Doktor S
 
  1  
Reply Fri 24 Mar, 2006 09:33 pm
Intrepid wrote:
My observational skills are fine. It is my eyesight that is lacking.

Your last post must have slipped in before my last one was posted, completely missed that.

Old frail eyesight having bastard Razz
0 Replies
 
Doktor S
 
  1  
Reply Fri 24 Mar, 2006 09:36 pm
Still, intrepid, it takes a logical mind to recognize one.

Take that how you will.
0 Replies
 
Chumly
 
  1  
Reply Fri 24 Mar, 2006 09:46 pm
Intrepid is Canadian and was in insurance, so all hands may not be lost, but the ship has set sail for parts unknown.
0 Replies
 
real life
 
  1  
Reply Fri 24 Mar, 2006 09:56 pm
Hi Foxfyre,

Hmmmm lots of activity here since my last visit. I see that DS and Chumly still cannot bring themselves to cite even one medical fact to support their position.

They are apparently content to be the (un?)witting pawns of Planned Parenthood's money making machine.

They seem to be way out of their depth in this topic and really have nothing substantive to say. Their acquaintance with the many facets of the abortion issue appears to be an inch deep and a mile wide.

I am thankful that my wife, though not as 'educated' as some of our members think themselves to be, did not exterminate any of our children.

Though it was difficult for us to raise them all, ( and challenges of many kinds are what life is all about,) capital punishment for the unborn would not have solved anything.

My mother was of the same mind, and I am thankful.

I wonder if DS or Chumly wish some 'educated' person would have recommended their 'enlightened' view on abortion to their mothers years ago?

They cannot (or at least have not) show one reason that the unborn is not a living human being or should not be protected from the abortionist's deadly practice.

Nor, I suspect, will they be able to do so.
0 Replies
 
Chumly
 
  1  
Reply Fri 24 Mar, 2006 09:57 pm
real life wrote:
I see that DS and Chumly still cannot bring themselves to cite even one medical fact to support their position.
What position would that be?
0 Replies
 
real life
 
  1  
Reply Fri 24 Mar, 2006 10:04 pm
Chumly wrote:
real life wrote:
I see that DS and Chumly still cannot bring themselves to cite even one medical fact to support their position.
What position would that be?


I'd be amazed if you cited any evidence to support any position. It all seems to be beyond you.

I asked for your position on abortion awhile back and you claimed that you had posted it and would repost it. Have you done so?

I have cited position statments from two different physicians groups, plus discussing in detail the medical status of the unborn.

You have plenty of ridicule for others, but what medical evidence have you cited?
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Fri 24 Mar, 2006 10:16 pm
real life wrote:
Chumly wrote:
real life wrote:
I see that DS and Chumly still cannot bring themselves to cite even one medical fact to support their position.
What position would that be?


I'd be amazed if you cited any evidence to support any position. It all seems to be beyond you.

I asked for your position on abortion awhile back and you claimed that you had posted it and would repost it. Have you done so?

I have cited position statments from two different physicians groups, plus discussing in detail the medical status of the unborn.

You have plenty of ridicule for others, but what medical evidence have you cited?


LOL Reallife, were your ears burning?

I just got tired of all the potshots along with inability to competently refute any of your excellent research. And besides, they make it soooooo easy Smile

I hope you didn't mind me using you as the catalyst to demonstrate the lack of substance in their 'neener neener neener' argument.
0 Replies
 
