Since: Jul 10

Minneapolis, MN

#230388 May 17, 2013
Mpnf1979 wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, I'm very confused by that response. I'm not sure if she thought I was referring to her when I used the term fruitcake, but I was referring to the poster she was also commenting on. Was sort of taken aback by the response. Just going to chalk it up to a misunderstanding, although, I'm still not sure what happened there.
should have said that.
.
thing is, the post you did that to. was one that I did in response to what you said. take a look at the post numbers. as in what you said in post #230360
Mpnf1979 wrote:
<quoted text>
This particular male is a fruit cake. It does many times come down to how men view women.
.
even if you did not mean it as in towards me. you should have said the person's handle in the post of who you were referring to. since you did not. and it was a response to one of my posts. it came out apparently directed at me when you did your posts with you calling a person a male and a fruitcake.
.
if it was supposed to have been lightforce or someone else. do it to THEIR post.
.
post number #230360 was in response to #230348
post number #230348 was in response to #230343 it was explaining on how some males do view women.

Since: Feb 08

Location hidden

#230389 May 17, 2013
Sangelia wrote:
<quoted text>
should have said that.
.
thing is, the post you did that to. was one that I did in response to what you said. take a look at the post numbers. as in what you said in post #230360 <quoted text>
.
even if you did not mean it as in towards me. you should have said the person's handle in the post of who you were referring to. since you did not. and it was a response to one of my posts. it came out apparently directed at me when you did your posts with you calling a person a male and a fruitcake.
.
if it was supposed to have been lightforce or someone else. do it to THEIR post.
.
post number #230360 was in response to #230348
post number #230348 was in response to #230343 it was explaining on how some males do view women.
Oh, bullshyte. You misunderstood, then when we told you that, you continued being all huffy. Get over yourself and maybe take a step back.
It was clear enough to all the rest of us that she wasn't talking about YOU. We not only got it, we tried to let you know, but you thought you knew better. You were WRONG.
Move on, and next time get clarification before going off on another pro-choice poster. As I did when recently one poster thought I was insisting that other women must carry rape related pregnancies to term.

“I'm here with bells on.”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#230390 May 17, 2013
NWmoon wrote:
<quoted text>Oh, bullshyte. You misunderstood, then when we told you that, you continued being all huffy. Get over yourself and maybe take a step back.
It was clear enough to all the rest of us that she wasn't talking about YOU. We not only got it, we tried to let you know, but you thought you knew better. You were WRONG.
Move on, and next time get clarification before going off on another pro-choice poster. As I did when recently one poster thought I was insisting that other women must carry rape related pregnancies to term.
Some people....

:)
LightForce

Warren, MI

#230391 May 17, 2013
Angel1976 wrote:
"Amazing Story of a Mother on MOTHER'S DAY":
When Carolyn Isbister put her 20oz baby on her chest for a cuddle, she thought that it would be the only chance she would ever have to hold her.
Doctors had told the parents that baby Rachel only had only minutes to live because her heart was beating once every ten seconds and she was not breathing.
Isbister remembers:
I didn’t want her to die being cold. So I lifted her out of her blanket and put her against my skin to warm her up. Her feet were so cold.
It was the only cuddle I was going to have with her, so I wanted to remember the moment.” Then something remarkable happened. The warmth of her mother’s skin kick started Rachael’s heart into beating properly, which allowed her to take little breaths of her own.
We couldn’t believe it – and neither could the doctors. She let out a tiny cry.
The doctors came in and said there was still no hope – but I wasn’t letting go of her. We had her blessed by the hospital chaplain, and waited for her to slip away. But she still hung on.
And then amazingly the pink color began to return to her cheeks. She literally was turning from gray to pink before our eyes, and she began to warm up too.
The sad part is that when the baby was born, doctors took one look at her and said ‘no’.
They didn’t even try to help her with her breathing as they said it would just prolong her dying. Everyone just gave up on her,” her mom remembered.
At 24 weeks a womb infection had led to her premature labor and birth and Isbister (who also has two children Samuel, 10, and Kirsten, 8 ) said,“We were terrified we were going to lose her. I had suffered three miscarriages before, so we didn’t think there was much hope.” When Rachael was born she was grey and lifeless.
Ian Laing, a consultant neonatologist at the hospital, said:“All the signs were that the little one was not going to make it and we took the decision to let mum have a cuddle as it was all we could do.
Two hours later the wee thing was crying. This is indeed a miracle baby and I have seen nothing like it in my 27 years of practice. I have not the slightest doubt that mother’s love saved her daughter.”
Rachael was moved onto a ventilator where she continued to make steady progress and was tube and syringe fed her mother’s pumped breastmilk.
Isbister said,“The doctors said that she had proved she was a fighter and that she now deserved some intensive care as there was some hope. She had done it all on her own – without any medical intervention or drugs. She had clung on to life – and it was all because of that cuddle. It had warmed up her body and regulated her heart and breathing enough for her to start fighting.
At 5 weeks she was taken off the ventilator and began breastfeeding on her own. At four months Rachel went home with her parents, weighing 8lbs – the same as any other healthy newborn. Because Rachel had suffered from a lack of oxygen doctors said there was a high risk of damage to her brain. But a scan showed no evidence of any problems and today Rachel is on par with her peers.
Rachel’s mom tells us,“She is doing so well. When we brought her home, the doctors told us that she was a remarkable little girl. And most of all, she just loves her cuddles. She will sleep for hours, just curled into my chest. It was that first cuddle which saved her life – and I’m just so glad I trusted my instinct and picked her up when I did. Otherwise she wouldn’t be here today.”
Type "I Love You Mom" if you really care for your Mom
Thank you for sharing this story. Moms are God's angels.

“Ignorance is bliss.”

Since: May 11

Pickerington, OH

#230392 May 17, 2013
Sangelia wrote:
<quoted text>
should have said that.
.
thing is, the post you did that to. was one that I did in response to what you said. take a look at the post numbers. as in what you said in post #230360 <quoted text>
.
even if you did not mean it as in towards me. you should have said the person's handle in the post of who you were referring to. since you did not. and it was a response to one of my posts. it came out apparently directed at me when you did your posts with you calling a person a male and a fruitcake.
.
if it was supposed to have been lightforce or someone else. do it to THEIR post.
.
post number #230360 was in response to #230348
post number #230348 was in response to #230343 it was explaining on how some males do view women.
Considering that we've engaged in conversation numerous times about this very topic, I didn't realize I needed to clarify, especially since I used a male pronoun and I know you aren't a male. Either way, I think maybe you probably shouldn't be so quick to jump to conclusions and jump down someone's throat and instead, either give them the benefit of the doubt or ask for clarification. In the two years I've been posting on here, typically if I and another poster are talking back and forth or have in the past, we don't necessarily refer specifically about whom we are speaking because it's the natural progression of the conversation.

It doesn't really matter, but I just hope maybe next time you aren't so quick to go off.

“Ignorance is bliss.”

Since: May 11

Pickerington, OH

#230393 May 17, 2013
LightForce wrote:
<quoted text>
Thank you for sharing this story. Moms are God's angels.
Does that apply to mothers who drown their children? Or try to give them away on Craigslist? Or inject heroin while they're pregnant?

Since: Feb 08

Location hidden

#230394 May 17, 2013
LightForce wrote:
<quoted text>
Thank you for sharing this story. Moms are God's angels.
Not necessarily.
Bringing a pregnancy to term or adopting a child does not magically imbue a woman with angelic properties. It doesn't even make them decent human beings. If they weren't before, it's not going to make them change just because a baby is now dependent on them. They're just as likely to take out their frustrations and anger on the baby.
I also don't believe the story is factual, it's a pool of treacle, fiction to evoke emotion.

“I'm here with bells on.”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#230395 May 17, 2013
Mpnf1979 wrote:
<quoted text>
Does that apply to mothers who drown their children? Or try to give them away on Craigslist? Or inject heroin while they're pregnant?
Oh come on....those aren't REAL mothers....
The only REAL mothers are the ones who wait until after marriage to get pregnant, gestate every pregnancy they conceive without a second thought, never have a problem pregnancy, refuse to work outside the home, pray upon waking and before every meal, attend church every time the doors open, bake their own bread, slavishly obey their husbands, stay in their marriages even if hubby is abusive, and completely ignore their own needs in favor of the children's.
You know that.
*wink*
LightForce

Warren, MI

#230396 May 17, 2013
Mpnf1979 wrote:
<quoted text>
Does that apply to mothers who drown their children? Or try to give them away on Craigslist? Or inject heroin while they're pregnant?
You forgot mothers that have abortions. All are "fallen" angels.
LightForce

Warren, MI

#230397 May 17, 2013
Liam R wrote:
<quoted text>
No woman should ever be forced to give birth to an unwanted child. The poor are more likely to not be able to adequately care for existing children, let alone the possibility of yet more mouths to feed. The rich do not have that problem.
While I personally consider it foolish to abort as a method of gender selection, it is not my choice, it is the decision of the woman.

Or as is FAR more likely, blacks and Latinos are far more likely to be living in poverty, and thus be unable to properly take care of any more children. Instead of lying or inventing statistics,. how about addressing the REAL problem and try helping minorities achieve equality in this country?
As it stands, the REAL racism is in what YOU have posted, trying to paint minorities as "evil" for making rational choices.
Who is poor? Nobody is poor who values life.“He who has a why to live can bear almost any how.”(Nietzsche) It’s just what the rich call people that don’t have as much influence, power, or wealth as they do. And those who are forced to live by standards that are set by those more rich/powerful, and that may be unachievable for them.

Why should anybody have to die because they may have less value - as it is defined by others, than some other people? We shouldn’t base our value of life on an unequal and unjust economic system. We need to change society rather than kill children. Giving in to injustices will only make it worse.
LightForce

Warren, MI

#230398 May 17, 2013
Liam R wrote:
<quoted text>
No, it is NOT proven, nor is it logical.
The point of entry of the soul is not a "phantom" argument, if you accept the existence of the human soul, then it is THE central argument. Without a soul, the wad of goo is not a human being, and an abortion is not significantly different from a biopsy.
The soul has not been found yet, and so is a “phantom” argument. My own opinion is that it might be created at the moment of conception, and is made of a substance involved in the creation of a new human being. A new human being and therefore a new soul is created at the same time. But just like any opinion about the soul, it is only an opinion based on what little factual evidence, if any is actually known about it.

“I'm here with bells on.”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#230399 May 17, 2013
LightForce wrote:
<quoted text>
Who is poor? Nobody is poor who values life.“He who has a why to live can bear almost any how.”(Nietzsche) It’s just what the rich call people that don’t have as much influence, power, or wealth as they do. And those who are forced to live by standards that are set by those more rich/powerful, and that may be unachievable for them.
Why should anybody have to die because they may have less value - as it is defined by others, than some other people? We shouldn’t base our value of life on an unequal and unjust economic system. We need to change society rather than kill children. Giving in to injustices will only make it worse.
If every sperm is sacred, why don't women become pregnant every time we have sex? Why aren't wet dreams, and miscarriages resulting in murder charges?
LightForce

Warren, MI

#230400 May 17, 2013
Liam R wrote:
<quoted text>
I find it difficult to believe that anyone capable of typing on a keyboard with so few spelling mistakes yet be so stupid as to not understand such a simple concept.
"No mischief ensues". The fetus is dead, a rotting lump of goo on the desert, but no mischief has ensued. That can only mean one thing, that the fetus is not considered a person.
First,“her fruit depart, and yet no harm follow”, meaning that the child and the mother are uninjured. "But if any harm follow, then thou shalt give life for life", meaning the child or mother later die.

But even your example only shows that if it was viewed as an accidental death to the preborn child, as it is written in the law it would not be punishable.

Either way, it definitely shows the importance that is placed on a pregnant woman, and on the life of the preborn child.

“Ignorance is bliss.”

Since: May 11

Pickerington, OH

#230401 May 17, 2013
Sister Kathryn Lust wrote:
<quoted text>Oh come on....those aren't REAL mothers....
The only REAL mothers are the ones who wait until after marriage to get pregnant, gestate every pregnancy they conceive without a second thought, never have a problem pregnancy, refuse to work outside the home, pray upon waking and before every meal, attend church every time the doors open, bake their own bread, slavishly obey their husbands, stay in their marriages even if hubby is abusive, and completely ignore their own needs in favor of the children's.
You know that.
*wink*
Ah yes, yes. How could I have forgotten? And according to Pat Robertson, if your husband cheats, it's your fault. It certainly isn't his - it's in his DNA! Isn't it wonderful to be a woman?

“Ignorance is bliss.”

Since: May 11

Pickerington, OH

#230402 May 17, 2013
LightForce wrote:
<quoted text>
You forgot mothers that have abortions. All are "fallen" angels.
How could I forget something that didn't happen? A woman who has an abortion does not have a child, therefore she isn't a mother. Even the likes of you could understand that.

Now, if you're done deflecting, answer my question.

“I'm here with bells on.”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#230403 May 17, 2013
Mpnf1979 wrote:
<quoted text>
Ah yes, yes. How could I have forgotten? And according to Pat Robertson, if your husband cheats, it's your fault. It certainly isn't his - it's in his DNA! Isn't it wonderful to be a woman?
Aaaaa-baloney. In Pat's world, men can't cheat, because monogamy isn't 'part of his DNA'.

It's only called 'cheating' if women do it, and when she gets caught, it's often punishable by death.

When men do it, it's called 'being a man', and it's celebrated by other men as 'spreading his seed'.

Gag.
Angel1976

Rockford, MI

#230404 May 17, 2013
LightForce wrote:
<quoted text>
Thank you for sharing this story. Moms are God's angels.
Yes they sure are. And you are very welcome. I know that it touched my heart when I read this. Miracles really do happen rather some people believe it or not. The fact is like I said they really do happen and God is the reason for these miracles.
Angel1976

Rockford, MI

#230405 May 17, 2013
Sister Kathryn Lust wrote:
<quoted text>No one here takes orders from you.
Begone, troll.
Sorry but you are the trolls. Especially since you think abortion is ok and it isn't. For one it does stop a beating heart.

“I'm here with bells on.”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#230406 May 17, 2013
Angel1976 wrote:
<quoted text>
Sorry but you are the trolls. Especially since you think abortion is ok and it isn't. For one it does stop a beating heart.
Boo hoo.

Go gestate something.
kiddude

Pittsburgh, PA

#230407 May 17, 2013
youtube.com/watch... ……
Sometimes Luck? huh? sex is the problem...

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.

Top Stories Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 2 min Liam 579,076
Poll Was 9/11 a conspiracy?? (Oct '07) 6 min WasteWater 270,121
Why Should Jesus Love Me? (Feb '08) 7 min His Hollines dr S... 609,837
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 9 min Christian with Jesus 817,586
Looking for a male friend? 1 hr Ivan 2
Poll Do misspelling and bad grammar bother you? (Dec '07) 1 hr Joe 16
Why Won't The Government Help Against Select Po... (Aug '12) 1 hr Swamp Fox 240
Bush is a hero (Sep '07) 5 hr bad bob 176,207
More from around the web