Posted on 06/03/2004 7:27:09 PM PDT by wagglebee
"It’s interesting that some abortionists incinerate aborted babies on site." Sadly, Jill, more and more of the serial killing factories are now also set up for fetal tissue harvesting ... from the womb to the serial killer's hands to the waiting tongs and scalple of the fetal harvester, then into wet ice and off to the research labs. I would bet that somewhere a whole little one has arrived on wet ice at a lab, only to be discovered to still have a beating heart.
What argument? The author of the article provides us with no evidence of this.
Connor Peterson was murdered by someone, they found the tape around his neck!
Using the latest 'trial of the century' as an example doesn't strengthen this argument.
Lincoln was the calm voice of reason in the Civil War and he believed that the blood shed by 600,000 Americans was due payment for the sin and stain of slavery.
Please stay on topic.
How can you ever hope to convince the other side that you are right, if you sound like a zealot?
I'm a zealot ... and you smarmed that the poster should 'stay on topic'. Well, opiniontater, the disenfranchisement of alive fellow human beings IS ON TOPIC, and it is the fundamental methodology used by serial killing supporters to support the holocaust.
However, I applaud her courage in speaking the truth about Planned Parenthood. Next time she discusses PP, she may want to mention the white supremecist and eugenicist origins of the group, something they don't want to talk about.
Kookoo. You are another poor representative of the pro-life movement.
Bwahahaha .. you've outed yerself, tater.
How much of Planned Parenthood's annual budget do you think is financed by abortion?
Of the 1/2 million serial killings in America each year, PP-hood does more than 50%. And they've been maintaining that rate for more than a decade.
I guess I should have looked at your profile before I responded to you. My mistake.
"Sorry, but you ain't one of the 'calm voices of reason'." ... What is reasonable about taking three days to dilate a pregnant woman's cervix, then yank an alive sensing child by the leg (sometime ripping the little one's leg off in the process, prior to killing the child) down through the cervical os until only the writhing little one's head is lodged within the woman's uterus, then jamming blunt-tipped scissors into the braincase of the struggling baby, opening the jaws to make room for a suction cannula or other trocar to remove the dying child's brain? You want calm in the face of a holocaust, reason in the face of insane inhumane slaughter? You sick apologist, go back under your deceitful slime of pond scum.
Thank you.
It's true. Sharia law is coming. Ready?
I do it for the little ones these deceitful apologists for serial killing enjoy disenfranchising for slaughter. We must stand and speak out for the little ones who have no voice to plead for their tiny, vulnerable lives in the face of this demonic assault greased by deceptive dissemblers like the notiontater and gcruse.
If you examine my remarks, you will see that I neither argued for nor against abortion. My point was that the author of the article does the pro-life movement a disservice by trying to represent it. You are obviously too emotionally involved in the topic to carry on a rational conversation.
That's right. It's not a public service. They don't do it for free.
I'm on my Treo, so my usual Google, copy and paste skillsa are limited. This is from my memory, but perhaps someone else can fill in the links:
Remember the woman reporter in Texas a few years ago who turned in her boyfriend's urine to an abortionist, and was told that she was pregnant and he abortion was scheduled?
The woman who ran that clinic has since written a book telling all about the intentional misleading rampant within the abortion industry (dispensing the least effective birthcontrol pills with little counseling, knowing the girl would likely be back for her abortion when the pill failed).
Follow the money.
And realize that abortionists are capable of the worst you can imagine
Some causes are worthy of the term "zealot". If this isn't one of them, what is?
Men use to take no to mean no, not any more. girls are not innocent not because parents aren't trying but because they don't see the difference between their childhood and the present generation. Girls are now servicing boys and adult men are using teenage girls.
Parents knew 25 years ago now their children act.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.