Honestly

Sparta, TN

#86447 Jul 1, 2013
phantom poster wrote:
<quoted text>Most fathers run far and fast. They have no wish to be involved in the end results of their actions.
That is not the question: what about the fathers that do care?? By the way the second ? is for emphasis
Honestly

Sparta, TN

#86448 Jul 1, 2013
The Original Amused wrote:
<quoted text>
And if the potential mother AND father make the decision to terminate the pregnancy? Let's hear your "big government" answer.
It is still killing a baby (fetus to you), They will have to answer for it in the end. God will see to that.

“IMNTBHO”

Since: Dec 10

Smyrna, TN

#86449 Jul 1, 2013
The Original Amused wrote:
<quoted text>
And if the potential mother AND father make the decision to terminate the pregnancy? Let's hear your "big government" answer.
That is a decision that they should make. Tother, they made the decision to have sex knowing there was the possibility of a pregnancy. Neither of them should have a right to decide alone to terminate it.

“IMNTBHO”

Since: Dec 10

Smyrna, TN

#86450 Jul 1, 2013
phantom poster wrote:
<quoted text>Most fathers run far and fast. They have no wish to be involved in the end results of their actions.
Most? Many but not most. Show your proof of that claim. I would also bet that fewer would run if they had a voice in the decision.

Since: Mar 10

Location hidden

#86451 Jul 1, 2013
NTMD8OR wrote:
<quoted text>
That is a decision that they should make. Tother, they made the decision to have sex knowing there was the possibility of a pregnancy. Neither of them should have a right to decide alone to terminate it.
You're avoiding the question. What if both partners agree to terminate the pregnancy?

Since: Mar 10

Location hidden

#86452 Jul 1, 2013
Honestly wrote:
<quoted text>
sounds like a female to me, especially by her previous post about abortion. Rem, little lady, when you elect an abortion, you will not only have to live with it but also answer for it in the end! whether you believe that is irrelevant, it is going to happen.
Ah, the timeless compulsion of conservatives on forum boards to define their opponents as women (or homosexual or effeminate men), as they are more comfortable "hitting" women than they are confronting an opponent who might potentially be more physically dominant than themselves. I've been noticing this for years now, it's a fascinating phenomenon.

Since: Mar 10

Location hidden

#86453 Jul 1, 2013
Honestly wrote:
<quoted text>
It is still killing a baby (fetus to you), They will have to answer for it in the end. God will see to that.
In Biblical times, children (like wives) were considered a man's property. The destruction of such property was punishable by...a fine. Isn't it coincidental that the most fervently vocal of abortion opponents are men who use the Bible to support their opposition to an issue that was not one time mentioned in the Bible?

Since: Mar 10

Location hidden

#86454 Jul 1, 2013
NTMD8OR wrote:
<quoted text>
Most? Many but not most. Show your proof of that claim. I would also bet that fewer would run if they had a voice in the decision.
That's silly. I would wager that fewer abortions would occur if fewer men ran away and left pregnant women all by themselves. Do you disagree? You are honestly suggesting men run away because they don't have a say in decisions revolving around pregnancy? Really? "I'm gonna run away because she probably will have an abortion and won't take my opinions about it into consideration." Really?

“IMNTBHO”

Since: Dec 10

Smyrna, TN

#86455 Jul 1, 2013
The Original Amused wrote:
<quoted text>
You're avoiding the question. What if both partners agree to terminate the pregnancy?
As I said. That decision is theirs to make together.

You say you are a Christian. God gave man the ability to reason and the free will to make those decisions. If they make that decision, they will answer to God.

I believe it is a child, not a fetus. But I Also believe that Americans should follow the laws of this Country. Those laws say it is not murder. While I disagree, I only have 1 choice. Follow those laws as they are & work to change them.
torr

Waynesboro, TN

#86456 Jul 1, 2013
Honestly wrote:
<quoted text>
Vet: sounds like phantom poster would not have any problems being a cannibal.... ooooooooeeeeeeeeeeee......a fr......ing liberal
And you call others a loon...
torr

Waynesboro, TN

#86457 Jul 1, 2013
Honestly wrote:
<quoted text>
It is still killing a baby (fetus to you), They will have to answer for it in the end. God will see to that.
Yea, yea, yea...

