Child's First Right Is to Be Born, Insists Holy See

On Sat, 5 May 2007 18:52:00 -0700, "DB" wrote:


"Paul Anderson" wrote in

YOU claimed that abortion was homicide under English Common Law. As
anyone can see, abortion was not only not a homicide, it was not even
a felony. It was, a misdemeander.

So by your reasoning, failure to pay CS was never a felony until recently,
so the crime shouldn't exist.

Contempt of Court has always been a felony, and a Judge has the
power to Jail anyone in contempt until the person agrees to comply
with a court order.

Regardless if you regard abortion a crime or not, having a life extracted
from your body ain't exactly the same as extracting a rotten tooth.

Well it cost more, but a unwanted fetus is really more of a danger
than a rotten tooth. And a fetus like a rotten tooth, will eventually
fall out. A rotten tooth, will seldom kill, pregnancy is far more
likely to kill than a rotten tooth.


--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

On Sat, 5 May 2007 18:58:59 -0700, "DB" wrote:


"Robert" wrote in

You are free to kill away my good friend, must be nice to not have a
conscience?

You mean like cause the world to be filled with people that are
mostly, ignorant and have no rights, and women die by the millions
trying to have babies that will suffer a short and miserable life.

You can spin it anyway way you want, the killing of innocent life is never
justified because it's not convenient for a woman's party plans.

Kill away my good friend as I'll have no part of this misery, but it's not
me you have to answer to! LOL

Then quit accusing us of being killers, and start praying for
forgiveness. For being a self righteous prick, judging others. I am
betting if any God should exist, you will be damned for your sin of
judging other, and lieing.

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

"Paul Anderson" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 5 May 2007 22:36:08 -0700, "Bob Whiteside"
wrote:


"Paul Anderson" wrote in message
.. .
On Sat, 5 May 2007 18:17:46 -0700, "Bob Whiteside"
wrote:

...

Let me get this straight. You post that Blackstone is your authority
on
Old
English Law regarding abortion.

No, I use Blackstone to show that you lied when you claimed abortion
was homicide under Common Law. You've been dancing ever since.

Now you are getting the posters mixed up. I said abortion was murder.

Big whoopie ****. Murder is a subset of homicide. Abortion is not a
homicide nor a murder. Never has been. *ALL* Pro-Lifers are liars on
this subject as without this lie you cannot justify denying the woman
her basic human rights.

Actually pro-lifers are consistent in what they believe. The killing of a
fetus is always a homicide or murder even when it is solicited, aided,
abetted, or consented to by the mother.

Pro-choicers, on the other hand, believe consent of the mother makes the
killing of a fetus exempt from being defined as homicide or murder even
though under all other circumstances the killing of a fetus is homicide or
murder.

The question pro-choicers refuse to answer is why they believe the innate
value of the unborn human inside a mother changes when a mother consents to
an abortion. They respond with slick slogans like her body, her choice or
call critics liars. But in reality pro-choicers cannot explain or justify
the inconsistencies in their position.

It's the abortion laws that are inconsistent, not the pro-lifers.

"Bob Whiteside" wrote in message
...

"Paul Anderson" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 5 May 2007 22:36:08 -0700, "Bob Whiteside"
wrote:


"Paul Anderson" wrote in message
.. .
On Sat, 5 May 2007 18:17:46 -0700, "Bob Whiteside"
wrote:

...

Let me get this straight. You post that Blackstone is your authority
on
Old
English Law regarding abortion.

No, I use Blackstone to show that you lied when you claimed abortion
was homicide under Common Law. You've been dancing ever since.

Now you are getting the posters mixed up. I said abortion was murder.

Big whoopie ****. Murder is a subset of homicide. Abortion is not a
homicide nor a murder. Never has been. *ALL* Pro-Lifers are liars on
this subject as without this lie you cannot justify denying the woman
her basic human rights.

Actually pro-lifers are consistent in what they believe. The killing of a
fetus is always a homicide or murder even when it is solicited, aided,
abetted, or consented to by the mother.

Pro-choicers, on the other hand, believe consent of the mother makes the
killing of a fetus exempt from being defined as homicide or murder even
though under all other circumstances the killing of a fetus is homicide or
murder.

The question pro-choicers refuse to answer is why they believe the innate
value of the unborn human inside a mother changes when a mother consents
to
an abortion. They respond with slick slogans like her body, her choice or
call critics liars. But in reality pro-choicers cannot explain or justify
the inconsistencies in their position.

It's the abortion laws that are inconsistent, not the pro-lifers.

I've always been interested in the curious discrepancy between what
feminists maintain about post-conception reproductive choice (for women) and
post-conception reproductive choice for MEN. It seems that the feminists
who are most anxious to defend post-conception reproductive choice for
women--up to and including the nauseating version of infanticide known as
partial birth abortion--are also the ones who are most anxious to deny
post-conception reproductive choice to men.

Pro-choice feminists rely on biology to argue that women must have the
unilateral right to decide on abortion ("her body, her choice"). However,
they dismiss biology when it comes to denying the ability that Nature has
given men--that of walking away from unwanted pregnancies.

It's almost as if the pro-choice feminists have absolutely NO
justification in principle for the inconsistency between the choices they
would allow women and the choices they would allow men. It's almost as if
the whole thing has been decided by the relative strengths of the feminist
movement and what would be called the masculinist movement, if such a thing
existed. But it couldn't be that simple, could it?

On May 5, 11:05�pm, (Paul Anderson) wrote:
On Sat, 5 May 2007 18:52:00 -0700, "DB" wrote:

"Paul Anderson" wrote in

Again with the lies. *A fetus is not A LIFE -- which in this case
would refer to the life of a human being.

It certainly is a life.

On May 6, 6:45�am, (Paul Anderson) wrote:
On Sat, 5 May 2007 22:36:08 -0700, "Bob Whiteside"





wrote:

"Paul Anderson" wrote in message
.. .
On Sat, 5 May 2007 18:17:46 -0700, "Bob Whiteside"
wrote:

...

Let me get this straight. *You post that Blackstone is your authority on
Old
English Law regarding abortion.

No, I use Blackstone to show that you lied when you claimed abortion
was homicide under Common Law. *You've been dancing ever since.

Now you are getting the posters mixed up. *I said abortion was murder.

Big whoopie ****. *Murder is a subset of homicide. *Abortion is not a
homicide nor a murder. *Never has been. **ALL* Pro-Lifers are liars on
this subject as without this lie you cannot justify denying the woman
her basic human rights.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Basic human right? To kill? You be it should be deprived.

On May 6, 10:56�am, Robert wrote:
On Sat, 5 May 2007 18:52:00 -0700, "DB" wrote:

"Paul Anderson" wrote in

YOU claimed that abortion was homicide under English Common Law. *As
anyone can see, abortion was not only not a homicide, it was not even
a felony. *It was, a misdemeander.

So by your reasoning, failure to pay CS was never a felony until recently,
so the crime shouldn't exist.

* Contempt of Court has always been a felony, and a Judge has the
power to Jail anyone in contempt until the person agrees to comply
with a court order.

Regardless if you regard abortion a crime or not, having a life extracted
from your body ain't exactly the same as extracting a rotten tooth.

* *Well it cost more, but a unwanted fetus is really more of a danger
than a rotten tooth. And a fetus like a rotten tooth, will eventually
fall out. A rotten tooth, will seldom kill, pregnancy is far more
likely to kill than a rotten tooth.



--
Posted via a free Usenet account fromhttp://www.teranews.com

Contempt is not a felony.

On May 6, 10:56�am, Robert wrote:
On Sat, 5 May 2007 18:52:00 -0700, "DB" wrote:

"Paul Anderson" wrote in

YOU claimed that abortion was homicide under English Common Law. *As
anyone can see, abortion was not only not a homicide, it was not even
a felony. *It was, a misdemeander.

So by your reasoning, failure to pay CS was never a felony until recently,
so the crime shouldn't exist.

* Contempt of Court has always been a felony, and a Judge has the
power to Jail anyone in contempt until the person agrees to comply
with a court order.

Regardless if you regard abortion a crime or not, having a life extracted
from your body ain't exactly the same as extracting a rotten tooth.

* *Well it cost more, but a unwanted fetus is really more of a danger
than a rotten tooth. And a fetus like a rotten tooth, will eventually
fall out. A rotten tooth, will seldom kill, pregnancy is far more
likely to kill than a rotten tooth.



--
Posted via a free Usenet account fromhttp://www.teranews.com

Well, one thing is obvious. There is no clear distinction between you
and a rotting tooth.. Its really a shame your mother didn't have you
extracted with a coat hanger.

In article om,
Relayer wrote:

On May 6, 10:56�am, Robert wrote:

Well, one thing is obvious. There is no clear distinction between you
and a rotting tooth.. Its really a shame your mother didn't have you
extracted with a coat hanger.

i take it you call yourself christian, right?

--
get real. like jesus would ever own a gun or vote republican.

On Sun, 6 May 2007 11:51:24 -0700, "Bob Whiteside"
wrote:


"Paul Anderson" wrote in message
.. .
On Sat, 5 May 2007 22:36:08 -0700, "Bob Whiteside"
wrote:


"Paul Anderson" wrote in message
.. .
On Sat, 5 May 2007 18:17:46 -0700, "Bob Whiteside"
wrote:

...

Let me get this straight. You post that Blackstone is your authority
on
Old
English Law regarding abortion.

No, I use Blackstone to show that you lied when you claimed abortion
was homicide under Common Law. You've been dancing ever since.

Now you are getting the posters mixed up. I said abortion was murder.

Big whoopie ****. Murder is a subset of homicide. Abortion is not a
homicide nor a murder. Never has been. *ALL* Pro-Lifers are liars on
this subject as without this lie you cannot justify denying the woman
her basic human rights.

Actually pro-lifers are consistent in what they believe.....

Actually not. Extremely few Pro-Lifers support punishing abortion as
murder -- which is inconsistent with the claim that abortion is
murder. Nor does your dodge change the fact that abortion is not and
never has been considered to be murder, or homicide.