Planned Parenthood Murders
Moodkiller

Mokena, IL

#21 May 14, 2013
Appalled wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, to use your own argument, "just because one nut used a gun is no reason to take the right away from everyone else".
You people are so adamant about personal rights when it comes to your guns and yet you think nothing of taking them away from a woman. It's her womb, for pete's sake, you were not invited in, stay out of it.
Back in the 1960s when you libs were called hippies, you wanted the government out of everything. You wanted free love, an end to the Viet Nam war, you wanted to burn your draft cards and your bras. You hated 'the man' and went so far as to try to kill as many as you could. You called them pigs. You were appalled that a president would break into a low level psychiatrists office but today you applaud the IRS's actions as well as what the Justice Department is accused of doing to the AP.

Well, you gave all that up in Roe v Wade. You libs called on government to crawl inside a woman's womb and decide what she can do with it. When you asked the government to get involved you changed the dynamic of what you hippies originally wanted, free love. From that day on you have called on the government to do everything for you. From womb to the tomb. The bigger the government, the more encompassing, the more intrusive, the better as far as you are concerned.

We do not wish to take away anyone's GOD given rights, we defend them. We want smaller government. We want a more manageable government. We want government to serve us, not to imprison us. We want government to leave us alone, just like you hippies wanted in 1968.
Professor

Mokena, IL

#22 May 14, 2013
Moodkiller wrote:
<quoted text>
Back in the 1960s when you libs were called hippies, you wanted the government out of everything. You wanted free love, an end to the Viet Nam war, you wanted to burn your draft cards and your bras. You hated 'the man' and went so far as to try to kill as many as you could. You called them pigs. You were appalled that a president would break into a low level psychiatrists office but today you applaud the IRS's actions as well as what the Justice Department is accused of doing to the AP.
Well, you gave all that up in Roe v Wade. You libs called on government to crawl inside a woman's womb and decide what she can do with it. When you asked the government to get involved you changed the dynamic of what you hippies originally wanted, free love. From that day on you have called on the government to do everything for you. From womb to the tomb. The bigger the government, the more encompassing, the more intrusive, the better as far as you are concerned.
We do not wish to take away anyone's GOD given rights, we defend them. We want smaller government. We want a more manageable government. We want government to serve us, not to imprison us. We want government to leave us alone, just like you hippies wanted in 1968.
You put me in a happy mood MOODKILLER!

Maybe too many drugs over time altered the hippies thinking? These are the old people now that Obama is looking to exterminate!
Appalled

Joliet, IL

#23 May 14, 2013
Professor wrote:
<quoted text>
I just brought up a question that I don't believe this infanticide is happening only at this one clinic. I don't believe its an isolated incident. Im not questioning the right to an abortion, im questioning how rampant is this infanticide murder happening? When a baby is alive, breathing, outside the mother, the baby is now a patient. What about that patients rights? Killing babies outside the mothers womb? I never knew killing full term living breathing babies outside a mother is considered an abortion to you? Well its murder appalled. I cant believe you support this. Im troubled by that.
You need to go back and read my posts. I most certainly did not support this. Just because someone is pro-choice does not make them total monsters.

Admittedly, it is hard to be on this side of the argument and I have never really shared on this forum what my personal stance is on abortion. I only know that I have no right to judge or decide for someone else.
Appalled

Joliet, IL

#24 May 14, 2013
Moodkiller wrote:
<quoted text>
Back in the 1960s when you libs were called hippies, you wanted the government out of everything. You wanted free love, an end to the Viet Nam war, you wanted to burn your draft cards and your bras. You hated 'the man' and went so far as to try to kill as many as you could. You called them pigs. You were appalled that a president would break into a low level psychiatrists office but today you applaud the IRS's actions as well as what the Justice Department is accused of doing to the AP.
Well, you gave all that up in Roe v Wade. You libs called on government to crawl inside a woman's womb and decide what she can do with it. When you asked the government to get involved you changed the dynamic of what you hippies originally wanted, free love. From that day on you have called on the government to do everything for you. From womb to the tomb. The bigger the government, the more encompassing, the more intrusive, the better as far as you are concerned.
We do not wish to take away anyone's GOD given rights, we defend them. We want smaller government. We want a more manageable government. We want government to serve us, not to imprison us. We want government to leave us alone, just like you hippies wanted in 1968.
I am a pro-choice, conservative who most often votes Republican. I guess that blows your theory.
Neighbor

Oswego, IL

#25 May 15, 2013
Woman's right to kill? Woman's health decision? IMO, these two items are programmed excuses in the majority of cases. Why is it ok for a woman to kill a living baby? Seriously, what can possibly justify that? How many of the million abortions are truly for the health of the woman? These are simply the age old feminist nonsense points. Call it what you want, but murder is murder is murder.
Professor

Mokena, IL

#26 May 15, 2013
Appalled wrote:
<quoted text>
You need to go back and read my posts. I most certainly did not support this. Just because someone is pro-choice does not make them total monsters.
Admittedly, it is hard to be on this side of the argument and I have never really shared on this forum what my personal stance is on abortion. I only know that I have no right to judge or decide for someone else.
I reread you post several time and your position was abortion is a womens right. Its her womb. Then you compared abortion to my gun rights stand. Your post suggests you support abortion at any degree of radicalism. You did not elaborate your position. Im glad to hear that you don't stand and support infanticide with Obama and Dr Gosnell. I couldn't believe you supported that. I can sleep better now that you cleared that up Appalled!
Professor

Mokena, IL

#27 May 15, 2013
Appalled wrote:
<quoted text>
You need to go back and read my posts. I most certainly did not support this. Just because someone is pro-choice does not make them total monsters.
Admittedly, it is hard to be on this side of the argument and I have never really shared on this forum what my personal stance is on abortion. I only know that I have no right to judge or decide for someone else.
It makes them partial monsters Appalled.
Appalled

Joliet, IL

#28 May 15, 2013
Professor wrote:
<quoted text>
It makes them partial monsters Appalled.


How is it, Professor, that you want less government. Less involvement in personal lives. Less effort to take away the rights that you feel are important to you like your guns but you draw the line at a woman's body?

Doesn't that make you "partial" in some way?
Appalled

Joliet, IL

#29 May 15, 2013
Professor wrote:
<quoted text>
I reread you post several time and your position was abortion is a womens right. Its her womb. Then you compared abortion to my gun rights stand. Your post suggests you support abortion at any degree of radicalism. You did not elaborate your position. Im glad to hear that you don't stand and support infanticide with Obama and Dr Gosnell. I couldn't believe you supported that. I can sleep better now that you cleared that up Appalled!
Allow me to elaborate.

People who use abortion as a regular form of birth control repulse me too. And quite honestly, late term abortions are very disturbing to me as well. But there are all sorts of reasons and situations that force women into making what is probably the most difficult decision of their lives for most of them. Who are we to judge whether their reasons are justified or not?

While you dwell on the pregnancy alone, there are a lot of people out there who recognize that there is no good answer to this one if you give value to the woman involved. I think most of the pro-lifers believe that most women who seek abortions are irresponsible sex addicts who just need to learn to say no. This is not the case. It is an ugly situation all the way around and certainly not one any woman would want to be in.

The conservative pro-life position seems very hypocritical to me. They want less government. Less involvement in personal lives. Less effort to take away the rights that they feel are important......except when it comes to abortion. Then they want control.

You are free to make any decision you want regarding this. No one has any right to make the decision for someone else. Her life, her womb, her decision, her consequences, IMO.
Accountability

United States

#30 May 15, 2013
Professor wrote:
<quoted text>
I just brought up a question that I don't believe this infanticide is happening only at this one clinic. I don't believe its an isolated incident. Im not questioning the right to an abortion, im questioning how rampant is this infanticide murder happening? When a baby is alive, breathing, outside the mother, the baby is now a patient. What about that patients rights? Killing babies outside the mothers womb? I never knew killing full term living breathing babies outside a mother is considered an abortion to you? Well its murder appalled. I cant believe you support this. Im troubled by that.
First of all, Appalled stated very clearly that Gosnell operated outside of existing law and for that, he will deservedly spend the rest of his life in prison. Secondly, how would you seriously enforce the law? Suppose abortion was made illegal. How far into a woman’s life are you willing to go to protect the fetus? Presently, a pregnant woman can engage in all types of legal, yet risky behavior that can provably do harm to the fetus. Though highly discouraged, a pregnant woman can smoke, drink alcohol, skydive, bungee jump, downhill ski, run a marathon, etc…If the fetus dies because of a legal but risky activity, such as “accidentally” shooting herself in the abdomen,(There’s a paradox for you gun nuts.) do you propose the woman be charged with murder? Are you willing to raise taxes to build all of the new prisons that will be required to house all of these “murderers” once they are forced to go underground? Remember, you won’t eliminate the practice, only criminalize it. Where do you want to draw the line? This is a perfect example of how women are still treated as property. Should we lock them in pens to fatten them up for nine months like veal? Pro choice is not pro abortion. I think most people would agree that they’d prefer that this service not be necessary but obviously, it still is. It’s easy to stand in judgment of people when you have no idea what their personal situation is. If a woman were to lose her job because of having to see an unwanted pregnancy through to full term, you’d be complaining about welfare and food stamps. You guys are really good at protecting them before they’re born but once they are, not so much. When medical science can figure out how to grow an embryo into a live baby outside of the womb, then it may be time to revisit this. Until then, there’s a reason they put the date of birth, not the date of conception on the birth certificate.
Professor

Mokena, IL

#31 May 15, 2013
Appalled wrote:
<quoted text>
How is it, Professor, that you want less government. Less involvement in personal lives. Less effort to take away the rights that you feel are important to you like your guns but you draw the line at a woman's body?
Doesn't that make you "partial" in some way?
America is unique because we value life. We have a moral compass. Our laws are based on and around those beliefs. Our success is in large because of our values and morals. The decay of our country is happening because those values and morals are being demonized by this socialist progressive movement in our nation.

When a woman is raped and becomes pregnant or her life is at risk due to a complicated pregnancy or health issue, abortion has its place and reason. A woman carelessly becomes pregnant, then doesn't want the baby for financial or responsibility issues, im not crazy about an abortion under those situations, I dont support it, but if its done within a few months, the mother has to live with that on her chest if she has any conscious at all. But this new definition of abortion at any time during a pregnancy, full term abortions, live birth abortions, abortions when babies are living outside the mother breathing, kicking, and living on their own is barbarically evil, disgusting, and morally troubling. Anyone who supports this is demonically sick and evil in my opinion, and thankfully with our courts as well!
Appalled

Joliet, IL

#32 May 15, 2013
Professor wrote:
<quoted text>
America is unique because we value life. We have a moral compass. Our laws are based on and around those beliefs. Our success is in large because of our values and morals. The decay of our country is happening because those values and morals are being demonized by this socialist progressive movement in our nation.
When a woman is raped and becomes pregnant or her life is at risk due to a complicated pregnancy or health issue, abortion has its place and reason. A woman carelessly becomes pregnant, then doesn't want the baby for financial or responsibility issues, im not crazy about an abortion under those situations, I dont support it, but if its done within a few months, the mother has to live with that on her chest if she has any conscious at all. But this new definition of abortion at any time during a pregnancy, full term abortions, live birth abortions, abortions when babies are living outside the mother breathing, kicking, and living on their own is barbarically evil, disgusting, and morally troubling. Anyone who supports this is demonically sick and evil in my opinion, and thankfully with our courts as well!
Gosnell was just found guilty....so I have to ask, where are you getting this "new definition of abortion"? If people step outside the law, they are not redefining the law. They are breaking the law.
Appalled

Joliet, IL

#33 May 15, 2013
Accountability wrote:
<quoted text>
First of all, Appalled stated very clearly that Gosnell operated outside of existing law and for that, he will deservedly spend the rest of his life in prison. Secondly, how would you seriously enforce the law? Suppose abortion was made illegal. How far into a woman’s life are you willing to go to protect the fetus? Presently, a pregnant woman can engage in all types of legal, yet risky behavior that can provably do harm to the fetus. Though highly discouraged, a pregnant woman can smoke, drink alcohol, skydive, bungee jump, downhill ski, run a marathon, etc…If the fetus dies because of a legal but risky activity, such as “accidentally” shooting herself in the abdomen,(There’s a paradox for you gun nuts.) do you propose the woman be charged with murder? Are you willing to raise taxes to build all of the new prisons that will be required to house all of these “murderers” once they are forced to go underground? Remember, you won’t eliminate the practice, only criminalize it. Where do you want to draw the line? This is a perfect example of how women are still treated as property. Should we lock them in pens to fatten them up for nine months like veal? Pro choice is not pro abortion. I think most people would agree that they’d prefer that this service not be necessary but obviously, it still is. It’s easy to stand in judgment of people when you have no idea what their personal situation is. If a woman were to lose her job because of having to see an unwanted pregnancy through to full term, you’d be complaining about welfare and food stamps. You guys are really good at protecting them before they’re born but once they are, not so much. When medical science can figure out how to grow an embryo into a live baby outside of the womb, then it may be time to revisit this. Until then, there’s a reason they put the date of birth, not the date of conception on the birth certificate.
There are so many elements to this complicated issue. This "monster" appreciates the help in pointing them out.
Moodkiller

Mokena, IL

#34 May 15, 2013
Professor wrote:
<quoted text>
You put me in a happy mood MOODKILLER!
Glad to be of service Mr. P!

.
Moodkiller

Mokena, IL

#35 May 15, 2013
Accountability wrote:
<quoted text>Pro choice is not pro abortion.
Yes it is. There is not one pro choice advocate who advocates the pro life side of the argument. Pro choice always winds up in abortion.
Accountability wrote:
<quoted text>
Until then, there’s a reason they put the date of birth, not the date of conception on the birth certificate.


Really? This is your argument that life begins at this point because the LAW demands a date has to be established for the legality of a birth certificate.

The laws conceived by man and the law of GOD are two different things.

'We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their CREATOR with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness,' is a definition of natural law. Don't confuse it with positive law, man-made laws such as what the French passed in 1789, i.e. Declaration of the Rights of Man, which is generally regarded as rights granted by the state and not the CREATOR.

.
Appalled

Joliet, IL

#36 May 15, 2013
Pro-choice is NOT pro-abortion. A person can be pro-life personally but still feel that others have a right to make their own decision.

No one is pro-abortion, no matter how many times the pro-lifers put it out there. When was the last time you heard someone say "Hey, I'm going out this week-end and get knocked up so I can go get an abortion". That would be pro-abortion. Got it? I am fairly certain that most of the women who make the choice would rather be anyplace else than there.

The pro-abortion comment just shows how little you understand of the other side of the argument.
Professor

Mokena, IL

#37 May 15, 2013
Appalled wrote:
<quoted text>
Gosnell was just found guilty....so I have to ask, where are you getting this "new definition of abortion"? If people step outside the law, they are not redefining the law. They are breaking the law.
This practice of Gosnell was defined by many, including Obama as abortion. Gosnell fought this in court as abortion and that is was the will of the mother so his practice of infanticide is justified. He lost. It was ruled MURDER!

That's why I then started the discussion to question Obama about the Gosnell decision.
Appalled

Joliet, IL

#38 May 15, 2013
Professor wrote:
<quoted text>
This practice of Gosnell was defined by many, including Obama as abortion.
Apparently the court did not agree.
Moodkiller

Mokena, IL

#39 May 15, 2013
Appalled wrote:
Pro-choice is NOT pro-abortion. A person can be pro-life personally but still feel that others have a right to make their own decision.
No one is pro-abortion, no matter how many times the pro-lifers put it out there. When was the last time you heard someone say "Hey, I'm going out this week-end and get knocked up so I can go get an abortion". That would be pro-abortion. Got it? I am fairly certain that most of the women who make the choice would rather be anyplace else than there.
The pro-abortion comment just shows how little you understand of the other side of the argument.
I understand it very well.

How many pro-lifers have you ever seen at a pro-abortion rally? None. That's how many because people you refer to do not exist.

In regard to getting 'knocked up' as you say, what I do hear is, I didn't know I could get pregnant. I'm only 15 years old, I've been told by my school counselors that I could get free condoms. Planned Parenthood said I could get woman's health care at their facility. Their main job is breast cancer screenings, not abortions. Clinton told me he wanted abortions rare and safe. Ted Kennedy said a conservative Supreme Court under Robert Bork would push abortions into the back alleys of America. Jocelyn Elders told me to masturbate more. Whatshername Sebelious told me I could get the morning after pill without my parents consent even though I'm a minor. Hah, and now I've got free health care until I'm 26 years old under my parents medical plan. Hey, I'm golden.
Hey

New Lenox, IL

#40 May 15, 2013
Which one of you is the lunatic that lives on Francis with the poster of the fetus on the side of the house?

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Joliet Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
breaking news!!!!! 15 min Shark News 516
Please Dear Lord 22 min Shark News 4
Slavery is over! 32 min Castro 15
Who wants these mother fu__ers out of our country! 43 min Hitler 5
Isn't it sad and so very pathetic... 1 hr Unreal Shi_ 6
Sheriff Clarke and other conservative blacks kn... 1 hr Unreal Shi_ 1
Why does the left Cry about White Supremists bu... 1 hr Hitler 74

Joliet Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Joliet Mortgages