Guest cactus Posted May 18, 2007 Posted May 18, 2007 Kelsey Bjarnason wrote: > [snips] > > On Tue, 15 May 2007 02:56:40 -0700, gudloos wrote: > >>> There was one state--I don't remember which one--that passed a law that >>> required any woman that wanted an abortion to get a 3D ultrasound of her >>> unborn baby. That pregnant woman would have been required to look at the >>> ultrasound before she could have an abortion. I liked that law and wish it >>> was a law in every state. I seem to recall reading that Planned Parenthood >>> and ACLU are fighting that law in court. Do you approve of that law? >>> Jason- Skjul tekst i anførselstegn - >> Why do you hate women? > > He doesn't. He rather likes them, in fact, and thinks everyone should own > one. Maybe several? Quote
Guest cactus Posted May 18, 2007 Posted May 18, 2007 Jason wrote: > In article <1179510218.722129.104340@q75g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>, > gudloos@yahoo.com wrote: > >> On 18 Maj, 10:53, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >>> In article <1179472005.049946.225...@n59g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>, >>> >>> gudl...@yahoo.com wrote: >>>> On 17 Maj, 22:30, cactus <b...@nonespam.com> wrote: >>>>> Jason wrote: >>>>>> In article <1179392300.841908.294...@k79g2000hse.googlegroups.com>, >>>>>> gudl...@yahoo.com wrote: >>>>>>> On 16 Maj, 20:22, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >>>>>>>> In article >>> <1179316001.502902.218...@e65g2000hsc.googlegroups.com>, Martin >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>>>>>> Phipps <martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>> On May 16, 3:35 pm, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >>>>>>>>>> In article >>>>>> <1179292465.099634.114...@y80g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>, Martin >>>>>>>>>> Phipps <martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> On May 16, 11:25 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> In article >>>>>>>> <1179278239.106024.108...@k79g2000hse.googlegroups.com>, Martin >>>>>>>>>>>> Phipps <martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> And yet during the first three months (when 90% of > abortions take >>>>>>>>>>>>> place) that is all that the baby is. More abortions would >>>>>> take place >>>>>>>>>>>>> during the first three months if women were able to get easy >>>>>> access to >>>>>>>>>>>>> abortions. It is my personal opinion that women should not >>>>>> choose to >>>>>>>>>>>>> have abortions after three months and I would approve of any >>>>>> law that >>>>>>>>>>>>> discouraged women from having abortions after three > months: it so >>>>>>>>>>>>> happens that late term abortiions are already illegal in 36 >>>>>> states. >>>>>>>>>>>>> (Seehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Late-term_abortion) > Here "late >>>>>>>>>>>>> term" refers to abortions that take place as early as five >>>>>> months into >>>>>>>>>>>>> the pregnancy. (See >>>>>>>> alsohttp://www.answers.com/topic/late-term-abortion >>>>>>>>>>>>> ) >>>>>>>>>>>> I agree that abortions should only be legal during the > first three >>>>>>>> months. >>>>>>>>>>>> The only exception would be if the mother's life was in danger. >>>>>>>>>>> That's not what I said. >>>>>>>>>>> 90% of abortions take place during the first three months > anyway, I >>>>>>>>>>> would personally _discourage_ somebody from having an > abortion after >>>>>>>>>>> three months but that's not the same thing as making it > illegal after >>>>>>>>>>> three months: when I said "I would approve of any law that >>> discouraged >>>>>>>>>>> women from having abortions after three months" I am not >>> talking about >>>>>>>>>>> an outright ban because, frankly, it is ultimately a matter > between a >>>>>>>>>>> woman and her doctor. I know (because my wife tells me) that >>> the baby >>>>>>>>>>> is quite heavy after three months and only gets heavier so an >>> unwanted >>>>>>>>>>> pregnancy might cause a woman to be unable to continue to work or >>>>>>>>>>> study or carry on a relationship or even keep her house > clean, do her >>>>>>>>>>> own cooking, etc. Unless you've had a baby (and I haven't -not >>>>>>>>>>> personally although my wife has- and I know you haven't) then you >>>>>>>>>>> can't even imagine what that would be like. It is my own > personal >>>>>>>>>>> opinion that the baby becomes a person at some point after > the three >>>>>>>>>>> month period and before the baby is born and that a woman > should give >>>>>>>>>>> serious thought to whether or not she wanted to have a late term >>>>>>>>>>> abortion. For a doctor to suggest that a woman considering > a _late_ >>>>>>>>>>> term abortion first undergo an ultrasound would not be > unreasonable: >>>>>>>>>>> for the first three months, it would be an absolutely silly > thing for >>>>>>>>>>> a doctor to suggest because all they will see is a collection of >>>>>>>>>>> cells. Really. Have you actually seen an ultrasound of a baby >>> at two >>>>>>>>>>> months? I have. It was actually a bit disappointing. >>>>>>>>>> No, I have not seen an ultrasoud of a baby at two months. I have >>> seen 3D >>>>>>>>>> ultrasounds of babies in the last trimester. I have seen detailed >>>>>> drawings >>>>>>>>>> in books about babies at every stage of development. It's > really tiny >>>>>>>>>> during the first month. >>>>>>>>> My wife is pregnant right now and she is coming up for four > months. A >>>>>>>>> month ago she had an ultrasound and we could see arms and > legs and a >>>>>>>>> head but two months ago all we saw was a lump of flesh. The doctor >>>>>>>>> printed out a picture and he had to circle where the baby was > because, >>>>>>>>> frankly, we couldn't tell. The baby obviously grows a lot > during the >>>>>>>>> third month. It was actually a bit silly doing an ultrasound > at two >>>>>>>>> months under the circumstances but it is a 100% reliable way of >>>>>>>>> determining whether or not a woman is pregnant. >>>>>>>>> This is the third time my wife has gotten pregnant since we were >>>>>>>>> married. Several years ago, my wife had a miscarriage after three >>>>>>>>> months. The baby came out and literally died in her hands. > I have no >>>>>>>>> doubt that the baby had been alive and we both felt guilt wondering >>>>>>>>> what we could have done to prevent the miscarriage. I can > understand >>>>>>>>> very well how women who have abortions feel with regards to > depression >>>>>>>>> after the fact. They don't need religious people calling them >>>>>>>>> murderers: an early term abortion is a cessation of pregnancy > and not >>>>>>>>> murder. I don't approve of late term abortions except for medical >>>>>>>>> emergencies: most doctors won't perform them and it would be >>>>>>>>> irresponsible for anyone to recommend one in so far as they > could be a >>>>>>>>> danger to the mother herself. A woman would be well advised > to either >>>>>>>>> have an abortion early (if she doesn't want the baby) or else > consider >>>>>>>>> having the baby and then putting it up for adoption. >>>>>>>>> Martin >>>>>>>> Good points--I agree--since abortions are legal--they should be done >>>>>>>> during the first trimester. The exception would be--if the > mother's life >>>>>>>> was in danger. >>>>>>> Why should that be an exception? You are (gasp!) contradicting >>>>>>> yourself. >>>>>> I have thought about that subject. The mother is alive and in > most cases >>>>>> has a husband and in many cases has other children. Her death > would cause >>>>>> great harm to that family if that woman died in childbirth. The > death of >>>>>> the child would also cause harm to that family but not as much > harm as the >>>>>> death of the woman would cause. She may even be able to have > another baby. >>>>>> I realize that it's a contradiction. Some people in the pro-life > movement >>>>>> believe the mother should be forced to have a baby even if it puts her >>>>>> life in danger. >>>>>> Jason >>>>> That was a very thoughtful response. Nicely done.- >>>> Too bad he cannot allow the woman to determine what the right thing to >>>> do is. He is nobly willing to "allow" a woman to have an abortion, if >>>> he determines there is a good reason. Clearly the woman cannot be >>>> allowed to make such a decision in Jason's world. >>> I would not force a woman to not have an abortion. >> Of course you would. You want to make abortions illegal. > > The pro-life groups want to stop abortions the exact same way that Martin > Luther King and his followers caused millions of people to demand that > Civil Rights Laws would be passed. He succeeded. We are succeeding in some > of the states and not succeeding in other states. Our end goal is to get > the vast majority of people in America to agree that unborn babies have > the right to life. People that bomb abortion clinics or write "BABY > KILLER" on the walls of abortion clinics are HURTING our cause by making > people not want to join our cause. To get back to your point: I don't want > to force a woman to not have an abortion--instead--I want women to decide > not to have an abortion or to not get pregnant if they don't want to have > babies. In the short term, since abortions are legal, the best option is > the morning after pill. I also support the law in one of the states that > requires women to look at 3D color ultrasounds of their unborn > babies--prior to abortions. > jason > >> >>> However, I see nothing >>> wrong with pro-life protestors carrying signs in front of abortion clinics >>> and in front of the offices of doctors that perform abortions. Do you >>> think that pro-life protestors should be arrested? >> Do you think that Rev. Phelp's people should be arrested when they >> picket a funeral? Harrassment is illegal. >> >> >>> In one of the southern >>> states, there is only one abortion clinic. In the Bible Belt States, we >>> are winning the battle.- >> >> Clearly you do not want women to have the right to decide for >> themselves. You will force them to not have abortions. Please do not >> lie about it again. > > Yes, I would love it if no women had abortions but it is legal in America. > I follow the law. Since it is legal, I would never prevent any woman from > having an abortion. If a woman asked my advice, I would advise her to have > the baby and put it up for adoption. If she wanted an abortion, I would > advise her to take the morning after pill. If that was not possible, I > would encourage her to have the abortion during the first trimester. If > there as a ballot proposition that made third trimester abortions > illegal--I would vote in favor of it. > > You could get in trouble with the reproduction fascists for this. Quote
Guest Kelsey Bjarnason Posted May 18, 2007 Posted May 18, 2007 On Fri, 18 May 2007 14:38:23 -0700, cactus wrote: > Kelsey Bjarnason wrote: >> [snips] >> >> On Tue, 15 May 2007 02:56:40 -0700, gudloos wrote: >> >>>> There was one state--I don't remember which one--that passed a law that >>>> required any woman that wanted an abortion to get a 3D ultrasound of her >>>> unborn baby. That pregnant woman would have been required to look at the >>>> ultrasound before she could have an abortion. I liked that law and wish it >>>> was a law in every state. I seem to recall reading that Planned Parenthood >>>> and ACLU are fighting that law in court. Do you approve of that law? >>>> Jason- Skjul tekst i anførselstegn - >>> Why do you hate women? >> >> He doesn't. He rather likes them, in fact, and thinks everyone should own >> one. > > Maybe several? I'm all for that, long as it's based on mutual attraction and consent; they seem to miss those points, though, somehow... -- I didn't edit the message.... I simply substituted asterisks for a profanity. - Jim Cowan Quote
