Should religion play a role in the abortion and family planning debate?

I still think we can learn a lot from what is going on in the Arab world on this issue, especially from the new movements that support the ideas of personal freedom of choice.

Arabic English Dictionary
Arabic English translation
Spanish English Dictionary

IN REPLY TO (IRT)
MOODY
CHECK IT OUT

Here's proof you asked for that dispute your views in the link below. Their statements are too many to post. No, your statements are not acknowledged by all.

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/10424a.htm

SPRENGER, Das Leben und die Lehre des Mohammed (Berlin, 1865); WEIL, Das Leben Mohammed (Stuttgart, 1864); MUIR, Life of Mohammed (London, 1858, 1897); SYED AMEER ALI, A Critical Examination of the Life and Teachings of Mohammed (London, 1873); IDEM, The Spirit of Islam; or, The Life and Teaching of Mohammed (Calcutta, 1902); KOELLE, Mohammed and Mohammedanism Critically Considered (London, 1888); NOLDEKE, Das Leben Muhammeds (Hanover, 1863); IDEM, Islam in Sketches from Eastern History (London, 1892), 61-106; WELLHAUSEN, Muhammed in Medina (Berlin, 1882); KREHL, Mohammed (Leipzig, 1884); GRIMME, Mohammed (2 vols., Munster, 1892-94); MARGOLIOUTH, Mohammed and the Rise of Islam (London, 1905); ZWEMER, Islam a Challenge to Faith (New York, 1907); CAETANI, Annali dell' Islam (Milan, 1905-); MARACCI, Prodromi ad refutationem Alcorani (4 parts, Padua, 1698); ARNOLD, Islam, its History, Character, and Relation to Christianity (London, 1874); KREMER, Geschichte der herrschenden Ideen des Islams (Leipzig, 1868); IDEM, Culturgeschichte des Orients unter den Chalifen (2 vols., Vienna, 1875-77); HUGHES, Dictionary of Islam (London, 1895); IDEM, Notes on Mohammedanism (3rd ed., London, 1894); MUIR, The Coran, its Composition and Teaching (London, 1878); PERRON, L'Islamisme, son institution, son etat actuel et son avenir (Paris, 1877); GARCIN DE TASSY, L'Islamisme d'apres le Coran, l'enseignement doctrinal et la pratique (end ed., Paris, 1874); MULLER, Der Islam im Morgen- und Abendland (2 vols., Berlin, 1885-87); GOLDZIHER, Muhammedanische Studien (2 vols., Halle, 1889-98); IDEM in Die Orientalischen Religionen (Leipzig, 1905), 87-135; LHEREUX, Etude sur l'Islamisme (Geneva, 1904); Encyclopedia of Islam (Leyden and London, 1908-); SMITH, Mohammed and Mohammedanism (London, 1876); KREHL, Beitrage zur Muhammedanischen Dogmatik (Leipzig, 1885); TOOL, Studies in Mohammedanism, Historical and Doctrinal (London, 1892); SELL, The Faith of Islam (London, 1886); WOLLASTON, Muhammed, His Life and Doctrines (London, 1904); IDEM, The Sword of Islam (New York, 1905); JOHNSTONE, Muhammed and His Power (New York, 1901); Literary Remains of the Late Emanuel Deutsch (London, 1874), 59-135; PIZZI, L'Islamismo (Milan, 1905); ARNOLD, The Preaching of Islam, A History of the Propagation of the Muslim Faith (London, 1896); MACDONALD, Development of Muslim Theology, Jurisprudence, and Constitutional Theory (New York, 1903); IDEM, The Religious Attitude and Life in Islam (Chicago, 1908); ZWEMER, The Mohammedan World Today (New York, 1906); CARRA DE VAUX, La doctrine de l'Islam (Paris, 1909); LAMMENS, A travers l'Islam in Etudes (Paris, 20 Oct., 1910); MARES, Les Musulmans dans l'Inde, ibid. (Jan. 5 and 20).

Non believers always counter that such statement was also given before by others, but conveniently don't mention that those were with errors hence not perfect. That’s why we say we discover now a days and not before.

AND WHILE DISCOVERING WE ALSO DISCOVERED THAT ALL THESE PRESENT DAY DISCOVERIES ARE ALSO MENTIONED IN QUR’AN 1400 YEARS BACK WITH MATHEMATICAL PRECISION, WHICH WE WERE UNABLE TO COMPREHEND BEFORE ALL THOSE DISCOVERIES WE MADE TODAY.

with corrections..

You say, “"There's actually plenty of evidence that Mohammed plagerized all of his 'miraculous' predictions from earlier Greek and Roman thought"
Where is that evidence with scientific correctness ??? (Altogether more than thousand times without having imperfections / errors)
Not a SINGLE dot / word of Quran was altered /changed since 1400 years of its revelation.
AND IT IS AN ACKNOWLEDED FACT EVEN BY ALL MUSLIMS OR NON MUSLIMS… WITHOUT ANY DOUBTFULNESS.
You said, "The only miracle here is the capacity for human minds to discover and make sense of their own universe"
I Say capacity to discover is not the only miracle, it is merely the God given human ability.
THE MIRACLE IS THE PERFECTION OF EVEN EACH AND EVERY TENY TINY OR THE BIGGEST THING OF THIS UNIVERSE, LIKE QUR'AN!
Most of the well known scientists agree that, half the knowledge of science makes you atheist and full make you believe.

"There's actually plenty of evidence that Mohammed plagerized all of his 'miraculous' predictions from earlier Greek and Roman thought"

where is that evidence with PERFECTION???

NOT A SINGLE DOT/WORD of Quran was altered/changed since 1400 years of its preservation.

AND IT IS AN ACKNOWLEDED FACT EVEN BY ALL.

You said,"The only miracle here is the capacity for human minds to discover and make sense of their own universe"

I Say capacity to discover is not a miracle, it is marely the God given human ability.

THE MIRACLE IS THE PERFECTION OF EACH AND EVERY TENY TINY THING OF THIS UNIVERSE, LIKE QUR'AN!

Most of the well known scientist agree that, half the knowledge of science makes you atheist and full make you believe.

"I think to be a real philistine in the biblical sense you have to own a boat (preferrably a very large one) ..... but maybe you do."

My best guess is that Philistines, in biblical times, were poor Phoenicans -- poor because they were Phoenicans without boats. So, in that sense, I qualify as a "philistine."

In the modern sense of the word, I am indifferent to most ideas and I lack culture.

In past times the question was, "What's the difference between ignorance and indifference?"

The philistinian answer was, "I don't know and I don't care."

'Can you bring ONE SOLID PROOF to support your irrational and abnormal statement?'

There's actually plenty of evidence that Mohammed plagerized all of his 'miraculous' predictions from earlier Greek and Roman thought.

Apparently ancient Saudi Arabia wasn't as isolated from the influence of advanced cultures as claimed by Quranic fundamentalists.

The only miracle here is the capacity for human minds to discover and make sense of their own universe - humans are also pretty good at correcting their own mistakes over time....an ongoing process.

More often than not, religion only gets in the way......

http://www.infidels.org/kiosk/article362.html

@persiflage

Can you bring ONE SOLID PROOF to support your irrational and abnormal statement?

1- I gave you evidence based on scientific FACTS
2- I gave you undenyable probability test
3- And On behalf of Islam I challenged you with 1000 such SCIENTIFICALLY PROVEN FACT discovered later mentioned before with SUCH MATHEMATICAL PERCISION.. Even modern day well known Scientist acknowledged it.

Or shall we leave it for the others to judge who is insane?

'Each line below is wihtout any flaw so perfect and discoverd and scientifically proven after 1400 years it was said contrary to any religious book on the face of the earth.'

Normally speaking, people that are frankly delusional are required to undergo a risk assessment i.e. whether they pose a danger to themselves or others.

Religious zealots get a pass, for reasons unknown to rational observers. This has proven, on occasion, to be a very big mistake.

I predict that in coming decades, religious extremism will be viewed in the same light as paranoid schizophrenia - and there is often a very close association between the two as it is. They really do need to be taken seriously.

Now imagine TTWSTY spouting his/her Catholicism based religious zealotry in Pakistan or Saudi Arabia. I foresee a very deadly outcome. Sometimes it's just good to be on US soil, crazy or not.

I meant I truly believed

And after reading below I became ture Muslim:

What is a ture muslim?

Can you imagine below are the word from Muhammad (PBUH) who did not know how to read and wirte by Allah's will.

Each line below is wihtout any flaw so perfect and discoverd and scientifically proven after 1400 years it was said contrary to any religious book on the face of the earth.

Non believers always counter that such statements were also given by other, but conveniently don't mention their imperfection.

OK.. I will say take a probability test.... 1000 perfect statement of scientific nature in Quran All are correct CONTRARY TO ALL OTHER BOOKS

What are the chances That Muhammad(PBUH) was WRONG?
1/1000
=0.0001
=0 CHANCE
=None

So one could say statments which are not of scientific nature what are there chances to be incorrect or lies... which we humans could not prove or PRECEIVE OR BEYOUND OUR APPROACH or UNABLE TO SEE THROUGH OR UNDERSTAND??????????

'There are more than 1000 scientific signs out of 6000 verses'

This is the insanity we're faced with today in the West. So much for accomodation to cultural diversity.....

And after reading below I became ture Muslim:

There are more than 1000 scientific signs out of 6000 verses

"Have those who disbelieved not considered that the heavens and the earth were a joined entity, and We separated them and made from water every living thing? Then will they not believe?
21:31

And We placed within the earth firmly set mountains, lest it should shift with them, and We made therein [mountain] passes [as] roads that they might be guided.
21:32

And We made the sky a protected ceiling, but they, from its signs, are turning away.
21:33

And it is He who created the night and the day and the sun and the moon; all [heavenly bodies] in an orbit are swimming.
21:34

And We did not grant to any man before you eternity [on earth]; so if you die - would they be eternal?
21:35

Every soul will taste death. And We test you with evil and with good as trial; and to Us you will be returned.
21:36

@TTWSYFAMDGGAHJMJ1

When someone twist statement or lie he/she lie to him/her self first. And lying people are the cause of inhumanity.

And [it is] an announcement from Allah and His Messenger to the people on the day of the greater pilgrimage that Allah is disassociated from the disbelievers, and [so is] His Messenger. So if you repent, that is best for you; but if you turn away - then know that you will not cause failure to Allah . And give tidings to those who disbelieve of a painful punishment. 9.3

Sahih International
Excepted are those with whom you made a treaty among the polytheists and then they have not been deficient toward you in anything or supported anyone against you; so complete for them their treaty until their term. Indeed, Allah loves the righteous. 9.4

And when the sacred months have passed, then kill the polytheists wherever you find them and capture them and besiege them and sit in wait for them at every place of ambush. But if they should repent, establish prayer, and give zakah, let them [go] on their way. Indeed, Allah is Forgiving and Merciful. 9.5

And if any one of the polytheists seeks your protection, then grant him protection so that he may hear the words of Allah . Then deliver him to his place of safety. That is because they are a people who do not know. 9.6

(IF YOU READ 9.5 & 9.6 TOGETHER IT WILL REFER TO OCCASION OF WAR... WHEN THEY FIGHT THEN FIGHT, WHEN THE SEEK PROTECTION, GIVE PROTECTION AS THEY DO NOT KNOW)

Sahih International
How can there be for the polytheists a treaty in the sight of Allah and with His Messenger, except for those with whom you made a treaty at al-Masjid al-Haram? So as long as they are upright toward you, be upright toward them. Indeed, Allah loves the righteous [who fear Him]. 9.7

How [can there be a treaty] while, if they gain dominance over you, they do not observe concerning you any pact of kinship or covenant of protection? They satisfy you with their mouths, but their hearts refuse [compliance], and most of them are defiantly disobedient. 9.8

They have exchanged the signs of Allah for a small price and averted [people] from His way. Indeed, it was evil that they were doing. 9.9

Sahih International
They do not observe toward a believer any pact of kinship or covenant of protection. And it is they who are the transgressors. 9.10

Would you not fight a people who broke their oaths and determined to expel the Messenger, and they had begun [the attack upon] you the first time? Do you fear them? But Allah has more right that you should fear Him, if you are [truly] believers. 9.13

DILD- whatever. I just laugh at your posts most of the time.

Your worldview is way out of whack, in fact it is whacked.

DILD- whatever. I read your posts and most of the time I just laugh at them. Your worldview is very out of whack.

'William James, an interesting thinker, along with Carl Jung and some others, in their reasonable attitudes toward religion.'

Jung knew a thing or two about religion alright. I read him fervantly in my youth.
A self-declared Gnostic, he was more interested in the symbolic/esoteric side of religion, and was highly suspicious of the dynamics of mass movements - religious and otherwise.

Religious mania would not be a healthy state of mind by his standards.....

I think to be a real philistine in the biblical sense you have to own a boat (preferrably a very large one) ..... but maybe you do.

IN REPLY TO (IRT)
MOOODY :
TRY LOOKING IN THE MIRROR.

ANS:
The Qur'an speaks for its self and from the fruits it bears, viz. death and tyranny, despotism, and fanaticism. The Quran appears to be a mass of contradictions.

The Qur'an strictly prohibited conversion by force. It says, ”There is no compulsion in religion'—(Sura 2:256)" Someone sure is playing a joke on the Christians and Jews. In Lebanon, the violence is Muslims on Muslim, Christian, and Jew. Honor Killings: "Muslim father kills 2 daughters. Shariah honor victim (nose cut off) finds help in US."

"When an infidel's country is conquered (in self-defense) by a Muslim ruler, its inhabitants are offered three alternatives: 1.The reception of Islam, in which case the conquered became enfranchised citizens of the Muslim state.

2. The payment of a poll tax (Jazyah) by which unbelievers in Islam obtained "protection" and become Zimmis, provided they were not idolaters (of Arabia). 3. Death is by the sword to those who would not pay the poll tax. ("Dictionary of Islam", page 243).

"KILL those who join other gods with Allah wherever you find them; besiege them, seize them, lay in wait for them with every kind of ambush...."(Sura 9:5).

"WHEN YOU ENCOUNTER THE UNBELIEVERS, STRIKE OFF THEIR HEADS, UNTIL YE HAVE MADE A GREAT SLAUGHTER AMONG THEM...."(SURA 47:4).

Saddam gassed his own people, and has murdered over 300,000 thousands innocent and defenseless people's. His warehouses contained thousands of remains of missing Muslims that he kidnapped and murdered. He worshipped Satan. He even murdered his two son-in-laws as they sat down to dinner. His daughters defended the murders. His thugs raped women in front of their families and children and then beheaded the father.

Saddam’s terrorists, in the name of religion, used innocent people as shields. They used their sacred temples as bunkers. They maimed and savaged anyone who would attempted to speak the truth. They bombed and terrorized innocent Iraqis. They did commit suicide. They slaughtered many innocent people.

When America freed the Iraqis, the people hung their leaders because they had committed inhuman crimes against their own people.

There is no religious freedom where Muslims reign. The Koran is a book of violence. Violence begets violence. When innocent people were killed in the Iraqi War it was because the terrorists were using them as shields. Terrorists claimed to be very religious, fighting a Jihad, a Muslim duty. They desecrated their own temples of worshiping, In the Iraq/Iran war, Iraq used little children to set off mines in the Iraq fields of battle. A crime no American would tolerate.

Mohammed was described as taciturn, affectionate, magnanimous, pious, and austere in the practice of his religion, brave, zealous, and above reproach. At first sincere, but later, carried away by success, he practiced deception wherever it would gain his end. He was not a God or inspired by God; he became a prey to his evil passions.

"Pardon the hyperbole....I know you play on a public course ;^)"

No pardon needed for hyperbole, maybe for those marks, ";^)"; and I play on what we like to think is a private course, and any other Golf course that will have me.

William James, an interesting thinker, along with Carl Jung and some others, in their reasonable attitudes toward religion.

I think the difference between us, Pesiflage, is that I am what some folks might call a "Philistine," and further, I take nothing in life too seriously.

Mooody

"If you look anywhere in Islamic Text you will find suicide in Islam is Haram/Forbidden under any circumstances. And even Muslim kids know that very well."

Well they're doing it BUDDY! Osama Bin Laden does not deny 9/11 so why do you? You have zero credibility if you cannot face and accept the terrible, terrible thing that was done on behalf of Islam and in your name.

