Abortion.What do you think about it?

Yes. Why not. Betrothal a grey area.

Is it not the real alternative to this other mess? You are going to have a lot of abortions and other stuff once irresponsible people start shagging randomly round the back of the pub when all popped up.

It's a small price to pay isn't it? Virgin brides are lovely. That's why the non-virgins imitate them when they get married themselves.

What are you talking about ?

spendius wrote:

Yes. Why not. Betrothal a grey area.

Is it not the real alternative to this other mess? You are going to have a lot of abortions and other stuff once irresponsible people start shagging randomly round the back of the pub when all popped up.

It's a small price to pay isn't it? Virgin brides are lovely. That's why the non-virgins imitate them when they get married themselves.

Nothing!

He's obviously had a few bints pretending they were a bit prim and proper when they weren't on him.

And he went along for the ride, or the convenience.

A pure animal reflex with a 2000 word vocabulary to make it sound dignified.

Kansas Abortion Facility With Shoddy Conditions Open for Public View[/u]

by Steven Ertelt
LifeNews.com Editor
July 10, 2006

Wichita, KS (LifeNews.com) -- A pro-life group that recently purchased a local abortion business in Wichita and closed it down has announced that the facility is open for public inspection. The group hopes the public will take the time to see what shoddy conditions existed at the abortion center that women were subjected to during abortions there.

Operation Rescue recently purchased the Central Women's Services abortion facility and last week it invited pro-abortion Gov. Kathleen Sebelius to tour it.

The organization wants Sebelius, who has vetoed legislation to inspect abortion centers, to see how deplorable the conditions were at the site.

Now OR is making the facility available for public inspection at the end of the week.

"We want the community to see the squalid conditions at this abortion mill for themselves before renovations begin," OR president Troy Newman said in a statement provided to LifeNews.com. "Viewing this facility really brings home the grim reality of abortion in America today and the human tragedy of the thousands of children who died here over the past 23 years."

Newman said the invitation is open to the media, the public an abortion advocates as well. He also extended an offer for women who had abortions there to return to get post-abortion help if they want it.

"We especially invite women who may have had abortions at Central Women's Services to return and grieve for their babies," Newman added. "Christians will be standing by to offer prayer and help for post-abortive women, if necessary."

Operation Rescue is calling for emergency inspections of the four remaining Kansas abortion mills in light of the filthy and unsafe conditions the group found at CWS after thoroughly examining the building after the purchase.

The pro-life group discovered horrific, unclean conditions in addition to out-of-code electrical wiring and plumbing, broken ceilings, and evidence of roach and rodent infestations.

This is the second Kansas abortion center discovered to have horrendous conditions.

Last year, a Kansas City abortion business run by Krishna Rajanna was found to be filthy and infested with rodents. Food and aborted baby bodies were stored in the same refrigerator and there were allegations reported by a Kansas City police detective of suspected cannibalism. Rajanna eventually lost his medical license and his abortion center was closed.

In April, 2005, Gov. Kathleen Sebelius vetoed HB 2503, a bill that would have required abortion centers to meet basic minimum standards.

In her veto statement she said, "As governor, nothing is more important to me than the safety and good health of our citizens."

"If Sebelius was telling the truth, she will order immediate emergency inspections of all remaining abortion clinics in the state of Kansas, and close those where similar conditions exist in the interest of public health and safety," Newman said.

Choosing baby's sex to be outlawed

Press Association
Wednesday July 12, 2006 1:03 PM

Sex selection of babies for non-medical reasons is set to be outlawed in the UK under Government plans for a shake-up of embryology regulation.

Health Minister Caroline Flint told MPs she was minded to introduce a "clear and specific ban" on the use of new techniques to choose one gender of baby.

Allowing parents to pick sex for reasons such as "balancing" the make-up of their family could be the start of a "slippery slope" to designer babies, she warned.........

High court says it will take case on abortion
Thursday, July 13, 2006
BY KATE COSCARELLI
Star-Ledger Staff
The state Supreme Court has agreed to hear a long-running court case about abortion.

A South Bound Brook woman sued her doctor, claiming she did not get enough information when he advised her to end her pregnancy. An appeals panel ruled this spring that the case should go to a jury, but that decision was appealed and now the highest court has agreed to step in

The woman, Rosa Acuna, is represented by a well-known anti-abortion attorney, Harold Cassidy, who said he welcomed the high court's review. Acuna has fought for 8 1/2 years and wants a trial, he said.