Guest Al Klein Posted May 18, 2007 Posted May 18, 2007 On 18 May 2007 10:46:16 -0700, gudloos@yahoo.com wrote: >On 18 Maj, 09:54, Martin Phipps <martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote: >> On May 18, 4:46 pm, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >> > In article <1179473352.119729.116...@u30g2000hsc.googlegroups.com>, >> > gudl...@yahoo.com wrote: >> > > On 18 Maj, 06:21, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >> > > > In article <4h3q43h64tgggeh816im12husij76kg...@4ax.com>, Al Klein >> >> > > > <ruk...@pern.invalid> wrote: >> > > > > On Thu, 17 May 2007 14:56:47 -0700, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >> >> > > > > >Do you believe that members of pro-life organizations should NOT be >> > > > > >allowed to carry signs outside abortion clinics and the offices of doc= >> > > tors >> > > > > >that perform abortions? >> >> > > > > Do you believe that people should be allowed to follow men around >> > > > > outside drug stores carrying anti-condom signs? >> >> > > > > > I heard about one pro-life group that carried >> > > > > >signs on the city steet outside the home of a doctor that performed >> > > > > >abortions. Do you think that those pro-life protestors should have been >> > > > > >arrested? >> >> > > > > How would they have felt if people picketed their homes with "Doctor >> > > > > Murderer" signs? >> >> > > > You failed to answer my questions. >> > > Actually he did. >> >> > I wish that you had been one of my professors. When I was in college, I >> > would not have passed any classes if I had answered all exam questions >> > with a question. I was hoping for yes or no answers. >> >> Times have changed. Professors nowadays expect you to think about a >> question and not simply answer with a "yes" or a "no". > > >Think about a question? How cruel! It's called "learning" - something an entire generation didn't have to know about. Quote
Guest Al Klein Posted May 18, 2007 Posted May 18, 2007 On Fri, 18 May 2007 12:07:33 -0700, Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >Things have sure changed. When I was in college, we had to take notes in >class and read the chapters. The tests only had one correct answer for >each question. Test like that are designed with students who can't learn much in mind. For instance, what was the cause of WWII? Simplistic answer - Hitler. Wrong, but simple. Quote
Guest Al Klein Posted May 18, 2007 Posted May 18, 2007 On Fri, 18 May 2007 12:49:35 -0700, Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >Even schools have changed. I found out that they are now showing >Al Gore's movie in grade schools. One of those students came home from >school and was crying. She said that the planet would be destroyed by the >time she was an adult and was worried that she would not be able to have a >normal life. That's been a possibility since the mid 40s - over 60 years now. > This real world is a crazy world. We were worried about >Russia firing nuclear missiles at America when I was a child. Now we have to worry about the American government destroying America. Quote
Guest Charles & Mambo Duckman Posted May 19, 2007 Posted May 19, 2007 Jason wrote: > My sister told me that my > parents did not want to have any more children when she became pregnant > with me. ?????????????? -- Come down off the cross We can use the wood Tom Waits, Come On Up To The House Quote
Guest Jason Posted May 19, 2007 Posted May 19, 2007 In article <22fs43d6i1i28ci0j1os4qli1v45qv7m9l@4ax.com>, Al Klein <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote: > On Fri, 18 May 2007 12:49:35 -0700, Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > >Even schools have changed. I found out that they are now showing > >Al Gore's movie in grade schools. One of those students came home from > >school and was crying. She said that the planet would be destroyed by the > >time she was an adult and was worried that she would not be able to have a > >normal life. > > That's been a possibility since the mid 40s - over 60 years now. > > > This real world is a crazy world. We were worried about > >Russia firing nuclear missiles at America when I was a child. > > Now we have to worry about the American government destroying America. We have much more to fear from Muslims. Since the border with Mexico is open, it would be easy for Muslim terrorists to smuggle a suitcase nuclear bomb or dirty bomb over the border and explode it Los Angeles or San Diego. The television show "24" is one of my favorite shows. Tom Clancy wrote a fictional book about this subject several years ago. Quote
Guest Jason Posted May 19, 2007 Posted May 19, 2007 In article <hves43l5bfdcl5pof28kdvsl8f9gb5dedp@4ax.com>, Al Klein <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote: > On Fri, 18 May 2007 12:07:33 -0700, Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > >Things have sure changed. When I was in college, we had to take notes in > >class and read the chapters. The tests only had one correct answer for > >each question. > > Test like that are designed with students who can't learn much in > mind. For instance, what was the cause of WWII? Simplistic answer - > Hitler. Wrong, but simple. I seen some of those college students on Jay Leno's "Tonight Show". They could not answer even simple questions that almost all of college students from prior generations could answer. Quote
Guest L. Raymond Posted May 19, 2007 Posted May 19, 2007 Jason wrote: >"L. Raymond" wrote: >> Jason wrote: >>>Mike wrote: >>>> L. Raymond wrote: >>>>> Do you support laws requiring women to be fully informed about >>>>> gestational diabetes, toxemia or the other various life threatening >>>>> conditions can can come from being pregnant? Laws requiring women to be >>>>> informed about the medical risks of giving birth and the cost of raising >>>>> a child? Laws requiring any man found to have fathered a child to marry >>>>> the baby's mother and provide for them both for the next 18 years? >>>> >>>> Of course not. What do you think he is, a logical person?????? >> >> I'll decide if he responds to my question. > > I responded but perhaps it did not get posted. Sorry, I didn't see it. > My response was that I will > not concern myself with those issues unless they appear on a ballot > measure. At that point in time, I will decide how I will vote on each of > those issues. How about you pretend they are on a ballot right now and offer an opinion. Do you think it is necessary for a woman to be fully informed about possible or probable medical problems and economic realities, or do you think she only needs to be "informed" of things that try for purely emotions reactions, like photos of fetuses? You clearly consider women to be no better than children, since you would deny the possibility we have already considered all aspects of our own lives and have made the best decisions for ourselves. You want to play on the emotions of a woman who's probably already exhausted and worried, not to mention dealing with all the hormonal changes associated with pregnancy. > I consider trying to provide unborn children with the right > to life to be more important than many other issues. Such as the quality of that life? -- L. Raymond Quote
