Shane Krouse is an MSU sophomore and State News columnist.
Posted on 08/02/2006 3:19:21 PM PDT by wagglebee
FL Right to Life endorses Republican Congresswoman Harris for Senator...........
Please give a bump & ping your pro-life lists to this thread:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-gop/1676802/posts
Please FreepMail me if you want on or off my Pro-Life Ping List.
It would appear that the "loving" God of these fundamentalists is many more times guilty of murder than all the human race's abortionists combined.
Yes, they are subhuman. It is GOOD they are not breeding, frankly. Sad for the abortees, of course.
"my parasite" and "not to breed" -- this is an open admission that the speaker herself is a parasite.
She should be sterilized immediately to prevent child abuse, by the pro-abortion side's OWN strictures.
NO cheers, unfortunately.
If you think they are bad when they are unborn,
just wait until they are 17.
They can suck blood like you can't believe.
There are already laws against incest.
Some liberals already commit incest, and seek to have abortions to cover up the evidence of ytheir crime.
Here's a question for you.
Since most of the third world (sub-Saharan Africe, women in Muslim countries, overpopulated Asia) will knowingly suffer throughout their entire lives, why aren't you choosing logical consistency and advocating genocide?
Question two for you.
Since liberals, you suffer horrible guilt for your Western upbringing and lifestyle throughout your life, why shouldn't folks condone mercy killings of liberals...?
No, their behaviour merits punishment.
Abortion is the work of the Devil. - Mother Teresa
It is not necessary for you to believe in gravity, for it to exist. Nor is it necessary for you to believe in free market capitalism for it to work. I use these examples because, like the human soul, they are not entirely understood - and yet their concepts are applied to daily life. So it is with the soul.
"Life always comes first."
"But women have the rights to their own bodies and what happens inside of them. You do not have the right to dictate a woman's womb."
The first quote is a retort to the second. A child's right to live trumps a woman's right to her body, every time.
"You didn't answer my question about incest tho. Why bring a child that will knowingly suffer throughout it's entire life into this world?"
How do you arrive at the conclusion that a child born from an incestuous relationship will suffer? Do you mean that they will suffer from the stigma affixed to those resulting from such unions? This can be averted by placing the child for adoption - which, in my view, is always the best solution in such a situation (i.e. incestuous pregnancy).
I think it more likely though, that you were referring to the common idea that such children will necessarily be deformed in some way. There is some truth to this idea, as a small gene pool certainly does increase the likelihood of reinforcing bad-recessive genes in offspring - thus leading to the deformations, ailments, etc. However, ALL genes - desireable, undesirable, and indifferent - are more likely to be increased in an isolated gene pool - and at the same time, there is NO guarantee that there will be reinforcement - just an increase in probability. (It is always possible that there aren't even any bad/undesirable genes to reinforce in the first place!)
In short, I don't conjure that a CERTAINTY of death is preferrable to a POSSIBILITY of deformity.
Hopefully, she'll never end up breeding at all.
Anybody can say anything.
It's still the work of the Devil, no matter how you slice it.
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.