| Author | Message | ||
     shamgar (shamgar) New member Username: shamgar Post Number: 2 Registered: 5-2005 Posted From: 65.122.209.136 |
The cult of the “Pro-Life” Hypocrites http://img178.echo.cx/my.php?image=georgebushprolifebywhosedefini.jpg http://img169.echo.cx/my.php?image=georgebushbible0026ze.jpg http://img191.echo.cx/my.php?image=thintheherd0015gh.jpg | ||
| shamgar (shamgar) New member Username: shamgar Post Number: 3 Registered: 5-2005 Posted From: 65.122.209.136 |
Abortion - a losing battle thanks to "Pro-Lifers" http://img183.exs.cx/my.php?loc=img183&image=thelosingbattle200000hp.jpg http://img183.exs.cx/my.php?loc=img183&image=thejustifiersofsupportforabort.jpg http://img183.exs.cx/my.php?loc=img183&image=onwardchristiansoldiers0000002.jpg http://img183.exs.cx/my.php?loc=img183&image=fundingabortionisevil00000008z.jpg http://img183.exs.cx/my.php?loc=img183&image=abortionloons00008it.jpg http://img183.exs.cx/my.php?loc=img183&image=theamericanholocaust0000da.jpg | ||
| gawain (gawain) Member Username: gawain Post Number: 70 Registered: 6-2005 Posted From: 151.203.144.29 |
If they are really concerned about unwanted children, why don't they adopt more of them? Or at least provide more funds to help them. | ||
| abort73 (abort73) New member Username: abort73 Post Number: 1 Registered: 7-2005 Posted From: 66.229.130.31 |
Something to think about: Would it have been hypocritical for someone to oppose slavery without being willing or able to help compensate the plantation owner for taking away his "right" to own a slave? Would it be hypocritical today for someone to oppose spousal abuse without opening a shelter for battered women? Would it be hypocritical to oppose child abuse without being a foster parent yourself? There are a whole host of other social scenarios in which those who criticize what they feel to be an injustice are not expected to bear the cost of eliminating that injustice. Why is it different with abortion? Having said that, the reality is, there are crisis pregnancy clinics all over the country, run by pro-lifers, often at great cost to themselves, which exist to provide for women who want to keep their baby. Any woman in America, if she wanted and needed it, could find a CPC which would provide her all the prenatal care she needed and help her place the child for adoption once it was born, without costing her a penny. Such resources are out there in abundance. Try doing a search on Google for "Crisis Pregnancy". It's an eye-opener. Ultimately, if children were being placed for adoption rather than being aborted, pro-lifers would adopt them in droves. As it stands today, however, these children simply aren't available for adoption and that's a fact: http://www.abort73.com/HTML/I-D-1a-adoption.html ----- HIstory will know the truth. You can know it today. http://Abort73.com | ||
| thejaybee (thejaybee) New member Username: thejaybee Post Number: 3 Registered: 8-2005 Posted From: 211.31.41.169 |
Pro lifer's eat children. And that's a FACT! | ||
| uncledrunkie (uncledrunkie) New member Username: uncledrunkie Post Number: 8 Registered: 8-2005 Posted From: 63.26.125.75 |
Wow Shamgar puts up a few political cartoons that seem to show all the answers. Forgot one, See I have no problem killing a few adult Iraqis, terrorists of any sort, or a bugler in the night AND I am pro-choice. Why is one ok and not the other? Why would a pacifist be pro-choice and anti killing? | ||
| yourmaster (yourmaster) New member Username: yourmaster Post Number: 4 Registered: 9-2005 Posted From: 24.20.127.133 |
John kerry is a disgraced viet nam war traitor who dislikes aborition but supports it also. A real pussy whipped false hero | ||
| yourmaster (yourmaster) New member Username: yourmaster Post Number: 10 Registered: 9-2005 Posted From: 24.20.127.133 |
only the mentaly deranged think i t is great to kill the most helpless of us. they are the selfish demons among us like john kerry and hillary clinton. | ||
| osirus (osirus) New member Username: osirus Post Number: 11 Registered: 9-2005 Posted From: 137.3.122.49 |
And Gorge W. Bush | ||
| ihavesinned (ihavesinned) Member Username: ihavesinned Post Number: 99 Registered: 9-2005 Posted From: 71.112.180.149 |
yourmaster, your spelling is almost as bad as your thought process. Are you really Rush Limbaugh posting from rehab? | ||
| rachelengland (rachelengland) Intermediate Member Username: rachelengland Post Number: 213 Registered: 5-2005 Posted From: 69.128.222.206 |
this has got to be another classic-that and playing poker with Jesus and glory's misunderstanding of southparks blame canada-i have to give it to you ihs(were casual right now right) you do have a sexy sense of humor-get over to the daily show with jon stewart | ||
| ihavesinned (ihavesinned) Advanced Member Username: ihavesinned Post Number: 529 Registered: 9-2005 Posted From: 71.112.180.149 |
Thanks for getting it, some people actually take me seriously on this board. But that guy is some kind of nut (yourmaster), must be some little kid or something? | ||
