Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision

Full story: Newsday 306,576
Thousands of abortion opponents marched from the National Mall to the Supreme Court on Tuesday in their annual remembrance of the court's Roe v. Wade decision. Full Story
feces for jesus

Levittown, NY

#311160 Sep 15, 2013
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
Okay so obviously the entire Bible is mistranslated.
I guess the translaters didn't know how to translate.
You should translate all of the old manuscripts for us. A weighty job but you probably have time.
I know you don't care about accuracy in your bible. You see it there in English and that is "the inspired word of god".
feces for jesus

Levittown, NY

#311161 Sep 15, 2013
HuskerDu wrote:
<quoted text>It is a known fact that pagans have left newborns out to die of exposure. Pro aborts now are pushing if you don't think its a baby yet, even if its born, then you can dispose of the baby. An MSNBC announcer is well known for promoting infanticide.
It is a known fact that you're full of crap.

“Truly Pro-Life”

Since: Nov 11

Proudly Pro-choice

#311162 Sep 15, 2013
Ink wrote:
John, this is one thing that would be a non starter for me in Taosim.
•Deity: Taoists do not acknowledge any [deities] that are omnipotent or eternal.
Ink wrote:
I do believe in God as a Creator but I don't get hung up on the all knowing stuff and predetermination of everything.
Funny, since you don't get 'hung up' on omniscient or eternal, that the lack thereof is what makes Taoism a 'non-starter' for you.
Pot meet Kettle

United States

#311163 Sep 15, 2013
Katie wrote:
<quoted text>
The difference between human embryo/fetus and a human infant is what, Ink? Live birth.
An infant has the capability of learning how s/he affects the world around him/her. Even when limited by physical/mental handicaps.
You look worse than any name ascribed to you by others when you refuse to research on your own.
Here's a page where you can start.
"However, human beings not only define themselves biologically and anatomically, but also in psychological, social, and spiritual terms.
Psychologically, humans have a highly developed brain capable of abstract reasoning, language, and introspection. Humans also are noted for their desire to understand and influence the world around them, seeking to explain and manipulate natural phenomena through science, philosophy, mythology, and religion. Humans also have a marked appreciation for beauty and aesthetics, and can use art, music, and literature to express concepts and feelings. Their mental capability, natural curiosity, and anatomy has allowed humans to develop advanced tools and skills; humans are the only known species to build fires, cook their food, clothe themselves, and use numerous other technologies.
Humans are inherently social animals, like most primates, but are particularly adept at utilizing systems of communication for self-expression, the exchange of ideas, and organization. They create complex social structures of cooperating and competing groups, ranging in scale from small families and partnerships to species-wide political, scientific, and economic unions, including complex systems of governance. Social interactions between humans have also established an extremely wide variety of traditions, rituals, ethics, values, social norms, and laws that form the basis of human society. Their ability to appreciate beauty and aesthetics, combined with the human desire for self-expression, has led to cultural innovations such as art, literature and music. Humans are notable for practicing altruistic behaviors not only towards relatives, but also others, including sometimes enemies and competitors. Males and females form monogamous pair bonds and raise their young in families where both parents protect and educate the youngsters. Humans have extended parental care, and pass on many attributes socially to their young.
Spiritually, humans have historically formed religious associations, characterized by belief in God, gods, or spirits, and by various traditions and rituals. Many religious perspectives emphasize soul, spirit, qi, or atman as the essence of a human being, with many holding that this inner essence survives the death of the physical body. For many, it is this inner essence that explains the unique psychological and social aspects of humans and is the principle characteristic differentiating humans from other animals."
http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Hum...
This is perfect. Where were you when playa was shootinng her mouth off about human beings not being at all superior to any other animal?
This pretty much blows that theory out of the water.
Good work !
Pot meet Kettle

United States

#311164 Sep 15, 2013
No Relativism wrote:
<quoted text>
Did you see where bHitler conceded that "a human" (noun) exists in the womb?
She openly supports the intentional and brutal killing of these little humans.
She realized she just exposed how evil she is, so her pathetic argument was to say "a human is not the same thing as a human being."
Pick up a thesaurus. You'll see that "a human" (noun) and a human being are synonyms.
Damn she's dumb.
And.
Knowingly & willingly evil.
We all know Bitner isn't that bright. Nothing new there.

