[Kazan]

Originally posted by Mongoose
Nope...that would be you

P.S.  Lots of other sources on Google if you discredit that one for some unknown reason.

biased project

[Kazan]

Originally posted by 01010

Also, if you can seriously think that a couple that have been together for four years do not have respect for each other both mentally, physically and sexually without being married then you are deluded.

[Mongoose]

Calm down, man.  I'm not forcing you to do anything; I'm not trying to impose my beliefs on marriage to you.  I'm simply stating what they are.  I think that you do have respect for your girlfriend; thinking anything else would be ridiculous.  I am positive you adore your girlfriend, and I realize that you don't attach the importance to marriage that I do.

However, I still am in disbelief as how you can consider raising a child a "waste of time."  Consider this:  if everyone else thought this way, neither you nor your girlfriend would be here.  In fact, the human race would cease to exist .

Edit:  As I said, Kazan, there's plenty of other sources, including the original government study that that article is based on.

[vyper]

Well, if nothing else I think we've found out which HLPers are not getting laid for quite some time.

You know guys, this is why revolutions and seperation of church and state happen... this is why folk get taken out and shot/crucified/et al. Do not screw with people's freedom - you will suffer the consequences.

[01010]

I mean, the worlds a ****ed up place and an abortion is a ****ed up thing, I don't think any here would deny that, it's not made any easier by apparently "compassionate" fundamentalists telling these people that they are going to hell for what they are doing. I'd have a lot more respect for a lot of so called Christians if they actually used there religion to preach love and compassion for all people, rather than preaching hate on people that are already in a tender situation.

I won't even get into the irony of pro-lifers that murder doctors.

However, I still am in disbelief as how you can consider raising a child a "waste of time."  Consider this:  if everyone else thought this way, neither you nor your girlfriend would be here.  In fact, the human race would cease to exist .

[/b]

Yeah, and the more I see of the human race the more I wish people thought like me.

[Mongoose]

I don't plan to "get laid," at least not until after I am married.  And by the way, abortion is no "freedom," at least not to the unborn child.  Also by the way, the original definition of "separation of church and state" has been so warped that it barely resembes what the Framers intended.

Edit again (everyone stop posting so fast ):  010101, I'm not saying that anyone who has an abortion is going "straight to Hell," or anything like that.  In fact, the Catholic Church has established something called Project Rachel, which provides counseling and support for women who have undergone abortions and are suffering emotional/mental trauma.  I feel no hate for people who have had abortions, only pity, since they felt that that was their best option.  Also, people who murder abortion doctors do not represent the pro-life movement or its values; they are going against what it stands for.

[Kazan]

Originally posted by Mongoose
Calm down, man.  I'm not forcing you to do anything; I'm not trying to impose my beliefs on marriage to you.

by being anti-choice you have

 Consider this:  if everyone else thought this way, neither you nor your girlfriend would be here.  In fact, the human race would cease to exist .

irrevelant - nor is this thread of argumentation pertinent to the discussion at hand

Edit:  As I said, Kazan, there's plenty of other sources, including the original government study that that article is based on.

this study itself is the problem - it was manipulated to produce the result they wanted, not a result resembling the reality of the situation

[Kazan]

Originally posted by Mongoose
I don't plan to "get laid," at least not until after I am married.  And by the way, abortion is no "freedom," at least not to the unborn child.  Also by the way, the original definition of "separation of church and state" has been so warped that it barely resembes what the Framers intended.

Only in that the "Wall of Seperation between Church and State" [Thomas Jefferson]  is now under assault from christian fundamentalists who, in their ignorance of history, have forgotten one of the hard-learned lessons of the formation of this country

The founding fathers were of _all_ western religious flavors of the time: Catholic, Protestant, Deist, Theist, Agnostic, Atheist - they _ALL_ agreed on the Seperation of Church and State as a NECCESITY for freedom

[vyper]

Mongoose, like I said to the others - I pity you more than anything else.

[Mongoose]

Give me a break, Kazan.  Every time someone produces evidence contrary to what you believe, you discredit somehow.  You're refusing to stand up and give valid arguments, instead hiding behind claims of "irrelevance."  That other discussion is pertinent; it's a response to something in 010101's post.  And as for being "anti-choice," I'm not imposing my beliefs; I'm trying to save innocent lives.  And this "separation" was supposed to prevent governmental intervention in religious affairs, not obliterate every trace of religion from government.

Vyper, you and your ilk are the ones deserving of pity.  If you can't see the beauty of life, then your perceptions of this world must be very warped.

[Kazan]

Originally posted by Mongoose
Give me a break, Kazan.  Every time someone produces evidence contrary to what you believe, you discredit somehow.

I only believe that which has the best evidence

 You're refusing to stand up and give valid arguments, instead hiding behind claims of "irrelevance."

When something that is off topic then it's irrevelant


 

And as for being "anti-choice," I'm not imposing my beliefs; I'm trying to save innocent lives.  

If you don't understand how this is imposing your views upon others in an act of religious perscution then you have clearly demonstrated why you cannot be trusted with the power to influence the future of this country

 

 And this "separation" was supposed to prevent governmental intervention in religious affairs, not obliterate every trace of religion from government.

It was supposed to keep government out of religion, that neccesitates keeping religion out of government

[Liberator]

I understand Kazan and the rest of you to a lesser degree now.

Originally posted by Kazan


biased project

If a piece of information doesn't agree with or at least discredit the opposition it's biased and therefore irrelevant.

As I've repeatedly said, and as you well know Kazan, the "separation of church and state" quote you and your ilk are so fond of bringing up anytime a person of faith stands-up for themselves and their rights was actually written to the ladies of a church is Pennsylvania(IIRC) who were worried that the new United States would enforce a state religion like the Anglican Church they had fled England to escape.

Originally posted by Kazan
It was supposed to keep government out of religion, that neccesitates keeping religion out of government

Quite the opposite in fact, it requires men of high ethics and morals that Christianity, and religion in general, incubates.

[vyper]

[q]Vyper, you and your ilk are the ones deserving of pity. If you can't see the beauty of life, then your perceptions of this world must be very warped.[/q]

I see the beauty in ENJOYING LIFE.

[01010]

Originally posted by Liberator
I understand Kazan and the rest of you to a lesser degree now.

People suck, why create more of them?

That's my stance, it's not that complicated.

[Liberator]

WTH does that quote have to do with what you said?

[vyper]

[q]Quite the opposite in fact, it requires men of high ethics and morals that Christianity, and religion in general, incubates.[/q]

So Muslim/Catholic men who would force their daughters to stay home and never choose their own path should be allowed into govt because they are defending _a_ particular morality?

Thats the road you're going down.

[01010]

You stated that you understand us to a lesser degree, I therefore made my position in this debate clear.

[Deepblue]

Originally posted by 01010
Liberator. Me and my G/f have been together nearly four years, I have no plans to ever marry and yet I know I do not want anyone else, she is currently at university and neither of us had partners before meeting. If she got pregnant she would abort the child, we have discussed this, we are careful, we use contraceptives and also she is on the pill, here is my question:

Why should some piece of flesh that is nothing more than a few bundled cells with NOTHING human about it be allowed to ruin both mine and my G/F's lives if the contraception were to fail? Why is it that you christian fundamentalist ****wits demonise sex and view a child as PUNISHMENT for what you percieve to be a sin, when the bible tells you to be fruitful and multiply?

Um... you cant "be fruitful and multiply" if you are killing children.

[Deepblue]

I just realized something... Your arguments are extremely similar to the idea that if I eat fatty food I should not have to get fat and its not my fault idealogy.

[01010]

Originally posted by Deepblue


Um... you cant "be fruitful and multiply" if you are killing children.

It's past, but way to focus on one thing. They aren't children either, more like tumours, or parasites if you like.

Originally posted by Deepblue
I just realized something... Your arguments are extremely similar to the idea that if I eat fatty food I should not have to get fat and its not my fault idealogy.

Nope. You eat fatty foods then get fat it's your own fault and you have to deal with it.

You get pregnant and you don't want the child you have to deal with it. It's a fairly simple idea.

I just don't see why any of it is anyone but the people directly involved with the abortions business. Are your lives that empty that you have to try to control other peoples?