Suicide bombing was started as a military weapon of terror of the Palestineans against Israel, with little military effect.

Then it morphed into the tool of the psychopathic, nihilistic streak in Islam, of which you seem to be a defender. Islamic groups use it against each other and against anything un-Islamic.

The people chosen to wear the suicide bomber belts are either coerced through threates to their families, or through psychological bullying framed in terms that religious fantatics might respond to, or else they are severely mentally ill, depressed, schizophrenic, or neurotic, and the nilhilists do not offer them any sense of kindness, care, or treatment, but instead exploit the broken-ness of their spirits by strapping on the suicide bomber belts, and then sending them in among the innocent to get rid of more, and more of the world, litle piece by little piece, that the nihilists hate and cannot understand.

Dear Miss Mooody, I do not reply to your links because I do not link to them and I do mot read them. How could you possibly imagine that any reasonable person would be intereted in reading one of your You-Tube selections, that do not prove anything except that you are crazy?

'Our most reasonable and enlightened scholars of human nature predict that the practice of religions are never going to go away, anymore than the practice of sexual activities for fun are ever going to go away. If realism is cynicism, so be it.'

I've said the very same more than once, and still believe religion be a core element in our gregarious nature. People seldom engage in the practice of religion in solitude - monastics of all kinds excepted.

They're a different breed any way - and are the very exceptions I've always been most interested in, taking my cue from William James.

Here I have to mention my own vision of the burgeoning class warfare that seems imminent on the horizon, and which is the 800 pound gorilla in every room these days. We're even reading about it in the Wall Street Journal, of all places.

I see enlightened, educated, well-heeled folks kicking back on the 19th hole, enjoying the vast surrounds of well-manicured green space, while TTWSTY and Fred Phelps are rallying the religious crazies down at the local Planned Parenthood center. The rich folks are thanking God, but only metaphorically.

The anti-abortionists and their fellow fundamentalists are not storming the palatial, gated entrances to private country clubs across the land - which is curious, because that's really where the great (and ever widening)divide really exists in the USA.

The rich really are getting richer - and the rest have God to thank.

Wall Street bonuses just went up again, because the government buyout/sellout was very, very lucrative for the crooks at the top. Praise the Lord, and let's have another drink.

Pardon the hyperbole....I know you play on a public course ;^)

"You'll pardon the occasional hyperbolic comment in order to make a point, but blame it on a mild intolerance for religious fanaticism."

Yes, Persiflage, I do understand, especially as one reads the religious fanatics attracted to this website. I mostly ignore them.

"I understand that you prefer to see folks pre-occupied with religion - they're just less trouble that way. Cynicism is not a religion, but it can be a philosophy of life."

There are many religious folks, but I have noticed only a few "pre-occupied" with it. Our most reasonable and enlightened scholars of human nature predict that the practice of religions are never going to go away, anymore than the practice of sexual activities for fun are ever going to go away. If realism is cynicism, so be it.

'Let's see, let me point out the instances, uh, ah, hmm, ah...well, no doubt you know of them all.'

Yesterday does have a way of becoming today....and personally, I wouldn't like to see the present day Vatican-controlled agenda of the Catholic Church make it's way any further into the fabric of our governmental institutions.

You'll pardon the occasional hyperbolic comment in order to make a point, but blame it on a mild intolerance for religious fanaticism.

I understand that you prefer to see folks pre-occupied with religion - they're just less trouble that way. Cynicism is not a religion, but it can be a philosophy of life.

'Let's see, let me point out the instances, uh, ah, hmm, ah...well, no doubt you know of them all.'

Yesterday does have a way of becoming today....and personally, I wouldn't like to see the present day Vatican-controlled agenda of the Catholic Church make it's way any further into the fabric of our governmental institutions.

You'll pardon the occasional hyperbolic comment in order to make a point, but blame it on a mild intolerance for religious fanaticism.

I understand that you prefer to see folks pre-occupied with religion - they're just less trouble that way. Cynicism is not a religion, but it can be a philosophy of life.

"One has to wonder whether the fundamentalist Muslims or the brainwashed Catholics are the single biggest threat to personal freedom in the world today."

Yes, Persiflage, your Catholic neighbors are a real threat to you, as they have been a constant threat to the USA, and the entire world, for lo, the 235 years of our existence.

Let's see, let me point out the instances, uh, ah, hmm, ah...well, no doubt you know of them all.

US forces particularly drop bombs on childerns, schools or muslim marriage gathering as a provocation tactic between the locals and their US dummy governments to erupt civil war which eventualy spreading, dummy rulers who are failing to provide security from US CANNIBLES ...

no wonder why your women do not feel a bit while killing their own babies....

@DanielintheLionsDen

If you look anywhere in Islamic Text you will find suicide in Islam is Haram/Forbidden under any circumstances. And even Muslim kids know that very well.

As far bombers are concerned they might be of local skin and color BUT THE BOMB (THR. AIR OR GROUNG) DROPER ARE NOT... they cropped bombers after their arrival. And US spies are all over those places, some even caught too. So dear nothing is hidden any more. All the cards are open.

First US cannibals were after oil naming blaming Islam and Muslim, Now after Gas Naming blaming Islam and Muslims... Killing and cropping bombs. AND CALLING THEM “MUSLIM SUICIDE BOMBER” one can see the irony… FOR US IT IS HARAM… HAAAARRRRAAAAM! Go and see its meaning, if u r least interested.

It is open now. YOUR LIES... GREED & GENOCIDES...

Iraq fought 10 years with Iran no bomber. Attacked Kuwait, then until 10 years after Kuwait... no suicide bombs.

Afghanistan attacked by Russia 9 year no suicide bombers. 10 Afghan internal civil war no bomber.

Pakistan before US Drawn Air and ground attacks no such bombers.

But where ever US forces landed DESTRUCTION AND BOMBERS CORPED UP.

CAN YOU PROVE IT WRONG? DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING TO SUPPORT THAT WHAT I SAID IS WRONG?

Twin towers inside job (check who 300 yard away Building no 7 steel under concrete melted, and why it collapsed along with twin towers... did twin towers collapsed same way yes/no??

And you have already read all my threads, but you never counter answered against any of them. Infect me read... you lying too.... so don’t matter...
You will say in the end what you have to say...

@DanielintheLionsDen

If you look anywhere in Islamic Text you will find suiside in Islam is Haram/Forbiden under any circumstances. And evern muslim kids knows that very well.

As far bombers are concerned they might be of local skin and color BUT THE BOMB (THR. AIR OR GROUNG) DROPER ARE NOT... they croped bombers after their arrival. And US spies are all over those places, some even caught too. So dear nothing is hiden any more. All the cards are open.

First US canibals were after oil naming blaming Islam and Musllim, Now after Gas Naming blaming Islam and Muslims... Killing and croping bombs.

It is open now. YOUR LIES... GREED & GENOCIDES..

Iraq fought 10 years with Iran no bomber. Attacked Kuwait, then until 10 years after Kuwait... no suiside bombs.

Afghanistan attacked by Russia 9 year no suiside bombers. 10 Afghan internal civil war no bomber.

Pakistan before US Drawn Air and ground attacks no such bombers.

But where ever US forces landed DESTRUCTION AND BOMBERS CORPED UP.

CAN YOU PROVE IT WRONG? DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING TO SUPPORT THAT WHAT I SAID IS WRONG?

Twin towers inside job (check who 300 yard away Buliding no 7 steel under concrete melted, and why it colapsed along with twin towers... did twin towers colapsed same way yes/no??

And you have already read all my threads, but you never counter answere against any of them. Infact I read... you lying too.... so doesn't matter..
You will say in the end what you have to say...

Counterww

... and I have a problem with religious snobs, who think they are better than everyone else, and don't mind telling, when really, they are kind of pitiful ...

Mooody

The sucicide bombers of Islam are the baby-killers, and if you support them, make excuses for them, or even fail to condemn them, then you are a baby-killer too You are a baby-killer, guilty, if you do not say something in humility and apology for what your Islamic tradition has unleashed upon the innocents of the world.

Merely to make excuses by blaming the US for past transgressions, is no good; that does not excuse you, nor wash the red, red blood of children from your hands, nor revive the once beating hearts of children whom your hatred and hateful motivations has destroyed.

"Margaret Sanger, a noted anti-Semite and racist and FOUNDER OF PP, often said that we must “EXTERMINATE THE NEGRO POPULATION.” "Black America must wake up and stand up to this racist organization that target aboratoriums firmly in Black and Minority neighborhoods -- sometimes, right next door to schools,” said Day Gardner, President of the National Black Pro-Life Union (NBPLU). Our government has become a major provider for the flesh mongers."

What a load of crap - talk about lying through your teeth. Better Margaret Sanger for sainthood than the notorious Vatican rubber stamp Mother Teresa.

Her anti-contraception, anti-birth control ministrations added to the seething, abjectly miserable millions that makes up modern-day Calcutta. But the Pope always knows best....

One has to wonder whether the fundamentalist Muslims or the brainwashed Catholics are the single biggest threat to personal freedom in the world today.

Since we've presently got one of each on this thread, folks can make up their own minds.

Who would ever have thought that the Crusades might yield such like-minded thinkers??

@
**You forgot to say that you are respectful tho your parents...until they leave your religion. Your duty is to hate and kill the kafirs, no exceptions to my knowledge.
-------------------------

Your knowlege level is very thin or very thick, either way it is not my fault.

As far as killings are concerned, present states or histroy both are witness.. and pointing finger towards only one direction.. and that is yours.... due to may be thickness or thinness. So please excuse us.

As far suicide bomb and bomber are concerned. Thx to US genorcity where ever it goes they crops up and never existed before US arrival (Iraq, Afghan, Pakistan). Does it rings a bell. BIG business is up and running.. baby killers.
I guess cloning will save your future. Nither you will bore babies nor you have to kill, atleast your own. Others had survived since the beginning of world, they will survive again. YOu keep on killing.. your babies first.

Religion, politics, thinkers, etc, should all play a role in debate, but hopefully we learn from one another instead of keep arguing and pointing fingers. I don't like the idea of abortion, but as a former foster mother, my heart cringed and ached before putting all my might into caring for an unwanted abused child. The altering of laws and funding is jargon next to altering our thinking about life and respect.

“THE MOST DANGEROUS PLACE FOR AN AFRICAN-AMERICAN IS IN THE WOMB”.

Abortion is Black Genocide, as it was Jewish Genocide for Nazi Germany. Jesse Jackson, when it was not politically expedient to promote Abortion, said, “Abortion, is Black Genocide." Bill Cosby campaigning to mitigate the total annihilation of the Black race, said on several TV appearances that "seventy percent of Black pregnancies occur outside of wedlock." Blacks wake up!

http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/02/23/billboard-opposing-abortion-stirs-debate/

A billboard a half-mile from a Planned Parenthood (PP) center, claimed that “THE MOST DANGEROUS PLACE FOR AN AFRICAN-AMERICAN IS IN THE WOMB."

PP is being subsidized by the Federal Government to murder unborn Children. Some 43 million abortions occur worldwide. The America government provides family planning services, an oxymoron, (it doesn't plan families it prevents them) to China.

"Congress recently appropriated $34 million for the United Nations Population Fund, the organization that provides family planning services, such as birth control and abortion, to developing nations. Among these nations is China, a nation whose "family plan" is a one-couple, one-child policy."

NY city’s Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, in its summary of 2009 vital statistics, recently reported an overall abortion rate of 41 percent (excluding miscarriages) in the city. THE RATE AMONG NON-HISPANIC BLACK WOMEN WAS “59.8” PERCENT.

“Our future is in jeopardy as a genocidal plot is carried out through abortion,” Mr. Broden, who is black, said in a statement on the group’s Web site.

http://www.lifenews.com/2010/12/16/planned-parenthood-gets-363m-in-tax-money-abortions-rise/

"The Planned Parenthood Federation of America finally released its 2008-2009 Annual report detailing its financial figures. The report shows it received more government funding, which has translated into more abortions.

"The [World's] largest abortion business released a factsheet in September showing the number of abortions it performed in 2008 increased to 324,008, a 6.1 percent increase over the 305,310 abortions it did in 2007.

"The total government grants and contracts received by PPFA affiliates from government sources including state, local and federal governments, increased from $337 million to $350 million in 2009. The new report shows that figure has increased again to $363 million, though it does not specify what portion of the figure was received from each level of government.

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=26220

Black Leaders Condemn PP's Racism
by Ericka Andersen 04/25/2008

"Margaret Sanger, a noted anti-Semite and racist and FOUNDER OF PP, often said that we must “EXTERMINATE THE NEGRO POPULATION.” "Black America must wake up and stand up to this racist organization that target aboratoriums firmly in Black and Minority neighborhoods -- sometimes, right next door to schools,” said Day Gardner, President of the National Black Pro-Life Union (NBPLU). Our government has become a major provider for the flesh mongers.

Just because something is legal doesn't mean its true and correct,it just means you won't go to jail for doing it.Regardless of the political correctness abortion still kills a growing child period.This is a biological fact and can't be ignored.

Two results of unprotected sex besides the one million abortions/yr:

from the CDC-2006

"Sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) remain a major public health challenge in the United States. While substantial progress has been made in preventing, diagnosing, and treating certain S-TDs in recent years, CDC estimates that approximately 19 million new infections occur each year, almost half of them among young people ages 15 to 24.1 In addition to the physical and psychological consequences of STDs, these diseases also exact a tremendous economic toll. Direct medical costs as-sociated with STDs in the United States are estimated at up to $14.7 billion annually in 2006 dollars."

and

http://pagingdrgupta.blogs.cnn.com/2011/02/20/yes-oral-sex-is-sex-and-it-can-boost-cancer-risk/?npt=NP1

"Yes, oral sex is sex, and it can boost cancer risk-

Here's a crucial message for teens: Oral sex carries many of the same risks as vaginal sex, including human papilloma virus, or HPV. And HPV may now be overtaking tobacco as the leading cause of oral cancers in America in people under age 50.

"Adolescents don’t think oral sex is something to worry about," said Bonnie Halpern-Felsher professor of pediatrics at the University of California, San Francisco. "They view it as a way to have intimacy without having 'sex.'"

@JUSTACOMMENT

What did I say, just showed the mirror to so called flag holder freedom lovers (hidden killers)

@JUSTACOMMENT

What did I say, should the mirror to so called freedom lovers (hidden killers)

Persiflage- go out and see the different forums up here.

You are all over the place. Sorry, mine are few compared to you.

I have a JOB and don't have time to go up here but at night a hour or two a week.

I DO agree that Christians are a peculiar lot, but even God said we are that way , and would be perceived that way.

I have the same distrust of intellectual snobs and atheists that you have for those that believe. I am not sure you are snob, but you try awfully hard to be one sometimes.

"Should religion play a role in the abortion and family planning debate?"

The question, as posed, is disingenuous. The current interference with family planning, which may include a woman's right to choose, is not the work of "religion," in the abstract, but of the extreme Christian (Protestant) right wing, and the RCC. These two institutions are, in no sense, "religion," in general. What they are are two denominations, which are not-so-slowly eroding separation and which time and again have succeeded in violating the Establishment Clause (definitions and details supplied on request).

The only role these two religious institutions should play in the matter under discussion is not to assure us all that they will not reproduce themselves under any circumstances.

EVEN ABORTIONIST KNOW YOU ARE TAKING AN INNOCENT LIFE.

Time Magazine admitted the conceived was a human life but said that there are times when murder is justifiable. Yeah, who makes that decision? Can a mother murder her own son or daughter? Terri Schiavo or her parents had no say in the matter, so her ex-husband had a couple of former Hemlock Society members murder her by dehydration and starvation. She suffered excruciating pain for 14 days a death if done to a dog would land you in jail.

The Court, by fiat, decided there are no inviolable rights the Court can't violate. Hence unborn became things, could be destroyed at the whim of the mother, and so began the flesh mongers and the flesh market.

Every new life begins at conception. This is an irrefutable fact of biology. It is true for animals and true for humans. When considered alongside the law of biogenesis – that every species reproduces after its own kind – we can draw only one conclusion in regard to abortion. No matter what the circumstances of conception, from conception, abortion always ends the life of an individual innocent human being. Every honest abortion cannot deny this simple fact.

