act of cruelty’ you speak of
            is

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            What is an ‘unborn?’ Is that kind of like ‘the undead?’ I can just hear the creepy 1950s horror movie music.

          • Jennifer Starr

            There are over 100,000 children languishing in foster care who are available to adopt, and in many cases the state will actually help with the cost. They may be older and they may not be perfect but they need homes–that is what adoption is supposed to be about–kids without homes who need them. No woman is required to carry a pregnancy for some selfish couple who only wants a newborn.

          • fiona64

            An ‘unwanted child’ is only unwanted by those who are afraid of being
            responsible for their actions; there are many couples who cannot have
            children and adopt; these children are cherished.

            They must not want to adopt very badly, since there are more than 100K children available for adoption in the US right now, most of whom will age out without ever having permanent homes.

            Those couples who are insisting that they will only adopt a perfectly healthy Caucasian male infant are selfish.

          • Think. Reason. Vote.

            Facts are ignored, you said there are over ‘100K children available for adoption’- this demonstrates the magnitude of irresponsible individuals turning their backs on situations they helped create and literally handing over their responsibility on others/ the state- isn’t that a cruel and uncaring action?

          • Jennifer Starr

            Children end up in foster care for various reasons–neglect,abandonment, abuse, financial reasons and some of them are orphaned. You don’t believe that they deserve permanent homes?

          • Suba gunawardana

            And what excuse do you have for exacerbating the situation and ADDING to the misery of these children?

            Whatever the reasons, it is a fact that the number of children needing care is FAR GREATER than the number of responsible caring adults available to provide care. Adding MORE unwanted children to this situation without equalizing the numbers would do what? INCREASE the suffering of children. Now why are you promoting this again?

          • Jennifer Starr

            What annoys me is that religious conservatives will complain about a supposed shortage of children to adopt in this country when what they really mean is a shortage of preferably white newborns.

          • fiona64

            You’re the dummy who wants to insist that more children be born, which would merely put more children available for adoption by those alleged “many, many couples” that you cite.

            You don’t get to decide for others what is or is not responsible.

          • Think. Reason. Vote.

            You are right. God gave us rules to follow for our own good!

          • Jennifer Starr

            We don’t live in a theocracy.

          • Suba gunawardana

            The reasons you gave for opposing abortion “It’s a human life” ; or “it’s wrong to kill someone with intellect”, have been disproved.

            So the only reason you have left is “god said so”. As I said in my other post, there’s absolutely NO evidence that god disapproves of abortion. All evidence shows that god loves abortion.

            So what’s your real objection to abortion again?

          • fiona64

            Which god?

          • Suba gunawardana

            You still haven’t provided OBJECTIVE evidence of my “anger”. What you presented was a subjective opinion. Regardless, I will
            respond to your “as though” scenario.

            “as though you are being persecuted by those who are speaking out in favor of

            Can you tell me how you are NOT persecuting/victimizing women and their unwanted children?

            -Forcing women to breed against their will is more than persecution, it’s full-blown out & out slavery. How would you like it if someone forced you (or your daughter/other female family member) to have an abortion against your/their will? Would you call that victimization?

            -Forcing unwanted children to be born to miserable lives is to knowingly promote child abuse.

            “An ‘unwanted child’ is only unwanted by those who area afraid of being responsible for their actions; there are many couples who
            cannot have children and adopt; these children are cherished. “

            Really? Then why is a child abused every 10 seconds; 4 or more
            children die from abuse every day; over 100k children languish in foster care any given time; hundreds of children die in the system every year; and thousands age out every year never getting a home?

            Where’s your “compassion” for these SUFFERING children whom
            you helped put in that situation?

            “the unborn, whose rights are dismissed completely and purposely.”

            I stand up for their right to be PROTECTED from neglect/starvation/rape/torture/murder as living breathing sentient children in the future. You on the other hand, make every effort to force those horrors on innocent children who never asked for it.

          • Think. Reason. Vote.

            Hi Suba,
            First I would not call having a child “breeding”, that is for animals.
            Forcing abortion on anyone is wrong because it kills not only the baby’s life but the mother’s spirit. To encourage life over abortion is not persecution, it is trying to help abortion thinkers to realize they do not hold the power to end any life, not even the one of the child they hold in their womb: this baby is a person separate from the mother.
            It goes back to wanting to do things “my way” and not the right way.

            Regarding the anger issue : it seems to me there is such an undertone of “ME FIRST” thinking in people who want abortion legalized that if anyone contradicts them, the spark of anger readily comes out as “MY RIGHTS FIRST” and never mind a life which depends completely on its mother for protection, and should be FIRST, before the mother, after all, it is a mother’s role, to protect their children.

          • Jennifer Starr

            never mind a life which depends completely on its mother for protection, and should be FIRST, before the mother, after all.

            That is a decision that you get to make for any pregnancies that you carry. Not for the pregnancies of other women.

          • Suba gunawardana

            What’s the difference between having a child and breeding? Biologically it’s exactly the same.

            “Forcing abortion on anyone is wrong because it kills not only the baby’s life but the mother’s spirit.”

            Really? And forcing an unwanted child on them doesn’t? Doesn’t it kill TWO spirits not one, the mother stuck with the unwanted child, and more importantly, the CHILD stuck with a mother who doesn’t want them?

            Once again, unless YOU are prepared to be a parent to that child, you have no right to force unwanted children to misery.

            “To encourage life over abortion is not persecution, it is trying to help
            abortion thinkers to realize they do not hold the power to end any
            life”

            You keep avoiding my question. Why do you wish to deny “the power over life” ONLY to pregnant women, while everyone else can kill to their heart’s content? If life is sacred it should apply to ALL life, not just human zefs.

            If YOU have no problem with killing innocent individuals for your necessity & convenience, you have no right to oppose other people doing the same for their necessity & convenience.

          • Think. Reason. Vote.

            Oops- got cut off-
            The “act of cruelty” is not a new life being born, but the destruction of that life and the hope that comes with every new life.
            -a miscarriage cannot be judged; we are not God. Do we fully understand why good things can happen to both good and bad people? We are not our own makers, we cannot understand the why to everything.
            -If we reason only in materialistic terms it is difficult for us to appreciate that pain and suffering, or indeed anything that requires an effort, can be worthwhile.

          • Jennifer Starr

            that pain and suffering, or indeed anything that requires an effort, can be worthwhile.

            As far as I can see, the only persons who love to trot out this trite little homily are those who are currently not suffering or in pain. Sure, ‘pro-lifers’ think suffering and sacrifice is awesome–provided someone else is doing it.

          • fiona64

            Yep. It’s always the pain and suffering of *others* that is “worthwhile.”

          • Think. Reason. Vote.

            Unthinking commentary.

          • Jennifer Starr

            True commentary.

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            Why do you lie? Jehovah loves abortion. Hosea 13:16.
            God says:
            The people of Samaria must bear their guilt,
            because they have rebelled against their God.
            They will fall by the sword;
            their little ones will be dashed to the ground,
            their pregnant women ripped open.

          • Think. Reason. Vote.

            Jennifer,
            There will always be suffering in this world because of our imperfect human nature. Faith in God opens the door to all who seek happiness not only for oneself, but for all mankind, yet it is almost impossible to speak of the goodness and mercy of God present in the life of every person to those who dislike any reference to God.
            Suffering has a very key purpose in life: it opens the heart and mind to God. When God has a place in our lives, we begin to mature in our humanity, meaning that we look beyond ourselves, beginning to comprehend that we truly must love our neighbor as ourselves.

          • Jennifer Starr

            Funny, but I don’t recall asking for a sermon. And I as I said, ‘pro-lifers’ are quite fond of talking about the place that suffering has in life, provided they don’t have to do the suffering themselves.

          • Think. Reason. Vote.

            Everyone suffers in this world in one way or another; perhaps those you accuse of not suffering choose not to wear it on their sleeve, rather, they offer it to God for those who oppose His goodness.

          • thedoorisajar

            Does a newborn deserve to slowly suffocate to death because your god saw fit not to give it functional lungs?

          • Think. Reason. Vote.

            Have you given God a chance in your life? Do you believe in God? Have you opened your door wide to Him and not only ajar?

          • Suba gunawardana

            If god cares about the “babies” in the womb, why does he NEVER step up to prevent abortion? Why does your god PROMOTE aboprtion by placing millions of zefs in the uteri of women who don’t want/can’t afford them? Why does he perform billions of abortions himself in the form of miscarriage?

            All evidence shows that your god LOVES abortion, so you are the one disobeying your own god.

          • Think. Reason. Vote.

            Suba, God does not stop abortions or crimes from happening ‘as a rule’ because of our free will. We are not robots. We have an intellect and a soul, and a will. He wants us to exercise it for the GOOD! If abortions are happening it because people are wanting it, making it their choice but it doesn’t mean it is right. God allows it to happen because he will not force HIS will on us, it is a beautiful gift He offers us to choose Him (Goodness). We just have to be courageous enough to be docile to His Will which is LOVE AND MERCY ITSELF.

          • thedoorisajar

            Then why does God permit innocent children to suffer from natural disasters and disease?

          • Think. Reason. Vote.

            Only He knows, but I think it is to wake people up to reality and to work on the ongoing process of transforming our hearts into His own likeness: LOVONE ANOTHER. It tramples on our pride I know, but that is good, because all evil begins with pride.

          • thedoorisajar

            God works in mysterious ways = not an answer.

            You know as well as we do that there is NO justification for giving infants cancer. None whatsoever.

            Furthermore, if you truly believe that abortion = murder, then the penalty for aborting a microscopic embryo should be the same as for shooting a toddler in the head

          • Suba gunawardana

            How is it OK to torture the innocent for ANY reason, particularly when you have the power to stop it?

          • Jennifer Starr

            As long as it’s not you or yours suffering from disease or a natural disaster, right?

          • thedoorisajar

            If you developed cancer, and were in constant, excruciating pain 24/7, and slowly began to lose control of your body, would you seek medical help, or praise the lord for permitting you to suffer?

          • Think. Reason. Vote.

            Both but in the opposite order.

          • thedoorisajar

            Why? Suffering = as good as gold.

            Medical treatment will alleviate or end your suffering. Tsk tsk.

          • Suba gunawardana

            That so called “free will” occurs AT THE EXPENSE of those weaker than able-minded humans (Children, animals/plants, the disabled).

            So your god is fine with all those VICTIMS being perpetually abused/tortured in the name of free will? How come an “all-powerful” god has no compassion for the weakest?

          • Think. Reason. Vote.

            I have purposely left out a source in all these conversations because of the common disbelief amongst atheists, etc.
            That source is, EVIL. Satan, the devil. IF you don’t believe in God then you deny the existence of satan. We who believe in God, KNOW that the devil exists and prowls about the world seeking the ruin of souls, abortion is one of his masterpeices.

          • Suba gunawardana

            Same question. Why does an all-powerful god allow Satan to wreak havoc in his kingdom? Why doesn’t god get rid of satan & be done with it?

            Either god is WEAKER than satan, or god fully approves of what satan does. You cannot have it both ways.

          • Think. Reason. Vote.

            Don’t you understand? We have our own battle to fight here in this life, in infinite forms (disease, poverty, violence, etc)- we have to do our part to fight against these things. God will do the rest. If we don’t bother to live out these basic codes of conduct (again, refer to the 10 Comm.), then we are making our own world what it is: chaotic.

          • Suba gunawardana

            Once again, it’s NOT about “Me me me me” or “us us us us”.

            As I asked numerous times, what about the innocent defenseless VICTIMS? Why does your god not care about them?

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            God has balls? Who said?

          • Suba gunawardana

            Why believe in someone who allegedly has all the power yet never lifts a finger to help the VICTIMS of this world? (His own victims as well has victims of humankind)

          • Think. Reason. Vote.

            If only you were aware of the many blessings in your life; they are not of your own making but from God who loves you dearly.

          • thedoorisajar

            If God gave suba cancer, would that be an expression of his love?

          • Think. Reason. Vote.

            Not an expression, but a call to recognize what is missing in her life. perhaps…?

          • Suba gunawardana

            What is missing in my life? Cancer?

          • thedoorisajar

            Apparently!

          • Ella Warnock

            Exactly! You’ll never know how much you wanted and needed it before it was lovingly laid at your feet, and you’d surely miss it terribly when it left. Or something.

          • Suba gunawardana

            You still haven’t explained (among other things) why a loving god sends disease & disaster to torture the innocent. Or if the devil does it, why doesn’t a good god get rid of the devil?

          • Jennifer Starr

            You don’t even realize how self-righteous and asinine that sounded, do you? You couldn’t have.

          • thedoorisajar

            So you believe that Suba’s life could be improved if she had leukemia?

          • Suba gunawardana

            I am well aware of how good my OWN life is. So what? It’s not about me me me me you know.

            What about the millions of children who are being starved/beaten/raped/tortured as we speak? Or animals? Why does your god never lift a finger to help THEM? Not only that, why does your god exacerbate their suffering by sending them diseases & natural disasters? Why does god give children cancer?

            You think I should THANK god for my life while I watch him torture others? Like sucking up to a bad boss? How nasty & shameful!

            P.S. Does god love all the children he tortures on a daily basis?

          • Think. Reason. Vote.

            Exactly, it is NOT about ME ME ME as you say. Do you pray for those suffering? Are you able to help in any substantial way, either financially, in person, etc? Getting involved in improving the lives of those in need of help? We are all called to action, to help one another, not get rid of one another.

          • Suba gunawardana

            Pray to your sadistic god who CAUSES/allows the suffering in the first place? Now exactly what good would that do?

            The first step in helping the needy is realizing that there’s NOBODY in charge, that if YOU don’t protect the weak, nobody would. Praying to a non-existent sky-daddy won’t do it.

            Of course I do what I can to help, which includes rescuing animals and PROMOTING CONTRACEPTION/ABORTION, in order to decrease the numbers of children being abused.

            YOU on the other hand, make every effort to INCREASE child abuse.

          • Jennifer Starr

            I didn’t accuse anyone of ‘not suffering’, but of demanding it from others. Unless you can carry someone else’s pregnancy for them, and you can’t–it is not up to you to determine how much risk–physical, mental or otherwise–that they must be willing to assume. That should be left up to the woman who is actually pregnant. You may freely take suffering and offer up what you wish–but you don’t get to make that same demand of others.

          • Think. Reason. Vote.

            Nobody can demand anything from another. We each have free will to exercise, and every choice has consequences (good or bad). Abortion itself imposes its will on the baby…think about it.

          • thedoorisajar

            By forcing women to gestate, to suffer with a pregnancy that can maim and kill them, you are imposing your will on them.

            And the unborn have NO right to a woman’s body. This is a right that does NOT exist – not for adults, and not for prenates.

          • Think. Reason. Vote.

            Who lived out the actions in becoming pregnant in the first place? Exempting rape/incest, a woman willingly exercises her sexuality which could bring on a pregnancy: a child. And the life of a child begins with conception. Think: It is 9 months for a baby to be ready to be born; it follows a phase of childhood years and into the teens phase. Then adulthood and eventually old age phase. The gestational stage is essential for the rest of those phases.
            Who is to say that a perfectly healthy 5 year old will not be maimed by an accident or disease? Whois to say it cannot happen to anyone at any phase of life?

          • thedoorisajar

            So you would permit abortion in the case of rape yes?

          • Jennifer Starr

            Babies are born.

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            There is no ‘baby’ until I make it. Think about it.

          • Suba gunawardana

            “Nobody can demand anything from another.” Exactly! No individual can invade/occupy/use another person’s body without their consent (as unwanted zefs do). When they do that, the person whose boidy is invaded has every right to kill the invader to protect her body.

            Many women CHOOSE not to exercise that right and accommodate the invader at the expense of her body. That does NOT mean you can take that right away.

          • thedoorisajar

            Try to make an argument against abortion that is not religious. Religious arguments do not work because not everyone believes in your deity – a deity that condoned slavery, rape and commanded genocide.

          • Think. Reason. Vote.

            Your last line: “a deity that condoned slavery, rape and commanded genocide” is the erroneous foundation you base all your views on. Faith in God, is believing in Him, trusting in Him, etc. it is not God who is to blame for humanity’s misery, it is humanity itself. Believing in God means to believe in what He teaches: to love Him, to love one another, to not commit adultery, etc ( the ten commandments). Those who represent the church and commit offenses against God and humanity are people, you and me, not God. It is why we need Christianity to flourish everywhere: it is the only faith which asks of us (with God’s help) to look after one another in all ways, spas to grow in real love for one another and not the opposite (again, the ten commandments).

          • thedoorisajar

            God could have put an end to slavery, genocide and rape at any time. He did not. He could have issued a commandment, but he did not. He *condoned* slavery, and *commanded* genocide.

            And how do you justify natural disasters and birth defects? What is the point of creating a baby that is born without lungs? Does your god get his rocks off on torturing children?

          • Think. Reason. Vote.

            God’s commandments include: “Thou shall not kill” amongst the ten. If you are curious about them, look them up, there is much depth to each of them which encompass a blueprint if you will, in trying to live this life in the best possible way: Founded in real love.

          • thedoorisajar

            LOLOLOL

            Ignorant about your own bible. You twit.

            The bible says ‘thou shall not MURDER’ which is why god COMMANDED the hebrews to genocide the amalekites

            1 Samuel 15
            God Commands Amalekite Genocide

            15:1 Samuel also said unto Saul, The LORD sent me to anoint thee to be king over his people, over Israel: now therefore hearken thou unto the voice of the words of the LORD.

            15:2 Thus saith the LORD of hosts, I remember that which Amalek did to Israel, how he laid wait for him in the way, when he came up from Egypt.

            (15:2-3) “Thus saith the LORD of hosts … slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass.”
            God orders Saul to kill all of the Amalekites: men, women, infants, sucklings, ox, sheep, camels, and asses. Why? Because God remembers what Amalek did hundreds of years ago.
            To kill or not to kill

            15:3 Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass.

            Your deity also commands baby killing:

            Hosea 13:16
            The people of Samaria must bear their guilt, because they have rebelled against their God. They will fall by the sword; their little ones will be dashed to the ground, their pregnant women ripped open.”

            How blessed will be the one who seizes and dashes your little ones against the rock.” (Psalm 137:9).

            ——-
            your god enjoys torture and suffering

          • Think. Reason. Vote.

            Perhaps I am a twit. Still, abortion kills/murders a child.

          • thedoorisajar

            So what should the penalty be for the s1uts (your implication) who abort? Life in prison?

          • Think. Reason. Vote.

            Anyone freely exercising their sexuality ought to be in a state of marriage. For the unfortunate that are not married and find themselves pregnant and afraid, that is where we can be of help to them. Encourage motherhood (it may change them for the better forever!) and to not repeat her actions unless she is married.
            What is forgotten is that our sexuality is not mere pleasure, it is to procreate responsibly and that means a family. What child does not seek its mother and father’s love? To deprive a child from this security (of a mother and a father), the cycle of misbehavior/immorality begins.

          • thedoorisajar

            Married women have abortions too, cupcake.

            And sexuality evolved for purposes of social bonding. There is absolutely nothing wrong with promiscuity – humans are like bonobos in that we have sex to strengthen social bonds.

            Now, kindly and honestly answer the question

            So what should the penalty be for the s1uts (your implication) who abort? Life in prison?

          • Think. Reason. Vote.

            The penalty for abortion, is already known to those who have aborted and it is more than sufficient penalty: their spirit is deeply hurt.
            We as women should encourage all women to know themselves well:
            by this I mean women are truly the ones who set the standards of society. The more we lower ourselves in morality, the lower men become. The higher standards we have, the higher do men strive.
            Feminism mentality has played a horrendous joke on women.

          • Jennifer Starr

            So you’re saying that men are unable to control their own behavior?

          • Think. Reason. Vote.

            The expectations and standards of a woman determine what is expected from men; a woman with high standard will attract a good man. Men are eager to to find such a woman.

          • Jennifer Starr

            To put it very succinctly, bullshit.

          • thedoorisajar

            And many good men don’t want kids. Ever. They will stay happily married to the same woman for 30+ years without having kids.

            Deal with it.

          • Ella Warnock

            Indeed. I have just such a man. Damn fine marriage, we have.

          • Suba gunawardana

            LOL so do I

          • Ella Warnock

            That’s awesome, suba!

          • thedoorisajar

            You should pity suba. Cancer is missing from her life.

            Suffering =as good as gold

          • Suba gunawardana

            Apparently suffering is gold as long as it happens to non-Christians (or children)

          • Suba gunawardana

            Question is what kind of men are “eager to find” such a woman.

            BTW what exactly do you mean by a high standard? That’s a very vague term.

          • Think. Reason. Vote.

            simplicity and purity.

          • Jennifer Starr

            I’m running out of ways to say this. Instead, I’ll let a video speak for me : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V3y3QoFnqZc

          • Suba gunawardana

            Is that code for stupidity & celibacy? If not, could you please explain what you mean?

          • Ella Warnock

            Yeah, I’m neither of those things so how I ended up with a quality partner is anyone’s guess, I suppose. ::roll eyes::

          • Jennifer Starr

            This is also the kind of thinking that keeps wives with abusive spouses–they listen to what you say and think that it is up to them to ‘change’ their man and make him better, even while he keeps putting them in the hospital. I dealt with this sort of thinking from my cousin for years–thankfully she and her children finally escaped.

          • Think. Reason. Vote.

            We cannot change others, but we can change ourselves. In an abusive family situation, it would be wise to seperate for the good of the family.

          • Jennifer Starr

            It contradicts your theory that a good woman will only attract good men.

          • Suba gunawardana

            Actually TRV doesn’t seem to think that men have to be good at all. Apparently women have to be “good” to attract just any man.

          • thedoorisajar

            I suspect that she is a follower of Micheal Pearl – a godly woman obeys her husband and is morally and sexually pure

            She is definitely a part of purity culture.

          • Jennifer Starr

            I’ve read about how Michael Pearl treats his wife–if that’s a good man I’m the Queen of England.

          • thedoorisajar

            Yes, and author of ‘to train up a child’

            http://www.patheos.com/blogs/lovejoyfeminism/created-to-be-his-help-meet

            Women were created to be help-meets. And children are little slaves who must be ‘broken’

            Michael Pearl is a sociopath.

          • Suba gunawardana

            Certainly a puke inducer…

          • thedoorisajar

            The penalty for abortion, is already known to those who have aborted and it is more than sufficient penalty: their spirit is deeply hurt.

            Is abortion as morally wrong as shooting a 5 year old in the head?

          • Think. Reason. Vote.

            Ending the life of any living human being is wrong. It isn’t our right to end ANY life.

          • Jennifer Starr

            So what punishment would you give a woman who shoots her five year old child in the head?

          • Suba gunawardana

            You are contradicting yourself. You just agreed that it’s fine to kill human beings in war, self defense, or protection of person/property.

            Also so far you haven’t addressed my point why it’s OK to kill non-humans but not zefs, if INTELLECT is your only criterion. Zefs have far LESS intellect than grown animals.

          • thedoorisajar

            OK. So zygotes are equal in value to toddlers.

            Then if the penalty for shooting a toddler in the head is life in prison, then shouldn’t the penalty for preventing a zygote from implanting in the uterus be the same?

            Try to be consistent.

            Remember, you have stated that zygotes and toddlers are both human beings of equal worth.

          • Jennifer Starr

            Actually many women who are married have abortions, and most of them already have at least one child.

          • Suba gunawardana

            What difference does marriage make? If you are an unfit parent, marriage does not magically make you a fit parent. Also there are many single people (men & women both) who make wonderful parents. What difference does marriage make again?

            “Encourage motherhood” is NOT an end-all soultion. Any idiot can spit out a baby & nominally be a “mother”. What happens to the baby afterwards? Do you care? What would become of that child the woman didn’t want/couldn’t afford? Unless YOU step up to provide all the love & care it needs, you have NO right to force other people’s unwanted children to life.

          • Think. Reason. Vote.

            Marriage offers a commitment to one another before God. When a family is started within a marriage, children benefit from that stability. Another foundational problem is that marriage is not seen as what it truly is: a sacred commitment to your spouse with God at the center. It makes it possible to life out this life (marriage) in giving rather than receiving. It is what gives peace and stability to a village, a city, a nation, a world. Destroy the family and you destroy civilization.

          • thedoorisajar

            Do you not understand that not every culture 1) believes in your god 2) even believes in marriage?

          • Suba gunawardana

            OK what does god have to do with it? God never lifts a finger to help starving children, or alleviate any of the suffering god himself created. Why do you keep kowtowing to this creature? (Sounds like a collective case of Stockholm syndrome)

            More importantly: Stability love & commitment are PERSONAL things offered by individuals. Has absolutely nothing to do with god or marriage.

            God or marriage CANNOT magically manufacture love, commitment or stability UNLESS the parties have those things to begin with, And if they do, who needs god or marriage?

            So we are back to square one. Marriage has NOTHING to do with good parenting. Having two parents is certainly better than one, but they have to be GOOD parents, and don’t have to be married.

          • Think. Reason. Vote.

            I realize i am on abortion site and against the odds. We all have a human heart, to be sincere is to begin to discover that heart and live according to its needs: LOVE. Only God opens that door to its fullest.
            God bless you all.

          • thedoorisajar

            Did you fap when you wrote that?

          • Suba gunawardana

            Doesn’t matter what site it is. You have been presented with MANY logical arguments against your stance. You have yet to address them.

            Once again, there’s nothing LOVING about spitting out children & abuseing/neglecting/abandoning them, or forcing others to do so. Every child needs to be loved & protected. If you can’t do that, you have no business breeding, or forcing others to breed. You are just punishing the children.

          • expect_resistance

            If you believe in patriarchy.

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            No thank you.
            I will have lots of hot earth shaking thigh melting sex.
            I will contracept.
            If I become pregnant, I will give birth or abort as I see fit.
            Not as you see fit.

          • Suba gunawardana

            You keep avoiding this question. If killing is wrong, why do you think it’s OK to kill millions of non-humans? What makes non-humans exempt from your “compassion”?

            If “killing is wrong” applies only to humans, do you oppose all legalized & necessary killings of humans, including war, death penalty, and for the protection of your person/property?

            BTW a zef is not a child.

          • Think. Reason. Vote.

            My life, your life, every living human being’s life began at conception. That is the beginning. Without a beginning there is no evolvement.
            When you say “non-humans’ are you referring to plants and animals? If so, we are in different categories. Human beings have a soul and an intellect. Animals have souls but not an intellect.
            Wars have their place, including military action to defend the innocent, such as WWII. I don’t think the death penalty is right either. it is natural to protect one’s family, even your neighbor if you see them under attack.

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            My dog Baby is smarter than you. And kinder.

          • Jennifer Starr

            Animals have souls but not an intellect.

            Phooey! Poppycock, balderdash, tripe, drivel, tommy-rot, banana-oil, nonsense, fiddle-sticks, stuff, fustian, baloney, tummy-rubbish and stimelderfrutch.

            (acknowledgment to Stephen Fry)

          • Suba gunawardana

            “Human beings have a soul and an intellect. Animals have souls but not an intellect.”

            So what? Are you saying that it’s perfectly ok to kill (even torture) any individual without intellect?

            If so, your objection to abortion is invalidated right there. Zefs have NO intellect. Even the latest stage fetus has LESS intellect than any full-grown animal, since the fetuse’s brain is not fully developed. So you should be fine with killing a fetus at any stage.

            From your comment on war & protection, you are fine with killing humans under certain circumstances. Therefore, you cannot object to abortion just because “it’s a human life” because obviously human life is not always sacred to you.

            Now that we got two of your fake reasons out of the way, What is the REAL reason you object to abortion?

          • Think. Reason. Vote.

            Only God gives life and only God takes away life. THAT is my objection to abortion.

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            Liar. Flagged for egregious abuse of pro choice men and women..

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            Liar. That is not what it says. It says thou shalt not murder. We have to kill to eat.

          • Suba gunawardana

            ” it is not God who is to blame for humanity’s misery, it is humanity itself.”
            Huge contradiction! Doesn’t your god have all the power, INCLUDING the power to stop the suffering if he wants?

            More importantly, wasn’t it your god who created this world in the first place, with all it’s misery? What kind of sadistic prick would create a world whose inhabitants MUST eat each other to survive?

          • Think. Reason. Vote.

            Suba,
            God IS all powerful, you are right. But He also has given you, me and everyone FREE WILL to exercise it for the good (or bad); it is our choice. God does not force Himself on us, He wants us to choose His way which is life itself: all that is good. You again speak restlessly (bad language). Perhaps it isn’t anger you have but a restless heart.
            We all are restless until we rest in God. Its true.

          • Jennifer Starr

            What bad language?

          • expect_resistance

            Jesus protect me from your followers.

          • Suba gunawardana

            You are avoiding the point again. As I already said: it’s NOT about “Me me me me” or “us us us us”.

            As I asked numerous times, what about the innocent defenseless VICTIMS? Why does your god not care about them? Why should THEY be subjected to untold suffering just so some stupid humans can have “free will”?

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            You contradict Isaiah 45:7 and you do it badly.

          • Suba gunawardana

            Why would a “loving” god condone prolonged unmitigated suffering? Particularly if he is “all-powerful” therefore CAN teach the exact same lesson without suffering? One who causes/allows suffering when it’s preventable is a SADIST. You are worshiping a sadist.

            Furthermore, what about those who have no choice or control at all, such as animals/trees/babies/disabled? What makes THEIR perpetual suffering worthwhile, when THEY get nothing out of it?

          • Think. Reason. Vote.

            Suffering is worth its weight in gold. If you are familiar with Christ and His Crucifixion and why He died, you should have a basic understanding for suffering. His death was for our own good, so that we would stand a chance to overcome sin and find peace. For an eternal life (so much more!!). IF you are not familiar with Christianity-Catholicism really- it is not possible to understand the value of suffering, making it perhaps futile to go on chatting.
            To view life from the world’s perspective is to miss luton the bigger picture of what life is all about. To see and live life through the eyes of God’s plan, is beautiful even through the chaos and suffering in the world because HOPE is alive.

          • Jennifer Starr

            You are allowed to fetishize suffering and martyr yourself all you wish. Other people don’t have to make that choice.

            And what does Miss Luton have to do with this ?

            http://www.lutontoday.co.uk/news/local/polish-beauty-queen-stripped-of-miss-bedfordshire-title-1-3848177

          • thedoorisajar

            Fetishization is right. Fuck me running!

          • thedoorisajar

            Suffering is worth its weight in gold

            Cool. Then that makes abortion ok, especially post-birth abortion, with live dismemberment yeah?

          • expect_resistance

            Not everyone is Catholic or Christian. There are lots if other religions. Being agnostic or atheist doesn’t make someone a bad or evil person. I do NOT believe Jesus saves it only gives people a reason to shame other people. Please stop with the religious bullshit.

          • Suba gunawardana

            -If you are a masochist it’s fine to choose suffering for YOURSELF (it’s your own choice) but you have absolutely no right to force suffering on anyone else.

            -If suffering is “good”, do you object to people trying to ALLEVIATE suffering? Do you object to hospitals, homeless shelters, animal shelters, painkillers, antibiotics, all kinds of medical advances?

            -What “good” at all did Christ’s suffering do for the world? In your own opinion, the world is in chaos. So apparently Christ’s death was totally redundant, & did not serve it’s intended purpose.

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            Religious word salad.

          • expect_resistance

            And then some.

          • expect_resistance

            One doesn’t need god to be a mature caring person.

          • Suba gunawardana

            How is it NOT an act of cruelty to knowingly force a child into a miserable life?

            And as I asked before, IF destruction of life is cruelty, what about the millions of non-human lives YOU destroy for the necessity & convenience of yourself, your family, and all the new humans you force into life? Why doesn’t your “cruelty” rule apply to any living being other than zefs? (zygote/embryo/fetus)

            “If we reason only in materialistic terms it is difficult for us to appreciate that pain and suffering, or indeed anything that requires
            an effort, can be worthwhile.

            It’s YOU who don’t appreciate the pain & suffering of all BORN individuals, including children, women, and non-humans. What you propose is to actively exacerbate the suffering of the BORN in favor of forcing the unborn to life. (And once the unborn are born, who cares how much they suffer, right?)

            “Do we fully understand why good things can happen to both good and bad people?”

            I do. Either there’s no god, or IF a god exists, he is a cruel sadistic
            prick. If you have a different explanation, I’d love to hear it.

          • expect_resistance

            Are you trying for sainthood or something?

        • fiona64

          Sincerity is hard to face for so many of us.

          Please let us know when you’ve demonstrated some sincerity, okay?

      • Counterculturalist

        So kill the unwanted basically? Nice, the Romans did the same thing. Instead of just hey, encouraging parents to be nice and accepting towards their kids, just kill the sucker before it’s even born. EXCELLENT!

        • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

          Works for me. If I cannot feed it and/or I do not want it, it is out of me toute suite. Cry me a river.

        • thedoorisajar

          Most children in ancient times did not survive until the age of 5. Also, no welfare net and extreme poverty. Infanticide was quite common right up through the middle ages.

          Also, infants and embryos are not the same.

        • Suba gunawardana

          What is your alternative? Force them to birth against the mothers’ will and let them die after months/years of abuse? How is that any better than death in-utero BEFORE they can feel all that pain?

          WE are not the ones influencing parents’ decisions one way or another, it’s YOU who try to force women to birth children they don’t want. The choice whether to carry or abort should be upto the pregnant woman alone, NOT you, me, or the government.

          • Counterculturalist

            Contraception. It doesn’t kill people any more than periods and ejaculations do. It works 99% of the time (while abortion works only 95% of the time). It’s safer than abortion. And by study, when women have access to contraception for free, they actually STOP getting abortions as frequently, DRAMATICALLY. Abortion levels decreases like 2/1000 women. Contraception is the most humane, ethical, and multi-beneficial alternative than dismembering and poisoning a unborn baby. It makes sure a woman is in control of her body MORE so than abortion, and it doesn’t kill anyone.

          • Suba gunawardana

            Contraception is great, but it’s the same forced-birthers who oppose abortion who also make every effort to restrict contraception and sex-ed. So your argument on that issue is with the forced-birthers.

          • Jennifer Starr

            While I respect you for holding this position, you do realize that most ‘pro-life’ people do not. Also failure rates are more than 1 %, depending on the method used. Even tubal ligations and vasectomies can fail.

        • fiona64

          Nice, the Romans did the same thing

          I believe you’re thinking of the Spartans, sweetie …

    • fiona64

      WTF are you droning on about?

    • expect_resistance

      What hideous crime? Do you see anyone here talking about breaking the law?

  • Counterculturalist

    I’m not funding feticide. Thank you.

    • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

      Suck my proboscis. Thank you.

      • thedoorisajar

        I see you met ockraz. He is a sophist. Much worse than Simon.

        • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

          Let us kick his ass. Tag team style.

          • thedoorisajar

            We also have Ann and Timothy. I am going to ask questions that point out the inconsistencies in his arguments.

            I’ll get to it later.

            I won’t out and out debate him, because he is a philosopher by trade. Yeah, really. But, pointed questions work, and then Ann and Timothy can run with it.

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            Ann is God. And Timothy is her consort.

        • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

          You have been hanging with and debating these people. You have guts of steel. The sheer volume of words saying nothing most of them produce wears me the fook out.

          • thedoorisajar

            I used to be intimidated by the mountain of bafflegab, but my skills have improved over the last year.

          • expect_resistance

            Same and I have you and the regulars here to thank. Hugs to all :)

          • Jennifer Starr

            You both are awesome :)

          • expect_resistance

            Hugs :)))

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            good. you are smart. you make one faulty assumption = that a person that can sling big words together is intelligent. forgive me for being so blunt. i am at a philly block party and i am happy and drunk on krupnik. oh and that you have to respond to each and every thing they say. relax. you are really really smart. now you need to have some fooking fun.

          • thedoorisajar

            Please have hot sex and kill lots of microscopic babies.

            We are all counting on you, Plum. Make us proud, baybeee killer!

      • Counterculturalist

        Kiss my black ass, an take a straight train to hell, you ugly little cunt. Thank you.

        • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

          I wish you what you wish me.

          • Counterculturalist

            So basically your response is “I know you are but what am I”? Great to know I’m arguing with a five-year-old.

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            No. My basic response if fook you up you cloaca. Am promoted to 13 now?

        • Arekushieru

          Appearance-shaming? Wow. I would make a comment about ableist remarks but a lot of the other posters are on here making ableist remarks, and, even though I agree with their stance on abortion, that would make me a hypocrite, and I don’t like being a hypocrite, unlike you.

        • eroteme

          I missed this earlier.

          Impressive.

          Wash out your mouth with soap, kiddo.

        • fiona64

          Kiss my black ass, an take a straight train to hell, you ugly little cunt. Thank you.

          The erudition here is amazing. No, really. I’m amazed.

          • eroteme

            Another SAT word!

    • thedoorisajar

      Why not?

      • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

        You are such a scrapper. I like that in a person.

      • Counterculturalist

        I don’t support killing other people.

        • thedoorisajar

          Cool. So your rapist can rape and beat the shit out of you, and you will simply lie back and think of England?

          • Counterculturalist

            Rape happens less than 2% of the time, when women get abortion. The main reason is that the women weren’t wearing protections, their relationship was failing, or the child was found to be mentally challenged and or physically disabled. So we’re killing the undesirables like Hitler wanted. Awesome!

          • Jennifer Starr

            Since rape often goes unreported and no one is required to disclose their reason for having an abortion, I’d be willing to bet that the number is quite a bit higher than that. Either way it doesn’t matter. Not wanting to be pregnant is an adequate reason.

          • thedoorisajar

            That wasn’t the question.

            The question was, would you let a rapist assault you vs killing him to escape?

            If I have to remind you, you said that killing people = wrong.

          • Counterculturalist

            Of course I wouldn’t kill him. I would always remember to carry around my special anti-rape superpowers against the evil rapist. I’ll use my superpowers to put him into a deep sleep, then I’ll use telekinesis to put him in jail, and tell the police telepathically to let them know that he attempted to rape me. There’s your answer. :D

          • Suba gunawardana

            Your point?
            It was a straightforward question. Would you kill to protect your body, or not?

          • Counterculturalist

            You gave me a scenario that wasn’t germane to the subject, so I gave you an answer that was equally ridiculous.

          • Suba gunawardana

            Are you this dense? You said your opposition to abortion is because “you don’t support killing other people”.

            Killing a rapist to protect your body is still “killing other people”. Do you approve of self defense or not?

            If you don’t, then you are proponent of a rape/physical assault.
            If you do, then your opposition to abortion is invalid.

          • Counterculturalist

            “Are you this dense?”

            Dense? Well I do have some curves on me if that’s what you mean. Unfortunately I don’t speak like a idiot who’s vocabulary is basically the urban dictionary, but rather a lady who knows her SAT words. If you’re going to add intelligently to the conversation of the subject of abortion, go ahead. But we aren’t talking about rape and abuse. We’re talking about the rights of people to take the life of their own children, legally. If you’re going to divert on something completely irrelevant I’m going to respond in the same level of ridiculousness that you initiated.

          • Suba gunawardana

            Personal attacks without logical rebuttals only make YOU look like an idiot.

            I took the effort to spell it out for you. Are you admitting you have no answer? That’s what I thought. All forced-birthers can do when faced with logic is to act falsely indignant & run off.

            SAT words? Are you trying to blame your incompetence on your age? Won’t work. I met a sixteen year-old on another thread who was a thousand times smarter than you.

          • Counterculturalist

            You mean the same personal attacks you made when you prompted a rapist to attack me? I’m laughing right now at your idiocy. You’re falling apart and slowly lacking any uniqueness or a simple legitimate rebuttal so you resort to whining like a bitch. How amusing. Carry on.

          • Jennifer Starr

            No, that’s not a personal attack. No one is threatening you–it’s a hypothetical situation.

          • Suba gunawardana

            Again how dense are you that you cannot grasp an ANALOGY? Go back & read my posts, you just MIGHT get it, or not. I’m not holding my breath.

            And let me remind you, your recent post was yet another bunch of personal attacks with no rebuttal, ergo, proving YOURSELF to be an idiot.

          • Suba gunawardana

            oops wrong place

          • Counterculturalist

            Again, not the person with three erotemes at the end of their sentence. You’ve lost this debate, goodbye.

          • Suba gunawardana

            What’s your obsession with three erotemes? You are free to use as many as you like too.

            You declaring something doesn’t make it so. Again remember you failed to justify your most basic stance, i.e. why you think abortion is wrong. So far you have only proved the opponents’ points.

          • Arekushieru

            The only one whining, here, is you.

          • Jennifer Starr

            SAT words? Are you a teen? And in case you’ve forgotten, your first response to me was to tell me to ‘fuck off’. Or is that on the SATs now as well?

          • Counterculturalist

            ‘Fuck’ is word, sweetie. And if you’re literate, you’d be surprised that the same language are in most college level literature. You’ve ever read One Hundred Years of Solitude? (Probably not, because you’re a idiot.) But any who, it’s a novel dense with a rich college-level vocabulary. “Fuck” is used quite often.

          • thedoorisajar

            Telling her to fuck off instead of engaging in honest, open intellectual debate is what a 15 year old would do.

            Are you 15?

          • Suba gunawardana

            Uh oh who’s throwing a tantrum???

          • Jennifer Starr

            Someone’s cranky and needs a nap.

          • Suba gunawardana

            Talk about drama….

          • Counterculturalist

            Well obviously not the person with a million erotemes at the end of their sentences.

          • Suba gunawardana

            Isn’t it funny that you take the time to respond to inane comments but have YET to provide a valid justification for your anti-abortion stance? Obviously you don’t have one. FYI “because I say so” is not a valid justification.

          • thedoorisajar

            if at any time you feel up for a challenge, there’s a new one at SPL – he is a professional philosopher, is friends with Mr. Fenix, and thinks he can bafflegab himself to victory.

            Me, Timothy Griffy and Ann Morgan are all having a go at him.

          • Suba gunawardana

            Great, which topic is it?

          • thedoorisajar

            http://blog.secularprolife.org/2014/08/watch-out-for-this-disingenuous-pro.html

            ockraz. His training is in philosophy, so he presents all of his arguments as if he was in a philosophy 101 class

            lulz

          • Suba gunawardana

            Thanks I’ll take a look.

          • Arekushieru

            Did you get a look at their photo, for that particular post? They imply that all Pro-Choice women have abortions and that medical waste goes in the trash bin. Yeah, like you said, not much different than the fundies!

          • Arekushieru

            I LOVE Timothy. Not saying I don’t like Ann, either, but Timothy’s arguments and mine run along the same lines, while Ann’s are more philosophically bent. :)

          • Jennifer Starr

            Three question marks does not a million make. Any more than randomly throwing big words around makes you seem more intelligent.

          • thedoorisajar

            CC’s vast and towering intellect is forcing me to excogitate, and dare I say I am feeling a tad saxicolous in comparison to her coruscant and ebullient vocabulary.

            She is a sesquipedalian.

          • Jennifer Starr

            Perchance you are a personage who hast failed to immerse themselves in the hallowed tome One Hundred Years of Solitude? (which to be fair is actually is a pretty decent read if a bit crammed with characters/situations.–it’s basically like reading a big long soap opera :)

          • thedoorisajar

            I shall endeavour to read it post-haste.

            Jennifer, I suggest you learn the art of conversation:

            http://www.yellow5.com/pokey/archive/index36.html

          • Jennifer Starr

            Love that :)

          • Jennifer Starr

            I don’t have a problem with the word fuck–you were the one clutching your pearls over the language you were being addressed in. And yes, I’ve read One Hundred Years of Solitude, I’ve actually read more books than your pretentious self has even dreamed of.

          • thedoorisajar

            You keep using the term ‘evolutionist’ but I think it’s clear that you are probably 15 years old and don’t exactly understand science.

            The term “evolutionist” is commonly used as an anti-science label by proponents of creationism and intelligent design. Sometimes the word changes to ‘evilution’ to indicate that belief in evolution is, in some creationist opinions, evil and of the devil. Both “evolutionist” and “evolutionism” refer to scientists and others who accept that the evidence-based theory of evolution is the best explanation for the development of life on the earth (otherwise known as over 99% of all scientists in relevant fields). Often, the term just gets thrown around to refer to anyone else they’re disagreeing with at the time, such as atheists or libruls. To compound this stupidity some creationists even argue that “evolutionism” is a secular religion leading to sexual freedom and other supposed failings of present day society.

          • Jennifer Starr

            Thank you for bringing this up–awesome post.

          • Counterculturalist

            The term “evolutionist” is commonly used as an anti-science label by proponents of creationism and intelligent design

            Really? Did you get that from rationalwiki.com? How cute. According to the dictionary, it’s anyone who believes in or supports a theory of evolution, especially in biology. So again carping irrelevant and proper terminology, because you’re clearly losing this argument against the subject of abortion.

            Are you going to over-analyze my hair, and conclude that since it’s blue I must be a Indigo child from The New Age movement? Please I’m curious. I really want to know what other distractions you can do to eschew and temporize the subject at hand.

          • thedoorisajar

            Yep, I got it from rationalwiki. And no ‘evolutionist’ would go around referring to themselves as an ‘evolutionist’ you twit.

          • Suba gunawardana

            Let me remind you that you have yet to provide ANY justification for your anti-abortion stance.

            “I don’t approve of killing people” doesn’t cut it, as has been amply demonstrated to you here.

          • Jennifer Starr

            Are you going to over-analyze my hair, and conclude that since it’s blue I must be a Indigo child from The New Age movement?

            I was thinking more of an accident with a paint bucket. But hey, it’s your hair.

          • Counterculturalist

            Ah so personal attacks after carping me for making personal attacks. Brilliant! So not only are you a idiot with no vocabulary, no intellect but wiki.com, no understanding of embryonic evolution whatsoever, no intelligent argument in this debate but “WOULD YOU KILL YOUR RAPIST?”, you’re a notorious hypocrite who throw third-grade-level insults when you lose a fight? What a little fuck you all are. Give yourselves a pat on the back.

          • Jennifer Starr

            Ah so personal attacks after carping me for making personal attacks. Brilliant! So not only are you a idiot with no vocabulary, no intellect but wiki.com, no understanding of embryonic evolution whatsoever, no intelligent argument in this debate but “WOULD YOU KILL YOUR RAPIST?”,

            And when precisely did I ever ask you that question? And trust me, you’re not an intellectual. You’re just pretentious.

          • thedoorisajar

            lololol

          • Suba gunawardana

            Wasn’t it YOU who screamed “Kiss my black ass, an take a straight train to hell, you ugly little cunt. Thank you.” ??? (and other similar little gems)

            And you have yet to answer that simple question on killing a rapist.

          • Arekushieru

            Vocabulary? Jennifer has been quite adept at explaining herself with proper vocabulary unlike a certain someone this entire time. Wiki.com is far more reputable than biased anti-choice sites. We have shown that you do not understand embryonic development and you keep avoiding a very RELEVANT and ANALOGOUS argument for some strange reason.

          • thedoorisajar

            i think that your hair is beautiful, and that you too are a beautiful, precious person, beneath the immature fuckwittery.

          • Counterculturalist

            Because fuckwitty is total a word.

          • thedoorisajar
          • Jennifer Starr

            Do you prefer smeghead?

          • Suba gunawardana

            How limited is your intelligence that you cannot comprehend a new word by how it’s used in a sentence?

          • Arekushieru

            So, either you’re stating that killing a person in self-defense does not equal killing a person in self-defense or you’re stating that a fetus is not a person, which means you lied, above. If neither, then the question Suba asked above is OBVIOUSLY germane.

          • fiona64

            I don’t speak like a idiot

            Ironic, to say the least.

            but rather a lady who knows her SAT words

            Funny, I don’t remember “go suck a dick” appearing on the SAT.

          • eroteme

            That’s cuz you took the wrong SAT. The one that isn’t for the developmentally disabled.

          • Jennifer Starr

            Apparently proboscis isn’t on that list either, since she doesn’t seem to know what it means.

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            Nor does she use her online dictionary. I think it is 12 and homeschooled.

          • eroteme
          • thedoorisajar

            it’s germane, sweetcheeeks

            You said, as I must repeatedly remind you, that killing another person is wrong

            So, killing your rapist would be wrong, yes?

          • Counterculturalist

            In what way is rape germane to abortion. Please tell me. However, if you argue that fetuses rape their mothers, I will laugh in your face.

          • thedoorisajar

            Did you not state, unequivocally that, ALL KILLING (of people) is wrong?

            This is a yes or no answer, honey.

          • Arekushieru

            It wouldn’t be an analogy if it were exactly the same, honey. Besides, what is it with you people and thinking that using incorrect analogies will make anyone but you look silly? Fetuses are not being associated with rape, PREGNANCIES are not being associated with rape. UNWANTED pregnancies are. Not all at the same time, now: LACK OF CONSENT is what makes the two ANALOGOUS.

          • fiona64

            Gestational enslavement, which you advocate, is rape.

          • thedoorisajar

            So you’d lie back and let him rape and beat you viciously? Because self-defense = morally wrong?

            And no, it isn’t an answer. You claim to be some sort of intellectual, so at least try to debate honestly.

            You wrote: “‘I don’t support killing other people.””

            So, you’d let the rapist viciously beat you and all that lovely stuff, because killing him to escape would be wrong?

            And i suppose if ISIS tried to behead you, killing in self-defense would also be wrong?

          • Counterculturalist

            I told you, I will always remember to carry around my special anti-rape superpowers against the evil rapist. I’ll use my superpowers to put him into a deep sleep, then I’ll use telekinesis to put him in jail, and tell the police telepathically to let them know that he attempted to rape me. There’s your answer.

          • Suba gunawardana

            You can twist & evade all you want. The bottom line is if you WOULD kill a rapist it invalidates your opposition to abortion, and if you WOULDN’T, it makes you a rape apologist.

          • thedoorisajar

            That is a dodge, honey.

            I thought you were an intellectual? Are you incapable of acting like an adult? I asked a straightforward question.

            Methinks that you are refusing to answer because your initial point, that killing people is wrong has been refuted by the question.

            You are afraid to be revealed as the intellectually bankrupt clown that you really are.

            I pity you.

          • Counterculturalist

            A dodge? You mean I refuse to talk about rape when the initial discussion was about abortion? No that isn’t a dodge it’s choosing not to give in to you pro-choice idiots. Come back when you add to the discussion about women having the right to kill their children, but don’t divert on rape and abuse, when pregnancy is nothing like the issue of rape and abuse. That’s called “avoiding the subject at hand”

          • thedoorisajar

            You said that killing people is wrong.

            Would it be wrong to kill your rapist?

            I mean, we are assuming here that you did intend to say that ALL KILLING IS ALWAYS WRONG, right?

          • Suba gunawardana

            If you need to be spoon-fed every point, you shouldn’t be debating at all.

            Once again (5th time?) YOUR opposition to abortion was that it’s wrong to kill another person. A rapist is another person.

            If you would kill a rapist to protect your body, you cannot object to someone else killing a zef to protect her body.

            If you OPPOSE killing a rapist to protect your body, you are a proponent of rape.

            There’s no two ways about it.

          • Counterculturalist

            And as I said, when your thesis isn’t stupid and ridiculous, I will answer a reasonable answer, but as long as you compare pregnancy to rape, I will continue to answer your arguments as ridiculously as you piece them together.

          • thedoorisajar

            Suba’s thesis

            So is this for her B.A., M.A. or PhD? Do you know?

          • Suba gunawardana

            Your inability to comprehend does not make the opponent’s point stupid or ridiculous, it only shows your inability to debate.

            FYI, if you consider a point “stupid”, it would be only too easy to shoot it down with logic. The fact that you have failed to do so (after hundreds of inane posts) shows that you have ABSOLUTELY no rebuttal. LOL

          • Arekushieru

            Why do you antis always make illogical analogies? WHY are you comparing ALL pregnancies to rape, when that is CLEARLY not what we are talking about.

          • fiona64

            There’s a good, adult response …

          • Suba gunawardana

            That’s not the point. Would you kill a rapist (who is another person) in order to protect your body?

          • Counterculturalist

            Of course I would but that’s self defense. And here’s the difference between rape and pregnancy:

            1) Rapists coerce me into having sex with them,

            2) a child did not coerce me into carrying them for nine months. The biological purpose of sex is strictly reproduction. When going about sex and not wearing protection or taking any birth control, I am opening my body to conceive a child as it was naturally suppose to. Meaning, the child never “raped” me. I was being irresponsible and the child is the consequence.

          • Suba gunawardana

            I responded to this above:

            The biological function of your vagina is to receive a penis. Does
            that mean you have to shut up & take it every time a penis is shoved
            in there REGARDLESS of your consent?

            Also, what is rape? Someone invading/occupying/using your body without your consent.

            What is unwanted pregnancy? Someone invading/occupying/using your body without your consent.

            What’s the difference? Except that the latter lasts far longer than the former.

          • Counterculturalist

            “Does that mean you have to shut up & take it every time a penis is shoved in there REGARDLESS of your consent?”

            So basically, you cannot answer this response intelligently.

          • Suba gunawardana

            No, you didn’t get my point. Try reading it again.

          • thedoorisajar

            You said ‘killing is wrong’. So, is it WRONG to kill your rapist, yes or no?

          • fiona64

            There is absolutely no way to know how many abortions are the result of rape. Why? Because, first of all, no woman is required to disclose the reason she seeks abortion. And second, rape is the most under-reported crime of all. https://www.rainn.org/get-information/statistics/reporting-rates

        • Jennifer Starr

          No one’s talking about killing other people.

          • Counterculturalist

            Being a evolutionist and someone who is scientifically literate, I didn’t come to my conclusions about abortions because my nonexistent preacher told me so. Fetuses by definition are unborn human offspring. And gestation by definition is carrying a human offspring in utero. The definition of a child is a human offspring. So with that, abortion (by definition) is killing a unborn child. Fetuses have death certificates, and people can be trailed in court for killing a unborn human for murder, if the child is wanted by the mother. So basically, science and politics agree that fetuses are alive, but the catch-20/20 is they’re NOT alive when they’re unwanted? That is blatant discrimination.

          • thedoorisajar

            You’re not scientifcally literate, you sound like an uneducated twit.

            And if a zygote is an offspring, then it shouldn’t need to gestate at all, should it? It can move out, get it’s own apartment right?

          • Counterculturalist

            fe·tus: noun ˈfē-təs : a human being or animal in the later stages of development before it is born
            http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fetus

            Fetal Death Certification
            https://www.health.ny.gov/vital_records/fetal.htm

            FETAL HOMICIDE LAWS
            http://www.ncsl.org/research/health/fetal-homicide-state-laws.aspx

            Pro-choicers are idiots.

          • Jennifer Starr

            Fetal homicide laws are predicated upon harm initially done to the pregnant woman.

          • Counterculturalist

            GEORGIA: offenses against unborn children. The law provides that a defendant convicted of murder in the second degree or murder of an unborn child shall be sentenced to a definite term of imprisonment of at least 10 years but no more than 99 years. The law does not apply to acts that cause the death of an unborn child if those acts were committed during a legal abortion to which the pregnant woman consented or a person authorized by law to act on her behalf consented, or for which such consent is implied by law.

            http://www.ncsl.org/research/health/fetal-homicide-state-laws.aspx

            Incorrect.

          • Suba gunawardana

            What’s your point? It specifically EXEMPTS abortion

          • Counterculturalist

            The point is the law validates a fetus’s life as a valuable human being when the child is wanted by the parent, but discredits the life of the child when the parents desire to kill it. In other words, if the child is wanted, it’s a human being with rights, and if it’s murdered under any circumstances, it’s murder. If the child is unwanted it’s fetal tissue, which can be discarded from the mother’s body like a scrap of unwanted meat.

          • Suba gunawardana

            Only when the zef is WANTED. As I said, it’s only at the discretion of the person carrying the zef.
            And it should not be defined as “murder”.
            Just like killing a pet is a crime against its owner, killing a wanted zef is a crime against its host.

          • Counterculturalist

            “Only when the zef is WANTED. As I said, it’s only at the discretion of the person carrying the zef.”

            So basically you cannot answer this response intelligently.

          • Suba gunawardana

            Is this the ONLY response you have left? I made valid rebuttals to all your points. Try reading them first, instead of parroting some childish nonsense.

          • Counterculturalist

            Childish? Oh that tickles. Childish is the one who laments on about how rapists can come “shut it up in my vagina” all day long, and who have to yell in their responses to get their ludicrous point across, and who use nonexistent words like “zef”. If you didn’t catch on, idiots like yourself, is what I’m basically talking about.

          • Suba gunawardana

            Can you point out where I “yelled”?

            None of your excuses justify not addressing my points.

            Let me spell it out for you, since you seem to be rather slow even for a forced-birther: You claimed “the biological purpose of sex is reproduction” implying you are OBLIGATED to carry every zef that gets in your uterus, whether you want it or not.
            With the exact same logic: The biological function of your vagina is to receive a penis. Does that mean you are OBLIGATED to shut up & take it every time you are raped?

          • Counterculturalist

            When you use caps in the middle of your sentences.

            you seem to be rather slow even for a forced-birther

            Birther isn’t a word, idiot and neither is Zef. And I’m pro-contraception, if you must know my politics. Also thanks for the personal attack, now I know that not only are you a idiot, you’re also a hypocrite.

          • thedoorisajar

            Caps does not always equal yelling. Capslocks = emphasis. Bold and italics are also used to emphasize words.

            Bless your heart, dear. And it’s ‘an idiot’, kiddo.

          • Suba gunawardana

            FYI, All caps all over the sentence means “yelling”. Caps limited to specific words/phrases is for EMPHASIS. (Something YOU need in order to understand the simplest point. Unfortunately even with all my efforts, you still have failed to grasp many points)

            Forced-birther = one who forces other people’s zefs into BIRTH.
            zef = abbreviation for zygote/embryo/fetus

            Now that you are educated on the meaning of words, you have no excuse to avoid addressing valid points. For example, you have yet to provide ANY justification for your anti-abortion stance.

          • expect_resistance

            You still sound sadistic.

          • Jennifer Starr

            Only when the zef is WANTED. As I said, it’s only at the discretion of the person carrying the zef.

            Get to the bad part.

          • expect_resistance

            Wrong.

          • expect_resistance

            No It doesn’t.

          • fiona64

            Nope, you’re incorrect. Fetal homicide laws *cannot* attach unless harm is done to a pregnant woman during the commission of a crime. They are not stand-alone laws, and your own citation points out that abortion is not covered under the statute.

          • Suba gunawardana

            Any individual who lives inside another person, has no rights of their own. They gave up those rights the moment they invaded another person’s body. The invader’s life (and any “rights” they may be purported to have) remains entirely at the discretion of the person whose body they occupy.

          • Counterculturalist

            “Any individual who lives inside another person, has no rights of their own.

            With that logic women and men could toss newborns and toddlers out into the streets when they’re unwanted as well. “No individual has the right to live on another person’s property” since you want to treat helpless infants like mature adults who actually have power over their circumstances

          • Suba gunawardana

            Nope, it applies ONLY to violating another person’s bodily autonomy. Property is not the same as body.

            CARRYING a pregnancy is a conscious choice. If a woman chooses to carry a pregnancy when abortion was avialable, that means she made a VOLUNTARY commitment to the future child, to protect & care for them for as long as necessary. That contract precludes her from abandoning/neglecting/abusing a child she CHOSE to birth.

            And why is your concern limited to human zefs? What about born children, and more importantly, what about the millions of animals and plants who care actively killed for our necessity and convenience? They are just as innocent as human zefs you know.

          • Counterculturalist

            CARRYING a pregnancy is a conscious choice.

            And being a parent is a conscious choice. You don’t get it do you? Even scholars agree that infanticide should be legal since abortion is. Hell there are biochemistry majors advocating “After-birth abortions” because according to them, “killing a fetus is no different than killing a baby” –> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/9113394/Killing-babies-no-different-from-abortion-experts-say.html

          • Jennifer Starr

            You need to find a better source than The Telegraph.

          • Counterculturalist

            Why? The telegraph is regular news.

          • Suba gunawardana

            Yes, being a “parent” is a conscious choice. Getting pregnant is NOT. That’s why some pregnancies are intended, while others are called UNINTENDED, unwanted or accidental.

            BTW any idiot can spit out a baby, doesn’t make them a parent. A PARENT is one who raises a child with love & care, whehter the child is biological or not.

            I can think of a number of individuals who may benefit from a 120th trimester abortion… Or rather, the world would benefit from providing those abortions.

          • Counterculturalist

            Getting pregnant is NOT. That’s why some pregnancies are intended, while others are called UNINTENDED, unwanted or accidental.

            Pregnancy by biology is parenthood. There are even paternity tests issued before the child is born so the mother can get much needed child support during her pregnancy (read it and weep http://www.genetica.com/GeneticaWebV2.nsf/XPrenatalDNAPaternityTest.xsp ). Women have had children without knowing they were pregnant up until the time the child was born. According to your logic, it is ethical to kill these children shortly after birth because the child was never intended. Do you see how your logic fails? Even experts agree that killing babies is no different from abortion. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/9113394/Killing-babies-no-different-from-abortion-experts-say.html

          • Jennifer Starr

            According to your logic, it is ethical to kill these children shortly after birth because the child was never intended.

            Why, when she can simply leave the child at the hospital and never look back?

          • Counterculturalist

            My mother actually has worked in Hospitals where the baby was born during a late-term abortion. Because the child was suppose to be dead. They actually did wrap it alive and toss it in the freezer with the dead babies, where it froze to death. I was pro-choice before I heard that story. It really hit me that pro-choice is basically discriminating the life of a person based on the location of the person, and not that the person is feeling, with a beating heart. Now, personally I’m not one of the Christians who will preach to you that “Because Jesus tells me so” because there is no scientific evidence that Jesus did exist. However, embryology does tell us that life starts at conception. If so, why can’t we simply advocate for contraception and see the “morning after pill” as a last resort? Contraception works 99% of the time, while abortion only works 95% of the time. Contraception are safer than abortions. Contraception insures that no one is getting killed and a woman has control of body and how many babies she wants to care for.

          • thedoorisajar

            It really hit me that pro-choice is basically discriminating the life of a person based on the location of the person

            Nope. The point of abortion is not to kill fetuses because they are fetuses, it is to rid your body of something that is infringing on your rights. If it was possible to beam embryos out of women star trek style and put them in artificial wombs it would be done.

            YOU, however, are engaging in special pleading for the unborn, by arguing that ONLY the unborn have a right to the body of another, and that ONLY women must be subjugated to another.

          • Counterculturalist

            Nope. The point of abortion is not to kill fetuses because they are fetuses, it is to rid your body of something that is infringing on your rights

            the same could be said about a born child what’s your point?

          • Jennifer Starr

            No, the same could not be said about a born child.

          • Suba gunawardana

            Once again, a born child does NOT live inside your body. And by carrying the pregnancy you made a voluntary commitment to care for the child.

          • thedoorisajar

            Women have abortions because they do not want to be pregnant. They do not want to undergo the pain and torture of childbirth.

            I know many women who would rather kill themselves than give birth.

            Why do you want to torture women?

          • Jennifer Starr

            A uterus is more than just a location–it’s a hell of a lot more than that. And yes we do advocate for contraception, which while effective is not 99% effective. All contraception has failure rates, up to and including sterilization methods such as vasectomies and tubal ligation.

          • Counterculturalist

            Combined contraceptive pill: more than 99% effective if taken correctly. Less than 1 woman in 100 will get pregnant in a year while taking the combined pill.

            http://www.nhs.uk/Conditions/contraception-guide/Pages/how-effective-contraception.aspx

            No excuses. The lament about the uterus fails simply because it was the mother’s responsibility (unless her contraception failed) that she was pregnant in the first place. You’re basically saying people have “the right” to be irresponsible about their reproductive organs, give life to a child, then take that life away at their will, even though they are faulted for the child’s existence in the first place. The child is vacuumed and grounded alive, crying helplessly in utero while it happens, but you feel you have the ok to do that, even though the child’s existence is your responsibility?

          • Suba gunawardana

            Once again: The fact that your own irresponsibility may have led to the
            invasion of your body, does NOT negate your right to protect your body.

          • Counterculturalist

            No excuses. Pregnancy isn’t a invasion, it’s DIRECT cause and DIRECT effect. Invasions suggests that the child HAD GONE INTO his/her mother, without HER DIRECT CAUSE.

            SEXUAL INTERCOURSE is SUPPOSE to result in a PREGNANCY. Meaning the “invasion” argument fails. IF you don’t want to have children, DO NOT HAVE SEXUAL INTERCOURSE WITHOUT PROTECTION. Period, no excuses.

          • thedoorisajar

            No, it isn’t. Sex, through exaptation, also exists for social bonding. This is why humans have a realllly tough time getting pregnant in comparison to other animals, and why women only ovulate for about 3 days out of every month. Sex exists for pleasure as well as procreation, and every encounter need not result in a pregnancy as far as evolution is concerned.

          • thedoorisajar

            All known methods of contraception including surgical sterilization have known failure rates.

            if contraception fails, can the woman abort with your blessings?

            and what about rape? can rape victims also abort?

          • Arekushieru

            Really, the woman directs the entire process of gestation from fertilization to implantation. No, ignorant little girl, it’s the FETUS that does that. If the woman DID, no woman would ever have an unplanned pregnancy and they would all get pregnant when they wanted. OOPS> So, YES, it is AN invasion, because, by YOUR logic, it directly caused pregnancy. DARN, DARN, DARN.

            No, it isn’t. The uterus was once an organ meant to protect female mammals from parasites. To this DAY, a fetus has to suppress a woman’s immune system or otherwise her body would identify it as an invader and kill it. So much fail.

          • Jennifer Starr

            SEXUAL INTERCOURSE is SUPPOSE to result in a PREGNANCY.

            No, kiddo My parents have had three children. If this was correct they would have only had sex three times. And the Duggars would be several hundred and counting, which is a frightening thought.

          • Suba gunawardana

            For the record, I have NEVER made excuses and never will. I support abortion on demand, at any stage of gestation, for any reason, or no reason at all. I am merely refuting your lame arguments.

            Once again, YOU declaring something does not make it so. If an unwanted individual is occupying/using your body (whether it’s a zef, a tapeworm, or a rapist), it IS an invasion.

            That your actions may have led to the invasion is IRRELEVANT, and does not negate your right to protect your body.
            Here’s an analogy, try to comprehend: If you walk into traffic and get hit, it WAS your own fault. Does that preclude your right to get treatment for your injuries and put your body back together? NO.

            Just you claiming “abortion is wrong” doesn’t make it so either. So far you have failed to provide ANY valid reason why it’s supposed to be wrong.