Guest Martin Phipps Posted May 19, 2007 Posted May 19, 2007 On May 18, 8:45 pm, Kelsey Bjarnason <kbjarna...@gmail.com> wrote: > [snips] > > On Fri, 18 May 2007 04:02:03 -0700, Martin Phipps wrote: > >> > 3) whether or not women should retain the right to choose > >> > abortions after three months > > >> What, their bodies magically become someone else's property at that point? > > > Okay, now you're being silly. I believe that the woman retains the > > right to choose but I believe that it is increasingly becoming a moral > > question at this point. By the beginning of the third trimester, most > > of the doctors themselves would be reluctant to perform an abortion > > unless the woman's own life were at risk. > > Yeah, because they'd be inundated with religiously-oriented nutbars > threatening to blow them up. No, because 1) late term abortions are no longer a simple procedure and the woman herself is at significant risk and 2) within a couple of months you would have a viable, if premature, baby that, under different circumstances, doctors would be fighting to keep alive in incubators. The irony is not lost on most people. > > Again, you missed the point: > > I didn't miss it; it was simply irrelevant. To you, perhaps, but not to anyone with any common sense. > > giving women access to early term abortions > > would reduce the need for late term abortions. > > Reduce? Fine, so what? So giving women access to abortions helps everybody in the long run. Are you arguing against this now? Martin Quote
Guest Martin Phipps Posted May 19, 2007 Posted May 19, 2007 On May 19, 12:43 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > Thanks. Yes, I spent over an hour trying to find the name of the author. > I did learn from that book that abortion also does harm to the people > (including doctors) that work in abortion clinics. The doctors develop a > lack of respect for life and learn to see the unborn babies as objects > instead of unborn babies. Many of the staff members "burn out" after a > couple of years. The people that work in the front office learn by > experience to never go in the back portion of the clinic. That's one of > the reasons that I hope the morning after pill means that lots of abortion > clinics to close down due to the lack of customers. A lot of people wouldn't be able to stomach working in full fledged hospitals either, what with all the sick people. Doesn't mean hospitals need to be shut down. Your almost complete and utter lack of any conscience whatsoever with regards to this issue is starting to wear me down. Martin Quote
Guest Martin Phipps Posted May 19, 2007 Posted May 19, 2007 On May 19, 12:49 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > In article <f2k7uu$gb...@news04.infoave.net>, Mike > <prabb...@shamrocksgf.com> wrote: > > Jason wrote: > > > <snip> > > > > Jason wrote: > > >>> Please tell me what lie that I told? I made an honest mistake. An honest > > >>> mistake is different than a lie. I still don't remember the exact words of > > >>> the television preacher. I don't take notes when I listen to a sermon. > > >>> Jason > > >> Jason, we just can't take your word for anything anymore. What > > >> difference does it make if you made an honest mistake or if you > > >> deliberately set out to deceive? I would hope that in the future you > > >> can get your facts straight. > > > >> Frankly, when you say "I believe lots of people lied to me in this > > >> thread" the impression I get is that you are arguing that it is okay > > >> for you to lie because other people are lying too. I hope I am wrong > > >> but I see no other reason for you to use the classic "But they've lied > > >> too" argument if you are not admitting to (knowingly or unknowingly) > > >> posting lies. Perhaps you can tell us what lies you've been told on > > >> this thread. > > > >> Martin > > > > Martin, > > > You are correct--it's not a good thing to do say: "Other people lied so > > > therefore it's okay for me to lie". > > > The main lie that I have heard is in relation to Planned Parenthood. > > > You haven't heard any lies about it unless you read your own posts out loud. > > > > Various posters have told me that abortions are an insignificant part of > > > their operation. I have no doubt that the people that told me that > > > information derived it from the Planned Parenthood website. That > > > information at that site was probably written by a person or persons that > > > have college degrees in the field of public relations. Almost all large > > > companies and charity organizations have people like that on their staffs. > > > I have received form letters from those sorts of people. Planned > > > Parenthood derives millions of dollars per year as a result of abortions. > > > Does Planned Parenthood offer other services--the answer is YES. > > > I have noticed that you have YET to actually REFUTE the statement that > > abortions are an insignificant part of their operation. If a > > company/organization brings in $500m a year and $5m of that is one > > particular product/service, that IS an insignificant portion of the > > company's income, even if it's "millions of dollars per year." > > > > I