Faye Wattleton, Planned Parenthood's longest reigning president of the largest abortion provider in the world said in Ms. Magazine:

"I think we have deluded ourselves into believing that people don't know that abortion is killing. So any pretense that abortion is not killing is a signal of our ambivalence, a signal that we cannot say yes, it kills a fetus." No, it murders a fetus.

Naomi Wolf, author and pro-abortionist feminist, writes: "Clinging to a rhetoric about abortion in which there is no life and no death, we entangle our beliefs in a series of self-delusions, fibs and evasions. We risk becoming precisely what our critics charge us with being: callous, selfish and casually destructive men and women who share a cheapened view of human life...We need to contextualize the fight to defend abortion rights within a moral framework that admits that the death of a fetus is a real death." There is no moral framework for Murder.

David Boonin, in his book, "A Defense of Abortion," admits, "There is no doubt this sonogram shows [my son] at a very early stage in his physical development. And there is no question that the position I defend in this book entails that it would have been morally permissible to end his life at this point."

Peter Singer, contemporary philosopher and public abortion advocate, writes, "There is no doubt that from the first moments of its existence an embryo conceived from human sperm and eggs is a human being." He then defends its murdered.

How glib and cavalier is the attitude of these cold-hearted insensitive misanthropes, who defend murdering their own children, who kill the defenseless with impunity. Those who support Abortion are no different than the murderers. But some day they will be defenseless.

Moody,

Comments in regard to your seven points:

6- Do not lie, steel, conspire, genocide humans, kill babies and others childern. Take the responsibility of actions otherwise there is "hard" punishment for "hard" ones.. oops.. I mean criminals of humanity.
**Most religions prohibit those things that you mention. But it's not entirely necessary because the secular judicial system takes care of those who don't comply with the laws in serious matters.

7- Hence only fear and submit to Allah and not the material "capitilistic mean' world or any person. And only praise One Allah who gave you, family, food, provided you every thing you need, who made you even stand on your feet. Can you at your own, if Allah does not wish? This is the system of God. WE.. what we are doing today.. snatching every thing of eachother even human lives.... HARD ONES....
**You say praise only one Allah, but my understanding was that only one Allah has been invented. Most people in the world, including you, don't know what Allah wish. Remember, Allah was invented copying from other religions that have invented a similar god before.

Muuuuudy, I'm aware that most of my comments are tainted by sterotypes, but is the only way to talk to an extreme irrational person like the one you show in your writings. Not that I believe this will make you rethink your fanatic ideology and tribal religion beliefs, but it may contribute to make you vomit more hate out of your mind and body. You are the best antigen against islam religion. You are in an special league with Twisty, Yasseryousuffy, Spidermean, Rcofield, Peterhuff, etc. Keep it up...

Moody,

Comments in regard to your seven points:

1- Respectful to my both parents 3 time more to my mother, who kept me in her womb for long period, bear the pain of my birth, fed me, holded me when I was dependent, kept awake for me night after night, taught me right from wrong.
**You forgot to say that you are respectful tho your parents...until they leave your religion. Your duty is to hate and kill the kafirs, no exceptions to my knowledge.

2- And when its there turn take care of your parents when they are old. And don't leave on government social service support and only celebrate parents day annually.
**What you say here is politically significant but not religiously meaningful. Irrespective of the SS there are families in this country that take care of their old relatives and others that can't or don't want. If you live in a country with social security send a letter renouncing to the money that the government took from your parents when they were working, so you feel good with yourself.

3- Take responsibility of your partner (as wife) and your childern, of there food and necessaties. Its my sole responsibily and not my female partner, though she can contribute too if willing. And be a man and don't be "expense FEARING" canabiliest...oops.. capitilist. Who "FEAR" capital loss.. under tax and debts on humangus interests.. stricken social conditions... HOW COULD WE SURVIVE ALONE, IF WE KEEP ON GIVING BIRTHS (UNPLANNED... AND WHY SHOULD WE TAKE RESPONSIBILITY... WE ARE FREE... WEEP WEEP.
**Your desire to dominate your partner makes you to downgrade the standard of life of your family. You hate capitalism, but it appears that you don't really know what and how it should work in free societies. Most peoople will agree that excessive capitalism is against the interest of the people in a country.

4- And Muslim women who happily accept the RESPONSIBILITY of making homes KNOWING their rights protected by default (property, kids, financially).. And preferred not to be wild free .. "like the hard ones". Our women who could not even imagine killing the expected ones (miscarriage is something least and unforseen... u cannot compair it with planned killing).
**After being beaten night after night your women unhappily accept to be slaves of the husbands. Your wives could not imagine many things. The more uneducated and docile the better slave-wife she is.

5- And our kids who are taught only to FEAR Allah (God) and not the (material needs of) world or any human being or any oppressing facist free of responsibility system. And respect your elders who brought you up, taught you every good thing and made you a man and woman.
**Your kids don't fear to fly airplanes into buildings, or wear backpacks with explosives. One of the reasons is that those hormonal young males are promised a lot of virgins when they arrive to the house of Allah.

More

I totally agree with TTWSYFAMDGGAHJMJ1

And below caption is with slight correction:

It is a war against the child - a direct killing of the innocent child - murder by the mother herself. And if we accept and OUR GOVERNMENT is telling that a mother can kill even her own child, then what is left behind. We can see way killing and war is so much in our blood.... and why we don't hesitate killing other nations especially target their women and children.... trvrnyly judy look in Iraq and then in Afghanistan.... NOW WE ARE VERY PROUD OF OUR SELVES.... IN PALESTINE ITS NOT US BUT THE JEWS.. THEREFORE DON'T MENTION.... WE LOOOVE WHAT WE DO....... especially our mothers killing their own babies.

Back to the topic:

Once again:

Considering the abortion and STD epidemics (one million and 19 million cases per year respectively) in this country alone, Planned Parenthood, parents, sexually active couples, and the educational systems have failed and continue to fail miserably.

Obviously, a perfect birth control barrier system does not exist. Time to develop one!

In the meantime, monomasturbation or mutual masturbation are highly recommended for heterosexuals who need a contraceptive. Abstinence is another best-solution but obviously the sex drive typically vitiates this option although being biological would it not be able to develop a drug to temporarily eliminate said drive? Planned Parenthood should make the development of such a drug a high priority.

West looting them their governments, their wealth their resources, destroying them, molesting them..

Though west is also busy doing it to it self too...

Migrating to west are the fools, who get nothing in the end but the honey trap....

And this phenominon is hardaly less than one century old... with all the on record facts supporting that it is just the honey trap ... for their immigrant nations larger destruction....

Hence killing their own live babies in the womb and childern around the globe in general.....

Mooody:
RESULTS OF DECEIT

This is why the USA contains more immigrants than the rest of the world combined; almost all of the next top 15 are traditionally Christian but largely secularized countries; and no one ever immigrates from them to Muslim nations except to work in the petroleum industry.

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/imm_imm_pop_num_of_imm-immigration-immigrant-population-number-immigrants

RESULTS OF DECEIT

And when someone or group of people conveniently lie (purposely about everything), it is only for 2 reasons;

1- Trying to hide something (Truth)….. which every human beings right and also responsibility to find and know.
2- Want something (exploitation of Humanity)

And when those people are men of Power and Great Authority, like Bush, Obama, Camron, Sarkosi, Church,Paul, Pop… under some (?) influence …………….
(?=Devil= greed of wealth +power+ authority=UNJUSTICE)

And the results are devastating…..

Iraq - Afghanistan – Bosnia – Chechnya – Palestine - Lebanon– Now Pakistan –

Africa – Vietnam - US Red Indians - Twin Towers – 1st & 2nd WW – 1000 year Crusades – Witch Hunting + lie like Original sin of woman – Heresy Laws – world is 5000 year old, world is flat - 10 to 12 % incest just in USA – 40% teenage pregnancies in west – every second women getting raped over there – children snatched for porno – all kind of racism of color breed, nation – no easy access to justice which is very expensive –System based upon unnatural laws of equality (taxation – work distribution – inheritance – property - kids)… (men and women are equal but neither men give birth nor women are physically stronger than men.)

RELIGION IN ACCORD WITH REASON IS THE DISCIPLINE AGAINST THE LICENSE OF UNRESTRAINED GOVERNMENT.

When government is separated from God, a practical materialism exudes which gives priority to the satisfaction of personal pleasure over respect for those who are weak, and which ends by considering life worthwhile only to the extent that it is productive and enjoyable. Suffering is considered useless, Sacrifice for the sake of others is thought unjustified. Underlying all this is a loss of the sense of God. But "when the sense of God is lost, there is also a tendency to lose the sense of man.

Among the duties which the moral law prescribes are some which are directly concerned with God Himself, and as such are of supreme importance. Where morality is divorced from religion, reason will enable a man to recognize the ideal to which his nature points, simply because these laws are inscribed in Human Nature. Thus, man naturally recognizes such proscriptions of murder, theft and lying.

However, much will be wanting. He will disregard some of his most essential duties. He will, further, be destitute of the strong motives for obedience to the law afforded by the sense of obligation to God and the knowledge of the tremendous sanction attached to its neglect — motives which experience has proved to be necessary as a safeguard against the influence of the passions.

First there is a denunciation of the proliferation and increased intensity of threats to life, especially when life is weak and defenseless at its very beginning and at its end, viz. abortion, immoral experimentation on human embryos, euthanasia.

There is a clear description of the unprecedented and specific features of these crimes against life. In public opinion they are claimed to be rights based on individual freedom. There is an inevitable trend toward their recognition in law. They are carried out with an inclination to corrupt medical science in order to give substance to this ignominy.

This involves a distortion of society's nature and purpose and of the constitutional state itself: Democracy, if detached from its moral foundations and linked to an unlimited ethical relativism, risks becoming the pretext for a war of the stronger against the weaker; the roles of health care personnel tend to be subverted. Instead of respectful service of life, they lend themselves to actions which bring about death.

The causes of this "culture of death" which threatens man and civilization are traced to a perverse idea of freedom, which is seen as disconnected from any reference to truth and objective good, and which asserts itself in an individualistic way, without the constitutive link of relationships with others.

Why is life a good? Why is it always a good? The answer is simple and clear, because it is a gift from the Creator, who breathed into man the divine breath, thus making the human person the image of God. Hence, life becomes sacred, lifted up above all the created Universe.

Once again:

Considering the abortion and STD epidemics (one million and 19 million cases per year) in this country alone, Planned Parenthood, parents, sexually active couples, and the educational systems have failed and continue to fail miserably.

Obviously, a perfect birth control barrier system does not exist. Time to develop one!

In the meantime, monomasturbation or mutual masturbation are highly recommended for heterosexuals who need a contraceptive. Abstinence is another best-solution but obviously the sex drive typically vitiates this option although being biological would it not be able to develop a drug to temporarily eliminate said drive? Planned Parenthood should make the development of such a drug a high priority.

wikipeida like most western tools purposly and very conveniently showing twisted form of Sharia... which we muslims know very well..

eg:

It says Muslims have to marry another person to get married again after 3 divorces. And so on and on and on..... every subject...
WHAT PICTURE THIS STATEMENT GIVES TO YOU???

Mulism
after 1st divorce can marry again or another person
after 2nd divorce can marry again or another person
after 3rd divorce cannot marry again. Islam encourage them to live apart and marry another person. But, if they get divorced again naturally, only then they can marry previous partner.
Divoce completes in more than 3 months otherwise it is no divorce.
between this period there is conciling, first between couple, then their family involved and in the last legal to encourage not to divorce.

I have not seen any muslim couple divorcing 3 time in their life time and willing to marry again.

There is deviated practice also exist in some muslims divorcing 3 times togather, which is directly in conflict with Quran where this particular matter is explained in great detail. Hence divorcing 3 time togather is haram and insane together.

Where are the Muslim panelists? How come when a women's or gay rights issue comes up, they completely disappear?

Don't tell me if Sharia is compatible with the Constitution. Tell me what an influx of Muslim voters would do to women's rights.

To eliminate funding for Planned Parenthood will have an adverse ripple effect on the poor especially given the organization's broad range of services and assistance.

Choice is simply that - the legal ability to decide to make such a choice.

Rather sad that men made this determination that will effect women.

any politician who says they are Catholic and supports abortion...
is not a catholic...
and should be excommunicated...
Life is the most precious gift from God...

Yes, religion should play a role in the abortion and family planning debate. And this is what it should be: first, inform its own members what their personal positions should be and what the overall parameters are; second, any religion has a right to attempt to persuade people of other religions and of no religion to conform with its position and parameters on the matter. This can be through letters to the editor, paid ads, public meetings, etc.

Most importantly, all religions in these United States should play the role of upholding the bill of rights which says there shall be no establishment of a single religion in this country. That includes that no single religion's positions, beliefs and parameters on abortion, family planning, who can marry whom shall be established as binding on others.

Leaders and members of all religions should take the position that we have different perspectives and beliefs on when life starts, what a proper family arrangement is, whether marriage can be between members of the same sex, etc. To impose one religion's (or even a group of religions') perspectives on all other religions (as well as on people who are spiritual but not religious, as well as people who identify as neither) is the equivalent of imposing "Shariah" on all people. "Shariah" is valid for Muslims, but not for others. Christian values and positions are valid for Christians, but not for others.

Imposition of one's definitions and theology on others is wrong. Reasonable attempts to persuade others through rational argument and rhetorical skill is fine. The others will either be persuaded or not. Otherwise, any given religion's role is to uphold the public space as open and free for a variety of perspectives, beliefs, and choices.

Every thinking person has axiomatic beliefs that form the basis of their world view. When those beliefs are religion, there is no way they cannot inform political view and voting. It is just foolish to put forth another view.

How the professed Catholics in legislatures square their political actions with their avowed religious belief is strange.

The only religious views that are relevant to a woman's decision of whether to carry or terminate a pregnancy are those of the pregnant woman.

[Jewish women] probably wish they could kill only male babies.

This is done commonly in Asia using ultrasound. The fact that no one has noticed a gender skew in Jewish births shows it's false.

Jewish women are notorious in their pro-abortion opinion. It can only be a form of protest vs. male-dominated historic Judaism. Orthodox Jerws thank God daily they have not been made a woman. Jewish woman retaliate by killing babies. They probably wish they could kill only male babies.,

Jewish women are notorious in their pro-abortion opinion. It can only be a form of protest vs. male-dominated historic Judaism. Orthodox Jerws thank God daily they have not been made a woman. Jewish woman retaliate by killing babies. They probably wish they could kill only male babies.,

'So try not to tell Muslims about their laws. Which you twist it with tug of war for Power and Wealth of todays Muslim rulers same like todays capitilistic west, as both are very close to each other. Where you hardly aware of purposly twisted picture of Islamic Laws(Sharia).'

________________

An excerpt from the link on Sharia - and why it will never see the light of day in the USA. Not only is it unnecessary, but it runs completely counter to our secular, civil laws, and it impedes the process of assimilation so necessary to immigrants that wish to reside in America.

Keeping one's traditions intact is all well and good - but parallel legal systems based on religion are fundamentally in conflict with true democratic principles. This 'separation of church and state' proviso is as much true for Christianity as for Islam.

Justice

The concept of justice embodied in Sharia is entirely different from that of secular Western law. Muslims believe the Sharia law has been revealed by God. In Islam, the laws that govern human affairs are just one facet of a universal set of laws governing nature itself. Violations of Islamic law are offenses against God and nature, including one's own human nature. Crime in Islam is sin. Whatever crime is committed, whatever punishment is prescribed for that crime in this world, one must ultimately answer to God on the Day of Judgement.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sharia

I have no problem with a politician allowing his faith to inform the government policies he or she supports. What I can't stomach is this Religious Right's dogged determination to impose their narrow religious beliefs concerning creation, reproduction, personal sexual orientation and scientific progress into the public policy process.

There is a vast difference between debating public policy and grounding that debate in one's faith and experience and insisting that one's particular faith must be the fundamental grounding for everyone else involved.

A GREAT HUMANITARIAN OF OUR TIMES SPEAKS ON THE EVIL OF ABORTION.

"Never bother about people's opinions. Be obedient to truth. For with humble obedience, you will never be disturbed. The greatest destroyer of peace today is abortion, because it is a war against the child - a direct killing of the innocent child - murder by the mother herself. And if we accept that a mother can kill even her own child, how can we tell other people not to kill one another?

"How do we persuade a woman not to have an abortion? As always, we must persuade her with love, and we remind ourselves that love means to be willing to give until it hurts. Jesus gave even his life to love us. So the mother who is thinking of abortion, should be helped to love - that is, to give until it hurts her plans, or her free time, to respect the life of her child.

"The father of that child, whoever he is, must also give until it hurts. By abortion, the mother does not learn to love, but kills even her own child to solve her problems. And by abortion, the father is told that he does not have to take any responsibility at all for the child he has brought into the world.

"That father is likely to put other women into the same trouble. So abortion just leads to more abortion. Any country that accepts abortion is not teaching the people to love, but to use any violence to get what they want. That is why the greatest destroyer of love and peace is abortion.

"Human rights are not a privilege conferred by government. They are every human being's entitlement by virtue of his humanity. The right to life does not depend, and must not be declared to be contingent, on the pleasure of anyone else, not even a parent or a sovereign."

"Respect, protect, love and serve life, every human life! Only in this direction will you find love. At the end of life we will not be judged by how many diplomas we have received, how much money we have made, how many great things we have done. We will be judged by 'I was hungry and you gave me to eat, I was naked and you clothed me, I was homeless and you took me in.' Hungry not only for bread - but hungry for love. Naked not only for clothing - but naked for human dignity and respect. Homeless not only for want of a room of bricks - but homeless because of rejection— Mother Teresa”

"Please don't kill the child. I want the child. Please give me the child. I am willing to accept any child who would be aborted, and to give that child to a married couple who will love the child, and be loved by the child.

From our children's home in Calcutta alone, we have saved over 3,000 children from abortions. These children have brought such love and joy to their adopting parents, and have grown up so full of love and joy!"

Life is an opportunity, benefit from it. Life is beauty, admire it. Life is bliss, taste it. Life is a dream, realize it. Life is a challenge, meet it. Life is a duty, complete it. Life is a game, play it. Life is a promise, fulfill it. Life is sorrow, overcome it. Life is a song, sing it. Life is a struggle, accept it. Life is a tragedy, confront it. Life is an adventure, dare it. Life is luck, make it. Life is too precious, do not destroy it. Life is life, fight for it. Mother Teresa

TTWSTY:

'There is no civilization that has existed since the beginning of man that hasn’t believed in a god because God is an innate virtue of human nature.'

Not only does this make no actual sense, but it's patently untrue.....dust off those history books, social anthropology research, ethnology, comparative religion studies, etc.

And how exactly are a belief in gods or God proof of anything whatsoever? The world is actually round, and the universe is a much bigger place than it seemed to be thousands of years ago.....and more mysterious, if anything. And yet, folks still claim to know all about God. This is really kind of strange, when you think about it.

Humans are a deeply superstitious species. That may well be an innate characteristic, although not necessarily a virtue.

Just look at yourself, for example.

Religion should not enter into any public policy debate. Religiuos persons and priests, shamans and preachers are free to enter into the debate but only as private citizens. The clergy is certainly free to attempt to indoctinate their "flock" but only from the pulpit. Religious affiliation or "credentials" should carry no weight in the public debate.

IN REPLY TO (IRT)
PERSIFLAGE
RESPONSIBILITY

IRT: “To the rational mind, humans are inescapabily responsible, whereas religious believers follow guidelines allegedly laid down by 'divine' authorities...and yet, no one has seen hide nor hair of a divine authority in quite some time - although some have claimed to have heard from God periodically."

ANS: Hide nor hair, where have you been looking? God is manifested in His Creation, His Church, and His miracles. In man’s conscience with the discernment of good and evil, and also in man’s concept of Justice. Further His precepts are vindicated by the fruits of their wisdom.

There are enormous amount of proof that God exists, but the morally blind cannot fathom them because they are predisposed in their own proclivities. Hence, it is written, in Romans 1: 18cf "For, professing themselves to be wise, they became fools. For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and injustice of those men that detain the truth of God in injustice.

"Because that which is known of God is manifest in them. For the invisible things of God from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made as to His eternal power also and divinity, so that their ignorance is inexcusable. When they knew God, they had not glorified him as God or given thanks: but became vain in their thoughts.

And their foolish hearts were darkened. For, professing themselves to be wise, they became fools. For they changed the truth of God into a lie and worshipped and served the creature rather than the Creator. A word to the wise should be sufficient. "

There is no civilization that has existed since the beginning of man that hasn’t believed in a god because God is an innate virtue of human nature.

Here's Counterweight:

'Pretty funny. How on God's green earth can anyone make such a statement. Political affiliation(i am an independent by the way) has no correlation to sense of humor.'

I disagree - historically I think you will find that most all of the great comedians were democrats and social liberals - maybe Timmy2 can back me up on that. Agreed that a sense of humor is sort of a different thing, but maybe a lack of irony is more to the point. You can't appreciate how whacky life is without it, and religion is really, really whacky.

The ironies of life are often funny and miserable at the same time......and God really has a preverse sense of humor at times.

And then:

'I still think you are pretty strange guy. How much time DO you spend up here posting stuff?'

Now there's irony for you - we both have the same mutual perception of one another....and I'm kind of on a roll lately with the posting, but expect to cool down any moment now. I imagine your own volume of posts ebb and flow as well - check it out.

And more:

'From my reading through the posts, you appear to have no life.'

You must be both brilliant and intuitive to arrive at that conclusion from reading my posts.....how did you put it all together?

And finally:

'Self acclaimed intellectualism always amuses me. You are them epitome of that character.'

I haven't claimed anything for myself, intellectually or otherwise....but have voiced a deep suspicion of religious believers, their beliefs, and their consequent actions. You sir, are the epitome of the religious believer, if you don't mind my saying so (and I know you don't).

Afterall, someone has got to joust with the religionists. It's kind of a sacred duty for the secularist......

No, the anti-abortion whackos have elevated their fetus worship to the status of a cult. The flaw in their crazy ideology can be found in their twisted concepts of original sin. Until the baby's born, there's no original sin, and they're somehow perfect. It's lunacy taken to a violent extreme.

A lot of people don't agree with them, a majority of Americans in fact. Yet they relentlessly pursue taking rights away from women even though they know the cost of doing so will be an increase in fatalities, that while they simply could care less about children once they're born outside of indoctrinating them into their religious whackery. They pay a heck of a lot less attention, and put a heck of a lot less money towards caring for poor children than they do towards undermining people's rights to choice.

They do that while they finance literally tens of millions of state -mandated- abortions a year in China. The companies they buy their goods from, that they cloth themselves with, that they use to cook, the very plates they eat off finance abortions directly, and they don't care.

It's a sick cult, and we should not be letting them fill people with their sick lies. Basing policy on their flavor of made up crap is utter and complete stupidity. Their beliefs are not provable, they keep predicting things that never will happen, and there's about as much fact associated with what they think as there would be in believing in Santa Claus.

How about we base public policy off of this crazy drivel when Jesus shows up and does an interview on CNN. I say that because Fox is so evil he'd never have a thing to do with those blatant liars were their fantasies to come true.

I think it's pretty safe to say that Jesus isn't going to show up anytime soon, the dude is long dead. For all we know they weren't speaking any sort of metaphor when they talked about eating his body and drinking his blood, that'd at least explain where it went more honestly than the froofy crap they want to spout about it.

And when ever you mention Sharia Law,
You always sound same like saying
Osama bin Laden, Twin towers (which is proven inside job, just check building no 7)
Suicide MUSLIM bombers,
Opperssion bla bla bla... and west is dying to save Muslims Right?

So try not to tell Muslims about their laws. Which you twist it with tug of war for Power and Wealth of todays Muslim rulers same like todays capitilistic west, as both are very close to each other. Where you hardly aware of purposly twisted picture of Islamic Laws(Sharia).

Sufism is sub form of same Origin that is "Islam (Words of Allah, and AUTHENTIC saying / actions / teaching of Prophet Muhammad(PBUH))"

Sufism is debatable where it is right and where it is wrong and same applies to Sharia if it is in conflict with above mentioned criteria of Islam.

Religion is the source of a great deal of our law. Marrying parents or siblings or animals are all prohibited solely because people find it morally repulsive. That's religion at work, whether organized or not. Cruelty to animals likewise. Likewise suicide is forbidden. All these acts are consensual and hurt no other person citizen. They are forbidden only because of religion. those who argue that abortion is solely the woman's right conveniently forget that the fetus also has a life. And surely the fetus does not want to die.

And to add more suiside bombing never happen in Afghan while 9-10 year Russion invasion or after that between 10-12 Year Afghan tribal wars
over Controll of the country.

Same goes to Pakistan...

Does it rings a bell....

Here comes US along with bombs and bombers..... BIG business is up and running.....

Suicide Bombers:

Suicide Bomber, do you see it as coincidence or find any resemblance?
This is new phenomenon, after illegal invasion by “US” army of Iraq, with adding up different Muslim sects killing each other in Iraq which never happened there on public level before, even when “US die hard friend for 30 years SADDAM” attacking Iran or on US will attacking Kuwait (or is it US army killing civilians brutally and making them fight?)
And then US army attacked Afghanistan and same started happening there, never before.
And then US army attacked Pakistan and once again same start happening there too. And out of the blue come Laden & new brand of all type Taliban. Thx to US generosity……… there air strikes killing innocent civilians and their children every day while we are making this discussion.
DOES SUCIDE BOMBER GET ANY REWARD KILLING THERE OWN PEOPLE? This is good question?
AND WHY THEY DOES NOT EXIST BEFORE ARRIVING US ARMY?????

Persiflage says to me:

I suspect that you're conspicuously lacking in a sense of humor. Many republicans suffer from this malady

Pretty funny. How on God's green earth can anyone make such a statement. Political affiliation(i am an independent by the way) has no correlation to sense of humor.

I still think you are pretty strange guy. How much time DO you spend up here posting stuff?

From my reading through the posts, you appear to have no life .

Self acclaimed intellectualism always amuses me. You are them epitome of that character.

Once again:

Considering the abortion and STD epidemics (one million and 19 million cases per year) in this country alone, Planned Parenthood, parents, sexually active couples, and the educational systems have failed and continue to fail miserably.

IN REPLY TO (IRT)
PERSIFLAGE :
“RELATIVITY
”
IRT :To anyone who struggles with their own decisions and takes responsibility for their own actions, truth is a relative thing.

ANS: Absurdity begets absurdity. Your statement is a half-truth offered as a whole truth. Yes, one takes responsibility for his freely chosen actions but he has no choice to intentionally change the truth. Truth is not relative,

The moral law is knowable to reason; for the due regulation of our free actions, in which morality consists, is simply their right ordering with a view to the perfecting of our rational nature.

There is a fundamental agreement regarding the general lines of conduct necessary in all life. That fundamental agreement is the Natural Moral Law. Summed up it is "do good and avoid evil," the purpose of man’s free will. There is no right to be immoral.

It may be said that the common voice of humanity proclaims it to be right for a man to reverence his parents; to care and provide for his children; to be master of his lower appetites; to be honest and just in his dealings, even to his own damage; to show benevolence to his fellows in time of distress; to bear pain and misfortune with fortitude.

Among the duties which the moral law prescribes are some which are directly concerned with God Himself, and as such are of supreme importance. Where morality is divorced from religion, reason will, it is true, enable a man to recognize to a large extent the ideal to which his nature points, simply because these laws are inscribed in Human Nature.

These moral precepts are imbued in the Commandments and Corporal and Spiritual Works of Mercy. They are immutable, unnegotiable and not relative. Moral responsibility is relative not its precepts. Responsibility depends one's knowledge and to the degree of one's intentions to seek the truth in order to do good.

Recent Secular ethical philosophy, manifested in Evolutionary, Positivist, and Idealist schools is that right moral action is altogether independent of religion. This propaganda of independent morality is presented as a substitute for morality based on the beliefs of Theism. On the other hand, the Church has affirmed that the two are essentially connected, and that apart from religion the observance of the moral law is impossible.

Man’s actions even if in accordance with the moral law, will be based not on the obligation imposed by the Divine will, but on considerations of human dignity and on the good of human society. Such motives, however, cannot present themselves as, strictly speaking, obligatory. But where the motive of obligation is wanting, acting lacks an element essential to true morality.

The Natural Moral Law has its ultimate obligation in the will of the Creator by whom our nature was fashioned, and who imposes on us its right ordering as a duty; and that its ultimate sanction is the loss of God which its violation must entail.

'What I beleive being Muslim,
Freedom from responsibility is inhuman (vicuous instinct), and freedom from oppression is every
(living) human beings right.'
__________________

There is no freedom from personal responsibility in any rational, psychologically healthy world. I suppose insanity is the exception, but I'm personally loathe to grant even that exception in many cases.

Only in the world of the anti-social personality type do you find this as an operational assumption. Only in sub-cultural enclaves that support suicide bombers do we find this freedom from personal responsibility (for murder). Hopefully you are very far from such preverse manifestations of Islam.

Freedom from (religious) oppression is not all that common in Muslim societies that abide by Sharia Law - hopefully you are free of those theocratic restrictions, wherever you happen to be.

More to the point, if you reside in a Muslim society governed by secular laws, you are doubly fortunate.

The fact is, I have the deepest respect for the Sufi tradition - and I would hope that you do as well.......

We may agree on more than you imagine.

So in your opinion,"In this country, life is all about the freedom of choice - even the hard ones."

What I beleive being Muslim,
Freedom from responsibility is inhuman (vicuous instinct), and freedom from oppression is every
(living) human beings right.

with corrections:

My religion taught me (and not my free will) how to be responsible;
1- Respectful to my both parents 3 time more to my mother, who kept me in her womb for long period, bear the pain of my birth, fed me, hold me when I was dependent, kept awake for me night after night, taught me right from wrong.
2- And when it’s their turn take care of your parents when they are old. And don't leave on government social service support and only celebrate parent’s day annually.
3- Take responsibility of your partner (as wife) and your children, of their food and necessities. It’s my sole responsibility and not my female partner, though she can contribute too if willing. And be a man and don't be "expense FEARING" canabilist...oops.. capitalist. Who "FEAR" capital loss.. under tax and debts on humongous interests.. stricken social conditions... HOW COULD WE SURVIVE ALONE, IF WE KEEP ON GIVING BIRTHS (UNPLANNED... AND WHY SHOULD WE TAKE RESPONSIBILITY... WE ARE FREE... WEEP WEEP.
4- And Muslim women who happily accept the RESPONSIBILITY of making homes KNOWING their rights protected by default (property, kids, financially).. And preferred not to be wild free .. "like the hard ones". Our women who could not even imagine killing the expected ones (miscarriage is something least and unforeseen... u cannot compare it with planned killing).
5- And our kids who are taught only to FEAR Allah (God) and not the (material needs of) world or any human being or any oppressing fascist free of responsibility system. And respect your elders who brought you up, taught you every good thing and made you a man and woman and take their responsibility at your turn.
6- Do not lie, steel, conspire, genocide humans, kill babies and others children. Take the responsibility of actions otherwise there is "hard" punishment for "hard" ones.. Oops... I mean criminals of humanity.
7- Hence only fear and submit to Allah and not the material "capitalistic mean' world or any person. And only praise One Allah who gave you, family, food, provided you everything you need, who made you even stand on your feet. Can you at your own, if Allah does not wish? This is the system of God. WE.. What we are doing today.. snatching everything of each other even human lives.... WE THE HARD ONES....

So in your opinion,"In this country, life is all about the freedom of choice - even the hard ones."

What I beleive being Muslim,
Freedom from responsibility is inhuman (vicuous instinct), and freedom from oppression is every
(living) human beings right.

My religion taught me (and not my free will) how to be responsible;
1- Respectful to my both parents 3 time more to my mother, who kept me in her womb for long period, bear the pain of my birth, fed me, holded me when I was dependent, kept awake for me night after night, taught me right from wrong.
2- And when its there turn take care of your parents when they are old. And don't leave on government social service support and only celebrate parents day annually.
3- Take responsibility of your partner (as wife) and your childern, of there food and necessaties. Its my sole responsibily and not my female partner, though she can contribute too if willing. And be a man and don't be "expense FEARING" canabiliest...oops.. capitilist. Who "FEAR" capital loss.. under tax and debts on humangus interests.. stricken social conditions... HOW COULD WE SURVIVE ALONE, IF WE KEEP ON GIVING BIRTHS (UNPLANNED... AND WHY SHOULD WE TAKE RESPONSIBILITY... WE ARE FREE... WEEP WEEP.
4- And Muslim women who happily accept the RESPONSIBILITY of making homes KNOWING their rights protected by default (property, kids, financially).. And preferred not to be wild free .. "like the hard ones". Our women who could not even imagine killing the expected ones (miscarriage is something least and unforseen... u cannot compair it with planned killing).
5- And our kids who are taught only to FEAR Allah (God) and not the (material needs of) world or any human being or any oppressing facist free of responsibility system. And respect your elders who brought you up, taught you every good thing and made you a man and woman.
6- Do not lie, steel, conspire, genocide humans, kill babies and others childern. Take the responsibility of actions otherwise there is "hard" punishment for "hard" ones.. oops.. I mean criminals of humanity.
7- Hence only fear and submit to Allah and not the material "capitilistic mean' world or any person. And only praise One Allah who gave you, family, food, provided you every thing you need, who made you even stand on your feet. Can you at your own, if Allah does not wish? This is the system of God. WE.. what we are doing today.. snatching every thing of eachother even human lives.... HARD ONES....

'My understanding of Buddhism leads me to believe that we choose the time and condition of our birth and life is the only phase in which we can change karma.'

Buddhism does indeed advocate against abortion, and the Dalai Lama in particular has spoken out against it, although Buddhists don't generally preach much, which is all to the good. Shintoism, the ancient religion of Japan, considers the fetus a part of the mother's body, and is not at odds with abortion. The link below gives a brief review of various religions and their stand on abortion.

Something to consider, however. Most religions (Wicca and other Pagan faiths excepted) are patriarchal, and are organized and administrated by males, including Buddhism. Even today, this has changed little over millenia.

Judaism is to be commended for promoting women within the ranks of their own Rabbinate.

Frankly, this male-centeredness makes me doubt more than ever, that any religion has a corner on the truth - or even has anything particularly worthwhile to say to non-religious folks that are quite content with a completely secular orientation to life. This is exactly why the laws of any democracy are structured specifically to control for untoward religious influences.

As for me, I've given many years of study to religion in a comparative sense, but seem to lack the capacity to fully believe any of it. I do find the historical connection and other similarities between Taoism and Zen to be intriguing on a personal level.

The elusive here and now remains the only reality in my view - and we all miss it continuously. Religion is forever bent on controlling not only the present moment, but the distant future as well....through the mechanism of beliefs, rituals, dogma, appeals to supernatural authority, and so forth. Naturally, fear is a thread that runs through the fabric of most religions.

In this country, life is all about the freedom of choice - even the hard ones.

http://atheism.about.com/od/abortioncontraception/p/Religions.htm

@ persiflage

I failed to realize that I too was mixing my religions in my most recent response.

@ RCofield
For me, it was the day I was born as I was an oops baby, being the 7th child born to my mom, who then got pregnant again and took pills to have a miscarriage and then got pregnant again and gave birth to my younger sister. I think even her preference was to the day I was born. If anyone wants to consider when I began life as any other day, that is their choice, I don't care what they think.

"Perhaps you're exaggerating to make your point - which has the appearance of consigning a pregnant woman's decision to give birth to some amorphous public decision on when life commences."

All public opinion is amorphous until it coalesces around legislation. My point, however, is that viability is just as arbitrary as a cutoff for legal abortion as any other. Certainly it is not fixed, being subject to advances in technology, and dependency on the mother does not end at birth.

My understanding of Buddhism leads me to believe that we choose the time and condition of our birth and life is the only phase in which we can change karma. Denying someone the chance at that life is a profound bad cause for which the terminator will feel a profound bad effect.

'But what is YOUR preference as to when others regard YOUR life as having begun?'

Now that I think about it (thinking with a fully developed brain is operative here) I personally believe life is not half bad.

Your question makes no sense, however....because I wasn't thinking about being born in utero (although in my more Buddhist moments, maybe I was). Since my mother had already lost two (God's will) she was probably only wondering if she'd make it to term on the third try.

Why? Because she consciously wanted my beautiful presence in her life. Had she decided differently, I'd have tried the pretty lady down the street, provided her husband was willing to cooperate.

Sorry, I didn't intentionally mean to mix religious belief systems i.e. one soul and one opportunity for everlasting happiness or eternal damnation vs one consciousness and an infinite number of opportunities.

Which option is preferrable? Another good question to ponder......

'But what is YOUR preference as to when others regard YOUR life as having begun?'

Now that I think about it (thinking with a fully developed brain is operative here) I personally believe life is not half bad.

Your question makes no sense, however....because I wasn't thinking about being born in utero (although in my more Buddhist moments, maybe I was). Since my mother had already lost two (God's will) she was probably only wondering if she'd make it to term on the third try.

Why? Because she consciously wanted my beautiful presence in her life. Had she decided differently, I'd have tried the pretty lady down the street, provided her husband was willing to cooperate.

Sorry, I didn't intentionally mean to mix religious belief systems i.e. one soul and one opportunity for everlasting happiness or eternal damnation vs one consciousness and an infinite number of opportunities.

Which option is preferrable? Another good question to ponder......

@ RCofield

My preference is the day I was born. I don't care what anyone else thinks and as for my mother, she is no longer with us and has no say in my prefernce anyway. If you want to go Biblical about God knowing of me before I was even conceived, then I would say He knew my spirit, which has been alive a lot longer than this body. But as to when my life in this body began, there again, on the day I was born and took my first breath. I'm really not trying to dodge anything.

@PERSIFLAGE & BEDWARDS99

Nice dodging, guys. But what is YOUR preference as to when others regard YOUR life as having begun?

'At what point would you have preferred that your mother (and philosophers on WAPO threads) believe your life had begun?'

In actual fact, this only matters when a prospective mother is deciding if or when to terminate a pregnancy. And then, it's all a matter of how the law reads and what she decides.

If a pregnancy is terminated, will that fetus know what it missed? A good question for philosophers and religionists On Faith to ponder.....

@ RCofield

The day I took and sustained my own breath. Before that, I was only alive because I was part of my mother's body and should she have died while still pregnant with me, and no emergency services provided, I too would have died in her womb.

'At what point would you have preferred that your mother (and philosophers on WAPO threads) believe your life had begun?'

In actual fact, this only matters when a prospective mother is deciding if or when to terminate a pregnancy. And then, it's all a matter of how the law reads.

If a fetus is terminated, will that fetus know what they missed? A good question for philosophers and religionists On Faith to ponder.....

@ Mooody

God said "CHOOSE", He did not say, "I'm forcing this down your throat". If God, in His infinite wisdom, is willing to allow us to choose life, why can we not give that same consideration to our fellow men and women?

To follow God is a choice I made for myself, but I cannot stop loving or caring for my friends who do not believe in Him. I am the only way that they are able to SEE Him in their lives. I'm not always the best of examples, but I do try my best and God knows that. Do you know how many people I am friends with who do not believe in God and immediately thought that the fact that I did would cause issues in our friendship? Too many.

Too many Christians or "God fearing" individuals think it is their place to tell someone else how to live their life, when only God should be the One doing that. The God I know and love is a God of mercy, a God of love, a God of kindness, and a God of patience. He is the one that by the Holy Spirit guides us to His will.

If His will were for every conception to turn into a birth, then there would never be any miscarriages. There would be no plants that when used can also cause a miscarriage... as He created every plant.

So, to this, God gave inspiration to a man who saw too many women dying on tables in back rooms, who tried to terminate a pregnancy, that a safe way could be had for those women who choose to terminate. Far too many people want to tell others how to live their lives, how to be Godly, and how to be acceptable. In reality, those people that are yelling instructions to everyone else are the ones who need to learn how to live their lives, how to be Godly, and how to be acceptable.

Somewhere along the years, far too many Christians have lost their compassion and understanding for our fellow humans. This is why Christianity today is rejected by so many.

I see that some of the discussion here is centered on when life begins, with varying opinions offered.

As I am fairly certain that everyone on this thread was at one time a newly fertilized egg, I have a rather simple question:

At what point would you have preferred that your mother (and philosophers on WAPO threads) believe your life had begun?

An honest answer to that question should rationally put this issue to rest.

First of all I congratulate them they have few efforts to promote mankind.
This world is the world of God. Growth is natural.Human has a major role to secure beneficiary material. A Man and A woman has same duties to save human race. If a single man and man to man can contribute to growth human race Nature never gave birth to a woman. If A woman can do it without a man then nature must avoid to stop a man's birth. A man and a human has equal responsibility to gave a birth to a new baby. Religion has major role to develop a family relationship. before marriage, a man and a woman oath for their faith to live together with love and kindness. They live faith and look after their breed as children or a child with their pleasure.
A man can't live with a cat to develop human race4 or a woman can't contribute to live with a Dog. Naturally as the matter of human growth only a man and woman are liable by natural process so we need to regard and honour to a religion if it takes its responsibility to secure a man's and a woman's relationship.

First of all I congratulate them they have few efforts to promote mankind.
This world is the world of God. Growth is natural.Human has a major role to secure beneficiary material. A Man and A woman has same duties to save human race. If a single man and man to man can contribute to growth human race Nature never gave birth to a woman. If A woman can do it without a man then nature must avoid to stop a man's birth. A man and a human has equal responsibility to gave a birth to a new baby. Religion has major role to develop a family relationship. before marriage, a man and a woman oath for their faith to live together with love and kindness. They live faith and look after their breed as children or a child with their pleasure.
A man can't live with a cat to develop human race4 or a woman can't contribute to live with a Dog. Naturally as the matter of human growth only a man and woman are liable by natural process so we need to regard and honour to a religion if it takes its responsibility to secure a man's and a woman's relationship.

'An infant is totally dependent for life and there is nothing particular to distinguish young humans from animals until they begin to speak. Perhaps personhood should be withheld from them as well.'

Perhaps you're exaggerating to make your point - which has the appearance of consigning a pregnant woman's decision to give birth to some amorphous public decision on when life commences.

Perhaps we should begin public trials for witchcraft again as well.......if she floats, she's a witch, etc.

"....in my opinion."

And everybody has one. An infant is totally dependent for life and there is nothing particular to distinguish young humans from animals until they begin to speak. Perhaps personhood should be withheld from them as well.

'God meant living beings and not the life style or decision to kill the life that God gave you.'

This is MOOODY telling us about God again. How does MOOODY know all of this??

MOOODY, the fact is, you don't know diddly about God - and neither does anyone else. You only know what you've been taught - and that is very different than actually knowing something for a fact.

Live with it......

My Dear bedwards99,

God meant living beings and not the life style or decision to kill the life that God gave you.

God says, “I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing: therefore choose life, that both thou and thy seed may live”

And thats how you twist words to your own satisfaction..............

'The crux of the issue at what point in development a fertilized ovum gets invested with personhood. This fundamental question should be decided by the people, not a select few that are a very long arm's reach from that will.'

Actually this 'populist' proposition on when life begins is frought with implied religious considerations, which are fundamentally unfair to the rest of us - since the so-called determination of that magic moment will inevitably be informed by religious beliefs which have no substantial basis in the material world i.e. when the soul enters the fetus, etc.

This is what the Constitution was designed to do - protect the general population from disparate religious beliefs, among other things.

But here's the thing - the fetus is the biological property of the mother until it can sustain viability outside the mother's womb. This is essentially what the law says - it is a private matter for the mother to decide, until the law intervenes.

Why this is so hard to accept or comprehend is baffling to me - societies kill their 'enemies' by the tens of thousands, execute convicted murderers, and then balk at a mother's right to determine her own reproductive destiny.

The fetus is part of the mother, ergo belongs to the mother....period.

.....in my opinion.

How to approach this... Much of our legal system was originally built on religion, so to try and separate the two seems a bit dysfunctional. But my views on abortion are that it's a medical procedure that every woman deserves the right to be able to choose, whether she believes in God or not. There are enough natural plants that can cause a miscarriage if you know what to look for and how to handle them.

I'm a woman and I'm a Christian and this debate stems from what is considered 'life'. Is life, Biblically speaking, when the woman's egg is fertilized? And if God is Omniscient, then don't you think He's aware of the fact that someone is going to have an abortion before they even make that choice? And when does the spirit enter the fetus? Does it enter at conception or at first breath? If scripture speaks of the division of the spirit and the soul, what is really the difference? Which one determines ‘life’? And when God breathed into man His Spirit, isn't that when life originated?

I know that in the Bible there is some value placed on repetition, so I did some quick research on the New King James Bible and this is what I found:

“Life” is mentioned 496 times in 450 verses.
“Spirit” is mentioned 576 times in 523 verses subtract “Holy Spirit” and it’s 431 verses.
“Law” is mentioned in 388 verses without the distinction of being a relative-in-law but does include both man’s and God’s law.
“Soul” is mentioned 322 times in 302 verses.
“Holy Spirit” appears in 95 verses.
“Man” and “Spirit” together appear in 41 verses.

What am I getting at here? From my limited understanding of the Bible and how we value what is written, I learned there is a repetition rule of understanding. Repetition applies to importance and I have listed these in the order of what I think is the highest to lowest of repetition and importance.

So from a Biblical standpoint, life is first, the Spirit is next, then law, then the soul. Then you have to ask what is the difference between the spirit and the soul. Soul is from the Greek work psyche, which is our mind, how we think, in my opinion. In the Greek, the word pneuma is used for spirit, which seems to be something outside of our minds.

I think that religion needs to step back from abortion and pray all you want, but pray from home and in your churches, but let the women who choose to have abortions, do it. God says, “I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing: therefore choose life, that both thou and thy seed may live” Life for you and life for me are different callings, so each person should be allowed to choose life as they feel they need and the law should be set regardless of religious beliefs because even Jesus said to give Caesar his due by the law of man.

"If left up to states, the pro-choice position would be railroaded out of existence almost immediately in many states, and the South in particular - where states rights and religion are completely bound together. Secularists have a hard way to go in Dixie."

The people of each state are perfectly capable of making decisions for themselves. One of the beauties of a republic is that we have 50 laboratories for legal experiments. While I'm certain that if Roe vanished, many states would outlaw abortion, I doubt that would spell the end of the political debate in those states and the issue would be contested in state legislative and executive elections until a consensus position was reached.

The crux of the issue at what point in development a fertilized ovum gets invested with personhood. This fundamental question should be decided by the people, not a select few that are a very long arm's reach from that will.

'We would have long ago reached a compromise on the matter in the normal political give and take of the electoral process except for the ill advised, precipitous action by the Supreme Court.'

I've seen this idea before, and I completely disagree. As far as the law goes, it only declares what is legal with regard to voluntary termination of pregnancy. What this establishes is a pro-choice situation as defined within legal parameters.

One is NEVER required to avail themselves of that right, so it is much like the practice of one's chosen religion. One may do so within the boundries established by law, but one is never required to practice a given religion.

Roe v Wade is a perfectly acceptable and intelligable interpretation of a Constitutional right - which one voluntarily either utilizes or not.

If left up to states, the pro-choice position would be railroaded out of existence almost immediately in many states, and the South in particular - where states rights and religion are completely bound together. Secularists have a hard way to go in Dixie.

As far as the interpretation of constitutional law goes, the Supreme Court must protect all citizens from the machinations of state government, in order to ensure the greatest degree of legally objective, secularly informed personal freedom - from both religion and political parties......which are notoriously subjective and with their own very limited set of values.

But of course, that's only my opinion ;^)

Core beliefs always play a role in participatory government. That participation is the missing component in the establishment of abortion rights. The decision was far removed from the will of the people and it has distorted the political landscape ever since. We would have long ago reached a compromise on the matter in the normal political give and take of the electoral process except for the ill advised, precipitous action by the Supreme Court.

You are what you do and not what you say.

Someone said, Actions speak louder than words.

Do you understand?????????????????????????????

I guess not.......HA!

Well, I am addressing to

Murderers,
Baby killers,
Child molesors,
Liars, Genocide and Masacar doers
Conscious less and shameless idiots
Anti human right active Government and its supporters.

and also posting real time live documented links related to their activities.

If you are not one of them or their supporter. Then my posts are not directed towards you.

Never I remarked against peaceful non Muslims in general.

And if i said nation, I meant nation of above mentioned category and there symbols means what to outside world.

Don't you agree?

'To one who believes in the truth, truth presents no problem; to those who live in darkness, Truth presents many problems.'

To anyone who struggles with their own decisions and takes responsibility for their own actions, truth is a relative thing. So far, no one has yet discovered a single 'absolute' truth that everyone agrees on - during the entire spectrum of human history. That alone should tell us something.

To the rational mind, humans are inescapabily responsible, whereas religious believers follow guidelines allegedly laid down by 'divine' authorities...and yet, no one has seen hide nor hair of a divine authority in quite some time - although some have claimed to have heard from God periodically.

In the end, beliefs are hardly different from opinions - and that includes all kinds and variations of religious beliefs.

For example, the illustrious MOOODY thinks that all non-Muslims are animals - this says something about MOOODY and his belief system, which is not necessarily complimentary - and in the mean time only confirms what many non-Muslim folks already believe about Islam to begin with.

And so it goes with beliefs and behavior ......

Shameless.... even worse than Animals.

IN REPLY TO (IRT)
DANIELINTHELIONSDEN :
“UNBELIEVABLE”

IRT: There is no scientific consensus on when there is a fully formed human being. Neither is there a Biblical nor Christian consensus. It is opinion and speculation..it is a false argument to say that the matter is scientifically proven.

ANS: Jeremiah 1:5 “Before I formed thee in the bowels of thy mother, I knew thee: and before thou camest forth out of the womb, I sanctified thee..." Gen 25: 22 “But the children struggled in her womb.." Gen 38: 27cf.; Job 3:11: “Why did I not die in the womb?” Job 19:17: “ I entreated the children of my womb." Job 31:15 : “Did not he that made me in the womb make him also: and did not one and the same form me in the womb The Lord hath called Me from the womb, from the bowels of my mother he hath been mindful of my name." Isaiah 49:: “And now saith the Lord that formed me from the womb." Luke 1: 41, "the INFANT leaped in her womb." You need another Bible and God's word is not opinion..

To you there is no scientific consensus. Even the Father of Abortion admitted the conceived was human. To one who believes in the truth, truth presents no problem; to those who live in darkness, Truth presents many problems.

In partial-birth Abortion, the butcher, posing as a doctor plunges a surgical scissors into the back of the child's skull being born (yes, contrary to you, it is a baby’s head, not a goat's or a chicken’s, or a snake’s head) and he sucks out its brains, while it is struggling for life.

Even when the butcher, masquerading as a doctor, bungles the Abortion, your beloved President, your Pied Piper, voted three times for murderer's right to finish murdering the poor helpless victim. No, if it’s not a child what is it? I know you are incapable of answering, you who cannot believe there is a Natural Law, who believes up is down and down is up.

Those who live in untruths live in a world of pretense. There is an analogy about truths and untruths that even philistines won’t deny unless they're insane. Passengers were ready to board a flight from New York to Paris. The intercom informs the passengers that the cockpit crew says that the plane doesn’t have enough fuel to make it across the ocean. The ground crew says they do. Then the voice said, “You can board the flight now.” No one boarded the plane but one person. Was that one person you?

When you can find a credible Embryologist, Eugenicist , or Micro-biologist who will contradict Dr. Lejeune, the winner of the highest award in Eugenics, the former head of Eugenics at Mayo Clinic, Haymie Gordon, the often called Father of IVF, Dr. Shettles, and the "Father of Abortion," Dr. Bernard Nathanson, let me know. Otherwise, remain in your alternate world and remain silent out of Justice to the real world.

TOP PAKISTANI CHRISTIAN OFFICIAL ASSASSINATED

Pakistan's federal minorities minister, a Christian, was gunned down in this capital city Wednesday in the second killing this year of a senior government official who had spoken out against the nation's stringent blasphemy laws.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/03/01/AR2011030101394.html?hpid=topnews
----------------------------------------
Remember: Pew poll results showed Egyptians had similar attitudes to Pakistanis on things like death for apostasy and stoning for adultery.

So your unborn live human baby killing price is 250bucks. Hmmmm!

No wonder killing babies for your forces around the globe is not very hard job choice. They are brought up this way........

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6LO2CHMPq9M&feature=fvw

Today 10 clidern died in Pak- Afghan border by US Air bombing....

Your Statue of Liberty is the symbol of Canabilism to the world. A nation how forces kill the childerns around the world indescriminately in millions, even the live ones in there women own wombs....10 weeks old, 12 weeks old, 14 weeks old... small babies with complete human shape.... JUST because lake of finance or in other words unplanned babies .. that is the name in those babies in the dictionary VICIOUS who like to call them selves liberators.... AND DON'T MIND KILLING... GENOCIDE... DOING MASACRE.... OF nations who don't agree to SUBMIT...to there type of liberty which is vicious, shameless, obsence, abnoxious, filthy, nude........... AND THE ONLY AUGUMENT U HAVE TO JUSTIY IS

WHY DO WE COVER OUR HEAD?
WHY ISLAMIC LAWS ARE SO INHUMAN?
THEY ARE JUST LAWS ... NOT THE INHUMAN BEHAVIOUR LIKE YOUR NATION.....

DID YOU EVER COMPARED OUR ACTIONS AND GENERAL BEHAVIOUR WITH MUSLIM WORLD?????

YOU VICIOUS ARE JUST KILLING... KILLLING AND KILLING.

ALL YOUR TALKS ARE NOTHING BUT B.S. IN REALITY

ANIMALS!

Cold Blooded Child Killers Nation,
Even predicting there future intents in 2000 movies through there media which unfolded in next 10 coming years... Until today 2011

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6LO2CHMPq9M&feature=fvw

Today 10 clidern died in Pak- Afghan border by US Air bombing.... In First US Air bomb attack about 3-4 years back 50 childern in school died and that was the beginning of US attack on Pakistans soverenity.... since then almost every day there is air attack and hunderds of thousand died 98% civilian more the 50% childern and women. YOUR PHONY STATUE OF LIBERTY IS STANDING... LYING TO THE WHOLE WORLD.

My daughter is six weeks into her pregnancy. The doctors checked for a heartbeat via ultrasound. There is one. Is this the heartbeat of a rabbit, a lamb, or of a growing human being? Hmmmm???

@MOODY
There's a website http://www.shariah4america.com/ referenced on another page. It's a great site that articulates why we should all live under Sharia. My favorite part:

The Islamic Demolition of the Statue of Liberty

One of the founding principles of the Islamic constitution is to ensure that all sovereignty and supremacy belongs solely to God;

The Statue of Liberty... is symbolic of the rebellious nature of the US constitution that elevates the command of man over the command of God.
...

thus as a temporary measure, it is proposed THAT A LARGE BURKHA IS USED TO COVER THE STATUE, thereby shielding this horrendous eye sore from public view as well as sending a strong message to its French creators.

Sex and religion. What an explosive mixture. Do a search: The First Scandal.

There is no scientific consensus on whan a fetilized egg becomes a fully formed human being. Neither is there a Biblical nor Christian consensus. It is opinion and speculation. Anyone is entitled to their opinion, but it is a false argument to say that the matter is scientifically proven. And saying it with emphasis, and fire and brimstone fervor does not add any value of truth to an argument that is false.

"...regarding your youthful incarnation as a former denizen of Hollywood boulevard, I'm assuming you're still (thankfully) supportive that abortion has been legal for all these years."

Yes, Persiflage, I suppose I could say you are quite correct, about that. Except, prior to when Roe/Wade was decided, I (we Californians) didn't acknowledge that abortion was illegal. Because, for $250Bucks, the job got done.

I've always thought Roe/Wade was for people that don't have the $250. I still do, and I don't think that that is a bad thing.

'Are the delusions the over 52 million aborted dead in America since Roe, the 43 million unborn aborted every year, the 26 million who have broke the Seventh Commandment and are dead from AIDS, the 33 million worldwide that have HIV and probably twice that number with STDs?'

One wonders about the fate of the unborn, and the fate of the USA itself, in an alternate universe where reproductive choice is not an option.

In other words, a medieval all Catholic world ruled solely by the ecclesiastical wisdom of the Holy Pontiff, and where every infant is born, regardless of the emotional or health-related circumstances surrounding the pregnancy, and/or the consequences and possible risks to the health of the mother.

No thanks - the world has been there before, and millions died. The unborn were of course saved.

I'll take Venus, and you take Mars......

What does a modern, not particularly religious (read three major monotheistic religions) person think of abortion and how religion treats the subject of abortion?

If this modern person is myself, the answer is relatively clear. Abortion, regardless of whether one is religious, is of course a sad situation for a woman to find herself in; a person should strive to not get into a situation where one has to have an abortion. From a medical standpoint and setting religion aside for a moment, abortion should be reserved for babies with clear medical problems (problems of development) supposing the technology clearly exists and can determine with accuracy babies' condition.

Of course religious people object to abortion period, so medical problems of babies even are not considered from the standpoint of religion. Now what are we to make of the religious view concerning abortion? I confess myself completely puzzled by the religious arguments in this regard. Let me see if I understand clearly. Abortion is murder according to the religious so let babies be born. But how many of those babies will be born into the particular religion one happens to favor, supposing one is religious?

In other words, abortion is murder to the religious so let the babies be born. But so many babies are not of one's religion so they not only meet with disfavor by God but get damned to hell for an eternity of torment. And to make things worse religion according to statistics is declining so all those babies to not be aborted by the religious, not to mention those who are born anyway, are to be damned to hell. I can just see a religious person standing among infants he or she has managed to save from abortion saying "well, we saved the babies from being murdered, now let's see if they can grow up to not be such as to be damned to hell by us".

I think a modern person such as myself is much more sensible--and in line with the modern political movement starting with Locke, Hobbes and Machiavelli which began to realistically take man as he is and design politics around that conception rather than trying to force people to conform to unrealistic and all too often religious expectations. A modern person such as myself will say "abortion of course is a sad thing, but at times it might be necessary; as for those babies who do get born, I'll try to take them as they are in their qualities and certainly not be pointing fingers and damning any to hell".

The religious just seem so odd calling abortion murder--when babies have no consciousness, unless of course a religious person wants to tell me about his or her memories in the womb--then damning perfectly grown and conscious people who disagree with them to an eternity of torture in hell. Tell me truthfully here which person, a person such as myself or the religious person, causes the most pain? Ah, but the religious will respond that the fully grown person has free will, therefore the religious are perfectly justified in damning incorrigibles to hell.

Apparently here I am not using my free will as the religious desire therefore I am to be damned to hell. Well, thank you religious people. And I accept fully your protestation that at least I was not aborted. Thank you for having worked toward my not being aborted only to damn me to hell.

The question remains, unanswered. "Should personal and religious views be allowed to prevent women from having access to a legal medical procedure?" The obvious answer here is "no." But those who oppose the availability of abortion will not dare to say this. They are too much enveloped in the (legal) issue of abortion to care whether or not women's rights are being trampled upon.

IN REPLY TO
PERSIFLAGE
“POLITICS v. RELIGION”

IRT: “The so-called 'natural law and moral order is simply a fictitious creation of the imagination - humans create themselves from the ground up, warts and all. This has always been the case.”

ANS: Yes, the Founding Fathers (FF) were so delusional that they based the Bill of Rights on them. Not until the 70s did anyone attempt to rescind their inviolability. Slavery was abolished by defending them, as was Brown v Board. Until “Roe” Americans were endowed with inviolable rights. Are you happy they now are all violable especially, the right to life. Only a witless self-centered cretin would give up this inviolability. However, they can be excused because of their ignorance; they knew not what they did.

But woe to the idiots on the Court who were given responsibility to safeguard these rights under the auspices of Justice.

Moreover, the FF were so dumbfounded that they claimed our rights were self-evident, namely that all men were created equal and endowed equally with these rights which gave man dignity and worth.

Therefore, government cannot, without serious tragic consequence to follow, violate them. Only the morally blind cannot see the tragedies happening before their very eyes. They cannot see the invitation of the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse that these violators have brought upon themselves and others. There violations have precipitated Famine, Pestilence, War and Death. They are real and they are only superstitions to the addle minds.

Are the delusions the over 52 million aborted dead in America since Roe, the 43 million unborn aborted every year, the 26 million who have broke the Seventh Commandment and are dead from AIDS, the 33 million worldwide that have HIV and probably twice that number with STDs?

IRT: “Religious beliefs are typically founded on superstition, and have no place in a court of law. Times change, but religion does not..."

ANS: Times change, the moral law doesn't unless you lose your human nature. You can’t see why. From your link: "Jefferson's 'Wall of Separation' has been cited repeatedly by the Court. In its 1879 Reynolds v. United States decision, the court allowed that Jefferson's comments "may be accepted almost as an authoritative declaration of the scope and effect of the [First] Amendment"

Strange that the FF expunged theocracy out of the Constitution. Yet, “Separation of Church and State" was never in the Constitution but inserted by the Court, and distorted the First Amendment from then on.

Again, the Court never expunged religion from the Constitution until the Secularist of the ACLU decided to overthrow the Constitution. Nearly all the Court's members during Brown v. Board of Education were card ACLU carrying members and relied on judicial fiat as they did for Roe.

'ANS: Here is a message for the Secularists. The operative word was not theocracy, but Theodicy. Try understanding the difference. Theodicy was what America was founded on, namely our Judeo/Christian Heritage.'

This is complete nonsense as the poster EPEARLSTEIN points out, and of course we've had this discussion before. Theodicy was the furthest thing from the minds of the Founders.

In fact, America and it's foundations were reflective of the concept of democracy as found in Greco-Roman idealism, and perhaps more than a little influenced by the thinking found in Plato's Republic.

Many of the Founders were Deists and were members of the Masonic Order. They may have been born into a largely Christian milieu, but either collectively or as individuals, were not interested in using the bible as their guide when drawing up the Constitution.

They freely employed the arcane symbolism of Masonry, and the architectural ideas found in ancient Rome and Greece - which we see everywhere in the nation's capital. One can find even a small touch of Egyptian mysticism on the dollar bill itself - not to mention the obelisk known as the Washington Monument.

It seems clear that ancient Pagans played a much larger conceptual role in the founding of the USA than is commonly acknowledged.....while the great thinkers of Enlightenment ushered in the Age of Reason within the same time frame.

Neither aristocracies or theodicies were high on anyone's list as ideal ways to live, in any case. The prevailing attitude seemed to be 'been there and done that'.

http://europeanhistory.about.com/od/theenlightenmen1/tp/enlightenmentthinkers.01.htm

http://www.temple.edu/ih/Enlightenment/

In reply to TTWSYFAMDGGAHJMJ1, who says “Theodicy was what America was founded on, namely our Judeo-Christian Heritage.”:

Nonsense!

There is nothing in the Bible to support “consent of the governed”, freedom of speech, freedom of religion, or a republican form of government, all of which are demanded by our founding documents. Indeed, there are passages in the Bible to oppose all of those values. The Bible clearly supports slavery, as does the original Constitution. The Constitution got corrected on that, but there is no way to correct the Bible.

Furthermore, the Treaty of Tripoli, negotiated by Presidens Washington and Adams and duly ratified by the Senate, says in Article 11 of the English-language version "the United States is in no sense based on the Christian religion."

IN REPLY TO (IRT)
PERSIFLAGE
“LESSONS IN HISTORY”

IRT: “Here's a history lesson just below theocracy and theocratic hegemony were expunged in building the early philosophical foundations of America, but apparently some folks didn't get the message. The concept of personal freedom is not compatible with theocratic rule, or government autocracy of any kind.”

ANS: Here is a message for the Secularists. The operative word was not theocracy, but Theodicy. Try understanding the difference. Theodicy was what America was founded on, namely our Judeo/Christian Heritage. Governments that expunged the Natural and Moral Laws (N&ML) become basket cases—East Germany, Nazi Germany, China, N. Korea, the Congo, Sudan, etc.

The N&ML is inscribed in our Bill of Rights, .and the Ten Commandments. In the throes of moral apostasy, our Court ruled that it was legal to murder the unborn. That violated the Fifth Commandment. Though the Commandments are displayed in their own Court room, the Court banned them from hanging in Public Schools because they violated Freedom of Religion.

In Stone v. Graham, the Court ruled "Posting of religious texts on the wall serves no such educational function. If the posted copies of the Ten Commandments are to have any effect at all, it will be to induce the schoolchildren to read, meditate upon, perhaps to venerate and obey, the Commandments." Namely, they might corrupt little minds.

In “Lawrence v Texas,” the Court ruled traditional morals serve no legitimate purpose to the State, are subjective, and therefore, are not a basis for the Civil Law. That’s the legacy you are thankful for, social suicide.

The Court's assault on the N&ML wrought over 52 million abortion deaths, pregnancy is viewed as a disease. Children’s aborted bodies are sold on the open market by a human flesh industry. Abortionists are trafficking in the sale of little baby body parts and we are, for the first time since Slavery, processing and devaluating human life and initiating Euthanasia by Rationing.

"America needs no words from me to see how your decision in Roe v. Wade has deformed a great nation. The so-called right to abortion has pitted mothers against their children and women against men. it is a war against the child - a direct killing of the innocent child - murder by the mother --Mother Theresa."

Today, our President is attempting to sell Embryo Stem Cell Research, proliferating more murders. The dignity of Marriage is undermined as the Court elevated gay-sex to the equivalence of conjugal love.

We are experiencing the destruction of the Family, as courts and the President are forcing gay-marriage and Obamacare down the throats of society. The family is the foundation of all society. When it falls so does the State.

America, is so inundated with Secularism, namely, the Sexual Revolution and the Culture of Death advocates, Americans chose a Marxists Muslim to lead America on the throes of its death march into oblivion and its demise.

So why do the epidemics of abortion and STDs continue:

From the Guttmacher Institute:

FIRST-YEAR CONTRACEPTIVE FAILURE RATES

Percentage of women experiencing an unplanned pregnancy

Method Typical

Pill (combined) 8.7
Tubal sterilization 0.7
Male condom 17.4
Vasectomy 0.2

Periodic abstinence 25.3
Calendar 9.0
Ovulation Method 3.0
Sympto-thermal 2.0
Post-ovulation 1.0

No method 85.0"

(Abstinence) 0

(Masturbation) 0

The failure of the Pill as noted above results in one million unplanned pregnancies every year because women basically fail to take it once a day as prescribed. Is there a literacy problem that Planned Parenthood failed to recognize?

The failure of the male condom results in another one million unplanned pregnancies every year basically because many men, as per Guttmacher, fail to use them even though they have them in their pockets or billfolds.

Then there are these additional facts:

from the CDC-2006

"Sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) remain a major public health challenge in the United States. While substantial progress has been made in preventing, diagnosing, and treating certain S-TDs in recent years, CDC estimates that approximately 19 million new infections occur each year, almost half of them among young people ages 15 to 24.1 In addition to the physical and psychological consequences of STDs, these diseases also exact a tremendous economic toll. Direct medical costs as-sociated with STDs in the United States are estimated at up to $14.7 billion annually in 2006 dollars."

and

http://pagingdrgupta.blogs.cnn.com/2011/02/20/yes-oral-sex-is-sex-and-it-can-boost-cancer-risk/?npt=NP1

"Yes, oral sex is sex, and it can boost cancer risk-

Here's a crucial message for teens: Oral sex carries many of the same risks as vaginal sex, including human papilloma virus, or HPV. And HPV may now be overtaking tobacco as the leading cause of oral cancers in America in people under age 50.

"Adolescents don’t think oral sex is something to worry about," said Bonnie Halpern-Felsher professor of pediatrics at the University of California, San Francisco. "They view it as a way to have intimacy without having 'sex.'"

Obviously, Planned Parenthood, parents and educational system have failed miserably on many fronts.

Child KILLERS

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6LO2CHMPq9M&feature=fvw

The Bible doesn't explicitly mention abortion; so we have to be indirect, and see what it says about some of the arguments used in the dispute.
Opponents of abortion say that: (a) Human life, for moral purposes, begins at conception. (Note: Biological or legal definitions are not relevant here.) The idea is that the "soul" enters the ovum at the same time as the sperm enters. (b) Human life is sacred.
The idea that human life (for moral purposes) begins at conception just isn't supported in the Bible, and sacredness of human life is contradicted all over. So people who consider abortion to be murder might be shocked to learn that they are thereby in disagreement with the Bible!
(a) In several places the Bible defines life as breathing, and I found no place where it defines life otherwise. For example, Genesis 2:7, which also defines the entrance of the soul: "and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and man became a living soul". Other references are Ezekiel 37:10, I Kings 17:17-21, and James 2:26. Since a fetus doesn't breathe, it isn't life and doesn't have a soul, according to biblical definition.
Additional evidence that a fetus is considered to be less than a human life is that the biblical penalty for causing a miscarriage is only a fine to be paid to the woman's husband (I don't know what is to be done if she doesn't have a husband!), while for an injury to a born person, it is life for life, eye for eye, etc. (Exodus 21:22-25, Leviticus 24:17-21).
Even an infant under the age of one month is considered to be worth a lot less than an adult (Leviticus 27:1-8, Numbers 3:15,28,34,39,40,43). Also, the god once punished David by killing his
newborn son (II Samuel 12:14-19); so apparently the right-to-life of the infant was not important.
(b) The sanctity of life, born or "unborn", is denied in many places. Two particularly relevant examples: "Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling...." (I Samuel 15:3), "they shall fall by the sword: their infants shall be dashed in pieces, and their women with child shall be ripped up." (Hosea 13:16)
A lot of the discussion on abortion has to do with "illegitimate" pregnancies. An adulterous woman is to be killed (Lev.20:10); with no mention of an exception if she is pregnant. And "A bastard shall not enter into the congregation of the Lord; even unto the tenth generation.." (Deut. 23:2). So according to the Bible neither the fetus nor the born child is worthy of much consideration.
Note also that Jesus talked of being "born again". He didn't say "conceived again".
Some quotes that anti-abortion people use out of context:
"Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee.." (Jeremiah 1:5) This is supposed to show that the "soul" starts at conception. But reading the entire chapter, including the remainder of the
sentence quoted, it's clear that the god is talking specifically to Jeremiah, not to the entire human race, as he is telling him that he was born to be a prophet.
"...he hath blessed thy children within thee." (Psalms 147:13). Again,this is supposed to mean that "human life" begins before birth, i.e. that a fetus is the same as a child. But read the restvof the psalm, and see that "thee" refers to the city of Jerusalem, not pregnant women!
Edgar Pearlstein, Lincoln NE

'As a campaign from Ireland so nicely put it:

You, me, we're all just grown-up embryos.'

Sounds distinctly Catholic to me - but no wonder, coming from Ireland. Is our population in the USA now 50% Irish Catholic, or is that just the spin from Vatican Central??

I know I personally got tired of their version of the 'absolute truth' at about the age of 17 and never looked back.

A lot of Catholics are doing pretty much the same thing these days......

'Dr. Jerome Lejeune, the "Father of Modern Genetics," testified that human life begins at conception before the Louisiana Committee on the Administration of Criminal Justice on June 7, 1990.'
_________________

The fact is, Lejeune was criticized as being unduly influenced by his personal religious beliefs - the above is an opinion based on religious values as much as anything.

Here's how the actual law pertaining to abortion rights reads:

'Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973),[1] was a landmark, controversial decision by the United States Supreme Court on the issue of abortion.

The Court decided that a right to privacy under the due process clause in the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution extends to a woman's decision to have an abortion, but that right must be balanced against the state's two legitimate interests for regulating abortions: protecting prenatal life and protecting the mother's health.

Saying that these state interests become stronger over the course of a pregnancy, the Court resolved this balancing test by tying state regulation of abortion to the mother's current trimester of pregnancy.

The Court later rejected Roe's trimester framework, while affirming Roe's central holding that a person has a right to abortion up until viability. The Roe decision defined "viable" as being "potentially able to live outside the mother's womb, albeit with artificial aid," adding that viability "is usually placed at about seven months (28 weeks) but may occur earlier, even at 24 weeks."

The following summaries of nearly 1500 JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES MEDICAL and other COURT CASES will provide the BEST and MOST ACCURATE info about Jehovah's Witnesses, their beliefs, and how they ACTUALLY practice such day to day.

The following website summarizes over 900 court cases and lawsuits affecting children of Jehovah's Witness Parents, including 400 cases where the JW Parents refused to consent to life-saving blood transfusions for their dying children:

DIVORCE, BLOOD TRANSFUSIONS, AND OTHER LEGAL ISSUES AFFECTING CHILDREN OF JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES

jwdivorces.bravehost.com

The following website summarizes over 500 Jehovah's Witnesses Employment related lawsuits, etc, including DOZENS of court cases in which JW Employees refused blood transfusions, and/or other cases involving Worker's Comp, medical, health, and disability issues:

EMPLOYMENT ISSUES UNIQUE TO JEHOVAH'S WITNESS EMPLOYEES

jwemployees.bravehost.com

There are so many places to begin.

First of all this is a farce of a debate - not a single panelist (and hopefully more voices will join the ruckus) puts a voice to the position held by more than 50% of Americans. In the past year, for the first time in a long time, there is a majority of pro-life individuals in America. Something you won't see on WA PO.

One columnist seems to go so far as possibly advocate for infanticide - saying that personhood should wait until an infant's brain wiring kicks in...there's enough of a brain to support the baby's vital signs in utero...and even enough life in a baby to have surgery IN UTERO as early as 19 weeks to correct some debilitating deformities. Yes, the diversity of opinions is based on different criteria...but to say that science has ruled once and for all that personhood comes after birth is simply absurd. There are brain waves in utero - the heartbeats in utero...

Secondly, just reading the most recent comment "The decision to have a baby is up to the person that bears it". I ABSOLUTELY agree -- however, what we lose sight of is the fact that the decision of whether or not to bear a baby happens AT THE MOMENT of sexual intercourse. When you have sex, there is ALWAYS a chance of getting pregnant. If you don't want to have a baby, the ONLY 100% proof positive method is to NOT have sex. Every single person in America who is not suffering from mental illness has the capacity of self-restraint. How many Planned Parenthood clinics tell young girls that if they don't want to get pregnant, they shouldn't have sex?

Though I could go on...I will end on this. At the end of time, we will all discover that there is an absolute Truth. And I am confident that this Truth will reveal over 50 million babies murdered in America because we as a country wouldn't stand up for them...because it was more important to allow people the freedom to seek pleasure whenever they want & have a way to destroy the consequences of their actions.

Let's get real. At the instant of conception all the genetics are available to sustain a unique, individual human life. That's scientific...Those "cells" can't get reordered to form a cat or a dog -- they can only grow into a unique person with special talents...

In New York City, 60% of African American babies never make it out of the womb alive. Think of all those wonderful people our nation has lost.

As a campaign from Ireland so nicely put it:

You, me, we're all just grown-up embryos.

The following summaries of nearly 1500 JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES MEDICAL and other COURT CASES will provide the BEST and MOST ACCURATE info about Jehovah's Witnesses, their beliefs, and how they ACTUALLY practice such day to day.

The following website summarizes over 900 court cases and lawsuits affecting children of Jehovah's Witness Parents, including 400 cases where the JW Parents refused to consent to life-saving blood transfusions for their dying children:

DIVORCE, BLOOD TRANSFUSIONS, AND OTHER LEGAL ISSUES AFFECTING CHILDREN OF JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES

jwdivorces.bravehost.com

The following website summarizes over 500 Jehovah's Witnesses Employment related lawsuits, etc, including DOZENS of court cases in which JW Employees refused blood transfusions, and/or other cases involving Worker's Comp, medical, health, and disability issues:

EMPLOYMENT ISSUES UNIQUE TO JEHOVAH'S WITNESS EMPLOYEES

jwemployees.bravehost.com

'Obviously, Planned Parenthood has failed miserably on many fronts.'

More obviously, parents have failed on many fronts, as well as some segments of a public education system that has been forced to preach abstinence over birth control methods and comprehensive sex education.

So why do the epidemics of abortion and STDs continue:

From the Guttamacher Institute:

FIRST-YEAR CON-TRACEPTIVE FAILURE RATES

Percentage of women experiencing an unplanned pregnancy

Method Typical

Pill (combined) 8.7
Tubal sterilization 0.7
Male condom 17.4
Vasectomy 0.2

Periodic abstinence 25.3
Calendar 9.0
Ovulation Method 3.0
Sympto-thermal 2.0
Post-ovulation 1.0

No method 85.0"

(Abstinence) 0

(Masturbation) 0

The failure of the Pill as noted above results in one million unplanned pregnancies every year because women basically fail to take it once a day as prescribed. Is there a literacy problem that Planned Parenthood failed to recognize?

The failure of the male condom results in another one million unplanned pregnancies every year basically because many men, as per Guttmacher, fail to use them even though they have them in their pockets or billfolds.

Then there are these additional facts:

from the CDC-2006

"Sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) remain a major public health challenge in the United States. While substantial progress has been made in preventing, diagnosing, and treating certain S-TDs in recent years, CDC estimates that approximately 19 million new infections occur each year, almost half of them among young people ages 15 to 24.1 In addition to the physical and psychological consequences of STDs, these diseases also exact a tremendous economic toll. Direct medical costs as-sociated with STDs in the United States are estimated at up to $14.7 billion annually in 2006 dollars."

and

http://pagingdrgupta.blogs.cnn.com/2011/02/20/yes-oral-sex-is-sex-and-it-can-boost-cancer-risk/?npt=NP1

"Yes, oral sex is sex, and it can boost cancer risk-

Here's a crucial message for teens: Oral sex carries many of the same risks as vaginal sex, including human papilloma virus, or HPV. And HPV may now be overtaking tobacco as the leading cause of oral cancers in America in people under age 50.

"Adolescents don’t think oral sex is something to worry about," said Bonnie Halpern-Felsher professor of pediatrics at the University of California, San Francisco. "They view it as a way to have intimacy without having 'sex.'"

Obviously, Planned Parenthood has failed miserably on many fronts.

'Persiflage, if that's the test, "...being an independently human entity," we can get rid of all the one day olds, to those of about the age of 10, or whatever age you judge independence to begin.'

You can find the legalize below (3rd trimester and so forth), although from earlier testimony regarding your youthful incarnation as a former denizen of Hollywood boulevard, I'm assuming you're still (thankfully) supportive that abortion has been legal for all these years.

So why the hair-splitting now??

You left out the a couple of words i.e. 'very far from being an independently human entity'.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roe_v._Wade

THE FETUS IS A HUMAN PERSON:

“The moral gravity of procured abortion is apparent in all its truth if we recognize that we are dealing with murder No Court or no man made laws can justify the taking of an innocent life, and an unborn child is a human life. Politics is about preserving life, not ending it.

http://www.prolife.com/FETALDEV.html

“Many internationally-known geneticists and biologists have testified that human life begins at conception. On 4/24-25/1981, a Senate Judiciary Subcommittee held hearings on the very question, "When does human life begin?" Dr. McCarthy de Mere, a medical doctor and law professor at the University of Tenn., testified: "The moment of the beginning of personhood is at the moment of conception.” Dr. Hymie Gordon, Chairman of the Department of Genetics at the Mayo Clinic, said: "By all the criteria of modern molecular biology, life is present from the moment of conception."

The sometimes called Father of IVF, Dr. Landrum Shettles "Conception confers life and makes that life one of a kind." MIT Dr. Gerald Schroeder Microbiologists unequivocally says that the conceived is a separate human person with all his inviolable rights.

Dr. Jerome Lejeune, the "Father of Modern Genetics," testified that human life begins at conception before the Louisiana Committee on the Administration of Criminal Justice on June 7, 1990.

He explained that within three to seven days after fertilization we can determine if the new human being is a boy or a girl. "At no time," Dr. Lejeune said, "is the human being a blob of protoplasm. As far as your nature is concerned, I see no difference between the early person that you were at conception and the late person which you are now. You were, and are, a human being.

"He pointed out that each human being is unique -- different from the mother -- from the moment of conception."Recent discoveries by Dr. Alec Jeffreys of England demonstrate that this information [on the DNA molecule] is stored by a system of bar codes not unlike those found on products at the supermarket...it's not any longer a theory that each of us is unique."

"Lejeune died on April 3, 1994. He was a medical doctor in Paris France, a Doctor of Science and a professor of Fundamental Genetics for over twenty years. He discovered the genetic cause of Down Syndrome, receiving the Kennedy Prize the Memorial Allen Award Medal, the world's highest award for work in the field of Genetics. He practiced at the Hôpital des Enfants Malades (Sick Children's Hospital) in Paris. He was a member of the American Academy of the Arts and Science, of the Royal Society of Medicine in London, The Royal Society of Science in Stockholm, the Science Academy in Italy and The Pontifical Academy of Science and The Academy of Science and The Academy of Medicine in France.

"The fetus, by it's very dependent nature on the mother as it's host, is not the property of the state, nor is it the property of a particular set of religious beliefs. It is still very far from being an independently human entity."

Persiflage, if that's the test, "...being an independently human entity," we can get rid of all the one day olds, to those of about the age of 10, or whatever age you judge independence to begin.

Listen what celebrities has to say, why they are becoming Muslims

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9XamK5Oyi_k&feature=related

Reality fo Western World

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g6W0HWuMMh4&feature=related

Why these things amaze almost 2 billion peaceful Muslims, because these things does not exist in Muslim World in general.

'Unfortunately our amoral seditious Court banned God from the Public Square and banned the N&ML as a basis for Civil Law. However, Thomas Jefferson rebuked that absurdity when he said, "To whom shall we go to seek moral guidance if not the Church?”'

Here's a history lesson just below - theocracy and theocratic hegemony were expunged in building the early philosophical foundations of America, but apparently some folks didn't get the message. The concept of personal freedom is not compatible with theocratic rule, or government autocracy of any kind.

As a consequence, there is no state religion in the USA, thanks to the vision of the early founders. Believing or disbelieving is a personal choice, as long as the laws of the land are upheld. They were emminently aware of the dangers of religious authoritarianism.

The so-called 'natural law and moral order' is simply a fictitious creation of the imagination - humans create themselves from the ground up, warts and all. This has always been the case.

Religious beliefs are typically founded on superstition, and have no place in a court of law. Times change, but religion does not. In a nutshell, this fact portends to the origin of much of the conflict between all things secular and sectarian.....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separation_of_church_and_state_in_the_United_States

I see no reason that MY medical decisions should be governed by someone else's religious beliefs.
I have been in emergency rooms where, due to illness or scheduling snafu's, there was ONE doctor on call. ONE. If I am taken to the emergency room, hemorrhaging, and the only doctor available is a Jehovah's Witness, should I be denied a transfusion and allowed to bleed to death because HIS religion forbids HIM to receive someone else's blood into HIS body?

GuitarLady,
Your god didn't create me - my mom and dad did.
Your god didn't create my daughter - her dad and I did.

guttmacher.org/pubs/fb_contr_use.html

"CONTRACEPTIVE METHOD CHOICE

Contraceptive method use among U.S. women who practice contraception,

Method No. of users (in 000s) % of users
Pill 11,661 30.6
Male condom 6,841 18.0 "

i.e.
The pill fails to protect women 8.7% during the first year of use (from the same reference previously shown).

i.e. 0.087 (failure rate)
x 62 million (# child bearing women)
x 0.62 ( % of these women using contraception )
x 0.306 ( % of these using the pill) =

1,020,000 unplanned pregnancies
during the first year of pill use.

For male condoms (failure rate of 17.4 and 18% use level)

1,200,000 unplanned pregnancies during the first year of male condom use.

The Gut-tmacher Inst-itute (same reference) notes also that the perfect use of the pill should result in a 0.3% failure rate
(35,000 unplanned pregnancies) and for the male condom, a 2% failure rate (138,000 unplanned pregnancies).

o Conclusion: The failures of the widely used birth "control" methods i.e. the pill and male condom have led to the large rate of abortions and STDs in the USA. Men and women must either recognize their responsibilities by using the pill or condoms properly and/or use other methods in order to reduce the epidemics of abortion and STDs.

IN REPLY TO
PERSIFLAGE
ABORTION

IRT: “Roe v Wade is the law of the land in regard to reproductive rights for women

ANS: All credible science demonstrates the conceived is unequivocally a human person. Therefore, the unborn has Constitutional rights irrespective of the Court that has no authority to rescind them.

Sorry bur murder is not an option, under no circumstances not because it is a religious belief but because it violates the Natural & Moral Law (N&ML) and our Declaration based on our Christian heritage.

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

And since “All Men are Created Equal,” All have an equal right to live. No man is above the law. That law is the N&ML, the laws that govern proper human behavior. No Civil Law that violates the N&ML is a just law and therefore it is not morally binding. No one has a right to be immoral.

Religion is a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, involving devotional and ritual observances, containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs. The N&ML is universal, and morally binding to all mankind. It is not optional, subjective and is religiously and civilly binding.

The concerns of religion are man’s relationship to God our Creator who endows man with certain rights to achieve his destiny with God. These rights are called Inviolable Rights, inviolable in that they exceed the powers of government and are forfeited only by man when he abuses them. These rights are given to man by God and not given by man. Man must recognize them.

Therefore, they are inviolable. Murder (a crime against Justice) is the unjust intentional taking of an innocent human life. There can be no moral or justifiable law to murder anyone, irrespective of any Court decision.

The Court has no more authority to define human nature, as it did to justify “Roe,” than it has to outlaw eating or breathing. It did. It defined the conceived as a “thing,” becoming human in three stages (The Blackmun Trimester Theory). Thus, the Court became the Creator, and created new kinds of creatures, partial human beings.

Just Civil Law cannot contradict the N&ML that God wrote implicitly in the Ten Commandments. Since the N&ML flows from God’s Eternal Law, all valid laws must lead man to God. Truth (Who is God) cannot contradict Truth, viz. God cannot contradict Himself. Since all Law comes from God, all just laws to be morally legitimate must be in accord with man's reason. Thus, true religion, Catholicism, is the guardian of the N&ML that justly governs all societies.

Unfortunately our amoral seditious Court banned God from the Public Square and banned the N&ML as a basis for Civil Law. However, Thomas Jefferson rebuked that absurdity when he said, "To whom shall we go to seek moral guidance if not the Church?”

My religion (and other sources of my moral code) should most certainly inform my decision about whether I will have an abortion. It will inevitably inform the way in which I support a woman who is wrestling with the difficult decision regarding an unplanned pregnancy. Nonetheless, it is *not* appropriate for me to rely on my religion to erect a legal bar to someone else's decision.

The Planned Parenthood funding situation is particularly galling. It has long been the case that federal money cannot be used to pay for abortion, and Planned Parenthood has carefully enforced a strict wall between the 10% of its operations that involve abortion and the 90% of its operations that do not involve abortion in any way, but provide health services and family planning to poor people. Thus, the cut in funding does nothing to reduce the incidence of abortion (since abortions were not funded through that means anyway). That makes the funding cut hard to view as anything other than a mean-spirited war on poor women. That is, politicians are using their religious views *not* to interfere with abortion decisions, but rather to punish poor women for seeking birth control and health care from an organization whose *sibling* continues to recognize a constitutional right. My religion labels such action as shameful and immoral.

Curiously, almost no one actually addresses the question: Should *religion* be the basis for intervening in a woman's right to decide whether or not to terminate a pregnancy? Perhaps that's because the answer is so obviously no. In our nation, at least, there is no consensus view on anything in religion. Not on the nature of God, the authority of Scripture, the Ten Commandments, and certainly not on abortion.
Anyway, our nation was founded on the principle that no religion should be established. So abortion opponents resort to bait-and-switch science. They rant about how science proves that "life" starts at conception, because there's a unique genome formed. This is a trivial truth. My hair has a unique genome, but I don't commit murder by cutting it.
The real question is, when does a new person come into being? That's much harder to answer, but science shows that for sure it's not at conception. For one thing, some zygotes split and become twins, who are certainly not one person. None of this was comprehended by the men who wrote the Scriptures. Oddly, there's no mention of genomes in the Bible, Quran, or Bhagavad Gita. In the end, then, we cannot rely on religious interpretations of ancient dogmas to decide these hard questions. We have to think for ourselves and respect the rights of others to do the same.

Clay Farris Naff
Science and Religion Writer
claynaff.com

Oh great.

This week, a third of the comments will be in favor of abortion rights, a third will be for fetus rights, and third will by TTWSY+ replying to the former.

Bible Mattehw Chptr 13 Vers 3-9: Then he told them many things in parables saying:"A farmerwent out to sow his seed. As he was scattering the seed, some fell along the path, and the birds came and ate it up. Some fell on rocky places, where it did not have much soil. It sprang up quikly, because the soil was shallow. But when the sun came up, the plants were scorched, and they withered because they had no root. Other seed fell among thorns, which grew up and choked the plants. Still other seed fell on good soil, where it produced a crop-a hundred, sixty or thirty times what was sown. He who has ears, let him hear." The believers can wiht this parable, abortion and familly planning, justify wiht religion. There go a lot of seeds be lost.

'I am sad that you think , as a former fetus, that humans on the other side of the womb who can't speak for themselves don't have the right to live on the other side of womb.'

My mother had three miscarriages before my illustrious birth - you can never depend on God to get the job done. He aborts by the millions.

'And the separation clause- was never meant to be as high as you claim.'

We've been through this before - and we know that the Forefathers were not the same as the Church fathers....in fact, many were not Christian (in the trinitarian sense and otherwise). Deists did not believe that the Supreme Deity had anything to do with the affairs of man. Jefferson in particular spoke out about the separation of church and state and the quotes are easily available.

'You are pretty funny.'

I suspect that you're conspicuously lacking in a sense of humor. Many republicans suffer from this malady. Arnie Schwarzenegger is my kind of republican....whether or not you liked him as governor of California - much brighter and funnier than Ronald Reagan, for example.

And a better actor, although not in his elected capacity, where Reagan was unparalleled in the acting department.

Persiflage says:

The separation of Church and State is under imminent threat in America, while it's a well established fact of life elsewhere in the Western world, and other democratic societies in general. This is directly attributable to the lingering and widespread influence of conservative Christian values and beliefs - few would argue with this observation.

What people believe about the status of the fetus should be immaterial, according to the implementation of the current law governing reproductive rights - which should by all means remain inviolable.

Then you go on to say how the Republican party "i is the single biggest danger to personal freedom and constitutional rights that we face today.

Like they said in the 3rd star wars movie-Only a sith deals in absolutes."

I am sad that you think , as a former fetus, that humans on the other side of the womb who can't speak for themselves don't have the right to live on the other side of womb.

Spoken like a true leftie. If ANYONE disagrees with your deluded mindthink, it is calling Republicans Nazis and the largest threat to personal freedom ever- what a laugh.

How about the Dems who want to regulate everything in sight,and want us to pay for something that people don't want(healthcare) .

And the separation clause- was never meant to be as high as you claim.

You are pretty funny.

Planned Parenthood yes, but once the life is conceived the unborn child (although still unborn) has the rights to be protected just like child services would protect a living child from harm or death. The view in the Bible tells us that one killing an unborn child is liable and worthy of the same treatment as justice. God makes the rules...and he should due to the fact he is the creator and originator of life so, shouldn't we at least honor his standard as to how life should be viewed? I think we should at least honor God with respect of his laws on life and living! Revelation 4:11 says, "You are worthy to receive the glory and honor because of you all things existed and were created".

Planned Parenthood yes, but once the life is conceived the unborn child (although still unborn) has the rights to be protected just like child services would protect a living child from harm or death. The view in the Bible tells us that one killing an unborn child is liable and worthy of the same treatment as justice. God makes the rules...and he should due to the fact he is the creator and originator of life so, shouldn't we at least honor his standard as to how life should be viewed? I think we should at least honor God with respect of his laws on life and living! Revelation 4:11 says, "You are worthy to receive the glory and honor because of you all things existed and were created". R

'....... Both measures were pushed by anti-abortion activists. Should personal and religious views be allowed to prevent women from having access to a legal medical procedure?'

Well, Roe v Wade is the law of the land in regard to reproductive rights for women. On the other hand, Southern states in particular are deeply influenced by conservative religious views of the Christian kind, most certainly including Virginia.

Politics and religion are so deeply intertwined in the USA, it's virtually impossible to separate the two - and it's equally impossible to get a secular/non-religious reading of the law in the South, and elsewhere.

The separation of Church and State is under imminent threat in America, while it's a well established fact of life elsewhere in the Western world, and other democratic societies in general. This is directly attributable to the lingering and widespread influence of conservative Christian values and beliefs - few would argue with this observation.

What people believe about the status of the fetus should be immaterial, according to the implementation of the current law governing reproductive rights - which should by all means remain inviolable.

The termination of any pregnancy should remain the decision of the woman who finds herself in this position, regardless of the circumstances. Other people may or may not have peripheral or even very significant influence, but in the end, the woman herself must decide.

The fetus, by it's very dependent nature on the mother as it's host, is not the property of the state, nor is it the property of a particular set of religious beliefs. It is still very far from being an independently human entity.

The mother has sole proprietary rights over the destiny of that fetus, according to law. The fact that Mississippi and it's legislative maneuvering has made it literally impossible to obtain a legal abortion in that state, will be recapitulated over and over in every Southern/republican state.

The fact is, the GOP and it's present hyper-conservative, religiously informed pseudo-philosophy is the closest thing we have to a totalitarian mentality in the USA - and it has plenty of supporters.

The GOP is the single biggest danger to personal freedom and constitutional rights that we face today.

I was under the impression that Planned Parenthood was not granted permission to use federal funds for abortion procedures. If I am not mistaken in this, it seems cruel and ignorant to take funding away from one of the few resources here to protect women's heath and rights. To think that members of congress actually read horrible descriptions of abortions just to squeeze federal funding from Planned Parenthood is deplorable. As elected representatives of the people, congressmen and women are obligated to listen to their constituents; black, white, Christian, Muslim, Jew, or Hindu. Voting by one's own religious convictions is not in the job description. If a member of congress feels that he/she "cannot serve two masters" they should then decide; "Am I serving my country or my religion?" With that in mind, realize that this country was founded on principals of individual freedom, which should not be taken lightly. As someone with strong religious convictions, I could never serve my country as an elected representative. I know that I would choose my own religious beliefs over and above anything else. A similar argument was concocted when Kennedy ran for President. He was the first Catholic ever to be elected, and he made a promise, that he would choose his country over his religion, and that is commendable, but not something that I could personally have done.

All this to say, there are politicians who can, and politicians who cannot take their oath of office seriously. Suffice it to say, being an elected representative is to represent the people, it is a service, a job of self-sacrifice, and will at times go against one's religious and moral code. In these situations, what is one to do? Do you choose your constituents and your oath of office, or do you choose to go your own way and violate that trust?

Legal protection for children at risk of abortion is not a matter of personal or religious views--it is a matter of human rights and the protection owed by all of us to the most vulnerable members of the human family.
From first knowledge of pregnancy, we know that a child has been conceived, is already alive and growing, not just 'potentially' alive, no longer just "an egg". Medical science confirms the real presence, of a small genetically unique human life, growing and being protected and nurtured in his/her mother's womb. We can identify the child's father, and whether the child is a son or a daughter.

Procured abortion constitutes arbitrary deprivation of life in breach of international human rights law, as established via the Nuremberg judgments and their codification in the International Bill of Rights. "...the unborn children were denied legal protection" (Nuremberg Trials Record).

The child at risk of abortion was given formal universal recognition as a legitimate subject of human rights, including entitlement to legal protection "before as well as after birth".

Right from the first drafting of the Umiversal Declaration of Human Rights principles, the legal language of human rights included repeatedly and consistently the terms 'unborn children' and 'the child before as well as after birth'.

It is not valid to replace these international human rights legal terms with 'the foetus' and then claim that the child has no right to legal protection.

Dehumanizing language cannot legitimize human rights violations. Giving the human child at the early stages of development medical nomenclature does not alter the child's human nature or the child's entitlement 'by nature' to the 'inherent dignity and inalienable rights of all members of the human family'.

The term 'inherent dignity', applied in the spirit and purpose of the Universal Declaration, means that every human being, from first knowledge of the child's existence as a discrete, genetically unique human entity right up to the point of natural death, has an immutable dignity, a dignity that does not change with external circumstances such as levels of self-awareness, maturity, mental or physical health, prognoses of quality of life, functionality, or 'wantedness'.

What could be argued to warrant programmed violent lethal abuse of a child at risk of abortion? Only that the child is not human. And both science and logic refute this as nonsense.
Violence against children is never 'necessary'. All violence against children is preventable.

Before as well as after birth, children should never receive less protection than adults.

Their mothers' personal and social needs can and should be met by non-violent means.

No, it shouldn't. The decision to have a baby is up to the person who bears it. There are many people who are anti-abortion. That's fine--then don't have one. However, your opinion should stop short of another woman's body. Abortion is a small percentage of what Planned Parenthood does. For the most part, they provide information on how to avoid abortions and sexual diseases with safe contraception and other health care services. A similar question--should my taxes be cut for military funding because I don't believe in war? No--because personal and religious views cannot be taken into consideration.