Article View: la.general
Article #3583Re: Ban Religious Bigots
From: Bill D
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1998 00:00
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1998 00:00
96 lines
5398 bytes
5398 bytes
Thus spake a Pervert: > > If you believe that abortion is wrong, then I heartily support your not > having an abortion. I also support your not compelling anyone else to > have an abortion. The difference is that I am not seeking to impose my > religious/moral/spiritual perspective on you. Is this so hard for you > to understand, half a brain or otherwise? And since I am a male, I find > it highly presumptive to dictate to any woman what she should, or should > not be compelled to do with their bodies. (And for the record, I am a > fiscally conservative, non-dictatorial Republican. There are such > creatures in the world.) > First, no one in this country has the absolute right to do whatever they want with their bodies. There are numerous ways one can use their body to commit unlawful acts. Second, in an abortion there are *two* bodies involved, not just the one of the woman. (A fetus is not a part of the female anatomy). Third, prohibiting is not the same as compelling. If a woman does not choose to give birth she can simply avoid pregnancy. (Just find out what causes it and don't do it). > If you are able to, and WILLING to read, you will notice once again that > I do not seek to limit your legal right to a legal medical procedure. > So much for my being an extremist. You have stated that you believe > that abortion is the taking of an innocent human life. I disagree. Have you an argument that it isn't? A fetus is alive, human and certainly innocent. Aborting it is killing it. Can you deny these facts? > Not > for the world would I ask you to change your religious belief for > yourself. Read, Pervert, READ! I have already stated that I have no religious affiliation. > And I'm a terrorist because...? Your threats. > I'm a zealot because...? Your intolerance of religion is the other side of the coin of religious extremism. > > And you are wrong when you paint me with the same brush as you use on them. > > But I didn't. READ, Bill, READ! I know you can do it if you really try > hard. Since I was not aware of, and could not possibly have cared less > about, your existence before you answered my post, it is virtually > impossible for me to have painted you with any brush at all! (Doncha > just love logic?) Everything in your post implied that all pro-lifers are religious zealots. I am a pro-lifer. ergo: You implied that I am a religious zealot. Yes, I have an appreciation for logic. > > You are also wrong when you claim a Constitutional right to abortion. > > IF you will read what I wrote, you will not find anyplace where I said > abortion was a Constitutional right. Then why did you cite the Constitution? Just another implication. > You WILL find where I said that > abortion was ruled by the Supreme Court to be legal (as you surely know > per Roe v. Wade). The COURT may have called it Constitutional, but I > did not. It is in clear point of fact, however, the law of the land and > has been for many years whether or not you like it or not or whether I > like it or not. This same argument was once used to justify slavery and other injustices such as the denial of women the right to vote. > Point of order. I may not approve of the fact that organized religions > get an obscene (i.e., lacking any redeeming social value) tax break > worth billions of dollars annually, but that, too, like the abortion > ruling, is the law until such time as that law may be changed. I prefer > the freedom of choice in my country. You choose your way, I'll choose > mine. Isn't freedom a wonderful thing? Point of order. Why do we keep coming back to religion? You seem to be obsessed by it. > It's like smoking. I don't smoke, although I used to for several > years. (I now have no bad habits. None at all.) AHA! There's your problem! You think you're perfect! Bottom line, Pervert, you threatened to inflict pain on any pro-lifer who "get's in my way". Should that person ever be me and you try to implement that threat, the painful experience may very well be your own. Bill D.
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<35D9B7C7.1293@home.com>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!unknown!not-for-mailReferences:
<35D004B4.73D8@aol.com> <35D1779B.5748@ca.no.spam.net> <35D18A14.4839B1C1@nospam.com> <6qs8ad$9sm$2@news.monmouth.com> <35D1B510.4B8B97CE@nospam.com> <6qsg63$e0c$1@news.monmouth.com> <35D2FB49.338BC219@nospam.com> <35d304e2.0@news4.his.com> <35D309E2.CAFB02BC@nospam.com> <6qv6ld$2gl$3@news.monmouth.com> <6r06u4$nu6$2@winter.news.erols.com> <6r1gea$eas$3@news.monmouth.com> <6r2lq6$8p9$3@winter.news.erols.com> <35D58A09.4FF78A3F@kdsi.net> <35D7C547.6DFD@swbell.net> <35D80C1D.7584@spam.lax.com> <35D82DF1.144D@spambad.flash.net> <35D8648A.7561@home.com> <35D8839C.40C2@spambad.yahoo.com>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 108b95,111b4a67abc6e703 X-Google-Attributes: gid108b95,public X-Google-Thread: 101049,111b4a67abc6e703 X-Google-Attributes: gid101049,public X-Google-Thread: 107d03,a5adc0974fb1517 X-Google-Attributes: gid107d03,public From: Bill D <here@home.com> Subject: Re: Ban Religious Bigots Date: 1998/08/18 Message-ID: <35D9B7C7.1293@home.com> X-Deja-AN: 382351382 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit References: <35D004B4.73D8@aol.com> <35D1779B.5748@ca.no.spam.net> <35D18A14.4839B1C1@nospam.com> <6qs8ad$9sm$2@news.monmouth.com> <35D1B510.4B8B97CE@nospam.com> <6qsg63$e0c$1@news.monmouth.com> <35D2FB49.338BC219@nospam.com> <35d304e2.0@news4.his.com> <35D309E2.CAFB02BC@nospam.com> <6qv6ld$2gl$3@news.monmouth.com> <6r06u4$nu6$2@winter.news.erols.com> <6r1gea$eas$3@news.monmouth.com> <6r2lq6$8p9$3@winter.news.erols.com> <35D58A09.4FF78A3F@kdsi.net> <35D7C547.6DFD@swbell.net> <35D80C1D.7584@spam.lax.com> <35D82DF1.144D@spambad.flash.net> <35D8648A.7561@home.com> <35D8839C.40C2@spambad.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Organization: Pacific Bell Internet Services Mime-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: la.general,dc.general,md.general