Faith, feminism and abortion: an individual's business, period

IN REPLY TO (IRT)
Faith, Feminism And Abortion: An Individual's Business, Period

ANS:
To the contrary, Abortion involves the rights of two people—the “conceived” and the mother, two distinct individuals—and no one has a right to murder the defenseless person in the womb, irrespective of the Court.

To rescind the inviolable Right to Life, the fundamental basis for all human rights, as the Court has done, is to render all inviolable rights violable. However, our Declaration declares that these rights are inviolable, and when a government "continuously" violates these rights, its citizenry not only has a right to replace that government with one in accord with the Natural Law (NL), but has a duty to do so.

Consequently, the Court exceeded its authority and violated rights it had no authority to violate. Hence, the conclusion of "Roe" is a rebuff of the Constitutional and a rebuke of the NL.

God made man immortal, not man. The Moral Law (ML), inscribed in the NL, is the authority that defines proper human behavior and the inviolable rights accorded to man.

Therefore, since our rights are God given, only man can forfeit them by abusing them. Hence, the Founding Fathers (FF) recognized these rights are above the authority of government and consequently are inviolable, and consequently protected them in the Declaration & Constitution.

There are many beliefs that honor some kind of god, but there is only one real God, whose Existence is His Essence, viz. “I Am Who Am,” the God with no “beginning or end,” unchangeable, outside of time, and the “Cause of All Causes.”

Since the Creator is the Cause of all Causes, all authority must come from God through the Natural Law. However, murder, the unjust and intentional taking of an innocent human life violates God’s N&ML. Murder is in discord with God and subsequently "Feminism." But that is what Pro-Abortionists do, viz. to claim a right that transcends God’s law. Subsequently, pro-abortionists censure their own feminine nature.

Thus, pro-abortionists are not feminists but a contradiction of Feminism. The real feminists embrace Human Life and Motherhood, and God, but are in accord with them.

Consequently, Palin is the quintessential epitome of “Feminism," who embraces Motherhood and life, while Pro-Abortionists are the self-contradictory antithetical anomaly of "Feminism.”

FEMINISM:
"Can you be a feminist and oppose abortion in all circumstances? Can you be a person of faith and support abortion in some circumstances?"

ANS:
Feminism is the body of natural properties that exclusively define feminine nature; this major property is the mark of the innate property of Motherhood. To be a feminist is to be in accord with those defining properties which are dictated by the Nature Law (NL). However, pro-abortion is in discord with Motherhood; it is the anti-thesis of Motherhood.

Right to Life (RTL) is the basic fundamental principle of all human natures, but Pro-Abortionists inappropriately impugned its authority. To obscure or rescind RTL is a rebuke of Feminism, namely, if you’re dead, Feminism is not only inconceivable, but is superfluous.

Any thing that compromises innocent human life is a critical breech of the NL. Since abortion is the imputation of Motherhood, pro-abortionists cannot be feminists but are a contradiction of “Feminism's” crowning property, Motherhood. A woman, to be a feminist, must be in accord with her nature, and consequently with her God who created that nature.

Pro-abortionists are diametrically opposed to the dictates of the NL and consequently are the antipode of "Feminism" and the antipathy of pro-life feminist. Therefore, a Pro-Abortion Feminist is a meaningless incoherency as is the pro-abortion Planned Parenthood designed to prevent families.

No one can intentionally compromise the murder of an innocent person irrespective of any faith or lack there of; viz. we can never, at our own capricious discretion, choose to violate any inviolable right. However this is what a Pro-Abortion Feminist does by denying the right to life in her own womb.

Either we have "inviolable rights," as is implicitly and explicitly stated in the Constitution’s Bill of Rights & Declaration, is implied in the 14th Amendment, and is revealed in the NL, or else there is no such thing as "inviolable" rights". To the contrary, all men are endowed their Creator, with certain "inalienable rights."

IN REPLY TO (IRT)
PERSIFLAGE
“RELIGION”

IRT:
"Religion claims with absolute certainty to be complete in every way.....

Now imagine a primitive world without science, where the innate curiosity of humans is still stifled by the authority of religious superstition

ANS:
The Catholic Church is the vanguard of science. There are more Catholic Universities in the world than all the other Universities combined.

The University and College systems were formed by Catholicism. Catholic schools teach more people than any other organization in the world.
“100 top Scientist in History Who Believe in God”

http://www.adherents.com/people/100_scientists.html#Scientific100

You might note how many are Catholic.

IRT:
“Of course in the real world, science admits to the limits of human knowledge, while religion denies its own ignorance, claiming supernaturally given doctrines at every opportunity.

ANS
No, wrong again, Christianity denies your ignorance. What religion believes there is no limit on knowledge unless they are on drugs, certainly not the Catholic Church? Moreover, no one has the knowledge of the Creator.

The Catholic religion is the only religion that has the gift of infallibility in its universal teachings because it was given by the Creator who is Omniscient, and therefore, is Truth itself. Therefore, God would not institute a religion that is a contradiction of His own self, only man can do that. However, religions that are man made are in error.

IRT:
“Here are three theories derived from the mind of man - none have been proven, but at least two are open to being proven, disproven, or altered in some way. One theory hasn't changed in several thousand years."

ANS:
Unwittingly, you saw the proof of God and don’t know it in your links. Holographic, and Cosmological constants testify to “order” and "order" requires an intelligence, we call God.

The links validate the order of the Universe, so stated by Aristotle and Aquinas’s Five Proofs of God. If you deny their proofs than you deny reason.

Aristotle is called the "Father of Logic" and the inventor of the "Scientific Method," consequently to deny his proof of the Primary Mover, or Aquinas’s proof from Motion is to be irrational and illogical.

Can you refute their proofs? If so do it and don’t rely on the Skeptics, Agnostics, and Atheists who either can’t reason or are being duplicitous, who know the truth and deny it.

IN REPLY TO (IRT)
PERSIFLAGE
“RELIGION”

IRT:
“Ah, the hubris of religious nonsense! As we've noted over and over, religion doesn't change - in fact, resists change at every turn.”

ANS:
Religion doesn’t change? Wrong again, there are some 26,000 to 35,000 Christian denominations alone that are contradictory in part or whole, not to mention the many sects of Judaism, Buddhism, Hinduism, Muslimism, Paganism and Shintoism. I see you’re still not thinking.

That’s why the Catholic Religion is the only true religion. Its universal principles and teachings do not change because they are given by the Creator through His Natural Law and Revelation. Thus, our inviolable rights are not given but recognized in our Declaration and Constitution’s Bill of Rights.

Consequently, since these laws are based on human nature, as long as you’re a living human, your inviolable rights are inviolable, viz. unchangeable. You imply that the government has every right to rescind them.

Hence, you want to believe one thing that the N&ML is subjective, but you unwittingly rely on their objectivity under the auspices of Freedom of Religion, and Speech, the Right to Life and the Right to own Property, etc. Fortunately, these rights were validated by the Founding Fathers. If someone tried to abolish them, I am sure you would make the argument that you rights are being violated. The N&ML is not an opinion it's a fact. If you start loosing them, you will quickly know why.

Do you think that these rights depend on five Justices on the Court and that's the only reason you have them. Can a government take them away? The Constitution charges the Executive Office to defend them.

Don't you believe as the Declaration says, if these rights are "continuously" violated, man not only has a right but a duty to replace that government with one that is in accord with our rights. That's not hubris, it's a fact.

Do you think that these rights depend on five Justices on the Court, and that's the only reason you have them, or do you believe as the Declaration says, if these rights are "continuously" violated man not only has a right but a duty to replace that government with one that is in accord with our rights. That's not hubris; it's a fact.

CIVIL LAW AND THE NATURAL & MORAL LAWS

Civil Law must be based on human nature, and when it contradicts human nature, it is not a law but an unjust imposition made by an unauthorized power of government that excedes its authority.

"The real purpose of Civil Law is to guarantee an ordered social coexistence in true justice, so that all may "lead a quiet and peaceable life, godly and respectful in every way" (1 Tim 2:2). Precisely for this reason, Civil Law must ensure that all members of society enjoy respect for certain fundamental rights which innately belong to the person, rights which every positive law must recognize and guarantee.

"First and fundamental among these is the inviolable Right to Life of every innocent human being. While public authority can sometimes choose not to put a stop to something which—were it prohibited—would cause more serious harm, it can never be presumed to legitimize as a right of individuals—even if they are the majority of the members of society—an offence against other persons caused by the disregard of so fundamental a right as the Right to Life.

"The legal toleration of abortion or of euthanasia can in no way claim to be based on respect for the conscience of others, precisely because society has the right and the duty to protect itself against the abuses which can occur in the name of conscience and under the pretext of freedom.

"In the Encyclical Pacem in Terris, John XXIII pointed out that "it is generally accepted today that the common good is best safeguarded when personal rights and duties are guaranteed." Hence, the Founding Fathers wrote these guarantees into the Bill of Rights.

The chief concern of civil authorities must therefore be to ensure that these rights are recognized, respected, co-ordinated, defended and promoted, and that each individual is enabled to perform his duties more easily.

For 'to safeguard the inviolable rights of the human person, and to facilitate the performance of his duties, is the principal duty of every public authority'. Thus any government which refused to recognize human rights or acted in violation of them, would not only fail in its duty; its decrees would be wholly lacking in binding force."

MORAL OBJECTIVITY:

The basis of these values cannot be provisional and changeable "majority" opinions, but only the acknowledgment of an objective moral law which, as the "natural law" written in the human heart, is the obligatory point of reference for Civil Law itself.

If, as a result of a tragic obscuring of the collective conscience, an attitude of skepticism were to succeed in bringing into question even the fundamental principles of the Natural & Moral law, the democratic system itself would be shaken in its foundations, and would be reduced to a mere mechanism for regulating different and opposing interests on a purely empirical basis.

Consequently there is a need to recover the basic elements of a vision of the relationship between Civil Law and moral law, which are put forward by the Church, but which are also part of the patrimony of the great juridical traditions of humanity.

Certainly the purpose of Civil Law is different and more limited in scope than that of the moral law. But "in no sphere of life can the Civil Law take the place of conscience or dictate norms concerning things which are outside its competence", which is that of ensuring the common good of people through the recognition and defense of their fundamental rights, and the promotion of peace and of public morality.

[...]
The issue here is not the morality of abortion. As it happens, I agree with the religious right that abortion is a moral issue. I simply do not agree that one faction's wickedly rigid definition of immorality should be translated into illegality.
[...]

Posted by SJ
______

Abortion is not a litmus test for feminism. Nor is belief in the "laws and judicial decisions" that have supposedly helped.

Public funding of, say, fertility treatments, in the name of reproductive rights or equality or whatever idiotic justification it falls under, is decidedly anti-feminist, wasteful, frivolous overcompensation for a favored class. Providing the name of a reliable adoption broker would be more "socially responsible", cheaper, and more consonant with feminist ideals-- and better for the gene pool.

Twisted keeps spewing bible noise like it means anything. That is funny.

And twisted. This crank once upon a time at least tried to appear rational, but now all we get is bible thumping. In fact it's becoming desperate.

Hang on to your silly little beliefs as hard as you can Twisted. it's obvious you need to talk yourself into it just a bit harder ...

'But try reading Genesis; the reason for the Universe is man. What other purpose would the Universe have?'
_________

Ah, the hubris of religious nonsense! As we've noted over and over, religion doesn't change - in fact, resists change at every turn. Religion claims with absolute certainty to be complete in every way.....

Now imagine a primitive world without science, where the innate curiosity of humans is still stifled by the authority of religious superstition.....the nature of reality, the dimensions and purpose of the universe, the destiny and future of the universe - all are alleged to be known. Questioning the established truth is heretical, punishable by death.

Of course in the real world, science admits to the limits of human knowledge, while religion denies it's own ignorance, claiming supernaturally given doctrines at every opportunity.

Here are three theories derived from the mind of man - none have been proven, but at least two are open to being proven, disproven, or altered in some way. One theory hasn't changed in several thousand years.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holographic_principle
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmological_constant
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God

IN REPLY TO (IRT)
FREDERIC2 |
“THE UNIVERSE AND MAN”
POSTED MAY 23, 2010 2:59 PM

IRT:
"Excuse me, but I think the universe would still retain its dignity without ttws and myself."

ANS:
You are excused. But try reading Genesis; the reason for the Universe is man. What other purpose would the Universe have? The Universe cannot love God; the Universe is a conduit to lead man to God. When there is no man on earth the Universe will cease to exist. Hence in Mark 13:31, “Heaven and earth shall pass away: but my word shall not pass away.” Man is immortal and not of the World, but in the World.

GENESIS 1: 21cf.
“And God created the great whales, and every living and moving creature, which the waters brought forth, and every winged fowl according to its kind. And God blessed them, saying: Increase and multiply,

“Let Us make man to Our image and likeness: and let him have dominion over the fishes of the sea, and the fowls of the air, and the beasts, and the whole earth, and every creeping creature that moveth upon the earth.

“And God created man to His own image: to the image of God He created him: male and female He created them. And, God said, “Increase and multiply, fill the earth, and subdue it, and rule over the fishes of the sea, and the fowls of the air, and all living creatures that move upon the earth.

“God said, “I have given you every herb bearing seed, and all trees with seeds of their own kind to be your meat. To all beasts of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and wherein there is life, that they may have to feed upon. And it was so done. “And God saw all the things that He had made, and they were very good.

IN REPLY TO (IRT)
P
“THE PANDERER”

IRT:
"...the role of the consummate God-struck panderer with complete sincerity."

ANS:
What’s wrong with pandering to God? That’s why he created us. To pander to God is to give satisfaction to God; it is our purpose in life. If not God, who should we pander to? Who but God should we indulge in rapacious edacious fervor? St. Augustine said, “Love God with all your heart, all your mind, and all your strength, and then go out and do what ever you want.”

To love God is to love what He loves, and what God loves the most is you. Hence, it is written, “No one has greater love for another than he who gives up his life for the good of another.” That’s what Jesus did when he died on the Cross. Our love for mankind is a vicarious love for God.

“There is a terrible hunger for love. We all experience that in our lives - the pain, the loneliness." Recognize the unloved and unwanted; find them; love them, care for them.

"Before you speak, listen, for God speaks in the silence of your heart. Give yourself fully to God. He will use you to accomplish great things on the condition that you believe much more in His love than in your own weakness.

"There are so many religions and each one has its different ways of following God. I follow Christ: Jesus is my God; my Spouse, my Life; Jesus is my only Love, my All in All; Jesus is my Everything."

"Make us worthy, Lord, to serve those people throughout the world that hunger to be loved. Give them through our hands, this day, their daily bread, and by our understanding love, give them peace and joy."—Mother Teresa the fanatic God panderer.

Palin’s little daughter Piper was holding Trig during Palin’s Nomination Acceptance Speech, while the gnarled, disturbed Secular recluses, who have dropped out of society, were apoplectically derisive because Palin didn’t have Trig murdered. They were exposed by the TV camera panning on Palin’s little daughter Piper holding and caring for little Trig.

Piper was an infinite expression of the passion and love that is radiated by the love of the Palins for one another and explains why Palin is pro-life, why she panders to God and why the disturbed recluses are so apoplectic because of it.

Excuse me, but I think the universe would still retain its dignity without ttws - and myself.

Hopefully readers didn't miss this thread profiling Palin, the eternal opportunist.

Imagining this woman in a high profile political position anywhere south of Anchorage gives me the willies......

Like most republicans and in particular her (unwilling?) mentor and master of flexible politics John McCain, she's nothing if not adaptable to any political situation - addressing her anti-abortion constituency, she takes on the role of the consummate God-struck panderer with complete sincerity.

Endorsing far right candidates is mostly what she's up to these days, but I suspect she's getting primed for her own campaign stump in the near future. Another shot at the national limelight?

What a scary, scary VP she would have been.......

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/right-now/2010/05/palin_gets_personal_in_speech.html

WHAT IS A FEMINISTS?

By: Carolyn C. Gargaro
Re-printed in Problems of Death: Opposing Viewpoints Series, Greenhaven Press

http://www.gargaro.com/lifefem.html

"Feminist" is a tricky term to use today - many women who are independent, support equal opportunity, and fight against injustices such as rape and abuse would consider themselves feminists. However, today's definition of "feminism" as defined by groups such as NOW, reject women who do not fit into their specific and radical idea of feminism. For instance:

"Sue Purrington, exec. dir. of NOW's Chicago chapter, said the following regarding Feminists For Life: "Either they misunderstand the whole issue of feminism, or they are using it for purposes I disagree with. Their philosophy is irrelevant."

"Patricia Ireland on Feminists For Life: "Their only agenda is antiabortion work."
Chicago Tribune 11/12/89

"In fact, Feminists for Life of America was founded by two women who were kicked out of NOW due to their pro-life views. A pro-life woman most often is told that she is not, and cannot be, a feminist. I myself have been told such a thing.

"True feminism condemns those who support oppression - whether the oppression be against women, men, minorities, or the unborn. Modern feminism has lost sight of the true meaning of feminism in the regards that modern feminism does not acknowledge the value of women who choose to stay home rather than work in the "business" world, or the value of a child if it is in the mother's womb.

"Pro-life feminists respect ALL human life, and they do not place their morality on people - including the unborn - by deciding who should live and who should die. Some people call pro-life feminists "anti-choice" - well, pro-life feminists *are* anti-choice, when it comes to abortion.

"They are also anti-choice when it comes to rape or the abuse of women. No one should have the "choice" to rape or abuse women either. No one should have the "choice" to beat a woman or not. Mary Calderon, former Director of Planned Parenthood

IN REPLY TO (IRT)
SUSAN JACOBY
“PALIN”

IRT:
“But she opposes government spending to support public programs, inadequate as they are, designed to help parents take care of children with disabilities.

ANS:
newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/.../08/sarah_polin.html - 3896k

“Advocates for the disabled receive Sarah Palin's pledge of support with the wary optimism of a group accustomed to unfulfilled promises.

"Social conservatives cheer when Palin talks about the value of all children because her words are a subtle but clear signal of her staunch anti-abortion views.

http://www.newsweek.com/id/157341

"In her speech at the Republican National Convention yesterday, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin delivered a special message for families of kids with special needs: "I pledge to you that, if we're elected, you will have a friend and advocate in the White House."

"When she finished speaking, she stood on stage with her infant son, Trig, who has Down syndrome, cradled in her arms. For advocates of mentally disabled citizens, Palin's pledge marked a rare moment in the spotlight for a set of issues too often hidden in the wings."

"Palin wants more funding for special-needs kids: News: WEYI ..."

"Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin pledged Friday to shift billions of dollars to programs for children with special needs and assured their families ...”

www.connectmidmichigan.com/News/story.aspx?id=211964 - 73k

So much for Palin not being for the disable.

"Even Liberals Must Admit the Unborn is Human"

http://www.gargaro.com/ppquotes.html

"Planned Parenthood - in Their Own Words
"One sperm plus one egg = one baby.”Planned Parenthood/World Population pamphlet entitled"ABCs of Birth Control," 1973, page 4.

"An abortion kills the life of a baby after it has begun.

"Abortion is the taking of a life." Former Planned Parenthood Medical Director Mary Calderone, who is pro-choice [American Journal of Public Health]

"C. Everett Koop wrote: 'In my thirty-six years in pediatric surgery I have never known of one instance where the child had to be aborted to save the mother's life.'"

"Even Planned Parenthood's Dr. Alan Guttmacher acknowledged, 'Today it is possible for almost any patient to be brought through pregnancy alive, unless she suffers from a fatal illness such as cancer or leukemia, and, if so, abortion would be unlikely to prolong, much less save, life.'”

IN REPLY TO (IRT)
SUSAN JACOBY
“PALIN”

IRT:
“Ex-governor Palin opposes all of the laws and judicial decisions that have furthered equal rights for women in this country during the past forty years."

ANS:
“The evil of the world is made possible by nothing but the sanction one gives it.”

If, by equal rights, you mean Abortion, there is no right to murder, especially for a mother to have her child murdered irrespective of the Court.

Yes, Palin opposes Abortion. The Court has no authority to trespass on our inalienable rights unless they are forfeited by abusing them. And last I checked, in spite of the Court’s redefining humanity, a Downs Syndrome child is a human.

IRT:
"She thinks that every woman should be forced to follow her example and carry a Down Syndrome fetus to term."

ANS:
Last I checked, being a Down Syndrome child is not a capital offense according to the Constitution or punishable by death unless Obama Dems and the ACLU has gotten it changed in the last few days.

Yes, Palin respects the dignity of human life and femininity, because the essence of femininity, as a compliment to masculinity, is innately motherhood, viz. a nurturer to others. Down Syndrome little children are human beings and all human beings are created equal, unless the Secularists and the ACLU Court changed that in the last few days.

No one has a right to murder any child, especially an infant who needs a mother’s love more than ever. I believe murdering children was a Hitler ethic during his effort to build a super race. He got the message of WWII that he wasn't very super and he committed suicide.

Obama, had voted three times that it was a woman's right if her child survived the abortion, the butcher who botched it could finish the job and strangle his victim after his first attempt failed. Palin opposed that inhumane right.

It appears that harvesting tissue from the placenta or 'after birth' is a much more common practice regarding human tissue use in cosmetics. Should this be a legal industry? Well apparently it is, although mildly disgusting.

If anyone profits from this is ought to be the mother that knowingly donates the placenta or fetal tissue for this purpose....certainly not hospitals and medical facilities that do it on the sly.

Whether this has any actual benefits is debatable, but here the appeal to human vanity is more about marketing strategies and expensive anti-aging cosmetics with miraculous results - the real villian is the human ego.

Corporate sinners, all.

http://open.salon.com/blog/amytuteurmd/2009/11/02/skin_cream_made_from_aborted_fetus

http://medicalbiotechnology.suite101.com/article.cfm/using_stem_cells_for_cosmetics

http://www.carefair.com/skincare/Placenta_Use_in_Cosmetics_1924.html

IN REPLY TO (IRT)
PERSIFLAGE

IRT:
"TV horror and scifi fantasy pale by comparison with the lurid imagery of an abortion-possessed Catholic, it would seem. This is really way beyond the lunatic fringe.....fetuses turned into eye makeup. Someone has got to report Revlon immediately!"

ANS:
You need to get out of the TV world. When you live in the alternate world, all Truth is beyond the lunatic fringe. That’s your problem, you can’t accept the truth because you are blinded by your predispositions.

Yes, you might contact Revlon but first look up what collagen is and don’t rely on your obscure imagination for the Truth is based on reality.

Consequently, you are so blind from your predispositions, you can’t see the truth if it is hanging on your nose. Your only reply to the truth, as a defense for your nescient unenlightment is your acerbic remarks. It has to be that way, because truth is your adversary.

Of course, these links are a worthless to those who can't accept the Truth, but you can't say you were not given the truth.

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=30900

MATTERS OF LIFE AND DEATH
Aborted-fetus shots
used to stop aging
'I had lots of wrinkles ... but now
the skin is as smooth as a baby's' Posted: June 19, 2005, 12:15 pm Eastern © 2010 WorldNetDaily.com

BABY BODY PARTS FOR SALE
Posted: March 13, 2000
1:00 am Eastern
By Dr. Chuck Baldwin
© 2010 WorldNetDaily.com

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=65

“Several months ago I commented that our country has sunk to its lowest moral depth yet by harvesting and selling body parts from aborted babies. That's right. An entire industry has grown out of killing unborn children. Not only are the baby butchers collecting millions of dollars from this hideous practice, so are baby-parts wholesalers.

“According to Wendy Griffith at CBN News, "Wholesalers, like the Anatomic Gift Foundation, headquartered in Laurel, Maryland, place workers or technicians inside abortion clinics to 'harvest' fetal tissue and organs for researchers such as universities and pharmaceutical companies.

"The wholesalers or middleman pays the abortion clinic for access to the aborted babies. They call it a 'site fee.' The researcher then pays the wholesaler for the parts, and since it's illegal to sell baby parts, they call it a 'fee for services,' technically skirting the law."

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=3869

FIGHT RAGING OVER BABY PART SALES
Part 3: Congress, ethicists debate fetal profiteering
Posted: November 17, 1999
1:00 am Eastern By Frank York
© 2010 WorldNetDaily.com

IN REPLY TO (IRT)
LEPIDOPTERYX
“ABORTION IS AN ASSAULT ON WOMEN”
POSTED: May 22, 2010

IRT:
“Just because a child’s whole body is still growing and can become pregnant does not mean that it's a good idea for her to carry it to term."

ANS:
But it was a good idea, and both were the better for it. Not to give birth was to put the girl more at risk. It would be more traumatic for both if the unborn child was murdered. The effects of abortion can be very dramatic and long lasting.

"Abortion is in fact responsible for a profound array of problems: There is a 160% increase in rates of suicide in the U.S.—Archives of Women's Mental Health (AWMH), in 2001;

"A 225% increase in rates of suicide in Britain.—British Medical Journal (BMJ),1997;

"A 546% increase in rates of suicide in Finland—Acta Obstetrica et Gynecologica Scandinavica, in 1997.

“In total, the average boosted suicide risk of these three studies is 310%! Hence it is a more dangerous risk to murder the unborn than to give birth.

“The best record-based study linking psychiatric admission rates following abortion reveals that in the four years following pregnancy outcome, women who abort are two to four times more likely to be admitted for psychiatric hospitalization than women who carry to term.

“Another record-based study reveals that even four years after abortion the psychiatric admission rate remained 67% higher than for those women who did not have abortions.

“Aborting women were more likely to be diagnosed with adjustment reactions, depressive psychosis and neurotic and bipolar disorders.—AWMH, in 2001.

“The risk for postpartum depression and psychosis during later wanted births is also linked to previous abortion. An average of eight years after their abortions, married women were 138% more likely to be at high risk of clinical depression compared to similar women who carried their unintended first pregnancies to term. – BMJ January 19, 2002.

“In the category of drug and alcohol abuse, we see many women trying to cope with their inner conflict and grief through a 4.5 times higher risk of substance abuse following abortion.”

It is even more traumatic for children. The greater risk for both was to not give birth.

'Even if the little defenseless child survives the brutal scalding by saline solution, the butcher may strangle it, drown it in its mother’s blood, or suffocate it with a plastic bag and dump it into the waste disposal where its flesh is sold for some $500/lb on the open market for collagen in cosmetics.'

______________

TV horror and scifi fantasy pale by comparison with the lurid imagery of an abortion-possessed Catholic, it would seem.

This is really way beyond the lunatic fringe.....fetuses turned into eye makeup. Someone has got to report Revlon immediately!

"Who are the destructive but the procreators of the Culture of Death, their solution to the Sexual Revolution, but the anti-Christian? Who attempts to destroy the family by redefining Marriage but Secularist immoral? Who but the immoral have created the plagues of AIDS and STDs? Who has been more destructive than the atheists nations? What is more destructive than having your own child murdered by abortionists?"

Who are the writers of gibberish but the ignorant and superstitious?

N REPLY TO (IRT)
PSOLUS
“REALITY v. SUPERSTITION”
POSTED MAY= 21, 2010 4:08 PM

IRT:
"Belief in superstition certainly can have destructive effects on people's lives. Look at what it has done to you."

ANS:
Who are the destructive but the procreators of the Culture of Death, their solution to the Sexual Revolution, but the anti-Christian? Who attempts to destroy the family by redefining Marriage but Secularist immoral? Who but the immoral have created the plagues of AIDS and STDs? Who has been more destructive than the atheists nations? What is more destructive than having your own child murdered by abortionists?

The morally blind see reality and effetely convince themselves it is not reality. It is what they must do when they choose to murder their unborn child.

No one but a cretin can believe that a mother believes she is with, what “Roe” concluded, a “thing,” and not child. However, the pro-abortionist must believe just that to justify murdering their unborn.

Who but the morally blind can allowing a butcher plunge a surgical scissors into the back of a born child's skull and sucks out its brains, unless they are morally and mentally blind.

The virulence is the delusion that a mother is with "thing," that the child is not sacred and more valuable than anything on earth.

Is it superstition that the whole Universe has been created for only man. What meaning is there for the Universe if man does not exist, if he has no more dignity than the ground on which he stands? That is the world of the Secularist.

Even if the little defenseless child survives the brutal scalding by saline solution, the butcher may strangle it, drown it in its mother’s blood, or suffocate it with a plastic bag and dump it into the waste disposal where its flesh is sold for some $500/lb on the open market for collagen in cosmetics.

Yes, who are these psychoneurotics; who are these blind leading the blind but the abortionists?

Pro-abortionists are not superstitious, they are savagery inscribed in a morally blind neurotic who denies truth and reality and lives in an alternate world of death were good is evil and evil is good.

One wonders if the moms of parasites make that information part of their children's/parasites' sex education?

"Hey Sally, did you know that you are actually a parasite mutation."

Apparently that information is not forwarded to some affected children!!!!!

TWITSY,

Just because a child whoe body is still growing can become pregnant does not mean that it's a godd idea for her to carry it to term.
The five-year-old pregnant girl in Peru was a medical anomaly in many ways.
To subject a child to the trauma of rape is bad enough. To add pregnancy and birth (even birth by C-section, which is no picnic), is beyond cruel.

"Reasonable" efforts to protect both lives does not include forgoing treatment that could save the mother's life, and that she would not hesitate to accept were she not pregnant, for the sake of the fetus. Not to mention that a womna with untreated cancer is not highly likely to give birth to a healthy baby if herown organ systems are failing as it gestates.

"Where there is love, there is sacrfice" should not include deliberately bringing a child into a situation where its entire life will consist of a few short, pain-filled years.

Yeal, my daughter knows that she was born because I wanted her to be born, not simply because of a chance meeting of sperm and egg. She also knows that I would not have had her if I had not been capable of adequately caring for her. And for BOTH of those facts, she has expressed gratitude. And she feels the same way I do about unwanted pregnancies.

As for the "if you don't want children, don't have sex" mentality, it's a bit unrealistic to expect someone to live a lifetime of celibacy simply because they don't wish to experience pregnancy or parenthood.

Just imagine if TTWSTYED sister were writing the laws....we'd still be burning heretics at the stake.

Fortunately, we can breathe a sigh of relief. ROE V WADE trumps biblical stupidity.

Faith & Abortion:

Feminism is embedded in Motherhood, with or without child. Motherhood is an innate part of woman. In teachers, nurses, nurturing is a vital part of woman’s nature. Abortion is anti-feminism, anti-motherhood. Palin is an example of a mother and her love is shining in her children.

“Any country that accepts abortion is not teaching its people to love, but use any violence to get what they want. This is why the greatest destroyer of love and peace is abortion.

“Many people are very concerned with the children of India, and Africa where many die of hunger. Many people are also concerned with violence in this great country of America. These concerns are good. But often, many are not concerned with the millions who are being killed by the deliberate decision of their own mothers. Abortion is the greatest destroyer of peace today - abortion which brings people to such blindness.

“What does God say to us? He says: 'Even if a mother could forget her child, I will not forget you. I have carved you in the palm of my hand.' That unborn child has been carved in the hand of God from conception and is called by God to love and be loved, not only now in this life, but forever. God can never forget us.

“The beautiful gift God has given our congregation is to fight abortion by adoption. We have already, from our house in Calcutta, over 3,000 adoptions. And I can't tell you what joy, what love, what peace those children have brought into those families. It has been a real gift of God for them and for us.

“I remember one of the little ones was very sick, so I sent for the father and the mother and I asked them: 'Please give me back the sick child. I will give you a healthy one.' And the father looked at me and said, 'Mother Teresa, take my life first than take the child.'

"So beautiful to see it--so much love, so much joy that little one has brought into that family. So pray for us that we continue this beautiful gift. And also I offer you--our Sisters here--anybody who doesn't want the child, please give it to me. I want the child.”—Mother Teresa

TTWSYFAMDGGAHJMJ1,

Belief in superstition certainly can have destructive effects on people's lives.

Look at what it has done to you.

“ABORTION IS AN ASSAULT ON FEMINISM”
This high suicide rate following abortion clearly disproves the myth that termination of a pregnancy is safer than childbirth.

"The best record-based study linking psychiatric admission rates following abortion reveals that in the four years following pregnancy outcome, women who abort are two to four times more likely to be admitted for psychiatric hospitalization than women who carry to term.

"Another record-based study reveals that even four years after abortion the psychiatric admission rate remained 67% higher than for those women who did not have abortions.

"Aborting women were more likely to be diagnosed with adjustment reactions, depressive psychosis and neurotic and bipolar disorders, according to the Archives of Women's Mental Health, in 2001.

"The risk for postpartum depression and psychosis during later wanted births is also linked to previous abortion.

"An average of eight years after their abortions, married women were 138% more likely to be at high risk of clinical depression compared to similar women who carried their unintended first pregnancies to term. This is according to the British Medical Journal of January 19, 2002.

"In the category of drug and alcohol abuse, we see many women trying to cope with their inner conflict and grief through a 4.5 times higher risk of substance abuse following abortion.

"And this is only based on those who are reporting substance abuse. Think of all those who think that drinking eight glasses of wine each night is simply a way to "unwind." This aspect was reported in the American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse, in 2000.

"The results of the first international long-term, follow-up study led by Dr. Vincent Rue reveals overwhelming evidence of post-traumatic stress disorder.

"Statistics collected in America reveal the following:

-- 55% of those who had abortions report nightmares and preoccupation with abortion;

-- 73% describe flashbacks;

-- 58% of women report suicidal thoughts which they relate directly to their abortions;
-- 68% reveal that they feel badly about themselves;

-- 79% report guilt, with an inability to forgive themselves;

-- 63% have fears regarding future pregnancies and parenting;

-- 49% have problems being near babies;

-- 67% describe themselves as "emotionally numb."

"An exhaustive review of many other studies and certainly clinical experience indicates that for many women, the onset of sexual dysfunctions and eating disorders, increased smoking, panic and anxiety disorders, and an addiction to abusive relationships became the souvenir coping styles which followed their experience with abortion."

“ABORTION AND DEPRESSION””

http://www.priestsforlife.org/clippings/2006/06-05-04abortionanddepression.htm

"Professor David Fergusson, a researcher at Christchurch School of Medicine in New Zealand, wanted to prove that abortion doesn't have any psychological consequences.

"He was surprised to find that women who have had abortions were one-and-a-half times more likely to suffer mental illness, and two to three times more likely to abuse alcohol and/or drugs.

"Fergusson followed 500 women from birth to age 25.

"Those having an abortion had elevated rates of subsequent mental health problems, including depression (46% increase), anxiety, suicidal behaviors and substance use disorders," reads the research published in the Journal of Child Psychiatry and Psychology.

"Abortion is in fact responsible for a profound array of problems:

"1. A 160% increase in rates of suicide in the U.S., according to the Archives of Women's Mental Health, in 2001;

"2. A 225% increase in rates of suicide in Britain, according to the British Medical Journal, in 1997;

"3. A 546% increase in rates of suicide in Finland, according to the Acta Obstetrica et Gynecologica Scandinavica, in 1997.

"In total, the average boosted suicide risk of these three studies is 310%!"

IN REPLY TO (IRT)
SUSAN JACOBY
ABORTION

IRT:
“As for whether one can be a feminist and oppose abortion in all circumstances, the better question would be whether one can be a decent human being and oppose abortion in all circumstances. Do you believe that a 12-year-old should have to give birth to a baby conceived through rape?”

ANS:
Yes! Murdering even a young child’s baby is even more traumatic than the child giving birth. Abortion is a death experience. It is the demise of human potential, relationship, responsibility, maternal attachment, connectedness, and innocence. Such a loss is rarely experienced without conflict and ambivalence. Post-abortion trauma is a serious and devastating illness which has no celebrity spokeswoman, no made-for-television movie, and no platform for the talk show confessional.

On May 14, 1939, Lina Medina, Andean village of Ticrapo made medical history when she gave birth to a boy by Caesarean section at age five years seven months and 21 days. She had been having regular periods since the age of three. The mother and child were fine.

http://www.snopes.com/pregnant/medina.asp

IRT:
“Do you believe that a woman with cancer should be denied an abortion and forced to forgo chemotherapy because it would harm her fetus?”

ANS:
Whether she can be forced to be treated for cancer is not the right of government. However, the mother has a moral responsibility to reasonably protect both of their lives.

IRT:
“Do you believe that a woman carrying a Tay-Sachs fetus, who will surely die in agony, probably by age three, should be forced to give birth and watch her child whither and die?”

ANS:
Mother Teresa
“Where there is love, there is always sacrifice. And when we love until it hurts, there is joy and peace.”

No one has a right to murder an unborn child period. Consequently, the mother is to comfort her child to the best of her ability. No one knows what will happen to the child for certain, physicians have been wrong before. Consequently, if Lina were living in America now and had become pregnant, the doctors would have murdered her child.

IN REPLY TO (IRT)
BLASMAIC
“WHAT’S WRONG WITH MURDER?”

IRT:
Women have been killing their unwanted children for tens of thousands of years. Why should they stop now?

ANS:
People have been robbing stealing and lying since the beginning of man's existence too; that doesn't justify them. What’s wrong with murdering people? They have been doing it since Cain and Abel. Moreover if we are legally allowed to murder unborn children, why not be able to murder you?

There is no difference between you and the unborn; both are human beings and presumed innocent. Why is one innocent life anymore valued than another’s innocent life? For one, the Constitution is based on the fact that all men are created equal.

Second, there is a right to Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness, according to the Declaration that authorizes our Constitution. I believe murdering your unborn child violates all of these rights irrespective of our Court who has no authority to trespass on these rights.

These rights are endowed by God, not man. Consequently, they are not given by the Constitution, they are recognized by it, and therefore are inviolable. Hence, if you don’t believe you have inviolable rights, then you must believe you have no right to live.

Only humans have inviolable rights, but they can forfeit them by abusing them.

Rights are preceded by the presupposition of responsibility. Thus, irresponsible persons that abuses their right forfeit those rights.

Hence, reckless driving may cancel the right to drive. Drugs or chronic drinking could cause your death and forfeit your right to life.

Murder is an abuse of an inalienable right, the Right to Life. There is no right to murder people; that violates the Natural and Moral Law that dictates the proper behavior of all men.

IN REPLY TO (IRT)
"Women have been killing their unwanted children for tens of thousands of years."

“Perhaps, but that has nothing to do with abortion.” Posted by: PSolus | May 21, 2010 8:16 AM

ANS:
Abortion is the intentional taking of a human life of an unborn defenseless child, viz. murder. It is taking a little defenseless baby while it is living and cutting its legs off one by one with a curette, then its arm, then another arm, and next its head, or slitting its throat and cutting its head off first.

It is sucking the little baby apart with a powerful vacuum, its legs, its arms, then sucking the rest of its body apart, and squashing its head to fit in the vacuum. Or, it is scalding the little child to death.

In the scalding, unfortunately, sometimes the child survives. The murderer than strangles to death the little child, pleading for help, or drowns it in its mother’s blood. Obama voted three times his approval of that. Even then the Abortionists deny it is human while he strangles it to death.

IRT:
"Your mythian belief system prevents you from seeing the world as it really is. It may be easier for you if you simply live by yourself in your own superstitious little world, and leave the real world for the rest of us. Enjoy." POSTED BY: PSOLUS | MAY 21, 2010 8:14 AM

ANS:
How would a pro-abortionist even know what reality is when they deny the child is human, when they condone its murder. In the face of all common sense and the enormous scientific facts they deny its humanity?

How can abortionists, who deny reality, know what reality is when they can approve a butcher, masquerading as a physician, taking a surgical scissors and plunging it into the back of the head of a little child before him struggling for its first breath and then he sucks out its brains.

P,

"And who are the responsibility and accountability police? You?"

I don't know which is more frightening. This or Lepid's asinine discussion on parasites.

(BTW: A parasite "lives on or in an organism of ANOTHER species.")

We are accountable to ourselves and to each other. We hold ourselves accountable in accepting the consequences of our actions. Our community (friends, family, etc.) holds us accountable when we do not.

"And you are the one responsibility for deciding that?"

Having sex can lead to pregnancy. Having an abortion abdicates the responsibility that comes with having sex. This isn't rocket science.

Sure, people will claim they are being responsible by having an abortion, but what they really are doing is grasping at relative truth. "I'm a single mom and can barely provide for the kids I have." "I'm only 18 and have my whole life ahead of me."

Again, accepting responsibility for one's actions is not contingent on the hardship it might impose. If you don't want a child, don't have sex. Or, if you do have sex, understand your responsibility for engaging in that activity. That's not my truth, that is THE truth.

"Women have been killing their unwanted children for tens of thousands of years."

Perhaps, but that has nothing to do with abortion.

"One wonders if the moms of parasites make that information part of their children's/parasites' sex education?"

Your mythian belief system prevents you from seeing the world as it really is.

It may be easier for you if you simply live by yourself in your own superstitious little world, and leave the real world for the rest of us.

Enjoy.

Women have been killing their unwanted children for tens of thousands of years. Why should they stop now?

One wonders if the moms of parasites make that information part of their children's/parasites' sex education? "Hey Sally, did you know that you are actually a parasite mutation."

Yeal - once it's to the point where it's capable of living outside the womb, then it can be considered something more than a mere parasite, but IMO, not yet imbued with the full rights of personhood. Those are only conferred upon live birth.
And yes, when I was pregnant with my daughter, I did consider her a parasite, but a parasite that I had decided I wished to allow to use my bodily resources until such time as it no longer needed them.

"If it's inside my body, dependent on the food I eat and the air I breathe for its survival, then it is a parasite, and I have the right to decide if it is allowed to stay or if it must go."???

What mother considers her baby unplanned or not to be a parasite equivalent to a leech or bloodsuckering worm??

In five months, said young body no longer needs mom's assistance then what!!!

If it's inside my body, dependent on the food I eat and the air I breathe for its survival, then it is a parasite, and I have the right to decide if it is allowed to stay or if it must go.

"Yes, it is both, when I have been shown unquestionable proof for something, I have been taught to believe it. When the proof is unquestionable, if I don't believe it then I am a fool or a simpleton."

You have chosen an ignorant and superstitious belief system for yourself.

Good luck with it.

IN REPLY TO (IRT)
PSOLUS
POSTED MAY 20, 2010 2:03 PM

IRT:
"This is simply something that you have been taught to believe, or have chosen to believe."

ANS:
Yes, it is both, when I have been shown unquestionable proof for something, I have been taught to believe it. When the proof is unquestionable, if I don't believe it then I am a fool or a simpleton.

Thus, seeing a bottle of liquid that says poison and a person who drank some and died, then I drink it anyway, I would be a fool.

Consequently, the former Chairman of Eugenics at Mayo Clinic, Hymie Gordon, one of a multitude of eminent scientists, said, "By all the criteria of modern molecular biology, life is present from the moment of conception."

And that is followed by the “Father of Eugenics," winner of the Kennedy Award and the highest award in Eugenics, the "Allen Award," for finding the genetic cause of Down Syndrome, saying:

"By all the criteria of modern molecular biology, life is present from the moment of conception." Dr. Lejeune discovered the genetic cause of Down Syndrome, receiving the Kennedy Prize for the discovery, and, in addition, received the Memorial Allen Award Medal, the world's highest award for work in the field of Genetics.

And knowing "he practiced his profession at the Hôpital des Enfants Malades (Sick Children's Hospital) in Paris. Dr. Lejeune was a member of the American Academy of the Arts and Science, a member of the Royal Society of Medicine in London, The Royal Society of Science in Stockholm, the Science Academy in Italy and Argentina, The Pontifical Academy of Science and The Academy of Medicine in France." Yes, I am taught to believe them. The evidence is overwhelming.

Do you have anyone with credibility to contradict them?

IRT:
[Murder is the intentional taking of an innocent human life.]

"How about the taking of a guilty human life?"

ANS:
When one forfeits his right to life by intentionally murdering a defenseless innocent human person, it is not immoral for the State to justly take his life. If he is proven to be a menace to society his execution is justified.

A taking of life can also be justified in self-defense and in a war, viz. attempting to save one’s own life, Self-defense is not murder. A murderer forfeits his right to life when attempting murder.

"ABORTION IS MURDER"

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

When Does Human Life Begin?

Doctors Testify to U.S. Senate

"Many internationally-known geneticists and biologists have testified that human life begins at conception. In 1981 (April 23-24) a Senate Judiciary Subcommittee held hearings on the very question: When does human life begin? Following are testimonies from two of the doctors who testified:

"1. 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."

"2. Dr. McCarthy de Mere, a medical doctor and law professor at the University of Tennessee, testified: "The exact moment of the beginning of personhood and of the human body is at the moment of conception."

BTW:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science_and_environment/10132762.stm

"Responsibility and accountability."

And who are the responsibility and accountability police?

You?

"Simply put, having an abortion is a decision made in an effort to abdicate."

And you are the one responsibility for deciding that?

"A decision that sends a clear and unmistakable message to our young people about the power of "me". That integrity is important only to the extent that it is convenient and that the truth is relative."

Care to enlighten as to the objective truth about this, and everything else, for that matter?

"Abortion is an intrinsic evil because it is murder."

This is simply something that you have been taught to believe, or have chosen to believe.

"Murder is the intentional taking of an innocent human life."

How about the taking of a guilty human life?

"Every unborn is a human being."

This, again, is simply something that you have been taught to believe, or have chosen to believe.

"To intentionally take the Unborn's life is to murder it."

This, again, is simply something that you have been taught to believe, or have chosen to believe.

IN REPLY TO (IRT)
SUSAN JACOBY
“ABORTION”

IRT:
"First, I am not in the business of defining either feminists or the faithful. The second portion of this week's question is particularly disturbing because it shows how successful the religious right has been at infiltrating its notion of abortion as an absolute evil into the larger culture. To ask whether one can be a person of faith and support abortion in "some" circumstances is to accept the premise that abortion is always bad."

ANS:
Abortion is an intrinsic evil because it is murder. Murder is the intentional taking of an innocent human life. Every unborn is a human being. To intentionally take the Unborn's life is to murder it.

All credible Embryologists, Microbiologists, and Eugenicists will tell you it is unequivocal and with out question, the “conceived” is as much a human being as any adult human is a human being.

The only thing that can confer humanity on a being is the union of man and woman and God, who infuses into the conceived at the time of conception a human soul.

Time cannot cause a human being; it has no humanity to give. Development cannot give a being humanity; it is, as time, a measure of change. Living things develop but all developing beings are not human, as do all beings existing in time are not human.

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

"Dr. Lejeune 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.

"Dr. Lejeune also pointed out that each human being is unique -- different from the mother -- from the moment of conception. He said, "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."

Sally: I envy you and resent you. Why? Because so often you express exactly what I believe so much better than I can express it.

Thanks for a very good essay.

I'm dumbfounded by the continual designation of abortion as a "moral" issue. It is not. This has absolutely nothing to do with religion or a lack thereof.

Responsibility and accountability.

That's it. Period. End of story.

Simply put, having an abortion is a decision made in an effort to abdicate. A decision that sends a clear and unmistakable message to our young people about the power of "me". That integrity is important only to the extent that it is convenient and that the truth is relative.

Rush Limbaugh and other right wing Republicans have often ranted about the evils of feminism and yet one of the top right wing Republicans in the nation now claims the title of “frontier feminist.” Is Sarah Palin really a feminist?

The concept of feminism generally refers to the idea of gender equality. This concept causes a bit of a contradiction for politically active Bible literalists like Sarah Palin. On the one hand in her speech to the Susan B. Anthony List, Palin talks about how women can be professional and still be mothers. This message is very much consistent with the ideals of feminism. On the other hand, the Bible has numerous verses about the role of women to be submissive to their men. Women are often treated as property in the Bible.

You can read the rest of my response to this topic:

http://www.examiner.com/x-8928-Philadelphia-Atheism-Examiner~y2010m5d19-On-Faith-Sarah-Palins-feminism-faith-and-abortion

I will be responding to every issue posted in the 'On Faith' section. If you would like to be notified when my new response is up, please subscribe.

Once again, some observations about taking the life of a young baby aka abortion:

Abortion boils down to one simple question, when does human life begin? And one paramount observation/law: There is basic human morality that goes beyond the OT and NT. A fetus dies without nourishment. A baby dies without nourishment. There is no difference.

And it is obvious that intercourse and other sexual activities are out of control with over one million abortions and 19 million cases of STDs per year in the USA alone.

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 STDs 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 associated with STDs in the United States are estimated at up to $14.7 billion annually in 2006 dollars."

How in the world do we get this situation under control? A pill to temporarily eliminate the sex drive would be a good start. (Andy Rooney of 60 Minutes, 4/18/2010 described them as anti-desire pills).

And teenagers and young adults must be constantly reminded of the dangers of sexual activity and that oral sex, birth control pills, condoms and chastity belts are no protection against STDs. Might a list of those having an STD posted on the Internet help? Said names would remain until the STD has been eliminated with verification by a doctor. Lists of sexual predators are on-line. Is there a difference between these individuals and those having a STD having sexual relations while infected???

And so a growing baby is considered by some to be nothing more than an infection?

Talk about having no respect for human life!!!!!

And Nature or Nature's God is the #1 taker of everyone's life. That gives some rational for killing the unborn or those suffering from dementia, mental disease or Alzheimer's or anyone who might inconvenience your life???

We constantly battle the forces of nature. We do not succumb to these forces by eliminating defenseless children!!!!!

continued below:

With respect to saving the life of a mother vs that of her and her husband's child.

With modern technology, that situation is a rare event. When it does occur, the decision should be a made by the mother and father of the child. With no father in the picture, the decision should be left to the mother or her parents if the mother is incapacitated.

And again, some famous adoptees:

Andy Berlin - entrepreneur: chairman of Berlin Cameron & Partners
Anthony Williams - politician
Aristotle - philosopher
Art Linkletter - comedian
Bo Diddley - musician, performer
Buffy Sainte-Marie - musician, actress
Carl-Theodor Dreyer - Danish film director
Charlotte Anne Lopez - Miss Teen USA
Christina Crawford - author
Clarissa Pinkola Estes - author
Crazy Horse - Lakota war chief
Dan O'Brien - decathlete
Daunte Culpepper - football player
Dave Thomas - entrepreneur: founder of Wendy's
Debbie Harry - singer
D.M.C. - hip hop artist
Edgar Allan Poe - poet, writer
Edward Albee - playwright
Eleanor Roosevelt - First Lady
Eric Dickerson - athlete
Faith Daniels - news anchor
Faith Hill - country singer
Freddie Bartholomew - actor
George Washington Carver - inventor
Greg Louganis - athlete
James MacArthur - actor
James Michener - author
Jean Jacques Rousseau - philosopher
Jesse Jackson - minister
Jesus - adopted by Joseph the carpenter (Bible)
Jett Williams - country singer and author
Jim Palmer - athlete
John J. Audubon - naturalist
John Hancock - politician
John Lennon - musician
Langston Hughes - poet and writer
Larry Ellison - entrepreneur: chief executive of Oracle
Lee Majors - actor
Leo Tolstoy - writer
Les Brown - motivational speaker
Lynnette Cole - Miss USA 2000
Malcolm X - civil rights leader
Mark Acre - athlete
Matthew Laborteaux - actor
Melissa Gilbert - actress
Michael Reagan - author, talk show host
Moses - Biblical leader
Nancy Reagan - First Lady
Nat King Cole - singer
Nelson Mandela - politician
Patrick Labyorteaux - actor
Peter and Kitty Carruthers - figure skaters
President Gerald Ford - politician
President William Clinton - politician
Priscilla Presley - actress
Ray Liotta - actor
Reno - performance artist, comedian
Sarah McLachlan - singer
Scott Hamilton - figure skater
Sen. Paull H. Shin - politician
Sen. Robert Byrd - politician
Steve Jobs - entrepreneur: co-founder of Apple computer
Surya Bonaly - figure skater
Tim Green - football player/commentator
Tim McGraw - country singer
Tom Monaghan - entrepreneur
Tommy Davidson - comedian
Victoria Rowell - actress
Wilson Riles - educator