have also noticed that many of the people that responded to my posts > > > seem to think that abortions do no harm to women. > > > Quote a single person who said abortions do "NO harm to women." > > > One poster indicated > > > that only a very small number of women suffer severe depression as a > > > result of abortions. I believe that is a lie but have no surveys for > > > proof. > > > I.e. you claim it's a lie and yet can't support that claim. > > > I believe that over half of the woman that have had abortions > > > suffer from severe depression problems--esp. if the abortions were > > > performed during the second or third trimesters. > > > Any source for this belief other than your ass? > > You are being disrespectful. My evidence is the women that I have seen > interviewed on Christian radio and television shows and the women that > have told their stories in Church services. Even if I posted the survey > results from a pro-life website--either you or someone else would say the > survey has no credibility. Based on your posting history, Jason, it is _you_ who no longer has any credibility. Martin Quote
Guest Martin Phipps Posted May 19, 2007 Posted May 19, 2007 On May 19, 1:12 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > In article <1179462808.818943.73...@p77g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>, Martin > > > > > > > > Phipps <martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > On May 18, 9:33 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > <snip> > > > > > > > Did it ever opccur to you that perhaps NONE of the world's religions > > > > > > are true? Why do you feel obliged to have to pick one? > > > > > > If you have ever studied the history of Indians and various isolated > > > > > groups of people in Africa, you would know that they believed in a > God or > > > > > Gods. The reason is because they knew (without ever being told) > that when > > > > > they died --that is was the beginning of a new life in heaven. That led > > > > > them to believe that God or Gods were watching over them. My > parents were > > > > > Christians and most all of my friends were Christians. I was > raised in the > > > > > mountains of Virginia which is part of the Bible Belt. Just like the > > > > > Indians and Africans that lived in the 1600's, I feel the same way they > > > > > felt--That God is watching over me and that I will have a better life in > > > > > heaven. Back to your question: No--it has never occurred to me that none > > > > > of the religions are true. I picked the best one that I could find and I > > > > > do not regret my decision. > > > > > Let me rephrase my question. Did it ever occur to you that atheists > > > > might be more enlightened than those who believe on the superstitions > > > > passed down from centuries ago? > > > > No, I know that is what most atheists believe but I believe they are > > > wrong. There are lots of Christian college professors; Christian medical > > > doctors and Christians involved in many other professions. They are just > > > as enlightened as any of the atheists involved in any of those > > > professions. > > >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religiosity_and_intelligence > > > "According to a study by Paul Bell, published in the Mensa Magazine > > in > > 2002, there is an inverse correlation between religiosity and > > intelligence. Analyzing 43 studies carried out since 1927, Bell found > > that all but four reported such a connection, and he concluded that > > "the higher one's intelligence or education level, the less one is > > likely to be religious or hold 'beliefs' of any kind."[1] A survey > > published in Nature in 1998 confirms that belief in a personal God or > > afterlife is at an all time low among the members of the National > > Academy of Science, only 7.0% of which believed in a personal God as > > compared to more than 85% of the US general population.[2]" > > > <a lot of stuff snipped> > > > What you don't seem to understand, Jason, is that the idea of late > > term abortion sickens me (and in fact most people) on many levels but > > the question is what does one do about it? Outlaw all abortions or > > encourage women to have abortions earlier so that it becomes a > > painless procedure for EVERYONE involved? Need I remind you again > > that I was adopted and that I could have been aborted myself? > It would be very easy for the professors at a Christian college to conduct > a survey that indicated that Christians were more intelligent than > atheists. Of course, Jason, because unlike scientists, Christians have no qualms whatsoever about lying. Martin Quote
Guest Martin Phipps Posted May 19, 2007 Posted May 19, 2007 On May 19, 1:18 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > In article <5b5vjlF2okt3...@mid.individual.net>, "Robibnikoff" > > <witchy...@broomstick.com> wrote: > > "Jason" <J...@nospam.com> wrote > > > in message > >news:Jason-1805070140390001@66-52-22-21.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... > > > In article <1179471115.012608.35...@u30g2000hsc.googlegroups.com>, > > > gudl...@yahoo.com wrote: > > > >> On 17 Maj, 22:49, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > >> > <snip> > > snip > > > I don't change my beliefs based on one study. For example, if I posted a > > > study that done by a pro-life organization that showed that 50 percent of > > > the women that had abortions suffered from severe depression--would you > > > believe the survey results? > > > Maybe - Maybe not. > > > I also wouldn't care. > > > I'm sure some women do feel depressed after having an abortion. So what? > > That's they're problem. > > Someone told me that I don't care about women. It appears that you don't > have much sympathy for women that suffer from severe depression as a > result of having abortions. I do have sympathy for those women. You mean the ones who "repent"? Martin Quote
Guest Martin Phipps Posted May 19, 2007 Posted May 19, 2007 On May 19, 3:07 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > In article <1179510375.780869.111...@q75g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>, > gudl...@yahoo.com wrote: > > On 18 Maj, 09:54, Martin Phipps <martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > On May 18, 4:46 pm, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > > > In article <1179473352.119729.116...@u30g2000hsc.googlegroups.com>, > > > > > gudl...@yahoo.com wrote: > > > > > On 18 Maj, 06:21, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > > > > In article <4h3q43h64tgggeh816im12husij76kg...@4ax.com>, Al Klein > > > > > > > <ruk...@pern.invalid> wrote: > > > > > > > On Thu, 17 May 2007 14:56:47 -0700, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > > > > > > >Do you believe that members of pro-life organizations should NOT= > > be > > > > > > > >allowed to carry signs outside abortion clinics and the offices = > > of doc=3D > > > > > tors > > > > > > > >that perform abortions? > > > > > > > > Do you believe that people should be allowed to follow men around > > > > > > > outside drug stores carrying anti-condom signs? > > > > > > > > > I heard about one pro-life group that carried > > > > > > > >signs on the city steet outside the home of a doctor that perfor= > > med > > > > > > > >abortions. Do you think that those pro-life protestors should ha= > > ve been > > > > > > > >arrested? > > > > > > > > How would they have felt if people picketed their homes with "D= > > octor > > > > > > > Murderer" signs? > > > > > > > You failed to answer my questions. > > > > > Actually he did. > > > > > I wish that you had been one of my professors. When I was in college, I > > > > would not have passed any classes if I had answered all exam questions > > > > with a question. I was hoping for yes or no answers. > > > > Times have changed. Professors nowadays expect you to think about a > > > question and not simply answer with a "yes" or a "no". > > > Think about a question? How cruel! > > Things have sure changed. When I was in college, we had to take notes in > class and read the chapters. The tests only had one correct answer for > each question. Yes, because today you are expected to actually understand the question and consider it based on its merits rather than simply memorizing the answer that the teachers supplied and you took as gospel. Near as I can tell, Jason, you never had a proper education, certainly not one that enables you to deal with the real world. Martin Quote
Guest Martin Phipps Posted May 19, 2007 Posted May 19, 2007 On May 19, 2:12 am, gudl...@yahoo.com wrote: > Nobody said that women enjoy their abortion experiences. There simply > is no objective data at all that indicates that a large percentage of > women suffer from clinical depression after having an abortion. > Interviews on Christian radio programs is not a source for such data. > Even if I were a Christian I would be able to see that. Don't be so sure: if you were a Christian then you would, statistically, be far less intelligent than you are now and would be willing to believe whatever you were told by other Christains. Martin Quote
Guest Martin Phipps Posted May 19, 2007 Posted May 19, 2007 On May 19, 3:29 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > The pro-life groups want to stop abortions the exact same way that Martin > Luther King and his followers caused millions of people to demand that > Civil Rights Laws would be passed. Martin Luthor King wanted to preserve the rights of ALL people. Protecting the rights of Black people in the United States did not in any way infringe the rights of others. It is not a valid comparison. Martin Quote
Guest Martin Phipps Posted May 19, 2007 Posted May 19, 2007 On May 19, 3:35 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > One person told me that he would reject any survey or reasearch study that > was funded or done by a pro-life group. > > See my point? That person would have rejected it since the results would > not have fit his point of view. How do you know the results would not fit his view? Do you know what the results are before the study is even conducted? Or are you admitting that a pro-life website is only going to publish results that agree with _their_ point of view? > Of course, he probably would have stated > that the study had no credibility. If you know in advance that the results of the study are going to fit the views of the people conducting the study then, yes, the study is invalid. Martin Quote
Guest DanielSan Posted May 19, 2007 Posted May 19, 2007 Martin Phipps wrote: > On May 19, 3:35 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > >> One person told me that he would reject any survey or reasearch study that >> was funded or done by a pro-life group. >> >> See my point? That person would have rejected it since the results would >> not have fit his point of view. > > How do you know the results would not fit his view? Do you know what > the results are before the study is even conducted? Or are you > admitting that a pro-life website is only going to publish results > that agree with _their_ point of view? > >> Of course, he probably would have stated >> that the study had no credibility. > > If you know in advance that the results of the study are going to fit > the views of the people conducting the study then, yes, the study is > invalid. > > Martin > For example: The Westboro Baptist Church ("God Hates Fags") decides to announce a study they are going to conduct: "Are fags evil or just crazy?" Tell me, Jason, is that study going to be valid? Quote
Guest Martin Phipps Posted May 19, 2007 Posted May 19, 2007 On May 19, 3:49 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > That is true. In the real world, people can answer questions with a > question. Even schools have changed. I found out that they are now showing > Al Gore's movie in grade schools. One of those students came home from > school and was crying. She said that the planet would be destroyed by the > time she was an adult and was worried that she would not be able to have a > normal life. This real world is a crazy world. We were worried about > Russia firing nuclear missiles at America when I was a child. I was in grade school thirty years ago and we were taught back then to care about the environment. Obviously your generation wasn't. Martin Quote
Guest Martin Phipps Posted May 19, 2007 Posted May 19, 2007 On May 19, 5:00 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > Springfield, IL -- This week's prestigious British Medical Journal > reports that women who abort a first pregnancy are at greater risk of > subsequent long term clinical depression compared to women who carry an > unintended first pregnancy to term. That's not the same as saying "a majority of women who have abortions suffer severe depression". And it doesn't mean that women who do carry their babies to term don't ever suffer from depression as a result. The report is also slightly suspect because abortion is supposed to be a private matter: the women who participated would have had to have come forward voluntarially to participate in the study so there is the problem of self-selection skewing the data. Martin Quote
Guest Martin Phipps Posted May 19, 2007 Posted May 19, 2007 On May 19, 10:05 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > In article <hves43l5bfdcl5pof28kdvsl8f9gb5d...@4ax.com>, Al Klein > > <ruk...@pern.invalid> wrote: > > On Fri, 18 May 2007 12:07:33 -0700, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > >Things have sure changed. When I was in college, we had to take notes in > > >class and read the chapters. The tests only had one correct answer for > > >each question. > > > Test like that are designed with students who can't learn much in > > mind. For instance, what was the cause of WWII? Simplistic answer - > > Hitler. Wrong, but simple. > > I seen some of those college students on Jay Leno's "Tonight Show". They > could not answer even simple questions that almost all of college students > from prior generations could answer. And yet a lot of those people we see on those Jay Walking segments are your age, Jason. Martin Quote
Guest Mike Posted May 19, 2007 Posted May 19, 2007 Jason wrote: > In article <f2ksf4$6jv$1@news04.infoave.net>, Mike > <prabbit1@shamrocksgf.com> wrote: > >> L. Raymond wrote: >>> Jason wrote: >>> >>>> The pro-life groups want to stop abortions the exact same way that Martin >>>> Luther King and his followers caused millions of people to demand that >>>> Civil Rights Laws would be passed. He succeeded. We are succeeding in some >>>> of the states and not succeeding in other states. Our end goal is to get >>>> the vast majority of people in America to agree that unborn babies have >>>> the right to life. People that bomb abortion clinics or write "BABY >>>> KILLER" on the walls of abortion clinics are HURTING our cause by making >>>> people not want to join our cause. To get back to your point: I don't want >>>> to force a woman to not have an abortion--instead--I want women to decide >>>> not to have an abortion or to not get pregnant if they don't want to have >>>> babies. In the short term, since abortions are legal, the best option is >>>> the morning after pill. I also support the law in one of the states that >>>> requires women to look at 3D color ultrasounds of their unborn >>>> babies--prior to abortions. >>> Do you support laws requiring women to be fully informed about >>> gestational diabetes, toxemia or the other various life threatening >>> conditions can can come from being pregnant? Laws requiring women to be >>> informed about the medical risks of giving birth and the cost of raising >>> a child? Laws requiring any man found to have fathered a child to marry >>> the baby's mother and provide for them both for the next 18 years? >> Of course not. What do you think he is, a logical person?????? > > Several people requested that I had no real proof that lots of women > suffer severe depression as a result of abortions. No, they STATED that you did not have ANY proof at all (real or otherwise.) > They were correct. Yes, they were. I > goggled "abortion depression" and was shocked at the number of sites that > appeared. I picked the one that was from a medical journal: > Here it is: > > For Release 1/18/02 > > Clinical Depression After Unintended Pregnancy Linked To Abortion > > Springfield, IL -- This week's prestigious British Medical Journal > reports that women who abort a first pregnancy are at greater risk of > subsequent long term clinical depression compared to women who carry an > unintended first pregnancy to term. Publication of the study coincides > with anniversary events related to the Supreme Court's January 22, 1973 > Roe v. Wade decision legalizing abortion. Nice example of cherry-picking. Note that the following is talking about a later article in the same "prestigious British Medical Journal" that says the opposite of your cited article. (BTW, note that neither of the studies actually were able to show a firm cause-and-effect here. In fact, it may be that those who suffered from the depression already had mental problems that predisposed them to having an abortion and not visa-versa.) Oct. 31, 2005 -- New research challenges the idea that having an abortion raises a woman's long-term risk of depression. Abortion opponents have long argued that women often suffer depression and other mental health problems as a result of having abortions; those on the other side of the debate say there is little clinical evidence to back up the claim. Much of the research has involved data from an ongoing study of women who were between the ages of 14 and 21 at recruitment in 1979. The findings have differed depending on who was doing the investigating. Back and Forth Debate In a 1992 study, Arizona State University researcher Nancy Felipe Russo, PhD, analyzed the study population and concluded that most women suffer no long-term mental health repercussions when they abort an unintended first pregnancy. A decade later, David C. Reardon, PhD, looked at the data in a different way and concluded that abortion is linked to later depression. Reardon found that an average of eight years after having an abortion, married women were 138% more likely to be at risk for depression than married women who chose to carry unintended first pregnancies to term. The association was not seen among unmarried women. At the time, Reardon told WebMD that his research was intended to challenge Russo's earlier findings. Reardon is director of The Elliot Institute, a research group with what he acknowledges to be an anti-abortion agenda. In the new study, published in the latest issue of the British Medical Journal, Russo and colleague Sarah Schmiege challenge Reardon's challenge of her original research. Russo tells WebMD that Reardon's work was flawed because it misidentified women who had unwanted pregnancies and excluded teens. "Younger women tend to have the least support and the fewest financial resources," she says. "All of these things combine to make the consequences of having a child early in life much greater than having a child later on." The New Analysis A total of 1,247 women in the ongoing study who aborted or delivered an unwanted first pregnancy between 1970 and 1992 were included in the latest analysis. The women were interviewed over several years. Russo and colleagues found that, for the most part, women who aborted a first pregnancy had the same risk for later depression as women who chose to give birth. The one exception was women who gave birth prior to 1980, when they were still teenagers. These women were found to have a significantly higher risk of depression than women who had abortions and women who gave birth in their 20s. The researchers conclude that, "under the present conditions of legal access to abortion, there is no credible evidence that choosing to terminate an unwanted first pregnancy puts women at higher risk of subsequent depression than does choosing to deliver an unwanted first pregnancy." According to the figures from the Alan Guttmacher Institute and the CDC, half of all abortions in the U.S. each year are performed on women under the age of 25, and one in five involves teenagers. Reardon acknowledges that his research says nothing about the impact of abortion or giving birth on teens. But he contends that the evidence linking abortion with later depression and other adverse events in older women is strong. "Nothing in the new analysis refutes our original contention that women who have abortions after adolescence are at greater risk of depression," he says. Roe v. Wade Revisited? But Stanley Henshaw, PhD, of the Alan Guttmacher Institute, says none of the research is conclusive because teasing out the impact of abortion on later mental health is almost impossible. The Alan Guttmacher Institute is a nonprofit organization focused on sexual and reproductive health research, policy analysis, and public education. Its mission statement says the organization has the aim of protecting "the reproductive choices of all women and men in the United States and throughout the world." Henshaw says Reardon and colleagues are intent on showing that abortion is linked to adverse psychological outcomes in large part to provide a legal foot in the door for overturning Roe v. Wade, the 1973 Supreme Court decision that legalized abortion. "They are trying to make the argument that when the Supreme Court decided Roe v. Wade they didn't know all of the harms that abortion would cause women," he tells WebMD. "They have published a dozen studies purporting to show that abortion is associated with negative mental health outcomes, including depression, anxiety and suicide. But if you read the fine print, all of them say that the link hasn't been proven." SOURCES: Schmiege, S. and Russo, N. British Medical Journal, Oct. 28, 2005 online edition. Nancy Felipe Russo, PhD, regent's professor, Arizona State University. WebMD Medical News: "Abortion Linked to Depression." Stanley Henshaw, PhD, senior fellow, Alan Guttmacher Institute, New York City. David C. Reardon, PhD, director, Elliot Institute. Alan Guttmacher Institute, CDC. Quote
Guest Mike Posted May 19, 2007 Posted May 19, 2007 Jason wrote: > In article <4iethmjhcqty$.16923i7d80rtb$.dlg@40tude.net>, "L. Raymond" > <badaddress@mylinuxisp.com> wrote: > >> Jason wrote: >> >>> The pro-life groups want to stop abortions the exact same way that Martin >>> Luther King and his followers caused millions of people to demand that >>> Civil Rights Laws would be passed. He succeeded. We are succeeding in some >>> of the states and not succeeding in other states. Our end goal is to get >>> the vast majority of people in America to agree that unborn babies have >>> the right to life. People that bomb abortion clinics or write "BABY >>> KILLER" on the walls of abortion clinics are HURTING our cause by making >>> people not want to join our cause. To get back to your point: I don't want >>> to force a woman to not have an abortion--instead--I want women to decide >>> not to have an abortion or to not get pregnant if they don't want to have >>> babies. In the short term, since abortions are legal, the best option is >>> the morning after pill. I also support the law in one of the states that >>> requires women to look at 3D color ultrasounds of their unborn >>> babies--prior to abortions. >> Do you support laws requiring women to be fully informed about >> gestational diabetes, toxemia or the other various life threatening >> conditions can can come from being pregnant? Laws requiring women to be >> informed about the medical risks of giving birth and the cost of raising >> a child? Laws requiring any man found to have fathered a child to marry >> the baby's mother and provide for them both for the next 18 years? > > No, I don't worry about most of those things unless they end up on a > ballot. In those cases, I would decide on a case by case basis. Nice dance around the question. Do they teach that in some dance studio or did you have to learn it yourself? Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.