Topless women activists bang Notre Dame bell in anti-pope protest in Paris cathedral

Topless women activists have pounded a huge church bell in Notre Dame Cathedral in Paris to "celebrate" the pope's resignation. Full Story

“Science not Conservatism”

Since: Jan 12

Progress, not Denial

#21 Feb 12, 2013
Interesting use of the word "bang" in that headline, lots of various interpretations were going through my mind before reading this....LOL

Incidentally, the one on the left nearest the camera is HOT. Just sayin'....:)

“Science not Conservatism”

Since: Jan 12

Progress, not Denial

#22 Feb 12, 2013
Knightmare wrote:
<quoted text>
Typical progressive liberal....
First you deny actual facts about abortions....yes legal abortions....including not only the deaths of women but the other affects which have been proven....
Then you cite a clearly biased anti-church, pro-gay agenda site....
Complete fail....
Oh dear, another anti-choicer who didn't hear what he wanted to hear and calls it "bias"....

“I Am No One To Be Trifled With”

Since: Jun 09

Dread Pirate Roberts

#23 Feb 12, 2013
The Pope of Las Vegas wrote:
<quoted text>
Why should others have any respect for your beliefs?
They should respect your RIGHT to believe what you want, but no need or obligation to have respect for WHAT you believe.
I personally think religion is moronic, juvenile, and unworthy of having my respect, but you have every right to follow religion yourself. If you like religion, go for it. I do not and I have no respect for it.
Don't confuse respect for freedom with respect for a subject matter.
So this is bald-faced progressive liberal tolerance? Nice....I commend you for telling the truth....

It falls short of compassion and actual love for others....

And yes....I do respect YOU as person and even what you believe....do I agree with it....no....can I say it is wrong....yes....but you have freedom of conscience, expression, speech, religion and you've excercised....that much I can support....

“I Am No One To Be Trifled With”

Since: Jun 09

Dread Pirate Roberts

#24 Feb 12, 2013
tha Professor wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh dear, another anti-choicer who didn't hear what he wanted to hear and calls it "bias"....
Pro-lifer....

You happen to be an anti-2nd amendment person?

http://www.pregnantpause.org/safe/bcancer2.ht...

Dr. Janet Daling is a cancer researcher at the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center and the University of Washington. On 2 November 1994 Dr. Daling and fellow reseachers published an article in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute (pp. 1584-1592) concerning induced abortion and breast cancer risk for premenopausal women. Some key findings:

Women under age 18 who had an induced abortion have an increased breast cancer risk of 150%.
Women of age 30 and above who aborted a FIRST pregnancy increase their breast cancer risk by 110%.
Overall, women who have an induced abortion have an increased breast cancer risk of 50%.
Dr. Janet Daling is self-described as 'pro-choice'.
The Journal of the National Medical Association is a publication by black medical professionals concerned with black health problems. In the December 1993 issue JNMA published the results of a Howard University study. Key finding:

Black women of age 50 and above who had at least 1 induced abortion have an increased breast cancer risk of 370%.

In September 1995 Louisiana became the first U.S. state to require abortion clinics to inform potential patients that induced abortions may increase breast cancer risk. In no other state (or in Canada) are women warned that there is even a possibility of a link between abortion and cancer.

Since: Jun 08

Bangkok, Thailand

#25 Feb 12, 2013
Knightmare wrote:
<quoted text>
Typical progressive liberal....
First you deny actual facts about abortions....yes legal abortions....including not only the deaths of women but the other affects which have been proven....
Then you cite a clearly biased anti-church, pro-gay agenda site....
Complete fail....
I gotcha. You don't need such trifles as sources and evidence if you've got God on you side. That's very Christian of you. By the way you earlier wrote this: "Kill the gays? Can you site sources?" That should have been "cite", not "site" since you were asking for a citation. Get it? Also, "affects" is a verb whereas "effects" is the noun you should have used.

“I Am No One To Be Trifled With”

Since: Jun 09

Dread Pirate Roberts

#26 Feb 12, 2013
http://realchoice.blogspot.com/2009/01/can-ab...

Can abortion kill the woman?
Yes.

Abortion can cause infection, hemorrhage, bowel injuries, clotting disorders, and other potentially fatal complications. Also, amniotic fluid, fetal tissue, or air can get into the woman's bloodstream and cause an embolism, which can be fatal.

The degree of risk of suffering any complication depends on the woman's health, the skill of the abortion practitioner, and how far advanced her pregnancy is. The risk of complications and death is also greater among Black woman and public-pay patients than among white women and private-pay patients, though researchers have been unable to determine why this is so.

The risk of death is widely touted to be less with abortion than with birth. This comparison is based on taking known abortion deaths -- detected mostly via statistical samples sent by state vital records offices to the National Center for Health Statistics -- and comparing them to maternal death rates from intensive maternal mortality studies. This means that we really don't know the risk of death from abortion.

But based on the scanty data available, the Centers for Disease Control has concluded that before 16 weeks, abortion is safer than childbirth, the risk is equal at sixteen weeks, and the risks of abortion death double every two weeks after week 16. This means that at 18 weeks, abortion is believed to be twice as risky as carrying to term, at 20 weeks four times as risky, and so forth. Most of the risk appears to be from the amount of effort it takes to dilate an unripe cervix to remove a large fetus, though injuries from bony fetal parts as the fetus is dismembered are also potentially catastrophic in later abortions.

Statistically, women who have undergone abortions also have a higher risk of suffering violent death -- suicide, homicide, or accident -- than women who have given birth or who have not been pregnant. The increased risk of suicide appears to be directly related to the abortion. The increased risk of homicide or accidental death has not been studied as much, and researchers currently can not determine if the increased risk is related to the abortion (strain on relationships, the known increased risk of drug or alcohol abuse in women who have undergone abortions), or if there is some common risk factor that leads women at higher risk of violent death to also be at higher risk of undergoing abortions.

“I Am No One To Be Trifled With”

Since: Jun 09

Dread Pirate Roberts

#27 Feb 12, 2013
http://www.pregnantpause.org/safe/finmort.htm

Is abortion safer for the mother than pregnancy? A Finnish study indicates that it is far more dangerous.
Researchers with STAKES, a part of Finland's National Research and Development Center for Welfare and Health, compared death records for Finnish women to hospital records on pregnancy-related events, for the years 1987 - 1994. They then identified all women who died within 12 months of giving birth, having a miscarriage, or having an abortion.

The result: Women who had an abortion had a death rate within the next year that was 400% of that of women who gave birth or had a miscarriage. That is, abortion proved to be 4 times as dangerous as childbirth or miscarriage.

Deaths included not only medical problems but also suicide, homicide, and accidental deaths.

As Finland has socialized medicine, records are highly centralized, and so the researchers had almost all the relevant information. Thus, it is highly unlikely that the study had any bias in the choice of participants.(Selecting participants is often a problem in medical research. For example, a study on the success rate of a certain diet plan might not be reliable if the subjects were all referred by the company that markets the diet: They would surely have an incentive to only refer successful cases. But in this case, almost every woman in Finland should have been included in the data.)

The study was published in Finland in 1997, but is only now (2000) coming to the attention of the American medical community.

“Science not Conservatism”

Since: Jan 12

Progress, not Denial

#28 Feb 12, 2013
Knightmare wrote:
Okay, progressive liberals/socialists are all the same everywhere huh? Typical so-called "tolerance" and respect for others beliefs....
More hypocritical whining from a rightie who would doubtless give short shrift to any kind of respect for progressives, liberals, etc.

Like you just did in that post, actually.:)

“Science not Conservatism”

Since: Jan 12

Progress, not Denial

#29 Feb 12, 2013
Knightmare wrote:
http://www.pregnantpause.org/s afe/finmort.htm
Is abortion safer for the mother than pregnancy? A Finnish study indicates that it is far more dangerous.
...EDITED....The study was published in Finland in 1997, but is only now (2000) coming to the attention of the American medical community.
Just so long as that's a choice the woman and her doctor get to make, not anti-choicers. That's the important thing.
Dan

Omaha, NE

#30 Feb 12, 2013
Stanley Engel wrote:
<quoted text>
Regarding Savita Halappanavar, she would have survived her ordeal if the Irish hospital had performed the abortion that was medically required. I wonder how many other similar cases in Catholic hospitals were never publicized? What's your estimate?
Regarding the rest of my post, it can bear a few additional comments. Pope Benedict XVI was pictured in mid-December 2012 giving a blessing to Rebecca Kadaga, the Speaker of the Ugandan Parliament, who promised to pass the country’s notorious Anti-Homosexuality Bill as a “Christmas gift”. It's been called the "kill the gays" bill and the Pope gave it his tacit endorsement by meeting with Ms. Kadaga.
The woman who dies was in a country where abortion is illegal, I believe. I believe Irish parliament sets state law there?

The Pope didn't bless Kadaga.

She was in a delegation that met with the Pope. No blessings were conferred to Kadaga. Check your sources. Please. No reason for you to continue to embarrass yourself.
sickofit

Faribault, MN

#31 Feb 12, 2013
Knightmare wrote:
<quoted text>
Freedom....interesting....why are there regulations on the 2nd amendment? Can we own any weapon we choose?
Can we pray in school?
We should be able to own any weapon we want. And praying in school is allowed. Pray to yourself all you want. Just dont force others to do so. It is not illegal to pray at school. Just cant force others to be part of said prayer..YOU KNOW LIKE 1ST AMENDMNET SAYS.

“I Am No One To Be Trifled With”

Since: Jun 09

Dread Pirate Roberts

#32 Feb 12, 2013
http://cvcomment.org/2013/01/04/the-pope-does...

So what actually happened? Some early reports claimed that Ms Kadaga met the Pope after a 13 December Mass in Rome attended by thousands of pilgrims, including a delegation of Ugandan legislators attending the World Parliamentary Conference on Human Rights. But Vatican spokesman Father Federico Lombardi has since clarified that Ms Kadaga received neither a private audience with the Pope nor a blessing from him.

“Relations with the delegation were not outside the normal framework and there was no blessing,” Father Lombardi explained.“The group of Ugandan delegates greeted the Pope, as did many other persons who attended the audience with the Pope, which in no case is a specific sign of approval of the actions or proposals of Ms Kadaga.”

The Ugandan Anti-homosexuality bill, which originally proposed the death penalty for what it termed ‘aggravated homosexuality’ was first proposed on 14 October 2009, when Uganda’s bishops were in Rome as part of the Synod of African Bishops, discussing the injustices that blight Africa. On 23 December 2009, the Ugandan Archbishop of Kampala Cyprian K. Lwanga (pictured) issued a Christmas statement in which he publicly condemned the bill, saying:

“The Catholic Church is clear in its teaching on homosexuality. Church teaching remains that homosexual acts are immoral and are violations of divine and natural law.[...] However, the Church equally teaches the Christian message of respect, compassion, and sensitivity. The Church has always asked its followers to hate the sin but to love the sinner.[...] The recently tabled Anti-Homosexuality Bill does not pass a test of a Christian caring approach to this issue. The targeting of the sinner, not the sin, is the core flaw of the proposed Bill. The introduction of the death penalty and imprisonment for homosexual acts targets people rather than seeking to counsel and to reach out in compassion to those who need conversion, repentance, support and hope.”

Archbishop Lwanga also condemned the proposed criminalization of those who would reach out in such a way towards homosexual people.

Far from favouring the criminalisation of homosexual acts, the Church in Britain publicly welcomed the 1957 Wolfenden Report, which urged the decriminalisation of private homosexual acts, and as recently as December 2008 the Holy See stated to the United Nations that globally:

“The Holy See continues to advocate that every sign of unjust discrimination towards homosexual persons should be avoided and urges States to do away with criminal penalties against them.”

Clearing the Ground, February’s parliamentary report on Christians in the UK, found that there was a deep and widespread level of religious illiteracy in British public life; Filipovic’s Guardian and Bennett’s Pink News pieces are classic instances of this. But ignorance is not an excuse for failure to carry out basic research.

“I Am No One To Be Trifled With”

Since: Jun 09

Dread Pirate Roberts

#33 Feb 12, 2013
sickofit wrote:
<quoted text>
We should be able to own any weapon we want. And praying in school is allowed. Pray to yourself all you want. Just dont force others to do so. It is not illegal to pray at school. Just cant force others to be part of said prayer..YOU KNOW LIKE 1ST AMENDMNET SAYS.
Read that 1st amendment....it says CONGRESS shall make no law for or against religion....

“I Am No One To Be Trifled With”

Since: Jun 09

Dread Pirate Roberts

#34 Feb 12, 2013
tha Professor wrote:
<quoted text>
Just so long as that's a choice the woman and her doctor get to make, not anti-choicers. That's the important thing.
Hmmm....who's the voice of the unborn baby?

Since: Feb 09

Location hidden

#35 Feb 12, 2013
sickofit wrote:
<quoted text>
Not at all.. Your mistaking your morals for what others have as morals....TRUE FREEDOM MEANS ALL PEOPLE LIVES AS THEY WISH AS LONG AS NOT HURTING OTHERS...
Cant waith until the day all religous peopel die off. Then we can have true freedom.
Im all for that. I just wish Liberals would leave us alone and not try to bill other people for their fun.
How about I dont force my religion on you , and you dont send me a bil for your condoms?
The Pope of Las Vegas

Miami, FL

#36 Feb 12, 2013
Knightmare wrote:
<quoted text>
So this is bald-faced progressive liberal tolerance? Nice....I commend you for telling the truth....
It falls short of compassion and actual love for others....
And yes....I do respect YOU as person and even what you believe....do I agree with it....no....can I say it is wrong....yes....but you have freedom of conscience, expression, speech, religion and you've excercised....that much I can support....
Okay. But what is "bald-faced"??
sickofit

Faribault, MN

#37 Feb 12, 2013
Knightmare wrote:
<quoted text>
Read that 1st amendment....it says CONGRESS shall make no law for or against religion....
Right....Which means they cant make children in a PUBLIC school do prayers. Children can say a pray anytime they want in school.JUST CANT MAKE OTHERS JOIN THEM.....Understand facts now?

“I Am No One To Be Trifled With”

Since: Jun 09

Dread Pirate Roberts

#38 Feb 12, 2013
Stanley Engel wrote:
<quoted text>
I gotcha. You don't need such trifles as sources and evidence if you've got God on you side. That's very Christian of you. By the way you earlier wrote this: "Kill the gays? Can you site sources?" That should have been "cite", not "site" since you were asking for a citation. Get it? Also, "affects" is a verb whereas "effects" is the noun you should have used.
No....I intentionally used affects....

http://maaadddog.wordpress.com/2009/02/24/the...

I. Be creative with the facts. Facts are fungible. Don’t be afraid to twist, ignore or make up facts, if necessary. Never let the facts get in the way of winning the argument—the ends justify the means.

II. Avoid arguments that you can’t win. Some conservatives are just too intelligent to argue with—e.g., John Doe—avoid arguing with them like the plague.

IV. Repeat lies repeatedly. The more outrageous the better. Bush lied, troops died [don’t get bogged down in defending our own people who said the same things.] Palin is dumb. McCain is Bush II. You get the idea. Lie lie lie! It works.

V. Run in packs. Get your buddies to pile on your opponent. Strength in numbers. The more the merrier. Claim victory, over and over and over again. It makes it appear that you are winning if all your buddies pile on and cheerlead for you.(Lowell Fulk is especially adept at utilizing this Commandment).

VI. Avoid using logic. Stick to appeals to emotion. Logic won’t convince liberals or others who are considering becoming liberals. And our positions aren’t based on logic. Avoid logic like the plague.

VII.“Meghan’s Law”(added in response to Matt’s comment). When your opponent is winning the argument, pick up on some little point that they made and whine about it being a personal attack (or anything else that can distract from the conversation and instead twist the conversation around to some topic where you might stand a chance). Examples? You called me “fat”(even if they didn’t really) or “that sounds like a racist/homophobic/mysogenist/[ insert some big word here]” and attack the person instead. You know that is where liberals excel, attacking the messenger. Named in honor of Meghan McCain. True, some might argue that this is merely a variation of Commandment X, but really, it is a clever way to actually misconstrue what your opponent says, make it sound like they said something, and then you can launch into personal attack mode yourself while claiming to be the victim. It is a less ham-handed approach to get to Commandment X than to just launch directly into name-calling.

{Nice to know you follow your ten commanments....}

Since: Feb 09

Location hidden

#39 Feb 12, 2013
The Pope of Las Vegas wrote:
<quoted text>
Why should others have any respect for your beliefs?
They should respect your RIGHT to believe what you want, but no need or obligation to have respect for WHAT you believe.
I personally think religion is moronic, juvenile, and unworthy of having my respect, but you have every right to follow religion yourself. If you like religion, go for it. I do not and I have no respect for it.
Don't confuse respect for freedom with respect for a subject matter.
Thats fine with me. I really dont care if other respect my belief. I just want them to leave me alone and not force their beliefs on me. You believe and do what you want to and I will do the same. Just dont try to force your belief on me and I will not try to force my belief on you.

“I Am No One To Be Trifled With”

Since: Jun 09

Dread Pirate Roberts

#40 Feb 12, 2013
sickofit wrote:
<quoted text>
Right....Which means they cant make children in a PUBLIC school do prayers. Children can say a pray anytime they want in school.JUST CANT MAKE OTHERS JOIN THEM.....Understand facts now?
They?

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.

Pope Benedict XVI Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 2 hr truth 555,197
Pope urges more Muslim opposition to IS in Turkey 4 hr Faith 4
United House of Prayer for All People: Bishop's... (Apr '08) 19 hr Hebrewsunite 8,634
Pope hopes Turkey visit promotes peace 22 hr champion65 4
A Gentleman. Thu QUITTNER Nov27 2014 1
Selfies with Pope Francis cardboard cutouts pop... Nov 25 pazuzu 9
20 years after collapse of communism, the pope ... (Sep '09) Nov 25 God worships Sin ... 2

Pope Benedict XVI People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE