The barbarism that is Planned Parenthood

• Con_Alma

  sleeper;1790884 wrote:???
  
  Con_Alma states he's not okay with abortion even if the woman will DIE from giving birth. Con_Alma values an unborn parasite over the right of a woman to chose to save her own life.
  
  This is 2016. Women are people too. Time to get over it.

  Huh???? That is not my position. I have stated I support the mother's right to choose and nowhere have I said I* value the unborn over the mother.
• majorspark

  

  jmog;1790811 wrote:I would be heartbroken either way to be quite honest, and while it would kill me inside to have to do it, yes, my wife's life would be more "important" to me at that time than the baby. I guess it also depends on how far along. If the pregnancy was 9 months along my wife and I would have a serious discussion, and knowing her SHE would choose to take the risk. If it was just say 5 weeks along we probably would have a much easier "discussion".
  
  My 'human' beliefs as a husband I guess would overshadow my Christian beliefs that all innocent life is precious. I am not saying I am "right", I am saying that's how I believe I would feel.
  
  What's weird, and I honestly can't explain why, once you, as a parent, have met/partially raised that child it is backwards. I would gladly give up my life for my child's and so would my wife if it came down to it.

  I agree with everything you said except the bolded part. Late in the term the decision is easy. Remove the baby from the womb intact and do everything medically possible to save both lives. The viability of the baby to survive outside of the womb determines the difficulty of any decision.
• jmog

  Con_Alma;1790907 wrote:Huh???? That is not my position. I have stated I support the mother's right to choose and nowhere have I said I* value the unborn over the mother.

  Don't worry about sleeper. His next post will be some random thought "agreeing" with you acting like he never made an assumption about your beliefs. That way he won't have to admit he was wrong.
• sleeper

  

  jmog;1790929 wrote:Don't worry about sleeper. His next post will be some random thought "agreeing" with you acting like he never made an assumption about your beliefs. That way he won't have to admit he was wrong.

  Tell me more about how the Earth is only 6,000 year old and how Noah fit 2 of every animal on a boat during a flood that never happened. LOL
• QuakerOats

  sleeper;1790905 wrote:LOL
  
  May you go fuck yourself, now and forever.

  
  .....pray for them that calumniate you
  
  
  
  
  God blesss
• SportsAndLady

  

  QO stoppppppppppp
  
  You're scaring the new members (all 0 of them) away with your religious whackiness.
• QuakerOats

  I know; it is far less wacky to allow unborn humans to be ripped out of the womb, yet imprison those who disturb a turtle egg in the sand.
  
  
  
  God save the republic.
• Heretic

  

  QuakerOats;1790953 wrote:I know; it is far less wacky to allow unborn humans to be ripped out of the womb, yet imprison those who disturb a turtle egg in the sand.
  
  
  
  God save the republic.

  True, far better for those unwanted unborns to be born so they and their not-ready-for-this parent can start reeling in those entitlements, one after the next. THE PERFECT END-GAME!!!
• Automatik

  

  QO is also a religious wacko? I'm shocked at this revelation. :rolleyes:
• jmog

  sleeper;1790943 wrote:Tell me more about how the Earth is only 6,000 year old and how Noah fit 2 of every animal on a boat during a flood that never happened. LOL

  Find where I said either of those are scientifically proven? All I have done is show some evidences that they are scientifically possible, not even scientifically probable.
  
  You can laugh, but I will gladly trade information about scientific backgrounds.
• gut

  jmog;1791196 wrote:Find where I said either of those are scientifically proven? All I have done is show some evidences that they are scientifically possible, not even scientifically probable.
  
  You can laugh, but I will gladly trade information about scientific backgrounds.

  
  It's kind of funny how most everyone agrees it's idiotic to take the Bible literally....yet most arguments against religion/God I see are based on - wait for it - taking the Bible literally. Anyone mocking "6,000 years old" is basically announcing they're an asshole trying to start a childish debate.
  
  It's a really amazing book if not taken literally. Obviously people don't go to graduate programs in Theology if it was as simple as just taking what you read literally.
• jmog

  gut;1791254 wrote:It's kind of funny how most everyone agrees it's idiotic to take the Bible literally....yet most arguments against religion/God I see are based on - wait for it - taking the Bible literally. Anyone mocking "6,000 years old" is basically announcing they're an asshole trying to start a childish debate.
  
  It's a really amazing book if not taken literally. Obviously people don't go to graduate programs in Theology if it was as simple as just taking what you read literally.

  Exactly correct. There have been 1000s of years of research just figuring out which parts to take literally and which to take allegorically and that difference still isn't settled.
• sleeper

  

  gut;1791254 wrote:It's kind of funny how most everyone agrees it's idiotic to take the Bible literally....yet most arguments against religion/God I see are based on - wait for it - taking the Bible literally. Anyone mocking "6,000 years old" is basically announcing they're an asshole trying to start a childish debate.
  
  It's a really amazing book if not taken literally. Obviously people don't go to graduate programs in Theology if it was as simple as just taking what you read literally.

  Convenient.
  
  What else are we supposed to use as a point of reference for religious beliefs? If it's not written down, people will constantly move the goals posts if they are ever backed into a logical corner on their belief system. It's hard to have a debate with someone who can simply say "Well that part is not meat to be taken literally". Again, convenient.
• sleeper

  

  jmog;1791337 wrote:Exactly correct. There have been 1000s of years of research just figuring out which parts to take literally and which to take allegorically and that difference still isn't settled.

  1000's of years of research wasted. Why don't we just call it what it is? It's a book designed to manipulate the ignorant to extract money and influence in exchange for a promise that can never be verified because you have to die to realize your "gain".
  
  Maybe we should allocate our resources into something more useful instead of pondering what a bunch of scam artists wrote 1000's of years ago.
• CenterBHSFan

  

  Get a room. Or go to the other thread dealing with this shit >.>
  
  Fucking sick and tired of reading through this jackassery every time somebody wants to act like the smartest person in the room/net.
• gut

  sleeper;1791349 wrote:It's hard to have a debate with someone who can simply say "Well that part is not meat to be taken literally".

  No it's not, it's just intellectually lazy - cherry-picking the obvious non-literal because you haven't bothered to actually read and understand the book.
  
  Theologians have been having those debates for centuries. So, apparently, not that hard to debate.
• Heretic

  

  sleeper;1791350 wrote:1000's of years of research wasted. Why don't we just call it what it is? It's a book designed to manipulate the ignorant to extract money and influence in exchange for a promise that can never be verified because you have to die to realize your "gain".
  
  Maybe we should allocate our resources into something more useful instead of pondering what a bunch of scam artists wrote 1000's of years ago.

  This so damn much. Just go back to medieval times. You had lords and peasants. One group lived as well as possible during that era; the other lived in poverty where their lives revolved around serving their lord and could be disrupted at any time. Shit really sucked. People with sucky lives become discontented. Discontent leads to rebellion, which the bourgeois obviously doesn't want, as they hold all the cards. Therefore, "Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit..." and other lines, which all basically say "Be a good serf, do what your lord says, don't complain AND THEN when your worthless pissant life ends, you'll get your reward and live in bliss in heaven for eternity!!!" And, of course, back then, you had the sort of strong and hilariously corrupt church where that sort of stuff was enforced with forceful zeal to really pound it into peoples' heads they NEED to be living a certain (subservient) way.
  
  Religion: A man-made construct designed by the elite to keep the masses in line. Nothing more needs to be said. At least in today's world, in civilized areas, it has lost enough appeal that witch burnings, inquisitions and other activities designed to cow the masses into submission have fallen out of favor; and the worst thing a lot of normal people have to deal with is ignorant people scrambling for bible verses as a way to "confirm" their personal prejudices.
• sleeper

  

  gut;1791353 wrote:No it's not, it's just intellectually lazy - cherry-picking the obvious non-literal because you haven't bothered to actually read and understand the book.
  
  Theologians have been having those debates for centuries. So, apparently, not that hard to debate.

  Theologians will debate anything to keep getting those government grants for "research".
  
  Again, you avoided entirely my question. If you have to spend time, 1000's of years apparently, to decipher what is meant to be taken literally and what is not, can you just skip to the next step and throw the entire thing in the garbage where it belongs? The book is not supposed to be taken literally, it was made up for the reasons I listed above; the long con if you will.
• sleeper

  

  Also, I'm guessing about 99% of all Catholics(or whatever) haven't read the book either.
• Mulva

  

  gut;1791254 wrote: Anyone mocking "6,000 years old" is basically announcing they're an asshole trying to start a childish debate
  .

  Some things deserve to be mocked.
• Automatik

  

  lol @ "childish"
  
  
  Jonah, Noah, woman from a rib bone. :laugh:
• sleeper

  

  Automatik;1791700 wrote:lol @ "childish"
  
  
  Jonah, Noah, woman from a rib bone. :laugh:

  It's not meant to be taken literally and you can't prove that it didn't happen!
  
  I really despise religion and its followers. What a bunch of fucking morons.
• MontyBrunswick

  

  sleeper;1791711 wrote:
  I really despise religion and its followers. What a bunch of fucking morons.

  ill pray for you.
• fish82

  

  sleeper;1791711 wrote:I really despise religion and its followers.

  No shit...seriously? Gosh...first I've heard of this. :laugh:
• Tiernan

  State of Ohio gave all you Right to Lifers a big OL' FUK U today didn't they Quaker Oats? Loved it.