|
The new pope...
|
The new pope...
|
The new pope...
|
The new pope...
|
The new pope...
On 3/15/13 9:55 AM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote:
On 3/15/2013 9:54 AM, Wayne B wrote: On Fri, 15 Mar 2013 07:51:39 -0400, BAR wrote: ======== The Roman Catholic church, led by the pope, has been a regressive force against every attempt a population control. A major portion of the world's problems are the result of over population and it's just going to get worse until a majority of people recognize the issue. One of the primary teachings of the Roman Catholic Church and most other christian churches is the sanctity of life. ==== No reasonable person would argue against the sanctity of life. The problem arises because your particular church, and some others, believe that life begins at conception even though there is not a shred of scientific evidence to support that notion. That's what makes it a religious belief: It is based on faith. You are entitled to your religious beliefs of course, and I support that right. However, when you start advocating and lobbying for laws that support your beliefs, you are trampling on the rights and beliefs of others. No woman should be forced to bring an unwanted child into the world just to comply with someone else's religious beliefs. Kinda' like Row vs Wade forcing me to pay for someone else s abortions? Look, everyone knows you are not very well educated or sophisticated, nor do you bother to research before you post, but... The Roe v. Wade decision has nothing to do with you being forced to "pay for someone else's abortions." |
The new pope...
On 3/15/13 10:45 AM, iBoaterer wrote:
In article , says... On Fri, 15 Mar 2013 09:55:57 -0400, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote: Kinda' like Row vs Wade forcing me to pay for someone else s abortions? === That's nonsense. Of course it is, it's Scotty!! Who, in his 50's, is married, presumably loyal, and still wears condoms because... |
The new pope...
On 3/15/2013 10:55 AM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 3/15/13 9:55 AM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote: On 3/15/2013 9:54 AM, Wayne B wrote: On Fri, 15 Mar 2013 07:51:39 -0400, BAR wrote: ======== The Roman Catholic church, led by the pope, has been a regressive force against every attempt a population control. A major portion of the world's problems are the result of over population and it's just going to get worse until a majority of people recognize the issue. One of the primary teachings of the Roman Catholic Church and most other christian churches is the sanctity of life. ==== No reasonable person would argue against the sanctity of life. The problem arises because your particular church, and some others, believe that life begins at conception even though there is not a shred of scientific evidence to support that notion. That's what makes it a religious belief: It is based on faith. You are entitled to your religious beliefs of course, and I support that right. However, when you start advocating and lobbying for laws that support your beliefs, you are trampling on the rights and beliefs of others. No woman should be forced to bring an unwanted child into the world just to comply with someone else's religious beliefs. Kinda' like Row vs Wade forcing me to pay for someone else s abortions? Look, everyone knows you are not very well educated or sophisticated, nor do you bother to research before you post, but... The Roe v. Wade decision has nothing to do with you being forced to "pay for someone else's abortions." You are as dense (dishonest) as kevin... |
The new pope...
On 3/15/13 11:00 AM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote:
On 3/15/2013 10:55 AM, F.O.A.D. wrote: On 3/15/13 9:55 AM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote: On 3/15/2013 9:54 AM, Wayne B wrote: On Fri, 15 Mar 2013 07:51:39 -0400, BAR wrote: ======== The Roman Catholic church, led by the pope, has been a regressive force against every attempt a population control. A major portion of the world's problems are the result of over population and it's just going to get worse until a majority of people recognize the issue. One of the primary teachings of the Roman Catholic Church and most other christian churches is the sanctity of life. ==== No reasonable person would argue against the sanctity of life. The problem arises because your particular church, and some others, believe that life begins at conception even though there is not a shred of scientific evidence to support that notion. That's what makes it a religious belief: It is based on faith. You are entitled to your religious beliefs of course, and I support that right. However, when you start advocating and lobbying for laws that support your beliefs, you are trampling on the rights and beliefs of others. No woman should be forced to bring an unwanted child into the world just to comply with someone else's religious beliefs. Kinda' like Row vs Wade forcing me to pay for someone else s abortions? Look, everyone knows you are not very well educated or sophisticated, nor do you bother to research before you post, but... The Roe v. Wade decision has nothing to do with you being forced to "pay for someone else's abortions." You are as dense (dishonest) as kevin... I've read Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton. There is nothing in those decisions that forces you to pay for someone else's abortions. Your claim that it is otherwise is just ignorant nonsense. |
The new pope...
On 3/14/2013 11:02 PM, Wayne B wrote:
On Thu, 14 Mar 2013 22:18:30 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote: "Wayne B" wrote in message ... On Thu, 14 Mar 2013 18:14:59 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote: please tell us how this Pope, or his immediate predecessors have adversely affected your life or interfered with your beliefs. ======== The Roman Catholic church, led by the pope, has been a regressive force against every attempt a population control. A major portion of the world's problems are the result of over population and it's just going to get worse until a majority of people recognize the issue. --------------------------------------- Maybe that's true in third world countries but I don't think the Catholic church's traditional views on contraception or abortion have much affect on people in the USA and other "modern" societies, even among those who are Catholic. For the record, I am not but I know many who are and virtually all of them practiced contraception methods that are "forbidden" by the church. For many, church teachings and traditions are a buffet ... take what you like and leave the rest. I see nothing wrong with that. ==== That's all fine as far as it goes but the church has also been a strong avocate for opposing legislation. Good for them. Birth control doesn't fall with the realm of things that need to or should be legislated. |
The new pope...
|
The new pope...
|
The new pope...
On 3/15/13 11:52 AM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote:
On 3/15/2013 11:25 AM, wrote: On Fri, 15 Mar 2013 09:55:57 -0400, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote: No woman should be forced to bring an unwanted child into the world just to comply with someone else's religious beliefs. Kinda' like Row vs Wade forcing me to pay for someone else s abortions? The $500 abortion is a lot cheaper than 18 years of welfare and a life time of prison costs. And more specifically which women in the US don't have access simply because there is an so far unsuccessful lobby group out there? As just one example, there is a single abortion provider in the state of Mississippi, and next month the state will hold a license hearing on the facility in an attempt to shut it down. I think Kansas and several other backwards states are moving in similar directions, and I know there are attempts in Virginia to shut down clinics. So, there is an answer to your question. Women of Mississippi may soon lose the one clinic in their state that provides abortions, and therefore they will have no access unless they have a way to get to another state. Perhaps you should expand your research venues. |
The new pope...
On 3/14/2013 11:13 PM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote:
On 3/14/2013 10:18 PM, Eisboch wrote: For many, church teachings and traditions are a buffet ... take what you like and leave the rest. I see nothing wrong with that. ....except it's dismissive bull****. They don't "take what you like"... You make decisions to follow teachings or not based on your own experience and your willingness to sin for the mortal life. Sometimes you decide to let the Lord judge you, not folks here who would "gage" how much of a Christian somebody is.. as that alone shows a lack of understanding and tolerance too... Believe what you want. Do as you please, but don't break the law. And you won't go to jail or hell. |
The new pope...
On 3/15/2013 11:55 AM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 3/15/13 11:52 AM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote: On 3/15/2013 11:25 AM, wrote: On Fri, 15 Mar 2013 09:55:57 -0400, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote: No woman should be forced to bring an unwanted child into the world just to comply with someone else's religious beliefs. Kinda' like Row vs Wade forcing me to pay for someone else s abortions? The $500 abortion is a lot cheaper than 18 years of welfare and a life time of prison costs. And more specifically which women in the US don't have access simply because there is an so far unsuccessful lobby group out there? As just one example, there is a single abortion provider in the state of Mississippi, and next month the state will hold a license hearing on the facility in an attempt to shut it down. I think Kansas and several other backwards states are moving in similar directions, and I know there are attempts in Virginia to shut down clinics. So, there is an answer to your question. Women of Mississippi may soon lose the one clinic in their state that provides abortions, and therefore they will have no access unless they have a way to get to another state. Perhaps you should expand your research venues. Yes, the answer to my question is there are no women in the US who don't have access because of the Church. |
The new pope...