“IMNTBHO”

Since: Dec 10

Smyrna, TN

#86458 Jul 1, 2013
The Original Amused wrote:
<quoted text>
In Biblical times, children (like wives) were considered a man's property. The destruction of such property was punishable by...a fine. Isn't it coincidental that the most fervently vocal of abortion opponents are men who use the Bible to support their opposition to an issue that was not one time mentioned in the Bible?
Yeah, just ignore that "Thou shalt not kill." thing. Right?
torr

Waynesboro, TN

#86459 Jul 1, 2013
NTMD8OR wrote:
<quoted text>
Most? Many but not most. Show your proof of that claim. I would also bet that fewer would run if they had a voice in the decision.
Proof is in the number of unwed mothers having babies alone.
Hammer

Harrisburg, AR

#86460 Jul 1, 2013
torr wrote:
<quoted text>Proof is in the number of unwed mothers having babies alone.
Like Mary when she had Jesus right?

Since: Mar 10

Location hidden

#86461 Jul 1, 2013
NTMD8OR wrote:
<quoted text>
Yeah, just ignore that "Thou shalt not kill." thing. Right?
It's so easily justified by conservatives when it comes to "collateral damage" in pre-emptive wars or the death penalty, but a clump of cells that have no nervous system...

I remember hearing an interview with a nun about 10 years ago on this issue; she said so many "Christians" were so fervently against abortion, but seemed to have no problem with the idea of pregnant women being torn apart by missiles and bullets so that they could be "free."

“IMNTBHO”

Since: Dec 10

Smyrna, TN

#86462 Jul 1, 2013
The Original Amused wrote:
<quoted text>
That's silly. I would wager that fewer abortions would occur if fewer men ran away and left pregnant women all by themselves. Do you disagree? You are honestly suggesting men run away because they don't have a say in decisions revolving around pregnancy? Really? "I'm gonna run away because she probably will have an abortion and won't take my opinions about it into consideration." Really?
You're saying that absolutely no man ever has, does, or ever will feel that way?
Vet

Fayetteville, GA

#86463 Jul 1, 2013
The Original Amused wrote:
<quoted text>
Ah, the timeless compulsion of conservatives on forum boards to define their opponents as women (or homosexual or effeminate men), as they are more comfortable "hitting" women than they are confronting an opponent who might potentially be more physically dominant than themselves. I've been noticing this for years now, it's a fascinating phenomenon.
Well, OA, you posted that you support banning abortion past the 20th week which is the same position of our great conservative Governor of Texas. It appears that you support the bill that the Governor says will pass.
Vet

Fayetteville, GA

#86464 Jul 1, 2013
The Original Amused wrote:
<quoted text>
You're avoiding the question. What if both partners agree to terminate the pregnancy?
What if the father or mother says no to abortion?

Since: Feb 13

Location hidden

#86465 Jul 1, 2013
phantom poster wrote:
<quoted text>Most fathers run far and fast. They have no wish to be involved in the end results of their actions.
I was thinking the same thing. It's very rare, nowadays, for the Father to take responsibility for his part in creating the pregnancy without the Courts forcing him to. If he does, he will do it with money only, and gripe about it everyday!

Fathers today are simply NOT Parents, for the most part, under the best of circumstances. It's all on the Mothers to do it all...especially in the South!
Vet

Fayetteville, GA

#86466 Jul 1, 2013
The Original Amused wrote:
<quoted text>
It's so easily justified by conservatives when it comes to "collateral damage" in pre-emptive wars or the death penalty, but a clump of cells that have no nervous system...
I remember hearing an interview with a nun about 10 years ago on this issue; she said so many "Christians" were so fervently against abortion, but seemed to have no problem with the idea of pregnant women being torn apart by missiles and bullets so that they could be "free."
Catholics do not support abortion.

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.

Rogersville Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
What is up with the Management at Amis Mill? 15 min Vic Tayback 3
Separation of church and state 18 min Mother Teresa 1
GOP senators guilty of treason for Iran letter 38 min enforce FARA 20
Mikie Barrett aka chunky (Apr '14) 1 hr anyways 11
Aliens in Pressmen's Home 1 hr UNREAL 10
Teachers. Please stop complaining on Facebook w... 1 hr dude 36
Gop plan on immigration 2 hr Willy 8
More from around the web

Rogersville People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]