ABORTION.......

neologist wrote:

Read my link, Frank. Then ask again if you haven't figured it out.

Stop being such a weasel, Neo.

What relgion or sect or cult do you belong to?

0 Replies

Frank Apisa wrote:

neologist wrote:
Frank Apisa wrote:
Oops. Sorry for that mistake. I certainly didn't mean to "hijack" your link...or your "beliefs"...and I think you know that.

But you were correct....in my haste, I screwed up.
Of course I know that, Frank. I just don't understand where the source of the argument has any bearing on its truthfulness.

What????

I do not understand this at all.

Quote:
If the neighborhood drug dealer came banging on your door in the middle of the night screaming that your house was on fire, would you check it out or tell him to go away and go back to bed?

I understand this even less.

Are you unable to put together a coherent sentence that actually expresses a thought?

Are you unable to understand the meaning of ad hominem?

0 Replies

Frank Apisa wrote:

neologist wrote:
Read my link, Frank. Then ask again if you haven't figured it out.

Stop being such a weasel, Neo.

What relgion (sic) or sect or cult do you belong to?

Are you afraid to read my sincere thoughts about the death of my grandson?

It's not all that long, Frank. And I don't use big words, either.

0 Replies

Intrepid wrote:

Does everything have to be about guts with you Frank?

You were the one who brought "guts" and "balls" into this discussion, Intrepid....not me.

Quote:

I am not saying that you will not hear that from a minister or priest in a Christian funeral service. Usually, you would hear this because the minister does not know how to otherwise phrase it or try to give comfort to the parents. Priests and ministers are, after all, human too.

Are you saying that they are lying?

Do you think that they do not "believe" the soul of the unfortunate youngster went to Heaven?

Quote:

You ask me to tell you what church I belong to, then you proceed to talk about fruitcake Christian sects etc. This tell me, that no matter what denomination I tell you I am, you will find some smart mouth remark to make about it. I will not subject my religion, myself, or fellow Christians to that nonsense.

You suggested I was incorrect when I asserted that most Christians feel that the soul of a child or baby goes to Heaven...BECAUSE YOU WON'T FIND IT in your church,.

I wanted to assess just how large a denomination you have in order to bring that into the argument.

But I can see that you, like Neo, will try to weasel out of answering.

Hey...no problem. If you are ashamed of your religion, I can understand it.

Quote:

Membership? It is worldwide and in the millions, Frank.

Millions. And that is supposed to impress somebody?

If you want to tell us what your denomination or sect or cult is....do so. If you don't want to...don't. But don't pretend that because you can say that your church does something that it impacts on a statement such as I made.

Quote:

Now I suppose we are going to hear about how Intrepid is gutless and stupid and afraid to say what church he belongs to and does not support his religion.

Your words right now...not mine.

Quote:

You know what? That does not bother me, Frank. I have figured out that you are afraid. You are afraid of religion and that is why you belittle it, use your foul language against it and those who believe in it and those who might believe in it.

Oh, Intrepid...I am terrified of religions. No doubt about it. For the most part, a bunch of goddam superstitious people ready to kill or bloody anybody who doesn't agree with 'em.

Give you superstitious sheep just a bit more power in this country...and we might just as well flush it down the toilet.

Yep...I am terrified of religion...and religious nuts like....well, you know.

Quote:

I have never tired to force my religion on anybody. If someone, in earnest, wants to hear about it I gladly share. I will not be drawn into childish rhetorical debate of what I believe.

Sure you won't!!!!

I've already done that to you.

Not that it much matters.

You really aren't very good at it.

0 Replies

neologist wrote:

Frank Apisa wrote:
neologist wrote:
Read my link, Frank. Then ask again if you haven't figured it out.

Stop being such a weasel, Neo.

What relgion (sic) or sect or cult do you belong to?
Are you afraid to read my sincere thoughts about the death of my grandson?

It's not all that long, Frank. And I don't use big words, either.

If you want to answer my question...answer it. If you want to weasel out of it...weasel out of it.

Don't lay any emotion cards on me, Neo...because that is horseshyt....just like calling a goddam spelling type to a person's attention is.

If you want to be petty...I suggest you try being petty with one of your fellow Christians. They're into that shyt just like you.

0 Replies

Go ahead, Frank. READ the link.After all I posted it in this thread before you asked your irrelevant question.

Here is is again for your convenience:

http://www.able2know.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=1373697#1373697

0 Replies

At the very least everyone should be guaranteed a chance at life. Abortion simply denies that. And there are so many other problems with abortion that it is ridiculous. If the women doesn't want the baby, and the man wants the baby with all of his heart, the baby is killed, without any consent from the father, the baby is half his. But on the other hand, if the women wants it, or is just too lazy to get an abortion, and the man doesn't want it, he is still required to pay 18 years of child support! That is ridiculous. Abortion should be remedied into a dual decision process. People view this so one-sidedly, Women's RIGHT! Babies RIGHT! What about the man's right to see his child live? Utterly Ridiculous abortion is.

0 Replies

Frank Apisa wrote:

Don't lay any emotion cards on me, Neo...because that is horseshyt....just like calling a goddam spelling type to a person's attention is.

If you want to be petty...I suggest you try being petty with one of your fellow Christians. They're into that shyt just like you.

I think enough of my fellow a2kers, to make my posts readable. Spell check is a small courtesy to them; one which you could care less about.

Don't read my link because of any emotional reason. Read it to find out the answer to your question, an answer posted before you asked.

How hard would it be, Frank? Just think of all the statements I may have made that you will be able to insult.

BTW, argumentum ad lapidem, Frank Laughing

0 Replies

Child of the Light wrote:

At the very least everyone should be guaranteed a chance at life. Abortion simply denies that. And there are so many other problems with abortion that it is ridiculous. If the women doesn't want the baby, and the man wants the baby with all of his heart, the baby is killed, without any consent from the father, the baby is half his. But on the other hand, if the women wants it, or is just too lazy to get an abortion, and the man doesn't want it, he is still required to pay 18 years of child support! That is ridiculous. Abortion should be remedied into a dual decision process. People view this so one-sidedly, Women's RIGHT! Babies RIGHT! What about the man's right to see his child live? Utterly Ridiculous abortion is.

The woman is the one with the growth in her body. If she wants the growth eleminated...it is my opinion (and the law) that she can do so.

End of story.

To suppose the guy has any say in her decision is absurd.

0 Replies

neologist wrote:

Frank Apisa wrote:
Don't lay any emotion cards on me, Neo...because that is horseshyt....just like calling a goddam spelling type to a person's attention is.

If you want to be petty...I suggest you try being petty with one of your fellow Christians. They're into that shyt just like you.
I think enough of my fellow a2kers, to make my posts readable. Spell check is a small courtesy to them; one which you could care less about.

Don't read my link because of any emotional reason. Read it to find out the answer to your question, an answer posted before you asked.

How hard would it be, Frank? Just think of all the statements I may have made that you will be able to insult.

BTW, argumentum ad lapidem, Frank

If you want to answer my question...answer it. If you want to continue to furnish a link to prior posts of yours in lieu of answering it...please feel free to shove the link were it is not likely to be faded by sunlight.

Your arguments are among the tritest I've ever seen on A2K...or Abuzz. And as I mentioned once before...you are guilty of the unpardonable debating "sin"....you are so goddam boring it is tough to read your crap without having to fight falling asleep.

0 Replies

I could have a better conversation with a six year old child.

0 Replies

Intrepid wrote:

I could have a better conversation with a six year old child.

Probably because you would be conversing with someone who thinks like you.

0 Replies

Frank Apisa wrote:

The woman is the one with the growth in her body. If she wants the growth eleminated...it is my opinion (and the law) that she can do so.

End of story.

To suppose the guy has any say in her decision is absurd.

That's ridiculous. The child is 50% of the man's. The fact that it is in the women's body clouds people's vision, and because of this a women can use a child to monetarily drain a man, but a man can't have a loving relationship with his own child. That is completely ridiculous.

0 Replies

The woman is the one with the growth in her body? Growth? Do you have kids, Frank? Did you consider them growths until they took their first breath?

I find it extremely barbaric to consider a miracle (of science, of God, of whatever you want to call it, life is a miracle) a growth that should be eliminated if the woman chooses to do so. And you call my God barbaric? You would make it right to slaughter a child, and yes Frank, no matter what you say, it is a child. Let's just suppose that two seconds before your child was to breathe their first breath, you and your wife decided, oops, don't want a kid! Since you consider it a fetus and not a child, does this mean you would kill the child in its womb? After all, it is just a growth, right?

I am beginning to believe that you chose your topics strictly for the amount of dissention you can cause.

0 Replies

Child of the Light wrote:

Frank Apisa wrote:

The woman is the one with the growth in her body. If she wants the growth eleminated...it is my opinion (and the law) that she can do so.

End of story.

To suppose the guy has any say in her decision is absurd.

That's ridiculous. The child is 50% of the man's. The fact that it is in the women's body clouds people's vision, and because of this a women can use a child to monetarily drain a man, but a man can't have a loving relationship with his own child. That is completely ridiculous.

Oh, please!

The pregnancy is the woman's....and the woman's alone. The growth is not occurring in the man's body....just in the woman's body.

If the woman does not want the pregnancy to continue...she should have the right to terminate it.

Nobody else should intrude into that decision.

0 Replies

The problem with that is that the man isn't offered the same liberty. If he doesn't want the child, he still has to pay 18 years of child support. If he does want it, he still has to watch the child be murdered.

Quick question. What is a person charged with if they hit and kill a pregnant women while drunk? 2 COUNTS OF MURDER.

0 Replies

Momma Angel wrote:

I find it extremely barbaric to consider a miracle (of science, of God, of whatever you want to call it, life is a miracle) a growth that should be eliminated if the woman chooses to do so.

Well...that is certainly your prerogative, MA. I prefer to think of it as a woman making a decision about her own body...without a bunch of goddam busybodies intruding into that decision.

Quote:

And you call my God barbaric?

Probably the most barbaric god ever invented. Thanks for asking.

Quote:

You would make it right to slaughter a child, and yes Frank, no matter what you say, it is a child.

NO...it isn't. And no matter how often you say it is...it still won't be. You can call an egg a chicken if you want...but the only reaction you will get from anyone with a brain is laughter.

Quote:

Let's just suppose that two seconds before your child was to breathe their first breath, you and your wife decided, oops, don't want a kid!

No. let's not do that, because it is bullshyt.

In any case...while the fetus is still in the woman...it is my opinion that she should be able to decide to end the pregnancy any time she wants.

You people just want to pretend this few seconds shyt is what worries you. But today...in fact...in congress they are debating a bill that has to do with zygotes in petrie dishes. The nut cases there also consider them to be full human beings.

You people have got to be stopped. You are the barbarians trying to have our country run by your superstitions.

Quote:

Since you consider it a fetus and not a child, does this mean you would kill the child in its womb? After all, it is just a growth, right?

I told you what I thought about this absurd hypothetical. Perhaps I should tell you what to do with it.

Quote:

I am beginning to believe that you chose your topics strictly for the amount of dissention you can cause.

The topics I discuss already have lots of controversy attached to them. I am sharing my opinions.

0 Replies

Child of the Light wrote:

The problem with that is that the man isn't offered the same liberty. If he doesn't want the child, he still has to pay 18 years of child support.

That is his tough luck.

In any case...he does not have the pregnancy occurring in his body...and he should have absolutely no say over whether or not a pregnant woman can abort.

Quote:

If he does want it, he still has to watch the child be murdered.

There is no child...and there is no murder.

You are talking nonsense.

Quote:

Quick question. What is a person charged with if they hit and kill a pregnant women while drunk? 2 COUNTS OF MURDER.

And????

If you are so sure it is a child...and if you want the law to decide...how about this scenario instead:

Take the fetus off your income tax as a deduction....and see what IRS has to say.

0 Replies

Tax breaks are the same as murder huh? That's a horrible example. The fact is that when a normal person kills a pregnant women or the fetus it is murder, but when a doctor does it it isn't. Why is that? Because she gave consent? If so that is stupid, and we should start calling hitmen Dr. Joey Fingers.

0 Replies

Frank Apisa wrote:

Intrepid wrote:
I could have a better conversation with a six year old child.

Probably because you would be conversing with someone who thinks like you.

Actually, I was thinking that they would actually make sense and not be prone to vulgar and oppressive language.

My religion, I know, is different than a few others who have posted. I may not agree with the doctrine of their religion, but I respect their right to hold it. You have not seen anyone else curse and use profanities on this thread...why do you? Is that the only way you think you can make a valid point? People may be more prone to listen to what you say if they are not being spat upon when they do not agree with you.

I notice that you actually write civilly to some posters. Do you just have a dislike for some of us?

Petersen was charged for the death of his unborn child. How do you account for this?

0 Replies

ABORTION.......

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know