On 3/15/13 12:09 PM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote:
On 3/15/2013 11:55 AM, F.O.A.D. wrote: On 3/15/13 11:52 AM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote: On 3/15/2013 11:25 AM, wrote: On Fri, 15 Mar 2013 09:55:57 -0400, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote: No woman should be forced to bring an unwanted child into the world just to comply with someone else's religious beliefs. Kinda' like Row vs Wade forcing me to pay for someone else s abortions? The $500 abortion is a lot cheaper than 18 years of welfare and a life time of prison costs. And more specifically which women in the US don't have access simply because there is an so far unsuccessful lobby group out there? As just one example, there is a single abortion provider in the state of Mississippi, and next month the state will hold a license hearing on the facility in an attempt to shut it down. I think Kansas and several other backwards states are moving in similar directions, and I know there are attempts in Virginia to shut down clinics. So, there is an answer to your question. Women of Mississippi may soon lose the one clinic in their state that provides abortions, and therefore they will have no access unless they have a way to get to another state. Perhaps you should expand your research venues. Yes, the answer to my question is there are no women in the US who don't have access because of the Church. If that Mississippi clinic is forced to close, lower income women in Mississippi will not have reasonable access to a clinic, especially since other southern states are proceeding similarly. |
The new pope...
On 3/15/2013 12:23 PM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 3/15/13 12:09 PM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote: On 3/15/2013 11:55 AM, F.O.A.D. wrote: On 3/15/13 11:52 AM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote: On 3/15/2013 11:25 AM, wrote: On Fri, 15 Mar 2013 09:55:57 -0400, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote: No woman should be forced to bring an unwanted child into the world just to comply with someone else's religious beliefs. Kinda' like Row vs Wade forcing me to pay for someone else s abortions? The $500 abortion is a lot cheaper than 18 years of welfare and a life time of prison costs. And more specifically which women in the US don't have access simply because there is an so far unsuccessful lobby group out there? As just one example, there is a single abortion provider in the state of Mississippi, and next month the state will hold a license hearing on the facility in an attempt to shut it down. I think Kansas and several other backwards states are moving in similar directions, and I know there are attempts in Virginia to shut down clinics. So, there is an answer to your question. Women of Mississippi may soon lose the one clinic in their state that provides abortions, and therefore they will have no access unless they have a way to get to another state. Perhaps you should expand your research venues. Yes, the answer to my question is there are no women in the US who don't have access because of the Church. If that Mississippi clinic is forced to close, lower income women in Mississippi will not have reasonable access to a clinic, especially since other southern states are proceeding similarly. Let me know when it happens... |
The new pope...
On 3/15/2013 12:30 PM, J Herring wrote:
On Fri, 15 Mar 2013 12:23:30 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote: On 3/15/13 12:09 PM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote: On 3/15/2013 11:55 AM, F.O.A.D. wrote: On 3/15/13 11:52 AM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote: On 3/15/2013 11:25 AM, wrote: On Fri, 15 Mar 2013 09:55:57 -0400, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote: No woman should be forced to bring an unwanted child into the world just to comply with someone else's religious beliefs. Kinda' like Row vs Wade forcing me to pay for someone else s abortions? The $500 abortion is a lot cheaper than 18 years of welfare and a life time of prison costs. And more specifically which women in the US don't have access simply because there is an so far unsuccessful lobby group out there? As just one example, there is a single abortion provider in the state of Mississippi, and next month the state will hold a license hearing on the facility in an attempt to shut it down. I think Kansas and several other backwards states are moving in similar directions, and I know there are attempts in Virginia to shut down clinics. So, there is an answer to your question. Women of Mississippi may soon lose the one clinic in their state that provides abortions, and therefore they will have no access unless they have a way to get to another state. Perhaps you should expand your research venues. Yes, the answer to my question is there are no women in the US who don't have access because of the Church. If that Mississippi clinic is forced to close, lower income women in Mississippi will not have reasonable access to a clinic, especially since other southern states are proceeding similarly. There are many other methods of birth control besides killing a baby. If there's only one clinic, then very few folks have reasonable access to it anyway (remember all the problems you mentioned yesterday?). Can they not get medical care at their local hospital? Perhaps education is the key. Salmonbait -- Hope you're having a spectacular day! Doesn't seem to be a religious problem at all. It's the state interfering with woman's rights. |
The new pope...