Chumly
 
  1  
Reply Fri 24 Mar, 2006 10:24 pm
Hi Real Life,

Shall we deconstruct your illogical specious viewpoint based on religious rhetoric and pseudo-science all over again?
Chumly wrote:
real life wrote:
Doctors have an ethical duty to provide complete medical information to patients before a procedure.
How absurd, it's completely impossible to "provide complete medical information".
real life wrote:
In the case of an abortion, that information regarding the status of the unborn should include heartbeat, brainwave activity and a sonogram.
Why?
real life wrote:
But abortionists prey upon the woman's fear and ignorance.
Explain what a so-called "abortionist" is. Then prove these so-called "abortionists" "prey upon the woman's fear and ignorance"
real life wrote:
Planned Parenthood does not want to provide medical information
Prove it.
real life wrote:
they want the woman or the young girl scared and in the dark so that they can continue to generate a profit.
Prove it.
real life wrote:
Abortion is a profit center
Prove it.
real life wrote:
There is not a single reason why abortionists should not have to provide this information to the woman.
Prove why they should have to provide this so-called "information".
real life wrote:
Do you agree that the practitioner has a duty to disclose this information and that the woman has a right to know about it?
The practitioner has a reasonable obligation to ensure the patient is reasonably well informed as to the procedure itself. The practitioner has no obligation to preach religious dogma to the patient.
0 Replies
 
Jason Proudmoore
 
  1  
Reply Fri 24 Mar, 2006 10:32 pm
Chumly wrote:
The practitioner has no obligation to preach religious dogma to the patient.



Twisted Evil
0 Replies
 
bandung
 
  1  
Reply Fri 24 Mar, 2006 10:37 pm
Frank Apisa wrote:
Derevon wrote:
So when exactly does a fetus become a child in your opinion?


A fetus becomes a child when it is born.


Quote:
A certain week? When it has reached a certain state? Who is to decide when a fetus becomes a child?


A fetus is a fetus....a child is a child. A fetus becomes a child...when it becomes a child...when it is born.


Quote:
As for the egg parallel, there is of course a huge difference between an egg and a fertilized egg.


This apparently is in response to my saying that an egg is not a chicken. Are you prepared to argue that a fertilized egg is a chicken???


Quote:
From a Christian point of view it's not really the degree of development the fetus/child has undergone that is relevant, but rather whether the fetus/child has a soul or not. Killing a fetus/child with a soul would of course be murder, and therefore totally unacceptable. Even if nothing is known for sure about when a soul comes into being, one simply cannot guess that it's in the third week, or fourth week or whatever. To be sure, one must assume that there is a soul involved from the earliest moment of the conception.


Really?

And why is that?

How about assuming that there is no soul?

Or that the soul only comes into being when the fetus is born into the world as a child.

Or even better...how about ending after "we really do not know."



Quote:
Also, the mother has no right to kill the child in her womb, because the child isn't her creation, but God's.


Well...there might not be a God. But let's suppose there is a God....why must we suppose that the God does not want the fetus (or baby, if you insist) to die while still totally innocent? Maybe the God is lonely in Heaven...and the only visitors he gets are innocent babies (and fetuses) that die.


Quote:
She may be its host, but it certainly doesn't mean that she is entitled to killing it at her whim.


Why not?

If there is a God...the God has no problems about taking small children into Heaven in very unusual ways. Many got to Heaven because someone dropped an atomic bomb on them. Many got there by having their pajamas catch fire...or by being in a car crash.

Some got there because the god of the Bible slaughtered them when Pharaoh refused to do his bidding.

In any case...if the soul of the fetus ends up in Heaven for all of eternity...what is the damage?
ABORTION or MURDER
GOD says :
1 Corinthians 3:16 Don't you know that you yourselves are
God's temple and that God's Spirit lives in you?
1 Corinthians 3:17 If anyone destroys God's temple,
God will destroy him; for God's temple is sacred, and you are that temple.
1 Corinthians 6:19 Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit,
who is in you, whom you have received from God? You are not your own;
1 Corinthians 6:20 you were bought at a price. Therefore honor God with your body.
1 Corinthians 6:13 "Food for the stomach and the stomach for food"-
-but God will destroy them both. The body is not meant for sexual immorality,
but for the Lord, and the Lord for the body.
Ephesians 5:5 For of this you can be sure: No immoral, impure or greedy person--such a man is an idolater--has any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God.
Ephesians 5:6 Let no one deceive you with empty words,
for because of such things God's wrath comes on those who are disobedient.
Hebrews 10:26 For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth,
there remaineth no more a sacrifice for sins,
Matthew 12:31 And so I tell you, every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven men,
but the blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven.
0 Replies
 
Chumly
 
  1  
Reply Fri 24 Mar, 2006 10:38 pm
I am off to watch the TV show Corner Gas!

I doubt it's rated for those against woman's rights though because it's Canadian.

All Canadians are godless communist heathens (except for Intrepid).

http://www.cornergas.com/
0 Replies
 
real life
 
  1  
Reply Fri 24 Mar, 2006 10:58 pm
Foxfyre wrote:
real life wrote:
Chumly wrote:
real life wrote:
I see that DS and Chumly still cannot bring themselves to cite even one medical fact to support their position.
What position would that be?


I'd be amazed if you cited any evidence to support any position. It all seems to be beyond you.

I asked for your position on abortion awhile back and you claimed that you had posted it and would repost it. Have you done so?

I have cited position statments from two different physicians groups, plus discussing in detail the medical status of the unborn.

You have plenty of ridicule for others, but what medical evidence have you cited?


LOL Reallife, were your ears burning?

I just got tired of all the potshots along with inability to competently refute any of your excellent research. And besides, they make it soooooo easy Smile

I hope you didn't mind me using you as the catalyst to demonstrate the lack of substance in their 'neener neener neener' argument.


Hi Foxfyre,

It's good to hear from you.

Yes potshots are about all that have been offered by the abortion supporters recently.

That and 'what's an abortionist?' Shocked

I would be embarrassed to post such a question, but apparently both DS and Chumly thought it made some sort of point to question whether this was really a word or not.

I appreciate your willingness to defend the unborn.
0 Replies
 
Chumly
 
  1  
Reply Fri 24 Mar, 2006 11:04 pm
Hi Real Life,

Shall we deconstruct your illogical specious viewpoint based on religious rhetoric and pseudo-science all over again?
Chumly wrote:
real life wrote:
Doctors have an ethical duty to provide complete medical information to patients before a procedure.
How absurd, it's completely impossible to "provide complete medical information".
real life wrote:
In the case of an abortion, that information regarding the status of the unborn should include heartbeat, brainwave activity and a sonogram.
Why?
real life wrote:
But abortionists prey upon the woman's fear and ignorance.
Explain what a so-called "abortionist" is. Then prove these so-called "abortionists" "prey upon the woman's fear and ignorance"
real life wrote:
Planned Parenthood does not want to provide medical information
Prove it.
real life wrote:
they want the woman or the young girl scared and in the dark so that they can continue to generate a profit.
Prove it.
real life wrote:
Abortion is a profit center
Prove it.
real life wrote:
There is not a single reason why abortionists should not have to provide this information to the woman.
Prove why they should have to provide this so-called "information".
real life wrote:
Do you agree that the practitioner has a duty to disclose this information and that the woman has a right to know about it?
The practitioner has a reasonable obligation to ensure the patient is reasonably well informed as to the procedure itself. The practitioner has no obligation to preach religious dogma to the patient.
0 Replies
 
real life
 
  1  
Reply Fri 24 Mar, 2006 11:18 pm
Chumly wrote:
Hi Real Life,

Shall we deconstruct your illogical specious viewpoint based on religious rhetoric and pseudo-science all over again?
Chumly wrote:
real life wrote:
Doctors have an ethical duty to provide complete medical information to patients before a procedure.
How absurd, it's completely impossible to "provide complete medical information".
real life wrote:
In the case of an abortion, that information regarding the status of the unborn should include heartbeat, brainwave activity and a sonogram.
Why?
real life wrote:
But abortionists prey upon the woman's fear and ignorance.
Explain what a so-called "abortionist" is. Then prove these so-called "abortionists" "prey upon the woman's fear and ignorance"
real life wrote:
Planned Parenthood does not want to provide medical information
Prove it.
real life wrote:
they want the woman or the young girl scared and in the dark so that they can continue to generate a profit.
Prove it.
real life wrote:
Abortion is a profit center
Prove it.
real life wrote:
There is not a single reason why abortionists should not have to provide this information to the woman.
Prove why they should have to provide this so-called "information".
real life wrote:
Do you agree that the practitioner has a duty to disclose this information and that the woman has a right to know about it?
The practitioner has a reasonable obligation to ensure the patient is reasonably well informed as to the procedure itself. The practitioner has no obligation to preach religious dogma to the patient.


'religious rhetoric' ?? Point it out.

'pseudo science' ?? Point it out.

The only thing you prove by reposting this embarrassment of yours is your complete lack of any grasp of the issue.

'explain what an abortionist is' ?? I looked it up once for you. Not twice.

'prove' that Planned Parenthood financially benefits from abortion? I suppose you think I should publish a Planned Parenthood price list.

and then your description of medical info such as heartbeat, brainwaves and sonogram as 'religious dogma'..................??

Well it speaks for itself, so I won't embarrass you further.
0 Replies
 
Chumly
 
  1  
Reply Fri 24 Mar, 2006 11:26 pm
Answer my post and I'll answer yours.
0 Replies
 
real life
 
  1  
Reply Fri 24 Mar, 2006 11:30 pm
Chumly wrote:
Answer my post and I'll answer yours.


Prove it.

(See, I've been learning your method. One doesn't really have to 'say' anything. Just holler 'prove it' or 'that's absurd')

Hope you enjoyed your show. For Canadian humor, I go with The Red Green Show.
0 Replies
 
Chumly
 
  1  
Reply Sat 25 Mar, 2006 01:01 am
The Red Green Show is cute too.

I'm going to switch away from these type of debates somewhat as I much enjoy economics and finances as well. Not that I don't find S&R interesting.

If you or any other poster reading this has a passion for economics and finances you can meet me here as per the Fed's abilities, the efficient market hypothesis, the random walk etc.
http://www.able2know.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=71685&highlight=

Cheers,

Chum
0 Replies
 
Wilso
 
  1  
Reply Sat 25 Mar, 2006 02:32 am
I worked with a guy who's got nine children. Particularly for the last few, they had every test imaginable done, if there was the slightest problem, they would have terminated immediately. For one simple fact. He told me that with the number of children they already had, it would have been absolutely impossible for them to devote the time required to a special needs child.
I've also seen the effects of Duchennes muscular dystrophy on the short life of the people who are afflicted with it. Anyone who demands that these poor souls are brought into the world, are nothing but selfish, sadistic, worthless scum. I'm so glad I live in Australia where the selfish freaks are ignored.
0 Replies
 
real life
 
  1  
Reply Sat 25 Mar, 2006 09:28 am
Wilso,

Your 'if they are sick, kill them' philosophy is disgusting. I am glad you are in Australia, too.
0 Replies
 
real life
 
  1  
Reply Sat 25 Mar, 2006 09:29 am
Chumly wrote:
The Red Green Show is cute too.

I'm going to switch away from these type of debates somewhat as I much enjoy economics and finances as well. Not that I don't find S&R interesting.

If you or any other poster reading this has a passion for economics and finances you can meet me here as per the Fed's abilities, the efficient market hypothesis, the random walk etc.
http://www.able2know.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=71685&highlight=

Cheers,

Chum


See ya. Very Happy
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

700 Inconsistencies in the Bible - Discussion by onevoice
Why do we deliberately fool ourselves? - Discussion by coincidence
Spirituality - Question by Miller
Oneness vs. Trinity - Discussion by Arella Mae
give you chills - Discussion by Bartikus
Evidence for Evolution! - Discussion by Bartikus
Evidence of God! - Discussion by Bartikus
One World Order?! - Discussion by Bartikus
God loves us all....!? - Discussion by Bartikus
The Preambles to Our States - Discussion by Charli
 
  1. Forums
  2. » ABORTION.......
  3. » Page 194
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.12 seconds on 12/25/2024 at 07:30:22