🚀 go-pugleaf

RetroBBS NetNews Server

Inspired by RockSolid Light RIP Retro Guy

Article View: alt.support.abortion
Article #10

Re: Who speaks for the baby?

#10
From: Karen Gordon
Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2008 20:43
64 lines
3218 bytes
Mark Sebree (sebree@infionline.net) writes:
> On Apr 20, 2:30=A0pm, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
>> On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 09:41:32 -0700 (PDT), Mark Sebree <seb...@infionline.n=
> et>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >> >> When they are human, they are unborn children.
>> >> >No, they are still embryos and fetuses.
>> >> They human life with a soul.
>> >First, you have never shown that a soul even exists.
>>
>> God said it does.
> 
> I do not care what you claim when you cannot support those claims.
> Calling yourself "god" does not help.  All that does is show the
> weakness of your position, and admit that you cannot support your
> claim.
> 
>>
>> >Second, they are embryos and fetuses.
>>
>> They are human life pre-birth.
> 
> They are not human beings or persons.  They are embryos and fetuses.
> 
> The woman is a person and a human being, and it is her body that is
> being used against her will.
> 
>>
>> >Third, so the woman that you ignore and that is having her body used
>> >against her will
> 
> [replace rest of paragraph that was dishonestly snipped]
> 
>> > and without her consent by the embryo/fetus is a
>> > human being and a person, and if it exists, possesses this mythical
>> > soul that you mentioned.  What's more, she is not bound by your
>> > superstitions, beliefs, or opinions
> 
> [end replacement]
> 
>>
>> She chose to put it there.
> 
> Not is the pregnancy was unplanned and unwanted.  Chances are she was
> using some method or methods of birth control to prevent the
> pregnancy, and those methods failed.
> 
>>=A0Don't claim it's against her will, turkey.
> 
> Why not when it is the truth.  If she wants to complete the pregnancy,
> then the pregnancy is not unwanted and the embryo/fetus is not using
> her body without her consent and without her permission.  A woman that
> is experiencing a wanted pregnancy does not get an abortion unless
> there is a significant and verifiable medical reason for it, like an
> etopic pregnancy.
> 
> Just because you do not like the truth does not mean that I will stop
> telling it to you.
> 
> Mark Sebree
> 
>>
>> duke
Technical Details
Message-ID: <fug9tf$fmh$1@theodyn.ncf.ca>
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!g2news1.google.com!news2.google.com!news.glorb.com!news.acm.uiuc.edu!news.xcski.com!ncf.ca!FreeNet.Carleton.CA!ar231
References: <e88ebf87-8986-487b-8ada-c1555e6ec231@m44g2000hsc.googlegroups.com>

Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
X-Google-Thread: 101e74,4b4ddd6a453dd482
X-Google-Thread: 10dda6,4b4ddd6a453dd482
X-Google-Thread: 104eff,4b4ddd6a453dd482
X-Google-Thread: 111a85,de1dbcfacfe2d55b
X-Google-Attributes: gid101e74,gid10dda6,gid104eff,gid111a85,domainid0,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!g2news1.google.com!news2.google.com!news.glorb.com!news.acm.uiuc.edu!news.xcski.com!ncf.ca!FreeNet.Carleton.CA!ar231
From: ar231@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Karen Gordon)
Newsgroups: alt.support.abortion,alt.politics.usa.misc,ca.politics,or.politics
Subject: Re: Who speaks for the baby?
Date: 20 Apr 2008 20:43:27 GMT
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Lines: 66
Distribution: usa
Message-ID: <fug9tf$fmh$1@theodyn.ncf.ca>
References: <e88ebf87-8986-487b-8ada-c1555e6ec231@m44g2000hsc.googlegroups.com>
Reply-To: sebree@infionline.net (Mark Sebree)
NNTP-Posting-Host: smeagol.ncf.ca
X-Trace: theodyn.ncf.ca 1208724207 16081 134.117.136.48 (20 Apr 2008 20:43:27 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: complaints@ncf.ca
NNTP-Posting-Date: 20 Apr 2008 20:43:27 GMT