| rachelengland (rachelengland) Intermediate Member Username: rachelengland Post Number: 247 Registered: 5-2005 Posted From: 69.128.222.206 |
wow she GETS you and she WANTS you-what more could you ask for? | ||
| am2 (am2) Intermediate Member Username: am2 Post Number: 139 Registered: 10-2005 Posted From: 137.3.122.49 |
Another right-wing nut job. (yourmaster) What is this a conservative messageboard? | ||
| am2 (am2) Intermediate Member Username: am2 Post Number: 141 Registered: 10-2005 Posted From: 137.3.122.49 |
ihavesinned, you seem pretty savy in politics and religion. Where did you learn all that? | ||
| kingdavid (kingdavid) Intermediate Member Username: kingdavid Post Number: 119 Registered: 9-2005 Posted From: 65.81.5.68 |
GEORGE BUSH LIKES IT UP THE CORNHOLE. HE IS AGAINST GAY MARRIAGE BECAUSE DICK CHENEY WANTS HIM TO DIVORCE LAURA, AND MARRY HIM INSTEAD. | ||
| warr (warr) Intermediate Member Username: warr Post Number: 237 Registered: 9-2005 Posted From: 66.80.154.3 |
king david your disgusting | ||
| nolurkingonme Junior Member Username: nolurkingonme Post Number: 40 Registered: 7-2006 Posted From: 69.85.147.73 |
has anyone here read "freakonomics"? it might be true that king david is disgusting, but i think that some of my neighbor's kids want my chest. (tongue in cheek) i don't mean the girl children are envious of a woman's figure type thing either. i mean the boy children even feel they have a right to tell an adult how much they should show their figures, etc...i am probably more modest than most women...but i still don't think children should tell strangers to show their busts to them, or that they are 'boring' if they don't'. i mean that the boy children have been raised so mentally "bound" to believing in pro life issues they have become obsessed with women's issues, and even sometimes seem to want to become women. i often feel like telling their boy children that if they want to tell women what to do with their bodies they are going to have to get transplants or hope for reincarnation, because i have no intention of exposing myself to children just so their parents can be entertained in home type settings where they think no one else will know. perhaps that sounds like a really nutty theory i have concocted. maybe it is. i'm not a sociologist. it seems that by setting such subjective policies this administration has supported many children in becoming "overly" involved in female issues. even boy children; parents are discussing sexual issues in public with their children that they aren't emotionally capable of handling. their growth and development doesn't seem "that" sophisticated at the age of say 8 years old, but they are being confronted by it by T.V., and their parents. the boys make comments to me about my figure that doesn't seem to have anything to do with "male-female" issues. I mean they quit whistling because i told them i would call the cops if they didn't, but that is more about the general way their parents have raised them (badly) (i can't expect to be forced to tolerate that type behavior everytime i walk out my front door. it's embarassing, and annoyingly repetitious. but, now that behavior seems to be focusing on "other" issues.) so now they seem to be venting their sexual frustrations about my not having children. it all seems so obsessive for people their young age. i think it has something to do with this administration focusing on sexual issues instead of real policy making. but, then i think to myself "what can you expect" of someone who used drugs that way? Bush is sort of like this "if i have to be born again" then "everyone has to find something to be born again about". i haven't had my second cup of coffee, and this is the first time i've really thought about this issue with much depth (obviously, ha,ha), but i think i'm generally on to something. | ||
| joiseygirl New member Username: joiseygirl Post Number: 4 Registered: 6-2006 Posted From: 69.238.57.192 |
nulurkingonme you must be crazy! maybe you are still asleep. have another cup of coffee, ha ha! | ||
| catholic_man Intermediate Member Username: catholic_man Post Number: 137 Registered: 11-2006 Posted From: 67.135.19.86 |
How can anyone be for abortion? Just because you are poor, lower class or elderly and disabled, does that make it right to put a gun to your head? Therefore, the point is that abortion is murder. Innocent babies do not stand a chance nor do THEY HAVE A CHOICE! It is a crime against humanity. God help us all! | ||
| fullofquestions Junior Member Username: fullofquestions Post Number: 36 Registered: 1-2007 Posted From: 70.57.32.25 |
Amen | ||
| artwise_one Advanced Member Username: artwise_one Post Number: 596 Registered: 7-2005 Posted From: 70.143.101.226 |
“Pro-Life” Hypocrite. | ||
| yerba New member Username: yerba Post Number: 3 Registered: 7-2007 Posted From: 207.200.116.135 |