On Fri, 15 Mar 2013 12:35:56 -0400, Meyer wrote:
On 3/15/2013 12:30 PM, J Herring wrote: On Fri, 15 Mar 2013 12:23:30 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote: On 3/15/13 12:09 PM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote: On 3/15/2013 11:55 AM, F.O.A.D. wrote: On 3/15/13 11:52 AM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote: On 3/15/2013 11:25 AM, wrote: On Fri, 15 Mar 2013 09:55:57 -0400, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote: No woman should be forced to bring an unwanted child into the world just to comply with someone else's religious beliefs. Kinda' like Row vs Wade forcing me to pay for someone else s abortions? The $500 abortion is a lot cheaper than 18 years of welfare and a life time of prison costs. And more specifically which women in the US don't have access simply because there is an so far unsuccessful lobby group out there? As just one example, there is a single abortion provider in the state of Mississippi, and next month the state will hold a license hearing on the facility in an attempt to shut it down. I think Kansas and several other backwards states are moving in similar directions, and I know there are attempts in Virginia to shut down clinics. So, there is an answer to your question. Women of Mississippi may soon lose the one clinic in their state that provides abortions, and therefore they will have no access unless they have a way to get to another state. Perhaps you should expand your research venues. Yes, the answer to my question is there are no women in the US who don't have access because of the Church. If that Mississippi clinic is forced to close, lower income women in Mississippi will not have reasonable access to a clinic, especially since other southern states are proceeding similarly. There are many other methods of birth control besides killing a baby. If there's only one clinic, then very few folks have reasonable access to it anyway (remember all the problems you mentioned yesterday?). Can they not get medical care at their local hospital? Perhaps education is the key. Salmonbait -- Hope you're having a spectacular day! Doesn't seem to be a religious problem at all. It's the state interfering with woman's rights. Maybe it's the state protecting the baby's rights! Salmonbait -- Hope you're having a spectacular day! |
The new pope...
On 3/15/2013 7:51 AM, BAR wrote:
In article , says... On Thu, 14 Mar 2013 18:14:59 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote: please tell us how this Pope, or his immediate predecessors have adversely affected your life or interfered with your beliefs. ======== The Roman Catholic church, led by the pope, has been a regressive force against every attempt a population control. A major portion of the world's problems are the result of over population and it's just going to get worse until a majority of people recognize the issue. One of the primary teachings of the Roman Catholic Church and most other christian churches is the sanctity of life. What is India's excuse, I mean the Hindi's excuse for not controlling thier population. Are you a adherent to Sanger's policies. Does Wayne not believe in the sanctity of life as Krause does? |
The new pope...
|
The new pope...
On 3/15/2013 9:54 AM, Wayne B wrote:
On Fri, 15 Mar 2013 07:51:39 -0400, BAR wrote: ======== The Roman Catholic church, led by the pope, has been a regressive force against every attempt a population control. A major portion of the world's problems are the result of over population and it's just going to get worse until a majority of people recognize the issue. One of the primary teachings of the Roman Catholic Church and most other christian churches is the sanctity of life. ==== No reasonable person would argue against the sanctity of life. The problem arises because your particular church, and some others, believe that life begins at conception even though there is not a shred of scientific evidence to support that notion. That's what makes it a religious belief: It is based on faith. You are entitled to your religious beliefs of course, and I support that right. However, when you start advocating and lobbying for laws that support your beliefs, you are trampling on the rights and beliefs of others. No woman should be forced to bring an unwanted child into the world just to comply with someone else's religious beliefs. Have a look at what you are advocating, if you dare. http://www.100abortionpictures.com/A...ortion_Photos/ |
The new pope...
In article ,
says... On 3/15/2013 11:25 AM, wrote: On Fri, 15 Mar 2013 09:55:57 -0400, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote: No woman should be forced to bring an unwanted child into the world just to comply with someone else's religious beliefs. Kinda' like Row vs Wade forcing me to pay for someone else s abortions? The $500 abortion is a lot cheaper than 18 years of welfare and a life time of prison costs. Can't argue with that... but it's not my issue here. My issue is why it's ok for folks to lobby congress to get laws passed that force me to pay for abortions, but I can not lobby congress to change that law? You've been asked and asked WHAT LAWS "force you to pay for an abortion"???? |
The new pope...
In article ,
says... On 3/15/2013 12:23 PM, F.O.A.D. wrote: On 3/15/13 12:09 PM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote: On 3/15/2013 11:55 AM, F.O.A.D. wrote: On 3/15/13 11:52 AM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote: On 3/15/2013 11:25 AM, wrote: On Fri, 15 Mar 2013 09:55:57 -0400, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote: No woman should be forced to bring an unwanted child into the world just to comply with someone else's religious beliefs. Kinda' like Row vs Wade forcing me to pay for someone else s abortions? The $500 abortion is a lot cheaper than 18 years of welfare and a life time of prison costs. And more specifically which women in the US don't have access simply because there is an so far unsuccessful lobby group out there? As just one example, there is a single abortion provider in the state of Mississippi, and next month the state will hold a license hearing on the facility in an attempt to shut it down. I think Kansas and several other backwards states are moving in similar directions, and I know there are attempts in Virginia to shut down clinics. So, there is an answer to your question. Women of Mississippi may soon lose the one clinic in their state that provides abortions, and therefore they will have no access unless they have a way to get to another state. Perhaps you should expand your research venues. Yes, the answer to my question is there are no women in the US who don't have access because of the Church. If that Mississippi clinic is forced to close, lower income women in Mississippi will not have reasonable access to a clinic, especially since other southern states are proceeding similarly. Let me know when it happens... Why, are you going to bomb it, you insane low class fool? |
The new pope...
On 3/15/2013 12:52 PM, J Herring wrote:
On Fri, 15 Mar 2013 12:35:56 -0400, Meyer wrote: On 3/15/2013 12:30 PM, J Herring wrote: On Fri, 15 Mar 2013 12:23:30 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote: On 3/15/13 12:09 PM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote: On 3/15/2013 11:55 AM, F.O.A.D. wrote: On 3/15/13 11:52 AM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote: On 3/15/2013 11:25 AM, wrote: On Fri, 15 Mar 2013 09:55:57 -0400, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote: No woman should be forced to bring an unwanted child into the world just to comply with someone else's religious beliefs. Kinda' like Row vs Wade forcing me to pay for someone else s abortions? The $500 abortion is a lot cheaper than 18 years of welfare and a life time of prison costs. And more specifically which women in the US don't have access simply because there is an so far unsuccessful lobby group out there? As just one example, there is a single abortion provider in the state of Mississippi, and next month the state will hold a license hearing on the facility in an attempt to shut it down. I think Kansas and several other backwards states are moving in similar directions, and I know there are attempts in Virginia to shut down clinics. So, there is an answer to your question. Women of Mississippi may soon lose the one clinic in their state that provides abortions, and therefore they will have no access unless they have a way to get to another state. Perhaps you should expand your research venues. Yes, the answer to my question is there are no women in the US who don't have access because of the Church. If that Mississippi clinic is forced to close, lower income women in Mississippi will not have reasonable access to a clinic, especially since other southern states are proceeding similarly. There are many other methods of birth control besides killing a baby. If there's only one clinic, then very few folks have reasonable access to it anyway (remember all the problems you mentioned yesterday?). Can they not get medical care at their local hospital? Perhaps education is the key. Salmonbait -- Hope you're having a spectacular day! Doesn't seem to be a religious problem at all. It's the state interfering with woman's rights. Maybe it's the state protecting the baby's rights! Salmonbait -- Hope you're having a spectacular day! It's not the state's business. There are already laws on the books dealing with murder. |
The new pope...
On 3/15/2013 10:58 AM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 3/15/13 10:45 AM, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Fri, 15 Mar 2013 09:55:57 -0400, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote: Kinda' like Row vs Wade forcing me to pay for someone else s abortions? === That's nonsense. Of course it is, it's Scotty!! Who, in his 50's, is married, presumably loyal, and still wears condoms because... What makes you an expert? You sold condoms and whiskey door to door. You are no expert on the subject. |
The new pope...
On Fri, 15 Mar 2013 10:27:32 -0400, J Herring
wrote: If the legislation promoted the killing of babies, then the Church did as it should. ===== If the church is gong to act as a lobbyist for a faith based belief, then they should lose their tax exempt status. Those bingo games and carnivals bring in a lot of revenue which has nothing to do with the church's mission. |
The new pope...
On Fri, 15 Mar 2013 15:46:32 -0400, Wayne B wrote:
On Fri, 15 Mar 2013 10:27:32 -0400, J Herring wrote: If the legislation promoted the killing of babies, then the Church did as it should. ===== If the church is gong to act as a lobbyist for a faith based belief, then they should lose their tax exempt status. Those bingo games and carnivals bring in a lot of revenue which has nothing to do with the church's mission. The Church may lobby against killing. Nothing wrong with that. What did you say when your wife said, "Feel the baby kicking!" Salmonbait -- Hope you're having a spectacular day! |
The new pope...
On Fri, 15 Mar 2013 20:24:57 -0400, J Herring
wrote: On Fri, 15 Mar 2013 15:46:32 -0400, Wayne B wrote: On Fri, 15 Mar 2013 10:27:32 -0400, J Herring wrote: If the legislation promoted the killing of babies, then the Church did as it should. ===== If the church is gong to act as a lobbyist for a faith based belief, then they should lose their tax exempt status. Those bingo games and carnivals bring in a lot of revenue which has nothing to do with the church's mission. The Church may lobby against killing. Nothing wrong with that. What did you say when your wife said, "Feel the baby kicking!" ========= That's different. We've had this discussion before and I'm not going to chase your circular reasoning. Be ready to start paying taxes on those bingo earnings. |
The new pope...
On Fri, 15 Mar 2013 23:14:07 -0400, Wayne B wrote:
On Fri, 15 Mar 2013 20:24:57 -0400, J Herring wrote: On Fri, 15 Mar 2013 15:46:32 -0400, Wayne B wrote: On Fri, 15 Mar 2013 10:27:32 -0400, J Herring wrote: If the legislation promoted the killing of babies, then the Church did as it should. ===== If the church is gong to act as a lobbyist for a faith based belief, then they should lose their tax exempt status. Those bingo games and carnivals bring in a lot of revenue which has nothing to do with the church's mission. The Church may lobby against killing. Nothing wrong with that. What did you say when your wife said, "Feel the baby kicking!" ========= That's different. We've had this discussion before and I'm not going to chase your circular reasoning. Be ready to start paying taxes on those bingo earnings. Oh, 'that's different' - but only when it's *your* baby! OK, enough is enough. I'll gladly pay taxes on any gambling winnings I have at bingo games. Paying my taxes is not something I do joyfully, but it *is* something I do! Salmonbait -- Hope you're having a spectacular day! |
The new pope...
On 3/16/13 8:32 AM, J Herring wrote:
On Fri, 15 Mar 2013 23:14:07 -0400, Wayne B wrote: On Fri, 15 Mar 2013 20:24:57 -0400, J Herring wrote: On Fri, 15 Mar 2013 15:46:32 -0400, Wayne B wrote: On Fri, 15 Mar 2013 10:27:32 -0400, J Herring wrote: If the legislation promoted the killing of babies, then the Church did as it should. ===== If the church is gong to act as a lobbyist for a faith based belief, then they should lose their tax exempt status. Those bingo games and carnivals bring in a lot of revenue which has nothing to do with the church's mission. The Church may lobby against killing. Nothing wrong with that. What did you say when your wife said, "Feel the baby kicking!" ========= That's different. We've had this discussion before and I'm not going to chase your circular reasoning. Be ready to start paying taxes on those bingo earnings. Oh, 'that's different' - but only when it's *your* baby! OK, enough is enough. Salmonbait http://tinyurl.com/cwcrbmj |
The new pope...
|
The new pope...
|
The new pope...
