Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


1 posted on 12/07/2004 1:04:40 PM PST by dead
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-30 next last
To: dead

I hate the idea of an organization such as Catholics for a Free Choice

Ya you have a free choice, go become an Unitarian and leave the Church alone.


2 posted on 12/07/2004 1:05:57 PM PST by escapefromboston (manny ortez: mvp)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: dead

What ever this article says, she is already responsible for the murder of countless babies through her actions. May God have mercy on her soul.


3 posted on 12/07/2004 1:08:47 PM PST by frog_jerk_2004
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: dead

Bump. It's amazing to watch the contortions these people put themselves through to continue defending what they know is wrong.


4 posted on 12/07/2004 1:10:31 PM PST by T. Buzzard Trueblood ("Hell, I don't want to meet them sons of bitches." Elvis Presley on the Beatles)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: dead; All
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/921369/posts
Bringing Good Things to Life (ULTRASOUND)
Citizen magazine ^ | June 2003 | Karla Dial
This is the Stealth Bomber that is going to zoom in under the pro-death crowd's radar and nuke them... once a woman sees what is really in her womb, it ceases to be a "tissue mass" and becomes... a baby.
 Her baby.
 

5 posted on 12/07/2004 1:15:10 PM PST by backhoe (-30-)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: dead

It's kind of a shame her parents didn't have the same feelings about abortion when her mother got pregnant with her. What a waste of skin and $3 worth of chemicals.


6 posted on 12/07/2004 1:15:37 PM PST by stm
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: dead

I posted Kissling's article here:

http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1295713/posts

I see Kissling's stand as evidence of some inroads made by pro-Life over the last decade or so. Although she and her organization would never change course 180 degrees, we can see them at least lilting to the right slightly. It's an interesting read considering the source.

Of course pro-Abortion people are going to have coniption fits at the mere suggestion that the fetus "may" have some value and that the discussion should at least advance .... most are absolutists.


7 posted on 12/07/2004 1:16:07 PM PST by Lorianne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: dead

I posted Kissling's article here:

http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1295713/posts

I see Kissling's stand as evidence of some inroads made by pro-Life over the last decade or so. Although she and her organization would never change course 180 degrees, we can see them at least lilting to the right slightly. It's an interesting read considering the source.

Of course pro-Abortion people are going to have coniption fits at the mere suggestion that the fetus "may" have some value and that the discussion should at least advance .... most are absolutists.


8 posted on 12/07/2004 1:16:31 PM PST by Lorianne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: dead
I'm glad to see that this vile Nazi is being forced to admit, at least in part, that she is wrong on the facts.

But she's negotiating - she's willing to give up drinking the blood of children over 20 weeks in exchange for guarantees that she can kill 19 week olds.

We have to keep fighting these devils.

9 posted on 12/07/2004 1:18:30 PM PST by wideawake (God bless our brave soldiers and their Commander in Chief)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: dead
Others take issue with the idea that the pro-choice movement should "present abortion as a complex issue that involves loss—and to be saddened by that loss," as Kissling suggests in her piece. "I don't hear her saying that there's joy sometimes," says Smeal. "I think if an 11-year-old is pregnant, it's a great relief for her to have an abortion. I happen to think it's a moral good to allow people to decide when they give birth."

Evil.

There's just no other word for it.

11 posted on 12/07/2004 1:20:07 PM PST by The Iguana
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: dead
I remember very well how emotional the moment was when I saw the heartbeat of my first on the ultrasound. Today she is a happy, vibrant three year old.

How anyone could look at that image of a beating heart and want to stop it is simply incomprehensible evil to me.

14 posted on 12/07/2004 1:25:01 PM PST by hopespringseternal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: dead
"We have to put the dying and suffering of women who don't have access to safe abortion onto the table

They are on the table.

15 posted on 12/07/2004 1:28:10 PM PST by Raycpa (Alias, VRWC_minion,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: dead
"If and when those who dominate anti-abortion politics could for a minute take seriously the rights to a decent life and health of born children," she wrote, "maybe then we could start to talk about advancing respect for fetal life, early or late."

Oh, here we go again, the same old tired canard that "pro-life" people "don't care about babies after they're born." Even if this accusation were valid (which it isn't) how does that justify "therefore it's OK to kill them"?

All this proves is that pro-aborts mouth these sound bites without having the faintest idea of what they're actually saying.

16 posted on 12/07/2004 1:28:41 PM PST by Alouette ("Fundamentalist Islam" -- not "fun" just "demented"...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: dead
"We have to put the dying and suffering of women who don't have access to safe abortion onto the table."

"...the dying and suffering of women who don't have access to safe abortion..." is a myth. The only way pro-abortion monsters can try to justify an abominable horror is to equate it in their minds to the preservation of the life of the mother. In the overwhelming majority of abortion cases, this is just. not. true. Abortion is used, by and large, as a gruesome method of birth control for those too ignorant, careless or wanton in their personal lives. It is a despicable attempt to abdicate responsibility for their sexual practices.

18 posted on 12/07/2004 1:31:43 PM PST by TChris (You keep using that word. I don't think it means what yHello, I'm a TAGLINE vir)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: dead
It's amazing to me that it took the heartwrenching horror of late-term abortion to finally begin to awaken this woman's senses!
22 posted on 12/07/2004 1:40:58 PM PST by TChris (You keep using that word. I don't think it means what yHello, I'm a TAGLINE vir)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: dead
Kissling suggests instead trying to change the legislation to say that fetal anesthesia should be respectfully offered as an option.

Actually, it should be required by state law, for abortions at a stage where the fetus is capable of feeling pain. State laws do not allow inhumane methods of euthanizing unwanted or sick animals.

23 posted on 12/07/2004 1:42:47 PM PST by GovernmentShrinker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: dead
"It's gruesome," Kissling says of abortions performed late in pregnancy.

That's because you are killing a person, Frances.

25 posted on 12/07/2004 2:14:27 PM PST by siunevada
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: dead

Again, it boils down to them thinking "It's not what we say, it's how we say it. If we say it differently, we'll win more people over."


26 posted on 12/07/2004 2:46:57 PM PST by wizardoz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: dead
It's funny to see the pro-aborts eat one of their own alive with the smallest suggestion of even TALKING about reasonable restrictions on abortion.

Keep it up, pro-aborts, this is why we are winning! People don't like extremists!

tSG
28 posted on 12/07/2004 2:53:11 PM PST by alkaloid2 (Your favorite site is now www.theSuperGenius.com! You are commanded!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: All
One has only to read the USSC's 1973 Roe v Wade decision to know that this kind of talk is nothing but agit-prop. FemiiNazi idealogy is famously written into the USSC decision.

Thanks to FemiNazis, the unborn child has literally no protection in the womb, and is considered fair game by any and all saline/suction-wielding abortionists.

The USSC decision specfically states that under the equal protection clause of 14th Amendment, the unborn child is not considered a "person" and therefore has no legal rights under US law (14th Excerpt: "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof......").

Roe v Wade author Justice Harry Blackmun wrote that "the unborn have never been recognized in the law as persons in the whole sense" and are not entitled to constitutional protection until birth.

Here, Blackmun was aided by tenets of the Jewish faith, and possibly other faiths, who teach that life begins at birth, not in the womb.

However, the official right-to-life position is that life begins at conception. Pro aborts insist that laws built on those religious beliefs infringe on their constitutional right of freedom from religion, yet they rarely if ever mention that the concept of life beginning at birth is a religious belief.

FemiNazis made sure that Roe v Wade made the "Right to Choose" paramount. The mother's rights over the womb are absolute.....up to and including the ninth month of pregnancy. Most people believe that the court decision was based on the viability of unborn life, and that the court examined all of the existing information, then decided there was no viability. Nothing could be further from the truth.

I have had to force newspaper editors to retract editiorials on this aspect of the USSC decision.

The court based its decision on the fact that since religion and science could not decide (up to that time) when life begins, they didn't have to, either.

Blackmun wrote: "We need not resolve the difficult question of when life begins. When those trained in the respective disciplines of medicine, philosophy and theology are unable to arrive at any consensus, the judiciary, at this point in the development of man's knowledge, is not in a position to speculate as to the answer."

It appears the Roe Court (or some of them) actually believed that it wasn't possible to determine when the life of a human being begins. But, by not resolving this factual issue, the Court left unresolved the legal question regarding the rights of an unborn child. So, the need to provide an answer to that question is inescapable.

Cutting edge millenium technology offers proof positive that life begins at conception. The issue of when life begins is no longer a difficult question. Scientific and medical evidence proves, without doubt, that human life begins at the moment of conception and that the child is a complete, separate, unique and irreplaceable human being from the moment of conception throughout gestation.

Since 1973, advances in technology have allowed us to obtain new information about human life on a molecular level. This information resolves all doubts that abortion is the act of killing a human being and that this tiny human experiences pain even during early gestation.

At the time of the Roe v Wade decision, abortion was completely illegal in 33 states except when necessary to save the life of the mother. The remaining 17 states allowed abortion in various circumstances. The most permissive, New York, allowed abortion for any reason up to 24 weeks, though New York did not allow third trimester abortions for "emotional health" as required by the Supreme Court.

In recent years, the abortion right has been extended to partial-birth abortions (sometimes termed infanticide) so that a perfectly viable child in the birth canal, in the process of being born, can be aborted in a most gruesome way, if the mother so chooses.

29 posted on 12/07/2004 2:58:21 PM PST by Liz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: dead
Rosalind Petchesky, a professor of political science at Hunter College and author of a seminal book on abortion rights, points out that many who get abortions after the first trimester are young teenagers who didn't act earlier because of the climate of fear, shame, and confusion created by anti-abortion extremists.

Well, that or maybe there wasn't a clinic around the corner from their house, or maybe they had something else to do on Saturday afternoon. I mean, who are we to judge?

30 posted on 12/07/2004 3:22:15 PM PST by madprof98
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-30 next last

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson