49 million to five

[ChChoda]

What is your stance exactly? Criminalizing abortions?

To bridle the federal government. If a grown woman wants an abortion, who am I to protest? I'm just a voiceless citizen.

 

[mrmadcow]

I agree. But the only thing atheists have in common is their disbelief in God. Nothing else. The link between believers doing crazy things specifically because of their religion and their dogmatic faith can't be ignored. Without such a belief, the act would not have happened.
Not to mention the ratio is much worse with believers, prison rates, murder rates, rape rates, suicide rates, all of them, there's more believers doing them than there are atheists. What do you have to say about that?

are you saying that there are more christians in jail than athiest? if so that would be because less than 10% of the population is athiest.
or are you saying a large percentage of people are in jail for doing crazy things specifically because of their religion? I need to see that stat.besides most people that are in jail will tell you they are not guilty anyway,blaming their mistakes/faults on god is just another copout.even if religion never existed, crazy people would do crazy shit based on their beliefs(back to the unibomber).blaming the bible for the stupid things some people do is as dumb as blaming the enviromentalist movement for the stupid shit some followers do.

to get back on topic.

What is your stance exactly? Criminalizing abortions?

i would say yes but let the punishment fit the crime.1st offense, very small fine.2nd offense,hefty fine. 3rd offense,jail time.
since no none knows when the fetus develops a soul (becomes human,if you will),I think we should error on the side of caution.

 

[jeff f]

typical liberal,take 1 line out of context to determine the whole book is bad.I am surprised you haven't attacked my spelling.(yet)
leviticus was written a few thousand years ago in an eviroment you cannot comprehend.while the penalties may seem harsh in todays world,the consequences for allowing such actions were worse.many tribes simply vanished in the dessert but the jews not only survived,they thrived.every law had a reason (& most are not apparent today)& like it or not, homosexual acts between men bring on diseases they couldn't understand or treat. open the book again,you will see that sex acts between MEN where forbiden, but neither man nor women could have sex w/ an animal.So lesbian acts were ok-Does this make it a little better in your modern progay mindset?
adultry was also punished by death,when you live in a small closeknit group,everyone must trust each other w/ their very lives,hard to do if the guy next to you banged your wife & you resent that.
Is "an eye for an eye" harsh by todays standard?at the time it was novel in the fact it was merciful compared to what was considered justice back then.

sorry to get off topic but people who judge the past while wearing 21st century glasses annoy me to no end & while pb is so entrenched in his liberal/progay stance that he wont bother listening to anything I say,some liberals have a brain & will learn (& become conservatives) ...mc

it always amazes me, just when you think nobody is listening, how someone who hasnt posted in a while comes in and knocks the fucker out of the park. great post MMC..

 

[jeff f]

If your "it was a different time period, laws were different back then" was true, why doesn't the same ring true for Allah and Islam? (again, I bring in the comparison to Islam because you guys never consider it) If the exact same shit happened in Islam it would be bad, but turn it around and say it was Jesus and his followers and it's allllll good! That's some bullshit. Not to mention terrible logic.

You're sick if you think any of that is justified, and even sicker if you worship the bastard you think is responsible. Fuck the bible.

that wasnt what he said at all dude. he said it was a different time period. you cant judge people by todays standards.

for instance, (i will use crayons so you understand) it used to be quite normal to put lepers on their own colony. science dictated that it was the safest thing to do to keep the disease from spreading. now we have cures so its not necessary.

it used to be thought that it was sexually transmitted also because thats where the science was at the time.

well that turned out to be wrong, so should we condemn all who put people in colonies? should we call them inhumane? well we could but that would be FUCKING RIDICULOUS....thats what he is sayin...are ya feelin me?

and another thing, you do know that in many cultures it is pretty normal to kill gays.....oh i dont know....lets just say....fundimentalist islam....

how come i dont hear ya bitchin bout dat?

 

[guitarzan420]

49 MILLION TO FIVE
by Ann Coulter
June 3, 2009

In the wake of the shooting of late-term abortionist George Tiller, President Barack Obama sent out a welcome message that this nation would not tolerate attacks on pro-lifers or any other Americans because of their religion or beliefs.

Ha ha! Just kidding. That was the lead sentence -- with minor edits -- of a New York Times editorial warning about theoretical hate crimes against Muslims published eight months after 9/11. Can pro-lifers get a hate crimes bill passed and oceans of ink devoted to assuring Americans that "most pro-lifers are peaceful"?

For years, we've had to hear about the grave threat that Americans might overreact to a terrorist attack committed by 19 Muslims shouting "Allahu akbar" as they flew commercial jets into American skyscrapers. That would be the equivalent of 19 pro-lifers shouting "Abortion kills a beating heart!" as they gunned down thousands of innocent citizens in Wichita, Kan.

Why aren't liberals rushing to assure us this time that "most pro-lifers are peaceful"? Unlike Muslims, pro-lifers actually are peaceful.

According to recent polling, a majority of Americans oppose abortion -- which is consistent with liberals' hysterical refusal to allow us to vote on the subject. In a country with approximately 150 million pro-lifers, five abortionists have been killed since Roe v. Wade.

In that same 36 years, more than 49 million babies have been killed by abortionists. Let's recap that halftime score, sports fans: 49 million to five.

Meanwhile, fewer than 2 million Muslims live in America and, while Muslims are less murderous than abortionists, I'm fairly certain they've killed more than five people in the United States in the last 36 years. For some reason, the number "3,000" keeps popping into my head.

So in a country that is more than 50 percent pro-life -- and 80 percent opposed to the late-term abortions of the sort performed by Tiller -- only five abortionists have been killed. And in a country that is less than 0.5 percent Muslim, several dozen Muslims have killed thousands of Americans.

But the killing of about one abortionist per decade leads liberals to condemn the entire pro-life movement as "domestic terrorists." At least liberals have finally found some terrorists they'd like to send to Guantanamo.

Tiller bragged about performing 60,000 abortions, including abortions of viable babies, able to survive outside the mother's womb. He made millions of dollars performing late-term abortions so gruesome that only two other abortionists -- not a squeamish bunch -- in the entire country would perform them.

Kansas law allows late-term abortions only to save the mother's life or to prevent "irreversible physical damage" to the mother. But Tiller was more than happy to kill viable babies, provided the mothers: (1) forked over $5,000; and (2) mentioned "substantial and irreversible conditions," which, in Tiller's view, apparently included not being able to go to concerts or rodeos or being "temporarily depressed" on account of their pregnancies.

In return for blood money from Tiller's profitable abattoir, Democrats ran a political protection racket for the late-term abortionist.

In 1997, The Washington Post reported that Tiller attended one of Bill Clinton's White House coffees for major campaign contributors. In addition to a $25,000 donation to Clinton, Tiller wanted to thank him personally for 30 months of U.S. Marshals' protection paid for by the U.S. taxpayer.

Kansas Democrats who received hundreds of thousands of campaign dollars from Tiller repeatedly intervened to block any interference with Tiller's abortion mill.

Kathleen Sebelius, who was the governor of Kansas until Obama made her Health and Human Services Secretary, received hundreds of thousands of campaign dollars from Tiller. Sebelius vetoed one bill restricting late-term abortions and another one that would have required Tiller to turn over his records pertaining to "substantial and irreversible conditions" justifying his late-term abortions.

Kansas Attorney General Paul Morrison also got elected with the help of Tiller's blood money, replacing a Republican attorney general who was in the middle of an investigation of Tiller for various crimes including his failure to report statutory rapes, despite performing abortions on pregnant girls as young as 11.

But soon after Morrison replaced the Republican attorney general, the charges against Tiller were reduced and, in short order, he was acquitted of a few misdemeanors. In what is a not uncommon cost of doing business with Democrats, Morrison is now gone, having been forced to resign when his mistress charged him with sexual harassment and corruption.

Tiller was protected not only by a praetorian guard of elected Democrats, but also by the protective coloration of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America -- coincidentally, the same church belonged to by Tiller's fellow Wichita executioner, the BTK killer.

The official Web page of the ELCA instructs: "A developing life in the womb does not have an absolute right to be born." As long as we're deciding who does and doesn't have an "absolute right to be born," who's to say late-term abortionists have an "absolute right" to live?

I wouldn't kill an abortionist myself, but I wouldn't want to impose my moral values on others. No one is for shooting abortionists. But how will criminalizing men making difficult, often tragic, decisions be an effective means of achieving the goal of reducing the shootings of abortionists?

Following the moral precepts of liberals, I believe the correct position is: If you don't believe in shooting abortionists, then don't shoot one.

Anyone who spouts Ann Coulter is a fuckin moron.

 

[jeff f]

...

The passive belief that those 99% of believers (not only Christians) have is equally as dangerous as the 1% that murder abortion doctors. It's them that allow this behavior to exist. Without the passive support group that makes up the majority of those that claim some higher power, half these lunatics wouldn't have committed the crazy things they did.

and this shining jewel of ignorance is based on?????

hey frued, do yourself a favor, leave the phsycobable to the phsycobablers.


the scene
6 oclock news....gunman goes into a office building downtown and opens fire killing 27 coworkers. i witnesses say he always seemed sad....

pad sitting in his pajamas in front of the tv--FUCKING CHRISTIANS, WHY DO THEY HATE GAY PEOPLE SO BAD?!

 

[guitarzan420]

are you saying that there are more christians in jail than athiest? if so that would be because less than 10% of the population is athiest.
or are you saying a large percentage of people are in jail for doing crazy things specifically because of their religion? I need to see that stat.besides most people that are in jail will tell you they are not guilty anyway,blaming their mistakes/faults on god is just another copout.even if religion never existed, crazy people would do crazy shit based on their beliefs(back to the unibomber).blaming the bible for the stupid things some people do is as dumb as blaming the enviromentalist movement for the stupid shit some followers do.

to get back on topic.

i would say yes but let the punishment fit the crime.1st offense, very small fine.2nd offense,hefty fine. 3rd offense,jail time.
since no none knows when the fetus develops a soul (becomes human,if you will),I think we should error on the side of caution.

Read Leviticus in the bible. It states that life begins when blood flows through the body(heart starts beating)at approx 18 days. Even the pope can't refute that. So the bible isn't against abortion.because there is a line in there about the using of"bitters", which in modern times would be considered a chemical abortion. So if you're going to punish someone for something you think is wrong, better check your source first.

 

[laughingduck]

I guess if we were talking about saving puppies we could all agree? It makes me sick that alot of folks think life has no value. Its ok to kill a kid in the womb, but folks sent to defend our freedom... oh hell no they need to come home right now, there lives are in danger! I do not get the logic, I guess I need to see a shink.

 

[jeff f]

I guess if we were talking about saving puppies we could all agree? It makes me sick that alot of folks think life has no value. Its ok to kill a kid in the womb, but folks sent to defend our freedom... oh hell no they need to come home right now, there lives are in danger! I do not get the logic, I guess I need to see a shink.

a lot of the hardcore people pushing the abortion machine think a puppies life is more important than an infant in the womb. yes, its that sick.

 

[PadawanBater]

are you saying that there are more christians in jail than athiest? if so that would be because less than 10% of the population is athiest.

blaming the bible for the stupid things some people do is as dumb as blaming the enviromentalist movement for the stupid shit some followers do.

No, actually it'd be because Christians commit just as much crime as atheists do, proving beyond reasonable doubt that morality is not derived from your bible.

i would say yes but let the punishment fit the crime.1st offense, very small fine.2nd offense,hefty fine. 3rd offense,jail time.

since no none knows when the fetus develops a soul (becomes human,if you will),I think we should error on the side of caution.

Wow, this requires some thinking. First, a soul? You're fuckin' kidding me with that shit right? Howbout this first, why don't you go ahead and try to define for me what a "soul" is exactly, where it comes from, what it's made of, when you get it, how twins get a soul, how chimera's discard a soul... Then think about what you'd tell the rape victims when they wanted to abort a rape baby. Or the young women with VD that will transfer to the kid, should it be born.

and this shining jewel of ignorance is based on?????

hey frued, do yourself a favor, leave the phsycobable to the phsycobablers.

the scene
6 oclock news....gunman goes into a office building downtown and opens fire killing 27 coworkers. i witnesses say he always seemed sad....

pad sitting in his pajamas in front of the tv--FUCKING CHRISTIANS, WHY DO THEY HATE GAY PEOPLE SO BAD?!

...dude, honestly, if everything I'm saying gets past you like this, maybe you're just on a higher level... I really don't know. But I'm not talking like the token Hippie on the boards, I'm using regular ol' everyday english, and check it out! I even use punctuation! The shit isn't hard to comprehend.

Hold my hand, I'll walk you through it...

(admittedly, totally condescending, but come on man...)

99% of believers are passive. They believe, much like you believe, that their belief isn't harming anyone. When these people vote during presidentail elections, polls show they're most likely to vote for candidates who hold their own personal moral beliefs, beliefs in god and the baggage that comes along with that, such as believing homosexuality is an abonimation, abortion is murder, and stem cell research should be outlawed because of the processes involved, (the conclusion each of these people come to regarding any of these issues is based on an ancient belief system that you yourself admitted is of a different time, and not based on scientific inquiry or observation) as their running platform, even if they don't actually believe them, and they just say they do, like they do 99% of the time, Republican or Democrat. That's what's most important to these people. With these beliefs (that are not founded on science and do not hold the nations interest at heart) these people go into voting booths and vote on such things as previously mentioned, which in turn establishes unconstitutional shit to go down.

Get it yet, do you follow how it goes from - innocent personal belief or way of life - to - picking presidential candidates, congressmen, senators, people who establish the rules of our society and foreign policy - to - your beliefs directly influencing how these politicans impliment their strategy, because they know that if they don't do what the majority of the people are telling them to do (based on those already admitted ancient beliefs) then the majority of people won't cast their vote for them come next election - ? A...B...C...D...

I guess if we were talking about saving puppies we could all agree? It makes me sick that alot of folks think life has no value. Its ok to kill a kid in the womb, but folks sent to defend our freedom... oh hell no they need to come home right now, there lives are in danger! I do not get the logic, I guess I need to see a shink.

a lot of the hardcore people pushing the abortion machine think a puppies life is more important than an infant in the womb. yes, its that sick.

What's sick is that you guys cannot see the incredible value in medical procedures that can potentially save lives and cure currently incurable diseases. SAVE LIVES. SAVE EXISTING, SUFFERING, HUMAN LIVES. Fuck your two week old embryo's "life" it doesn't even have yet if it means solving major medical problems.

 

[mrmadcow]

Read Leviticus in the bible. It states that life begins when blood flows through the body(heart starts beating)at approx 18 days. Even the pope can't refute that. So the bible isn't against abortion.because there is a line in there about the using of"bitters", which in modern times would be considered a chemical abortion. So if you're going to punish someone for something you think is wrong, better check your source first.

interesting,I will read it again

No, actually it'd be because Christians commit just as much crime as atheists do, proving beyond reasonable doubt that morality is not derived from your bible.

so because people fall short of the ideal,the message is wrong& should be hated? back to the unibomber, ALL enviromentalist are evil & nothing they say should be listened to.further proof-Al Gore has a bigger carbon foot print than some small communities so he is a hypocrite and the whole movement should be hated!!

Wow, this requires some thinking. First, a soul? You're fuckin' kidding me with that shit right? Howbout this first, why don't you go ahead and try to define for me what a "soul" is exactly, where it comes from, what it's made of, when you get it,

its a phrase, as I said,when does a fetus become human life?

Wait, I forgot a lesson my father tought me long ago...

you are right! all you say is makes perfect sense.please forgive this ignorent fool for my superstious beliefs for I am not intelligent or evolved enough to question your superiour knowledge.

 

[CrackerJax]

It's a human life when science says it is, not the church.

 

[OregonMeds]

interesting,I will read it again


so because people fall short of the ideal,the message is wrong& should be hated? back to the unibomber, ALL enviromentalist are evil & nothing they say should be listened to.further proof-Al Gore has a bigger carbon foot print than some small communities so he is a hypocrite and the whole movement should be hated!!


its a phrase, as I said,when does a fetus become human life?

Wait, I forgot a lesson my father tought me long ago...

you are right! all you say is makes perfect sense.please forgive this ignorent fool for my superstious beliefs for I am not intelligent or evolved enough to question your superiour knowledge.

You're a fool because you don't question anything and just go along with the craziest shit.
Just because your father told you something, whether long ago or yesterday,
it doesn't make it true.

 

[PadawanBater]

interesting,I will read it again


so because people fall short of the ideal,the message is wrong& should be hated? back to the unibomber, ALL enviromentalist are evil & nothing they say should be listened to.further proof-Al Gore has a bigger carbon foot print than some small communities so he is a hypocrite and the whole movement should be hated!!

I really don't know how you can keep missing the point. The message is wrong, because it's wrong. It should be hated because when retards get together in mobs to demand their imaginary friends words be heard or die, it tends to upset those that are killed and their families...

its a phrase, as I said,when does a fetus become human life?

When it develops consciousness.

 

[mrmadcow]

Just because your father told you something, whether long ago or yesterday,it doesn't make it true.

you are proving my father's point.

I really don't know how you can keep missing the point. The message is wrong, because it's wrong. It should be hated because when retards get together in mobs to demand their imaginary friends words be heard or die, it tends to upset those that are killed and their families...

I thought your problem was w/ the bible & not the Koran?I have also read that book & find it enlightning,my only complaint was it left me w/ the feeling that its message was that people who dont follows its path are less than human & can be treated any way you see fit.(only read it once so I am not well versed in it & acknowledge I could be wrong- that is just my 1st impression)
or do you know anyone who was forced to accept christianity or DIE?when was the last time the vatican ordered someone put to death?
but of coarse you are right oh wise one.I beg you to write your own book of morality so those of us who are not as enlightened as you (& need guidance)can read your words and follow the rightous path.please remember that we humble & simple people are superstitious & need something besides our guns to cling to while we go about our simple lives.

When it develops consciousness.

so when the child becomes self aware? like at 3-4 yrs old?
my daughter developed a personality w/ likes & dislikes while still in the womb.or more accurately,she began top express her likes/dislikes by the 6th month of pregnancy.when they 1st started is unknown to me.

 

[bicycle racer]

christians think that people who are not christians burn in hell for eternity. now of course thats crazy and stupid but if christian's really think that how is that different from muslims wanting to kill your physical body. then again the muslim view depends on which muslims you talk to the same as with christians some are more aware of the purpose of those faiths in the begining than others. point being weak minded people who follow religion tend to miss the point entirely and become militant in there misguided beleifs and easily promote violence or eternal damnation of which i see no distinction. it all leads to violence against anyone with different views regardless.

 

[bicycle racer]

so madcow how do you feel about killing simple organisms or animals with regards to your understanding of conciousness? plants show what they like and dislike right from germination are they concious simply from showing responses? non-vertabrate organisms do the same how would a fetus with an undeveloped central nervous sytem be different please explain were all of course evolved from these same cells at some point.

 

[supertiger]

I think you have to ask yourself where life starts. For me, once the child is conceived, a time line has been created for that persons life. I fail to see how any logic can be formed to justify tampering with the persons time line. Which is the same thing as that persons life or their time they would have live out had they not been cut short. Only nature or God should decide when that life line ends. Not you, and not me..

 

[ViRedd]

Anyone who spouts Ann Coulter is a fuckin moron.

Anyone who drinks Progressive Kool-Aid then eats and spews Progressive talking points is a fucking dupe.

 

[CrackerJax]

I think you have to ask yourself where life starts. For me, once the child is conceived, a time line has been created for that persons life. I fail to see how any logic can be formed to justify tampering with the persons time line. Which is the same thing as that persons life or their time they would have live out had they not been cut short. Only nature or God should decide when that life line ends. Not you, and not me..

That's why we have science. to answer questions that CANNOT be answered by "man's interpretation" of what a deity might think.

It's a life when science says it is, not an old book written by a anonymous backward ppl...

It's not up to the church. They don't have a clue.