Cassidy said he has another appeal pending before the high court seeking to reinstate Acuna's wrongful-death claim stemming from the abortion.

John Zen Jackson, who represents the physician, Sheldon Turkish, and filed the appeal that the court has now accepted, did not return calls seeking comment.

The state chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union said the case is ripe for review by the Supreme Court.

"If the Appellate Division's decision stands, it would interfere with reproductive freedom by chilling doctors' ability to do their jobs by forcing them to convey particular moral judgments about abortion in order to avoid potential liability," said executive director Deborah Jacobs.

The case has been bouncing around the courts for years.

In 1996, Acuna was a 29-year-old mother of two when Turkish advised her to have an abortion because her pregnancy was complicated by a kidney disorder.

Acuna claims Turkish didn't say her 6- to 7-week fetus was a baby when she asked. She contends he told her: "Don't be stupid, it's just some blood."

The doctor testified he did not remember Acuna asking such a question but would have advised her that a "7-week pregnancy is not a living human being."

A few weeks after the abortion, Acuna had to be hospitalized. According to court papers, nurses told her the physician had "left parts of the baby inside of her." Acuna sued on grounds that she had agreed to the abortion based on "erroneous information."

As is its practice, the Supreme Court's announcement that it would hear the case was just a short notice that did not describe the details of the case. It is not clear when arguments will be scheduled.

Doctors should and must disclose all info based upon present known and possibly disputed facts, the discission should only be made after this.

BDV wrote:

Doctors should and must disclose all info based upon present known and possibly disputed facts, the discission should only be made after this.

The woman whose body is the subject of the decision...should make the decision when she chooses...based on whatever she chooses to bring into the decision making process.

I happen to think that she ought to get all the information possible...but I have no say in the matter....and neither do any of you...nor does any government of which you folks are a part.

The woman should have a right to terminate a pregnancy if and when she choose...and that is that.

Those of you who think you should stick your noses into the process...or who champion the right of government to take that choice away from a woman...

...ought to grow up sufficiently to recognize that you ought to be ashamed of yourselfs.

I doubt that will happen. Instead, you will continue to sit around inflated ith pride for your perceived superior morals on the issue. But it is fun letting you know that it should happen.

There's no morals involved Frank. She simply unwomans herself. She becomes a construct of materialism rather than a mystical being.

You are at least consistent. Maybe you fear the mystic woman which is perfectly understandable. But you mustn't think she doesn't exist.

There are women and men on both sides. The one I see taking a superior tone is you - you seem to pretend this to be somehow foregone, as if all discussion of pro and con is silly.

Well the way I see it many women will have abortions no matter what the circumstances are, either legal or illegal, mostly due to the pressures the church and society put on them.

In these circumstances, modern day society in the west has developed casual abortions, which i believe must be done away with, as i stated earlier education & information plus some financial support from the church and society may prevent many of these deaths both of the unborn and the mother.

The church at the moment has very little to say, sure in Africa they refuse to promote the use of Condoms, or to give them out, instead they allow the killer disease AIDS to spread, and also allow women to get pregnant just because sex in their eyes is immoral. Its about time religionists get off their high ground and help out.

snood wrote:

There are women and men on both sides. The one I see taking a superior tone is you - you seem to pretend this to be somehow foregone, as if all discussion of pro and con is silly.

Pretend? I'm one of the posters who agrees with Frank that most of this discussion is silly.

There's a good-sized segment of the world that believes this has nothing to do with anyone but the woman involved. Nothing.

BDV wrote:

Doctors should and must disclose all info based upon present known and possibly disputed facts, the discission should only be made after this.

The woman whose body is the subject of the decision...should make the decision when she chooses...based on whatever she chooses to bring into the decision making process.

I happen to think that she ought to get all the information possible...but I have no say in the matter....and neither do any of you...nor does any government of which you folks are a part.

The woman should have a right to terminate a pregnancy if and when she choose...and that is that.

Those of you who think you should stick your noses into the process...or who champion the right of government to take that choice away from a woman...

...ought to grow up sufficiently to recognize that you ought to be ashamed of yourselfs.

I doubt that will happen. Instead, you will continue to sit around inflated ith pride for your perceived superior morals on the issue. But it is fun letting you know that it should happen.