Abort73 writes: Would it have been hypocritical for someone to oppose slavery without being willing or able to help compensate the plantation owner for taking away his "right" to own a slave? Would it be hypocritical today for someone to oppose spousal abuse without opening a shelter for battered women? Would it be hypocritical to oppose child abuse without being a foster parent yourself? There are a whole host of other social scenarios in which those who criticize what they feel to be an injustice are not expected to bear the cost of eliminating that injustice. Why is it different with abortion? Having said that, the reality is, there are crisis pregnancy clinics all over the country, run by pro-lifers, often at great cost to themselves, which exist to provide for women who want to keep their baby. Any woman in America, if she wanted and needed it, could find a CPC which would provide her all the prenatal care she needed and help her place the child for adoption once it was born, without costing her a penny. Such resources are out there in abundance... Ultimately, if children were being placed for adoption rather than being aborted, pro-lifers would adopt them in droves. *** Oh really? First, yes, it's hypocritical to oppose abortion and not be willing to adopt or foster parent. Preventing or harassing a woman into not aborting results in a helpless child being born that needs a willing parent. There are about 80,000 foster kids in California, alone, ~20,000 living in group homes. No one is taking those 20,000 in and keeping them, let alone adopting them. And that's just in California. There are 27,000 children dying for lack of about 25 cents worth of food and medicine daily, worldwide. Why don't "pro-life" people stop having babies (contributing to the number of children needing care) and foster or adopt kids, instead? If you love children, don't have them--so that you can care for the ones that are already here and are in need of loving, caring parents. And what about using permanent birth control? Out of every 4 pregnancies in the U.S.: 2 are planned 1 is unintended and brought to term 1 is unintended and aborted *stats from Planned Parenthood website Why are heterosexuals creating so many kids "accidentally"? Why are so many heterosexuals being so sexually irresponsible? Obviously, men are not using condoms, for so many unplanned pregnancies to occur. If "lifers" keep wanting to curtail a woman's right to choose, then it's time women started putting it on men and THEIR bodies to prevent pregancy, instead of always having the debate be about women's bodies, after the fact, and then pressuring women into carrying unwanted babies to term. (continued below) | ||
| yerba New member Username: yerba Post Number: 4 Registered: 7-2007 Posted From: 207.200.116.135 |
(continued from above) So...guess what, boys? It's time for men to start stepping up to get vasectomies, at age 18, or as soon afterward as they feel they are ready to make that lifelong step. Voluntarily, of course, not forced. Why choose vasectomy? Out of responsibility and respect for women, the many children permanently living in group homes, or dying daily, and out of respect for the earth, which is rapidly growing hotter, in large part due to out of control overpopulation and overconsumption in industrialized countries. One child born into a low-income American family consumes and pollutes about as much as 20 children born to the 80% poorest people in the world. So creating just one American pregnancy, accidentally or not, that's brought to term, causes enormous environmental damage. If someone helps create one child, that person increases her/his environmental impact by 50%. Two kids: that person increases her/his environmental impact by 100%. Getting a vasectomy, or only being willing to have straight sex with someone who has done so, is the most significant thing any one person can do to protect the environment. It's time for women to realize they have the right to say no to sex with any man, for any reason, including one who does not respect her enough to have gotten a vasectomy. (Why should any woman have to live with the constant fear of pregnancy?) Men, of course, have the right not to have vasectomies--as it should be. I oppose involuntary sterilization of anyone. But at the same time, women have the right and responsibility to choose partners who have gotten vasectomies. Or to have women partners, of course. Please, if you love children, don't have them--or don't have any more of them. You have the right, for yourself, and for the well-being of all children, to not bring another child into the world. Women are always supposed to put ourselves last. Especially according to so many religions. Don't let anyone put that over on you. Women who care that much for their own lives, and those of others, as well as for the health of the planet, as to not bring an unwanted pregnancy to term, are to be commended for their responsibility and integrity, and deserve our gratitude. |