In article om,
says... On 3/15/2013 12:52 PM, J Herring wrote: On Fri, 15 Mar 2013 12:35:56 -0400, Meyer wrote: On 3/15/2013 12:30 PM, J Herring wrote: On Fri, 15 Mar 2013 12:23:30 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote: On 3/15/13 12:09 PM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote: On 3/15/2013 11:55 AM, F.O.A.D. wrote: On 3/15/13 11:52 AM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote: On 3/15/2013 11:25 AM, wrote: On Fri, 15 Mar 2013 09:55:57 -0400, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote: No woman should be forced to bring an unwanted child into the world just to comply with someone else's religious beliefs. Kinda' like Row vs Wade forcing me to pay for someone else s abortions? The $500 abortion is a lot cheaper than 18 years of welfare and a life time of prison costs. And more specifically which women in the US don't have access simply because there is an so far unsuccessful lobby group out there? As just one example, there is a single abortion provider in the state of Mississippi, and next month the state will hold a license hearing on the facility in an attempt to shut it down. I think Kansas and several other backwards states are moving in similar directions, and I know there are attempts in Virginia to shut down clinics. So, there is an answer to your question. Women of Mississippi may soon lose the one clinic in their state that provides abortions, and therefore they will have no access unless they have a way to get to another state. Perhaps you should expand your research venues. Yes, the answer to my question is there are no women in the US who don't have access because of the Church. If that Mississippi clinic is forced to close, lower income women in Mississippi will not have reasonable access to a clinic, especially since other southern states are proceeding similarly. There are many other methods of birth control besides killing a baby. If there's only one clinic, then very few folks have reasonable access to it anyway (remember all the problems you mentioned yesterday?). Can they not get medical care at their local hospital? Perhaps education is the key. Salmonbait -- Hope you're having a spectacular day! Doesn't seem to be a religious problem at all. It's the state interfering with woman's rights. Maybe it's the state protecting the baby's rights! Salmonbait -- Hope you're having a spectacular day! It's not the state's business. There are already laws on the books dealing with murder. Why is an abortion not murder? When a woman who is pregnant is killed and the baby is killed the killer can be charged with two murders. |
The new pope...
|
The new pope...
|
The new pope...
In article ,
says... In article , says... On Fri, 15 Mar 2013 07:51:39 -0400, BAR wrote: ======== The Roman Catholic church, led by the pope, has been a regressive force against every attempt a population control. A major portion of the world's problems are the result of over population and it's just going to get worse until a majority of people recognize the issue. One of the primary teachings of the Roman Catholic Church and most other christian churches is the sanctity of life. ==== No reasonable person would argue against the sanctity of life. The problem arises because your particular church, and some others, believe that life begins at conception even though there is not a shred of scientific evidence to support that notion. That's what Scientific evidence may not exist today that life begins at conception but, science changes all of the time. New scientific evidence is being found or discovered every day. When an egg and sperm merge what is the outcome, life. Do you have evidence that emphatically and unquestioningly supports your belief that life does not begin at conception? makes it a religious belief: It is based on faith. You are entitled to your religious beliefs of course, and I support that right. However, when you start advocating and lobbying for laws that support your beliefs, you are trampling on the rights and beliefs of others. Everyone advocate and lobbies for laws that support their beliefs regardless as to whether their beliefs are scientifically supported or not. Laws do not have to be based upon and wholly supported by science. No woman should be forced to bring an unwanted child into the world just to comply with someone else's religious beliefs. I am pro-life, my position is pro-life and I want other people to be pro-life. Killing babies in the womb is not something I can not support. I have never said that I want abortion abolished or to prevent others from getting abortions. This country is based upon the premise that everyone's voice should be heard. As someone who is pro life, I'd guess you are then against the death penalty and against guns sold for killing? What about hunting? Fishing? |
The new pope...
On Sat, 16 Mar 2013 08:32:31 -0400, J Herring
wrote: Oh, 'that's different' - but only when it's *your* baby! No, what's diffrent is that you are talking about late term abortion. I am not. OK, enough is enough. I'll gladly pay taxes on any gambling winnings I have at bingo games. Paying my taxes is not something I do joyfully, but it *is* something I do! I'm talking about the Catholic church losing their tax exemption and paying taxes on *their* gambling earnings. |
The new pope...
On Sat, 16 Mar 2013 09:37:01 -0400, BAR wrote:
Why should a religious institution be denied the right to speak freely? === There is a difference between speaking freely and hard core lobbying efforts. |
The new pope...
On Sat, 16 Mar 2013 09:36:11 -0400, BAR wrote:
In article , says... On Fri, 15 Mar 2013 10:27:32 -0400, J Herring wrote: If the legislation promoted the killing of babies, then the Church did as it should. ===== If the church is gong to act as a lobbyist for a faith based belief, then they should lose their tax exempt status. Those bingo games and carnivals bring in a lot of revenue which has nothing to do with the church's mission. If I refrain from pushing any religious beliefs can I stop paying taxes? ===== You'll have to talk with Harry about that. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:22 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com