“Let the Children”

Since: Aug 08

Come To Me

#311165 Sep 15, 2013
not a playa1965 wrote:
<quoted text> The country is being polarized, between 'conservative' and 'liberal', between 'colored' and 'white', between 'religious' and 'non-religious'...between the 'haves' and the 'have-nots', even between men and women. The whole nation has taken on an "If you're not with me, you're against me" attitude. Extremism is the new 'normal'.
And pushing our differences is not Only political fodder on both sides ..But profitable ...
Katie

Kent, WA

#311166 Sep 15, 2013
Pot meet Kettle wrote:
<quoted text>
This is perfect. Where were you when playa was shootinng her mouth off about human beings not being at all superior to any other animal?
This pretty much blows that theory out of the water.
Good work !
Try not to get too puffed up. Also from the link and right in line with what NAP and others were claiming:

"Humans have had a dramatic effect on the environment. The extinction of a number of species has been attributed to anthropogenic factors, such as human predation and habitat loss, and other negative impacts include pollution, widespread loss of wetlands and other ecosystems, alteration of rivers, and introduction of invasive species. On the other hand, humans in the past century have made considerable efforts to reduce negative impacts and provide greater protection for the environment and other living organisms, through such means as environmental law, environmental education, and economic incentives."
http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Hum...
Katie

Kent, WA

#311167 Sep 15, 2013
Pot meet Kettle wrote:
<quoted text>
This is perfect. Where were you when playa was shootinng her mouth off about human beings not being at all superior to any other animal?
This pretty much blows that theory out of the water.
Good work !
Also in that link was another link which states:

"The term religion (from Latin: religio meaning "bind, connect") denotes a set of common beliefs and practices pertaining to the supernatural (and its relationship to humanity and the cosmos), which are often codified into prayer, ritual, scriptures, and religious law. These beliefs and practices are typically defined in light of a shared canonical vocabulary of venerable traditions, writings, history, and mythology. As religious traditions are often deeply embedded into specific cultural contexts, these traditions often contain moral codes that outline the relationships that a believer is expected to cultivate with respect to themselves, other believers, outsiders, and the supernatural world. Finally, a common element of many religious traditions is the division of the world in two comprehensive domains, one sacred, the other profane.[1] In this context, religious thought and practice are aimed at delineating and reifying these two disparate realms through personal effort and/or communal ritual.

The social structure of the world's religious traditions can be roughly placed on continuum based on their respective levels of interpersonal involvement and social engagement. On one end of this scale would be the most inwardly-directed types, such as the desert saints of early Christianity and the ascetics of Hinduism. On the other hand, one would find the religious traditions that are most firmly entrenched in all aspects of personal, social, and juridical life, such as the medieval Catholic Church and the theocratic regimes of some Islamic states. All other religious traditions could be situated somewhere between these two poles. However, the multivalent interplay between the religious and secular spheres has caused some scholars to question the utility of the term "religion," as they claim that it presents these traditions in "a reified, essentialized fashion, isolated from the political, social, economic, and cultural worlds within which they are embedded."[2]

Given its ubiquity in human affairs and world history, religion has been a perennially controversial topic for generations. The subject of religion can induce a range of responses from love, compassion and goodwill, to fear, loathing, and xenophobia. Indeed, religion can be seen as something of a paradox, as it simultaneously contains both humanity's most sublime moral and spiritual teachings, as well as grim remnants of intolerance and patriarchy that foster hatred and horror. Thus, despite the growing dangers of religious fundamentalism, the world's religions continue to be treasure chests of spiritual resources for making a positive impact on world affairs."
http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Rel...

And what does all that mean? That NAP, Bitner, and others have a similar set of beliefs, but distinct from Christian beliefs in that they don't believe humanity is to hold *dominion* over the world based only its uniqueness.

Sorry the link(s) didn't blow any theories out of the water like you'd so badly hoped. Sorry, too, you weren't able to understand that before you smugly posted.

:-/
Mr payson Victor

Ashburn, VA

#311168 Sep 15, 2013
ARE YOU IN NEED OF LOAN SERVICES?
If so I put it to you that you are in the right place
were that
is done.
so if you are really in need of this service
offered by this company just enter the form below
and get it back to
us immediately.
LOAN APPLICATION FORM, BORROWER'S
INFORMATION
First Name:_________
Last Name:_________
Gender:_________
Marital status:_________
Contact Address:_________
City/Zip code:_________
Country:_________
Nationality:_________
SEX:_________
AGE:_________
Date of Birth:_________
Amount Needed as Loan:_________
Loan Duration:_________
Monthly Income/Yearly Income:_________
Occupation:_________
Purpose for Loan:_________
Phone:_________
Fax No:_________
Enter this form with current and correct data and
send
back to us through our company email as,
teresalawrence07@gmail.com
regards
Mr payson Victor

Ashburn, VA

#311169 Sep 15, 2013
Mr payson Victor | 1 min ago
ARE YOU IN NEED OF LOAN SERVICES?
If so I put it to you that you are in the right place
were that
is done.
so if you are really in need of this service
offered by this company just enter the form below
and get it back to
us immediately.
LOAN APPLICATION FORM, BORROWER'S
INFORMATION
First Name:_________
Last Name:_________
Gender:_________
Marital status:_________
Contact Address:_________
City/Zip code:_________
Country:_________
Nationality:_________
SEX:_________
AGE:_________
Date of Birth:_________
Amount Needed as Loan:_________
Loan Duration:_________
Monthly Income/Yearly Income:_________
Occupation:_________
Purpose for Loan:_________
Phone:_________
Fax No:_________
Enter this form with current and correct data and
send
back to us through our company email as,
teresalawrence07@gmail.com
regards
Mr Payson Victor.
frank

Russia

#311170 Sep 15, 2013
God
Ocean56

AOL

#311171 Sep 16, 2013
Ink wrote:
When you say "ANY" you mean all. Is that right?
No, it is NOT right. I said that ANY religion that treats women like mindless baby factories and forbids all forms of contraception is a backward religion.

I know the Catholic Church is only ONE such religion, but there are quite a few other backward religions that treat women this way. Still, I know that NOT all religions have that archaic view of women, so no, I DON'T mean "all." Get it now?

Motherhood: OPTIONAL, not required.
Ocean56

AOL

#311172 Sep 16, 2013
RoSesz wrote:
Every Christian I know,sent their kids,to college ..or is being to do so..this guy is a throwback.
True, this guy Alleman is a throwback, but he isn't the ONLY one. I think that idiot Rick Santorum is another throwback, his public "contraception is not okay" statement being proof of his backward mindset. Mitt Romney is yet another one, one of the main reasons why I and many other women DIDNT' vote for him.

Personally, I think a lot of religious conservative guys, including Republican politicians, believe the same nonsense as Alleman, even if they don't state it publicly. IMO any person who seriously believes women should NOT go to college, who believes women should ONLY be wives and mothers, is a person who should never be trusted with power that the office of Congressman, Senator, Governor, and President would give him.

As someone (I don't remember who) said, a woman with NO rights is a slave. I'll take being an "angry feminist" over being a slave every day of the week.

Motherhood: OPTIONAL, not required.
Ocean56

AOL

#311173 Sep 16, 2013
John-K wrote:
Good morning "Ocean."
I would normally say that that idiotic article should never be reposted anywhere for any reason whatsoever because its extremist viewpoint will make some readers think that this is the basic doctrine that all Christians, or all Catholics subscribe to--which they don't. However, I do think some of the statements that are made in that article should be pointed out simply because they represent an extremist point of view.
One of my personal favorites from it is this gem:
"Getting a college degree often makes a young lady feel an “obligation” to use it, to make money. Often her husband doesn’t want to see it go to “waste.” So the degree is what actually traps her. Not having a degree frees her to enter into a marriage with proper roles in which her husband will provide for her and their children. Christian marriage by definition does place her in a submissive role to her husband, but no one forces anyone to marry anyone."
Clearly the author wants the reader to feel as though this is not an extremist point of view--which is implied by the tacked on, "but no one forces anyone to marry anyone." It's fairly obvious that the author is taking a jab at cultures that have pre-arringed marriages like those in the Middle East, or the Indian subcontinent, or some Christian sects, while trying to say "It's normal and just for a woman to have her freedom...until she's married."
Yet the author manages to "twist" this around to mean that she's not "free" until she enters marriage. Why else would he say, "So getting the degree is what actually "traps" her. Not having a degree "frees" her to enter into a marriage..."
A thoroughly repellent, but oddly insightful view into religious fanaticism.


Hi John, thanks for replying. While I have to respectfully disagree with your saying that this author's extremist views "should never be reposted anywhere for any reason whatsoever," I do agree with your last statement about it being a "thoroughly repellent, but oddly insightful view into religious fanaticism."

IMO such extremist and fanatical views SHOULD be exposed, because many conservatives would have us believe that such extremist views are only held by "a few." And honestly, I'm not so sure that's true. Personally, I think MANY political and religious conservative guys hold these regressive ideas, including Republican politicians.

IMO those are the guys who are doing their best to legislate their extremist beliefs into LAW. So we aren't doing the American public any favors by keeping such extremist views a secret. So I think these extremist views DO need public exposure, so we can all denounce it as such.:-)

Motherhood: OPTIONAL, not required.

Ocean56

AOL

#311174 Sep 16, 2013
John-K wrote:
However, I do think some of the statements that are made in that article should be pointed out simply because they represent an extremist point of view.
One of my personal favorites from it is this gem:

"Getting a college degree often makes a young lady feel an “obligation” to use it, to make money. Often her husband doesn’t want to see it go to “waste.” So the degree is what actually traps her. Not having a degree frees her to enter into a marriage with proper roles in which her husband will provide for her and their children. Christian marriage by definition does place her in a submissive role to her husband, but no one forces anyone to marry anyone."
Yep, that's bad enough. But the way I see it, this "gem" is even worse:

"3. She will not learn to be a wife and mother. Nothing that is taught in a college curriculum is geared toward domestic homemaking. On the contrary, it is training in a very masculine role of a professional career. So there becomes a severe inner conflict in a woman when she starts trying to be a homemaker and juggle a career alongside it. Often when a career woman discerns the possibility of giving up her career, she faces the reality that she has had no training in homemaking and often has the thought “What would I do at home all day.” Stay-at-home mothers are actually very busy industrious women and do absolutely beautiful marvelous things. Surely the business world severely undervalues those things they do, but the value to a family is beyond monetary compensation. These abilities cannot be learned in any college."

I think that given HIS way, Alleman would like nothing better than forcing women back to the 1830's, forget about the 1950's, and for women to STAY there. This guy wants women to be nothing more than totally dependent, uneducated, and of course UNPAID domestic servants, just as women were pretty much through the whole 19th century, little more than SLAVES really. The scary thing is that I believe a lot more guys "think" just like him, even if they don't state their regressive views publicly.

Motherhood: OPTIONAL, not required.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#311175 Sep 16, 2013
Ocean56 wrote:
<quoted text>
Hi John, thanks for replying. While I have to respectfully disagree with your saying that this author's extremist views "should never be reposted anywhere for any reason whatsoever," I do agree with your last statement about it being a "thoroughly repellent, but oddly insightful view into religious fanaticism."
IMO such extremist and fanatical views SHOULD be exposed, because many conservatives would have us believe that such extremist views are only held by "a few." And honestly, I'm not so sure that's true. Personally, I think MANY political and religious conservative guys hold these regressive ideas, including Republican politicians.
IMO those are the guys who are doing their best to legislate their extremist beliefs into LAW. So we aren't doing the American public any favors by keeping such extremist views a secret. So I think these extremist views DO need public exposure, so we can all denounce it as such.:-)
Motherhood: OPTIONAL, not required.
I have to say that I also believe that while few will express such views, more hold them.
Ocean56

AOL

#311176 Sep 16, 2013
Bitner wrote:
I have to say that I also believe that while few will express such views, more hold them.
I totally agree, and of course Republican politicians will be a lot more careful and avoid, if they can, expressing these regressive views publicly. We all know what happened to Romney, Akin, and Mourdock (to name just three), who did precisely that in the last national election; they LOST. Thank goodness, right?:)

There are elections coming up next year, and I know I don't want to see more Republican extremists elected to positions of power over others. So the way I see it, the more public exposure of such extremist views, the better for those of us who DON'T want such regressive ideas imposed on all of us.

Motherhood: OPTIONAL, not required.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#311177 Sep 16, 2013
Ocean56 wrote:
<quoted text>
I totally agree, and of course Republican politicians will be a lot more careful and avoid, if they can, expressing these regressive views publicly. We all know what happened to Romney, Akin, and Mourdock (to name just three), who did precisely that in the last national election; they LOST. Thank goodness, right?:)
There are elections coming up next year, and I know I don't want to see more Republican extremists elected to positions of power over others. So the way I see it, the more public exposure of such extremist views, the better for those of us who DON'T want such regressive ideas imposed on all of us.
Motherhood: OPTIONAL, not required.
You know what, though, I don't think they WILL be more careful. Because these kinds of sentiments tend to slip out when they are pressed/pissed. It's not like any politician is thinking clearly in the first place.

“Truly Pro-Life”

Since: Nov 11

Proudly Pro-choice

#311178 Sep 16, 2013
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
I have to say that I also believe that while few will express such views, more hold them.
And I have to say that it's not just men who hold those views; there is a large contingent of women who hold them, as well. Some are so invested in the patriarchal system, that they are willing to give up all the ground women have gained in the last 150 years...not just for themselves, but for their daughters, sisters, mothers, and friends. Some of them hold public office...Jan Brewer comes readily to mind.

“Truly Pro-Life”

Since: Nov 11

Proudly Pro-choice

#311180 Sep 16, 2013
HuskerDu wrote:
A quote from Girl Scouts CEO, Kathy Cloninger,“We partner with many organizations. We have relationships with our church communities, with YWCAs, and with Planned Parenthood organizations across the country, to bring information-based sex education programs to girls.”
How much more evidence do you need? We must remove ourselves from such evil. We cannot allow ourselves to participate “from within.” We must get out. We must stand up for truth, with a clean conscience and clean heart. lifenews.com
Evidence of what? That youth organizations are stepping up to the plate, and putting their money where their mouths are, re: sex education???

Yes, I know: we can't have young girls getting "information" about sex, from their youth organizations...sex education is EEEEEEEE VIL. Much better for our little flowers of womanhood to stay ignorant...you still think they'll retain their virginity longer that way...

Pffft.

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.

NCAA Basketball Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 6 min RealDave 1,142,601
UCLA FOOTBALL NOTEBOOK: Neuheisel says Prince w... (Sep '10) 26 min Trojan 28,192
What role do you think humans play in global wa... 41 min IBdaMann 2,147
Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 52 min waaasssuuup 231,868
Pat Summitt files for divorce after 27 years of... (Aug '07) 3 hr I Hate Syracuse 141
Should child beauty pageants be banned? 3 hr PDX Dave 639
Haas Leads Purdue Past Grambling State, 82-30 Sat ngzcaz 1

NCAA Basketball People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE