Operation Rescue Beautiful baby held in palm of the hand
    Home Abortion Facts Resources Media Center About Operation Rescue West Links Ways to Support OR Pregnant and Need Help? Contact Operation Rescue West
News
     



 

Inside a Death Camp

January 01, 2004

American Holocaust:
See Inside an Abortion Death Camp

Few memories resonate throughout humanity more than the images of the decaying bodies of Nazi victims. However, these pictures were not taken in 1945 by an Army victorious over evil. No, these images were taken just a couple of years ago -- in a scene that is repeated every week in every American city, in your city. How long will you sit idly by?


These pictures were taken 1/25/98 and 2/1/98 at:

National Cyto-Path Laboratories

3780 Woodruff Ave., #K

Long Beach, CA 90808

This "lab" is a depot for Family Planning Associates, California's largest abortion mill chain. Every container holds a baby who was murdered by abortion. The size of the container is proportional to the age of the child. The larger containers hold 2nd trimester babies. Each of these children deserved to live. (Please give these pictures time to load.)

Posted: January 1, 2004 09:53 PM
Comments

I weep for all these innocent children who were denied their right to life, I pray that those who take part in such a heinous and criminal activity will turn from their ways. This crime will continue as long as good men remain silent. I , for one can no longer look the other way. Thank you for the good works that you are doing. The Truth Trucks are "awesome"in there effect! I am retired on limited income but $25.00 towards another truck is in the mail today. John Delagrange

Posted by: John C. Delagrange at July 16, 2004 03:59 PM

sad to say but thats what happening right now....

many babies are bein aborted....

may the GOD forgive them...


better yet, pray for those who have commited such acts...

Posted by: moises at July 24, 2004 02:30 AM

Well.. I'd just like to say...

So what? Those pictures have NOTHING to do with the choice that a woman has to make. NOTHING. And just get over the religious stuff.

Posted by: sorrow at August 11, 2004 01:49 AM

Sorrow (good name) they have _everything_ to do with the choice a woman makes. This death and more is the result of that choice.

Why the anger about "religious stuff" Do you have a religious background of some sort?

Posted by: Ron at August 11, 2004 10:15 AM

First of all, I think it`s a stink in the nostrils of God to kill a child!!! if you have an obortion you are committing murder, you and the doctor himself! When I look at these pictures it just breaks my heart i just can`t believe somebody would want to kill a baby! This nation is getting so perverted and it`s gonna get worse before the end of time All I have to say is Get saved or get left! Pray HARD!

Posted by: Hayley at September 2, 2004 10:57 PM

Abortionist is a nice way to say murderer like insurgent skates around the word TERROIST.

I cannot imagine being the woman making the choice to abort her baby. To have to live with that every day of her life-what a shame. I disagree with abortion and I personally could never commit this murder. I hold my 5 year old everday and thank God she is in my arms. I can't wait to see what and who she will grow up to be. Aborted babies, we will never know.

My mom had several abortions. One was my older brother. I know he was my older brother because she was 6 months pregnant at the time. I will never know him or what he would have been or who he would have been. My little brother was also suppose to be aborted. Luckily he was not. I know who he is and what he is and he has been a very special addition to our family. He is my only living brother (remember, the first one was murdered). Today he is surviving our country on an attack sub in the mediterranean.

Posted by: Jessie at September 13, 2004 02:39 PM

This post is going out to LocoLamb and all the other mothers who feel that having a children will be a burden on their lives and careers. Let me tell you my story.

When I was in my early 20's I was an adult enetrtainer/dancer. My husband was in the business as well. We partied hard and traveled across the U.S. and to other countries. When I was 24 I found out I was pregnant with twins. I was devastated. There went my social life, my career, my travels and friends all down the drain. I did think about abortion but decided against it in the end. The pregnancy was hard but I ended up giving birth to a beautiful baby boy and girl. I put everything on hold for them for a year and then went back to work. The four of us traveled to other countries were I filmed and danced and my children were exposed to a variety of other cultures and beliefs. Both attended school in several countries as well.
My daughter is fluent in German and French and graduated from a U.S college with a business degree and a 3.42 GPA. She owns an Adult Boutique and dances part time out in California and has a small son of her own.
My son is a tattoo artist who has won numerous awards and has been featured in many magazines. He also has a part time job as a lead singer in a local heavy metal band. Both are wildly successful well adjusted adults whom I am very proud of.
Don't you see Loco of what you are depriving a child of. If I can do it you can too!! I'm not saying it won't be tough but it will be worth it.

Posted by: Deleilah at September 14, 2004 06:08 PM

I had an abortion in 1985. I was 18, in college. I still cry about it. My heart breaks for my helpless baby whom I selfishly killed. Later, once I was married, I tried and tried to get pregnant... I cried every month when the baby I wanted to have wasn't there -- I couldn't get pregnant. I was told I can't have children. Abortion hurts women. How much effort have ALL of you put into helping to teach abstinence? If we ALL reinforce to our youth that abstinence is a real option, we wouldn't have to deal with as much abortion or AIDS. What a nice, positive, approach that I'm sure ALL can agree on.

Posted by: Mommy at September 21, 2004 05:08 PM

I read Vicky's comment...at the end she says "Abortion is no one but the woman's business". I don't think this line is true or at list right. The child is not a woman's only, but God is the giver of life. Why that mother who was raped could not have the child born, what if her mom was raped too but gave birth to her, Isn't that selfishness, she thinks only of herself but nothing for the child. Would that woman die if she gave birth- I'm trying to think if she was acting on self-defence by killing (in this cases which would not mean to death). Can that be justified? A woman did not loose her virginity of the rape, she was already right. She wouldn't think 'oh..i lost my virginity to this child of rape'. What big would she loose, would she loose a husband, Was she compelled by the husband to take off the child?. I found no justification for this baby-murder?, yet i cannot expect such wisdom to bear up with a child of rape from ppl who do not fear the Lord. for they do not have fear, and fear (of the Lord) is knowledge and wisdom. I feel very sorry for her, but i grieve for the baby. Thaks everyone for attention. Spha (male, 21) from South Africa.

Posted by: Sphamandla at October 13, 2004 03:38 AM

I just went of lisa's comment..unfearous people...a christian has love, hope and faith for everything. That's the only solution in the Name of Jesus. Fearing the Lord is better that nothing, but best to sustain life.

thanks

Posted by: Spha at October 13, 2004 03:43 AM

I would like to make a few remarks to those who wrote in on this site. First off I am highly anti-abortion, to me it is akin to murder and worse, the worst thing another human being can do to another. BUt aside from my personal stand. Here are the points I would like to make.
A. Every person has the rights to speak their mind regardless of who they are and what their opinion is. If you disagree, feel free to do so, but do it as a mature adult, without the name calling. It is very unproffessional. If you were to make a public speech to garner support for the pro-life campaign and were to call your opposers stupid, dimwits, and obviously lacking in intelligence, how many do you think would see your point of view and join your side?
B. If you have scientific evidence of a fact, where did you get this information? Is it credible? I, as well as many reknowned scientists believe that life starts at conception. But as jerry put it, hundreds of years ago reknowned scientists thought the earth was flat. To add: the greatest scientists belived that the earth was the center of the universe, that all things were made of the elements fire air earth and water and any thing could be changed into any other thing by adding the appropriate amounts of the right elements, (Ever hear of turning coal into gold?) the molecule is the smallest piece of matter(we now say it is the atom which is actually made of smaller things call protons neutrons and electrons) that an atom could not be split, that a motorized flying machine could not be built, that space travel was not possible, i could go on and on about the enormous list of things that were once PROVEN FACT accepted by every major scientist in the world at the time. we have since disproved these and more.
If your are going to use scientific fact to make a point, cite your source and understand that in the future it may be found that you are wrong.
C. If you are using logic and science to make a point, dont throw in god. I am agnostic and belive strongly in pro-life. I have many atheist friends who are pro-life. I know "devout" Christians who have had abortions. do not use something that has not been proven (god) to make a point from a science standpoint.
D. Last and finally, to all of you pro-lifers that say that a child can be given up for adoption to be cared for by someone else so that the child does not have to die, and the mother is not burdened.
My question to you is: How many of you have adopted a child? How many of you stand in a picket and shout pro-life sentiments but wont save one of these children from a hard life or premature death. How many of you have given birth to your own children but wont go to the orphanage? there is a word for this, hypocrisy.
You make it your problem to save the unborn from murder, but will you make it your problem to raise them? I seriously doubt half of you have or will, to you it is your duty to save them but someone else's to care for them. Thats one of the biggest problems with America, its always someone else's responsiblity.
As for me, when i was 19 a good friend of mine became pregnant, she wanted an abortion but i convinced her not to go through with it.
i am now 21, i work 50-60 hours a week, i go to college 16 hours a week, and i take care of her son because i am pro-life, i take responsibility and i love this child more than i love anything in this world and would gladly trade everything for him
So go ahead and send back your hate messages because i expose your hypocrisy, but just think who is the one who has taken initiative, and who is content to write childish messages on websites and not truly stand for what they believe?

Posted by: nihilum at October 21, 2004 06:14 AM

This is my first visit to this website and after reading the posts,I share much of the same opinions that Nihilum.I am a Christian and I believe that you have shown your friend and her child the love that Jesus requires of us all.I believe that God gave us freedom of choice...but, with our choices there is also responsibility and personal accountability.I believe in my heart and soul and what I have learned that abortion is wrong...and I will be held accountable for my choices.I choose to stand up for those who can't stnd up for themselves.Thanks for loving them both,Nihilum.

Posted by: Jim at October 23, 2004 05:54 AM

nihilum

to address a few of your points...honestly, i don't care if someone has a problem with having their views and the expression of same 'dimwitted' or 'pathetic'. there is so much information out there on this issue, that to come on a site like this and spout off ignornant nonsense is a waste of everyone's time. just as in my previous example, if someone came on here and said the world was flat, it would not be out of line to call that individual 'dull' or 'totally uninformed' or something like that. anyone saying such a thing would be, by definition, stupid. and so the same goes for this issue. people that uninformed are not worth trying to convert. they already have their minds made up, and have bought into every lie there is. to try and dismantle their system of lies would be an endless waste of time and energy.

i will engage anyone with a thoughtful opinion, and who is willing to acknowledge certain basics that are unarguable. this is not really a site where poor choicers are allowed to freely come and post propoganda, and expect prolifers to spend valuable time arguing with them. for one thing, the pictures speak for themselves, and anyone who can look at those pictures and still come on here with diarreah of the mouth, spouting long ago disproven proabortion deception, deserves to be called dimwitted, in my view.
they aren't even making the simplest baby step towards trying to think and reason - just mouthing tired old slogans and cliches.

now, as far as your other points. the one about adopting....i respect your remarks about your prolife convictions. but this reference is just an old red herring that is continually thrown up as an excuse for abortion. it is tiresome to go over this time and time again. crisis pregnancy centers, staffed by loving caring prolifers, outnumber abortion mills over three to one in america. they don't get a dime of government money. but they provide, free of charge, counseling, adoption, material assistance, baby clothes, cribs, high chairs, a place to stay, parenting classes, post-abortion counseling, etc, etc, etc.... and there are over 2 million couples cleared and waiting to adopt each year, with about 1 1/2 million abortions. you do the math.

the point is that there is not a direct correlation between whether a prolifer adopts a child and whether that same prolifer can stand on firm moral ground in opposing the slaughter of the innocent. trying to link the two is an old argument that has no merit at all. opposing abortion is a basic moral question of right and wrong. the fact that there are children in foster care is another matter altogether. abortion doesn't solve these problems, though we were promised that it would in 1973. it has made them worse. because in a culture that doesn't respect life or children, who gets hurt? children and women. but prolifers are helping both, and this is unarguable and a matter of record. dr john willke, the father of the prolife movement, coined the phrase 'love them both' and he has practised what he preaches for over 35 years.

as far as God goes, His existence CAN be proven - i urge you to go to www.equip.org and do some research. but beyond that, why does your conscience (and mine) tell you that abortion is wrong? the answer is, because God made you and He made me, and He gave us a conscience that tells us instinctively that things like abortion are wrong. prolifers welcome agnostics and atheists to our fold, but will never stop singing the praises of the ONE who made each of us, and who knits every unborn child together in its mother's womb. don't expect us to.

Posted by: jerry at October 24, 2004 12:20 AM

It's interesting to read the various posts and arguments. I have always been pro-life, even before becoming a Christian. My mother aborted my little brother when I was 5, and I can tell you for sure that she has regretted it every day of her life since. One of my sisters had 2 abortions and again, has regretted it every day since. It's not logically possible to see the pictures of those precious but murdered babies and think that what has been done to them is OK...it's not. It can't be right to destroy tiny people. The fact is those pictures are of 'babies' not lumps of 'tissue'. There are severed arms and legs. Tiny hands and completely formed bodies and little faces that have been butchered. Poverty in the world does not justify the murder of babies. Neither does neglect or abuse. Perhaps if our society exerted the same amount of energy, passion and finance into loving and protecting children as they do to push the pro abortion issue we might help those children who suffer, lets not kill them just 'in case they have a hard life', chances are they won't. I love the Lord, and I have experienced His mercy and forgiveness in my life for many various things. I know He's real because I've met and experienced Him...so my experience has more merit than an argument. I will never criticise someone for not believing as I do, and I would never use name calling either, I don't think it helps. I understand Jerry's frustration though when the facts are so very obvious, but as a Christian I am meant to mirror the nature and character of Christ and love everyone as Christ does. That doesn't mean to say the Christ condones sin of any description, but it does mean that He's incredibly willing to save people from sin and can give healing, freedom and new life to any who ask for it. My prayer is that those who love Him will lovingly show Him to a hurt and decieved world and that those who are hurt and decieved will see Him in us. We're not perfect, but I promise you that Jesus is. There's an answer to abortion, His name is Jesus and He loves you so incredibly much.

Posted by: Mandy at October 25, 2004 08:06 AM

mandy

i concur fully with everything you said, except to point out that sometimes Jesus did use harsh methods. He once made a whip and drove money changers out of the temple - on other ocassions He called people snakes, hypocrites, vipers, and children of the devil. yet He never sinned. being God, He knew the exact state of each heart, and we do not. but if any of the words and actions of our Lord could've reached those people, then they would've responded, and received Him. but in many cases, they did not.
my point is that some people are simply unreachable, no matter whether the methods are harsh or tender.

i appreciate very much your call for compassion and kindness. it is very much needed in our world. i think prolifers, for the most part, epitomize that in their ongoing work, though we certainly fall short of perfection oftentimes. after all, we care about the woman and the baby, before, during and after pregnancy. it is frustrating to deal with arguments that have long ago been disproven, when the facts are readily available most anywhere, if one seeks them. for me, the frustration comes when people have strong passionate opinions about matters they've never bothered to do any research on.

thanks for a thought provoking and well written post.

Posted by: jerry at October 25, 2004 11:39 AM

Jerry,

Thanks for the nice response. I do understand where you're coming from. The evidence is so overwhelming obvious that abortion is murder, but the Bible says that "to those who are perishing, the Gospel is foolishness." People who don't know Christ think that those who do are loonies, we don't make sense to them, so to reach them we have to love them. Sometimes I think that name calling just gets them angry and makes them want to dig their heels in even more. Jesus reached out to sinners with so much understanding and grace, it was to the pious religious folk that he gave the verbal lashing to. But yes, the truth must be told, and as has been shown, a picture tells a thousand words and there's hope for those contemplating abortion and there's hope for those who've already gone through with it. I have experienced so much grace and so much healing in my own life that the things that broke me and hurt God have been healed so completely that it's like they never happened. Either Jesus is who He said He is or He isn't, and since I've met Him and experienced His amazing transforming power I can say with absolute assurance that Jesus is the REAL THING. When it comes to telling the truth, I've discovered that you catch more flies with honey than you do with vinegar. Children need to be saved, and I'm with you, let's tell people there's a better way, the way of hope in Christ.

Posted by: Mandy at October 26, 2004 01:32 AM

Adoption. Most couples or singles wanting to become parents will pay for the expenses, so why then is most pro choicers argument about poverty.

Posted by: JMN at October 28, 2004 03:28 PM

Wow! There was a lot of heated debate up there! I am pro-life, and it took me a long time to come to this decision...a long time. I personally believe that abortion is only an option when it is the last resort to save the mother, or the mother and other children in a multiple birth pregnancy. I really don't even support abortion when it comes to rape. Yes I know its not the mother's fault and why should she have to live the child of the rapist? Also the issue comes up that the child is unwanted and therefore may be resented and unloved upon birth. I must say that it would take a STRONG woman to give birth to a child that was forced upon her. However, you have to be strong enough to separate the child from the criminal they are not the same person. Also adoption is always an option. I think rape is morally wrong, but killing is too. I also must thank my mother for being strong enough to have and raise me when she was raped, so I guess that is why I am so pro-life because if my mother had gone through with aborting me (she went to the clinic 3 times) then I would not be here and she has never made me feel like a burden or unwanted in anyway. In fact she feels that having such a gift come from such a huge pain is what lifted her up out of the role of being a rape victim. I know my mom was terribly hurt 20 years ago, but I was not the one who hurt her.

Posted by: DLSinger at October 31, 2004 01:07 PM

the final sentence was cut off, but should've read -

"we actually don't agree at all."

Posted by: jerry at October 31, 2004 04:19 PM

I was clearing out my history and came across this site again so I decided to see if anyhting was new.

I nearly died laughing when I read Angela's post. I have no clue who she is.

Also ROTFLMFAO at the remark that my comments are weird and wacky. I be sure to write that into my thesis about the welfare of children in India were 2,590,000 children under the age of 5 die annualy of malnutrition and poor health care.

Posted by: Lisa at November 1, 2004 03:07 AM

I work for Planned Parenthood and I visit this site on occasion because I do recommend it to women who visit the clinic and are undecided. I have nor has anyone else who works with me demand that abortion is the only way to go. That's what choice is about. We present a woman with ALL options. We go through step by step the abortion procedure and we go through step by step the adoption procedure. Also in either decision we discuss birth control so the woman can plan and or space her pregnancies. In the end it is up to the woman to decide not us. Also I do not assist in the abortion process I am just a counselor.

Most young women become pregnant because they are woefully ignorant about their bodies and birth control much like in Locolambs mother's case. Many parents refuse to discuss sex with their children let alone how to protect yourself from it. I know many of you say "Well just don't have sex and you won't get pregnant." Very true but sex happens no matter how well you preach to your children. Many a crying mother has visited my office with her young pregnant daughter not understanding how a 'good christian girl' ends up like this.

And last but not least I want to correct those that think family planning performs abortions willy nilly up until nine months. We only abort up to three months. After that if the woman and child are healthy we will not abide. The only time is if mother and or child is in a severe health crisis due to deformities that will result in a still birth or death shortly after or that the mother will die while giving birth.

I have worked at 3 clinics in my life and these rules were applied at everyone. Now I am aware that there are 'back alley' places that will perfrom abortions on any women no matter what month or condition.

And I know Lisa personally. She found this site through me. I know of no moderator named Angela and she hardly posts on that boards forums. She is extremely out spoken on her views (no matter what they are) so she does tend to ruffle feathers now and again. However she is a bright girl who currently is a drug and alcohol counselor. She also use to work in child placement services (adoption).

Thank you all for listening to me speak. I enjoy reading your views as well. Please take care of yourselves.

Posted by: Anna at November 1, 2004 03:52 AM

anna

you mean you only KILL up to three months......

why is it that proabortion advocates and the the truth are always total strangers?

and please don't try to tell us that you give women 'the facts' on what you do.....that has been exposed time and time again by people who used to do exactly what you do, and they say the exact opposite. the idea that you would say anything to the girl that might cause you to lose the sale - well, you won't make any money that way, and that is your only goal and motivation.
so that's nonsense. pregnancy help centers DO tell women the truth about abortion and all other options. the only option you offer is a dead baby. i can imagine the kind of so-called counseling you offer, with phrases like "don't worry, it won't hurt a bit" and "no, it's not a baby, it's just a blob of tissue". and God forbid you'd ever let the woman hear her baby's heartbeat or see an ultrasound.....oh no. that would almost assuredly lose you another sale.

your post is full of so much of the proabortion deception and falseness. "helping women" is just the illusion you put forth in order to help further the deception. why are abortion killing centers all around the US being sued and shut down if all they do is provide a 'legitimate' service, and why are women still dying of "legal" abortions, and why are women by the thousands coming forward with stories about how they were lied to by people just like you, and why has roe v wade been shown to be an absolute fraud, perpetrated by lawyers who manipulated and even invented statistics that they now admit were false? and why is the breast cancer/abortion link being hushed up by your side, when the facts are irrefutable? doesn't sound very prowoman to me, to withhold facts from her before you sell her an abortion, with about as much concern as 'wally' sells somebody a used car off his lot, 'as is', with no guarantee.

as far as lisa goes, it's not surprising that you would claim to know her and consider her 'intelligent'. birds of a feather tend to flock together. but it doesn't change the fact that both of you KILL for a living, or help to facilitate the exploitation of women by participating in the bloodshed.

you can put all the lipstick you want on a pig, anna, but when you're finished, it's still a pig.

Posted by: jerry at November 1, 2004 06:49 AM

Jerry,

I have worked for over 25 years in family planning and never has any of our staff ever said anything to persuade a women to choose one way or the other.How many times do I have to say it's the woman's choice in the end? The complete nonsense that we will lose a 'sale' when many of the women who come in can't afford to have one and we absorb the loss. Besides we provide a variety of other services from OB/GYN check-ups to birth control and tubal ligations

We offer to let the woman have an ultrasound. Some do change their mind while others simply do not care and wish to go through with it. We have had women on the table who were about to recieve anesthetic and at the last minute changed their mind. We NEVER persuaded them to continue.

Like I said many women can have complications and due sue clinics but a majority of these women I have found (at least in my clinic experience) are money seekers. Several have been convicted of fraud and found to have gotten doctors to were pro-life to exagerate their claims in order to shut us down. Women have to follow specific after care procedures like in any surgery. If she doesn't then complications will follow. Here is a case that happened several years ago that will really blow your mind! A woman would get pregnant and go to a clinic and have an abortion and then sue for medical anguish and malpractice. It turns out that she had several abortions at several clinics and sued them all. Her reasoning was that she would sacrafice the lives of a few children so she could shut the clinics down.
Yes many back alley clinics do want that 'sale'. I was fired from one when I was found I was telling the women about adoption alternatives.But until you work along side of ME in MY clinic you can't speak about what I do and don't do because you aren't there. Other clinics that you are sure about then sing it from the hills.

Also I noticed that you said that Lisa and I were both killers. Lisa works as a drug and alcohol counselor and was in child placement services so how she kills anyone is beyond me. She has seen alot of horror (as well as good) in the adoption system. How some people can want to adopt children and then molest and starve them boggles my mind.

Well I've said my peace and I am done. Like I have stated I only speak from my experience at my clinics and not as a collective whole. What other clinics do is on them.

Posted by: Anna at November 1, 2004 03:26 PM

IS there any reason why we need to be killing of all these children? NO! If you don't want children, dont have sex! It's as simple as that! if you had no choice in the matter AKA rape, why right a wrong with another wrong? carry it to term, and if then you can not care for it, look up an adoption agency, there are thousands of families out there that can take good care for that child.

Murder is always wrong!!!!!!!!!

Posted by: Ty at November 2, 2004 12:14 PM

There have been some good discussions on this page. However most had been off topic so we removed them and ask that you use the new forum for off topic or longer discussions.

http://www.operationrescue.org/forum

Posted by: Webmaster at November 8, 2004 12:20 PM

Right you are, admin. I wasn't actually aware that you had forums for this kind of thing!

Posted by: The Wicker Man at November 8, 2004 02:57 PM

hey, nice site, perhaps youd like to check out mine: Ortho Tri-Cyclen

Posted by: Ortho Tri-Cyclen at November 21, 2004 08:58 PM

anna

what you do is earn a living in the baby killing industry. you help to destroy lives, and you make a tidy living doing it. it's amazing that your conscience is so seared that you can't even recognize the evil of your actions, and instead, try to whitewash it as if it's something 'good' or 'noble'. please....

as far as the false stories and smear tactics you have attempted to use, regarding women who were wounded and hurt by abortion (physically, emotionally, spiritually) - shame on you. the evidence is massive and overwhelming that abortion does NOT benefit women, and that women are routinely lied to and deceived in order that abortion mills make more money. it's a half billion dollar a year business, and the last thing abortionists are concerned with is the health and welfare of women.

if you're so comfortable with killing babies, then why do you come on this site and post rationalizations for it?

Posted by: jerry at November 23, 2004 05:15 PM

Hi Guys

Thanks for taking the time posting. MSN have finally launch blogs, what was with the delay?
Call Centre Project

Cya
Bruce

Posted by: Call Centre Project at December 4, 2004 09:09 AM

to all the men making posts on this site; this is not your issue. it is strictly a woman's issue. it is impossible for a man to ever be in the position of a woman with an accidental pregnacy therefore they should have no say on the subject. i myself am undecided on whether or not abortiotion is morally just. i always listen with an open mind to any intelligent woman with an opinion on the topic but never to a man.

Posted by: danielle at December 4, 2004 04:34 PM

Abortion is not just a women's issue. I am a woman. However, children also have fathers. Some children become fathers. It is an issue belonging to HUMANITY.

Posted by: Anne at December 12, 2004 04:15 PM

I came across this sight while doing a project and started reading the first messages. I don't believe that religion has to do with any of this, I also don't think that people posting messages that say we should pray for the murdered babys will do any good. First these babys werent living to begin with so they cannot be murdered. you do not know the women who gave up the non-born child you also do not know the life they are living and the lifestyle that the baby might be living in now, which could be a lot worst and this path is better off for them. I bet that many of the people on this sight that post messages against abortion are daily bible reading holy rollers, which is not a bad thing but many people don't have a religion and it does not come into play when they are making their decisions. I believe that women should have the choice and if they choose to have an abortion who are you to tell them that they are un-holy or a killer are you an almight god? It is their own private business and own private right.

Posted by: celia at December 12, 2004 10:52 PM

Sorry, I must disagree. The baby is most certainly alive. Otherwise, it would not need to be killed. Simply because it is dependent on its mother for sustaining that life is irrelevant. All children, born or otherwise, are dependent on their parents until they are matured. Actually, a preborn baby is just in a different phase of life, but life nonetheless. If it were part of the mother, and not a life on its own, how would its DNA differ. In fact, how could 51% of the pregnancies be BOYS!

Okay, one may choose no religion. That is acceptable in civilized society. However, civilized society must do what it can to protect the least helpless. Would you accept doing this to companion animals? Even cattle are (supposedly)stunned before being "processed." If we can find compassion for other creatures, can we find none for children?

That being said, even I can find a reason for the extremely rare abortion I suppose. I cant really say there would NEVER be a reason, and I don't mean rape. However, even in such cases it would never be past the first trimester. Other readers, please do not split hairs with me. Intellectually I agree with you that no time is a good time for an abortion. But considering the technology and testing available, I see no reason why any abortion should be allowed beyond the first trimester. Certainly it is possible to know you are pregnant well before that.

Additionally, I work in a medical environment. Believe me, too, too many people are having sex with no thought to the consequences, and then "simply" having an abortion. If abortions were limited to those pregnancies that were considered by most to be unbearable, I have no doubt the numbers would plummet! Unfortunately, it is simply birth control.

It may be compassion to understand the distraught mother's point of view regarding a severely deformed baby (i.e. no brain, etc.). It is NOT compassion to give a green light to promiscuity, religion or not. Even an atheist can see that rampant promiscuity has lead to rampant disease and breakdown of family.

Phew! I think I've had my say.

Thank you.

Posted by: Anne at December 13, 2004 07:19 AM

I just wanted to point out that the guys who don't have a say in the matter helped make you women out there. Do you honestly believe that a man can not understand that a man can love an unborn baby just as much as a woman. They know that they helped create that life, and they should have a say in the matter. If you are a woman who wants to have an abortion, and the dad-to-be wants you to keep it I have a solution. Carry the baby to term and give it to him. No longer your problem!
Just one more thought...If these baby's weren't living then why do you have to kill them. Something that's not living can't die!!!
Look up the definition of terminate, k?
God bless you all, and the babies whom others have terminated "slaughtered."

Posted by: a baby once at January 10, 2005 11:45 AM

There is just something about used cars that I really like. Saving money always sounds good to me. :)

Posted by: Used Cars at January 11, 2005 06:22 PM

An additional comment to what "A baby once" has written. Yep, you can't kill something that is not alive. For those who would have the argument that "well, it's not really alive until birth." If you don't "terminate" the pregnancy the fetus will continue to GROW. Things that are not alive can not GROW.

Therefore, if you are going to clearly state the reality, the question you must ask is "Under what circumstances would I kill my child."

Young ladies, please listen. I am not an old coot yet, just middle aged and now a mom. In my 20s I was as silly as the rest of you and nearly came up against this very situation. I would have chosen the coward's way out...abortion...and would have regretted it forever now that I have a better grip on life. THis is not an answer to your problems, it will compound your problems. And even better than using protection for sex, I have a better idea...keep your pants on! I wish I had some way to go back in time and tell myself this, to wait until I was important enough to somebody that he wanted to marry me and partner with me instead of just having fun with me, and frankly, I with him. I suppose I have gotten off the track, but sex leads to babies! What can I say? In addition to valuing the life of an unborn child, please also value your life. Respect yourself.

Posted by: A mom at January 12, 2005 04:08 PM

Search listings for used cars. Our detailed listings of used cars for sale in your area are updated daily. Once you find the right used cars for sale at the right price, you may contact the seller yourself to work out the details of test driving and purchasing the vehicle. Get expert advice on buying used cars. If you'd like a little more help with your purchase, Kelly Blue Book can give you real time used car prices. You may also need to get car insurance quotes so you can save money.

Posted by: Used Cars For Sale at January 12, 2005 11:35 PM

Search listings for used cars. Our detailed listings of used cars for sale in your area are updated daily. Once you find the right used cars for sale at the right price, you may contact the seller yourself to work out the details of test driving and purchasing the vehicle. Get expert advice on buying used cars. If you'd like a little more help with your purchase, Kelly Blue Book can give you real time used car prices. You may also need to get car insurance quotes so you can save money.

Posted by: Used Cars For Sale at January 13, 2005 08:27 PM

This is not a used car lot. Have a little more respect for the women in here how really are trying to make a serious decision, or even just trying to get their point across. I agree with "a mom" I am not a mother yet, and I recently got engaged. One thing that I regret is that I don't have my virinity to give to him. It's one of the most valuable parts of me, and some jrk-off teenage boy got it several years ago. He didn't deserve it. I deserved to keep it though, and i should have.

Posted by: a baby once at January 14, 2005 01:24 PM

A Baby Once:

My dear, I've exuded the same lament you've just expressed. Now, I'm a whole lot older than yourself, so listen to me - and respect your elders as you have never done before:

Is your intended husband a virgin? Did the teenage urchin who disabused you of your virginity have a stainless past? Why is it only us women who beat ourselves off, er.....up, for this youthful error?

If you are a Christian, then ask our Lord for forgiveness (that's assuming you have anything to ask forgiveness for. If you were raped, you have nothing to apologize for.). The same God who cares for us infinitely also suffers with us when we err - and His mercy and love is greater than all of us. When we confess and seek forgiveness - our sins are expunged, and we are reborn in God's grace. That's a wonderful experience, and it's more powerful than any sin some teenage devotee of "Portnoy's Complaint" could ever hope to share with you. So, in a very real sense.......

You and your intended husband CAN give yourselves to one another with purity and love - and you definitely shouldn't let the past cast a shadow over your happiness. I know I wouldn't allow a one-inch entity** that hasn't been in full bloom since the waning days of 1974 befoul my hopes and dreams - were I in your shoes.

**Besides, if anyone deserves to beat himself up, it's my ex - not me. The Bible says that, if we sin with our hands, cut them off. If we sin with our eyes, gouge them out. If we.......well, I should probably stop right there. One would need a magnifying glass to complete that analogy. No, that's too kind. One would need a.......

I'm not into astronomy - never have been, never will be.

So, I hope you have listened to me - and taken my words of wisdom to heart. Here's hoping your imminent marriage will be a blessed fulfillment of all your youthful aspirations, and a lifelong partnership with you, your husband and God Himself, who wants only the best for us!

Posted by: Songbird77 at January 19, 2005 01:15 PM

The discussion here has been interesting to say the least. I am anti-abortion, have been for awhile now, and I must say the site of all those containers full of body parts nauseates me. Anyone who can work for (even if it's indirectly) someone who provides abortions has no conciensce whatsoever. I must ask though. Where does the link between abortion and breast cancer come from?
Oh, one last thing. Christ wasn't being literal when he talked of chopping off your hand or plucking out you eye. I hope you all realize this.

*signature*I am anti-abortion! I oppose legalized murder! You will not mock my God, you will not silence my message, you will STOP KILLING YOUR CHILDREN!

Posted by: Catholicforlife at January 24, 2005 01:25 PM

CatholicForLife:

Yes, I know that Christ was not speaking literally - but metaphorically - regarding the excisement of offending, uh, members......

Please be merciful, OK? I was making fun of my ex - it's just something that brings a song to my heart.

Like you - I abhor abortion. There's nothing funny about this form of legalized destruction.

But, as regards my youthful imbecility, I just HAVE to poke fun at myself - and the human wreckage who had my heart for far too long - otherwise, I'd have cannibalized myself years ago! Instead of human condemnation, I deserved as much abject pity as a mongrel canine who couldn't stop chasing its own tail.

I didn't deserve to be called Slutsky Sluttenstein, any more than I deserved to lament the loss of the coitus nondescriptus that resulted in my pregnancy. I just didn't want the young lady above to begin her sacramental marriage with sadness and regrets.

Posted by: Songbird77 at January 25, 2005 09:57 AM

Dear Catholic for LIfe,

I am not certain but I think the breast cancer link is because of the hormonal changes that occur in the body when pregnant, including the breasts, that are abruptly cut short when an abortion is performed. Is there anyone out there more informed about this to correct or agree with me?

Thanks

Posted by: Anne at January 25, 2005 06:30 PM

this could be anything inside these plastic cups.

however, we're too many for this planet anyway...

Posted by: gerald at January 26, 2005 10:48 PM

Gerald, feel free to leave. That is YOUR choice, not a choice you are making to an innocent child.

Posted by: Miranda at January 27, 2005 08:24 AM

Well, I wanted to stay out of the conversations for a while to see if I could get any insight. I am doing a paper for my English class. I have always been pro-life, but I wanted to view this from both sides...just to be fair. Needless to say my views have not changed any, but I have a little more knowledge on why people feel the way they do. If anybody has some insight for my paper...from either point of view, then please do not hold it to yourself. I am trying to be as fair as possible in my paper. Thank you songbird77 for your advice. You are right..he's not a virgin either, and he never judges me. There is so much of me I can give to him, and you helped me to realize that. Thank you very much, I feel a little better about the marriage I am about to enter into. Well, I hope to get tons of information back. Thank you all for hearing me. God Bless you all!

Posted by: ababyonce at January 27, 2005 11:36 AM

Dear A Baby Once,

Here is a lovely thing to ponder. Because of medical problems (not related to anything promiscious or abortion related) I was under medical care in order to become pregnant. Once I did manage to become pregnant, I went at 5 WEEKS gestational age (3 weeks after a missed period more or less) for an ultrasound. The ultrasound showed MY BABY'S HEARTBEAT...AT FIVE WEEKS! It was astonishing and wonderful.

Enjoy your life with your husband. Be respected, respectful and forgiving.

Congrats

Posted by: A mom at January 27, 2005 01:43 PM

ababyonce:

I have some further insights I would like to share, as I have the utmost respect for education! In January 1973, when Roe V. Wade was enacted, I was only fourteen and was firmly pro-choice. I did NOT see first-trimester abortions as the taking of innocent life. I, my mother (who was and remains the most maternal, sweet and wonderful person in the world), my brother and many people I knew shared my views at that time.

Further, there were no ultrasounds or even EPTs in those days - and not as much was known as regards pre-natal development. Dr. Bernard Nathanson was, at that time, still an ardent proponent of abortion and had performed hundreds of these operations with a clear conscience (at least at first).

Two years later, of course, I became pregnant at age 16 during the waning days of 1974. My ex-boyfriend virtually ordered me to have an abortion, and I was too brain-deficient to believe I had a right to stand up to him or to refuse his physical advances, woeful (i.e., perfunctory) as they were.

I underwent an abortion on February 14, 1975, and for the first five months afterward I felt immense relief. I did NOT have murderous intent, nor did I believe, at that time, that I had caused an innocent life to end. I believed I had "ended a pregnancy" or terminated a "uterine condition."

Five months later, the deep, deep regrets and immense sorrow began to enfulf me. The reasons were and remain a mixture of spiritual awakenings, heightened realizations as regards prenatal life, and the mental clarify and maturity that can only derive from the passing of time......and the removal of a crisis situation.

And, there is obvious a cruel irony here. Extrication of a crisis situation, via a "remedy" that at first seemed so easy, provided the basis for further clarity. And that provided much moral regrets - regrets which remain with me still. Thankfully, I sought and received forgiveness and I still bask in this forgiveness and the love of Christ in my life - and the lives of everyone.

However, I cannot close without saying this much: prevention of pregnancy and destruction of pregnancy are two radically different dynamics. My advice to you and your prospective husband would be to discuss the issue of family planning before you are married. Newer and improved methods of natural family planning have been taught since the late 1970s - so that might be a very viable option for you, especially if you're young and healthy. Moreover, these natural methods may be utilized to achieve a pregnancy as well as to avoid it, and they teach a profound respect for a woman's fertility. For these reasons, I still retain a fair degree of reverence for its proponents, although I certainly do not believe that other non-abortifacient methods are sinful.

I've learned - the hard way - that the difference between prevention of a pregnancy and its destruction are as wide, deep and vast as the most expansive ocean. This is a painful fact of my life that I hope you do not ever experience.

I'm very pleased that my advice about virginity (i.e., spiritual purity versus technical virginity) was helpful to you. If you and I and millions of other women lived in another country, we'd likely be having hymen reconstruction surgery right about now. And that's about as disgusting to me as asking some man to circumsize himself at an old, run-down Four Skins, er, Four Seasons Hotel on the outskirts of town.

Best wishes to you and your imminent marriage!

Posted by: Songbird77 at January 27, 2005 02:14 PM

Dear songbird77 and a mom,
Would you mind if I use your experiences in my paper? I would really appreciate it. I do not want to abuse your privacy though and will leave it alone if you wish. I admire the fact that you have been willing to share with me and many more people so far.
I called an abortion clinic in Seattle yesterday to get some information for my paper. They said the offer military and student discounts. I wanted to be sick. Anyways, I am in class so I have to go. Keep in touch please.

Posted by: Ababyonce at January 28, 2005 09:53 AM

Hello, a babyonce:

Yes, feel free to use my experiences. I am afraid, though, that I cannot release my real name. There is still too much of a stigma attached to post-abortive women, I'm afraid. (And if you've read some of my recent posts on the ORW Forum lately, you'll see proof of that.) Good luck on your paper. (You can give me a fake name if you wish - or you can just use "Songbird" if you would like - I'm not picky here. Just don't call me "Yoko" or "Marabel" - 'cause then I'll probably start to snarl........

Posted by: Songbird77 at January 28, 2005 02:38 PM

I would never ask to use your real name. This is way too heated of a debate. I would never release my name either. It's not about my paper anymore. My paper is merely a way to release heated feelings on this topic. I am planning on putting in a paper or something after I get it edited. I want girls to think about what they are doing to thier bodies, and the babies in them before they decide to have abortions done. Well, I have to go. Thank you very much for insight on this particular topic.

Posted by: ababyonce at January 28, 2005 02:56 PM

Only when women are free to make an informed, unstigmatized decision are we going to be a truely free society. Women, when given all the facts, are their own best decision makers. It is the social stigma against abortion that is a real problem in these United States. Look at infant mortality rates at the US Census department and see that Mississippi, the state with only 1 remaining abortion provider has the highest infant mortality in the US. Women who don't want a child should have the option of ending the pregnancy. A post from before said a fetus will continue to grow if not killed, but so will cancer and I don't see anti-cancer web sites. Abstinance is not a reality and never has been. Birth control methods will fail, they always do. Abortion is the safest optional medical procedure in the US according to Women's Health Specialists a non-profit health center. Protest tonsil removals, they are alive and have DNA and make a nice bloody chunck of tissue in a container for your pictures too. Let doctors, not politicians, make medical decisions. The e-coli bacteria is alive and will grow, but I don't want it in my body and I don't cry when I get antibiotics for an infection.

Posted by: Ryan at February 7, 2005 04:59 PM

Last time I checked cancer or tonsils do not turn into a living human. It will not some day be free to make it's own decisions or live a possibly prosperous life. I don't think it fair that an eagle egg has more rights than our own unborn children. How often do women actually get all the information before they have an abortion? Hardly ever. I have talked to many on both sides of this debate and most of them say they were not givin the accurate information. I called an abortion clinic, and what i found made me angry. The woman said she accepted walk-ins, and offered student discounts. OK so lets encourage a bunch young females to keep their legs open and men to climb into a bed with no thought of what could be the reprocutions. Maybe if they had to sleep in the bed they made (no pun intended) then their wouldn't be so many young mothers. Why do people forget about all the people out there wanting to adopt a child. Why should we rob them of that possibility as well? These are not insults. These are actual questions I would like answers to please. Thank you for listening to me once again. Have a nice life.

Posted by: ababyonce at February 8, 2005 09:35 AM

Ryan,
You are comparing human life to a parasitic infestation. Not comparable.

The tonsils are you, not a separate being. A cancer is also your cells run amok. If you chose to refuse treatment, that is your perogative. You can not make decisions for another human being carte blanche. E. coli and other bacteria and viruses, come on, those things will harm you. Being pregnant generally will not.

You know what, Ryan? If doctors and concerned parents really did do what was best there probably would not be the debate that there is. Many people, however, especially young people are NOT using birth control. Can you believe it? With all the information that is available. I know it is true because I deal with medical records. And it astonishes me. In that light, people are not opting for abortion because they are incapable of raising a child with birth defects but because they couldn't be bothered to take precaution in the first place. How many millions of abortions would be avoided if people accepted personal responsiblity for their sexuality. I wonder how many abortions would be performed if doctors only performed them for actual medical reasons. Does anyone have a number? But to fling the doors wide open for any kind of inconvenience is what has made pro-lifers so strong in their conviction.

Whenever I read that so many millions of women die because of abortions, I always add to that number the millions of babies that also die in abortions.

I don't even advocate a return to the 50s when women were shunned and sent off to unwed mother homes. I advocate a society where sexually active people take responsibility for their protection. Pregnancy will still happen, sure, but to such a great extent? And of those that do occur, only allowing the medically necessary or severely traumatic pregnancies to be terminated probably would bring the numbers down to a level "acceptable" by most. I am not being broadly pro-choice here, I wouldn't even abort a baby who is destined to die shortly after birth due to defects, but I am being practical. I think life of mother or viability of infant are reasonable criteria.

I could go on but would only be restating my opinion in different ways.

Posted by: P2 at February 9, 2005 08:36 AM

Nice work morons, I can't see sh*t, so how the hell am I gonna take pity? Idiots.

Posted by: Nightmare at February 9, 2005 09:19 AM

NIghtmare, you are so angry. What is wrong?

Posted by: P2 at February 9, 2005 10:46 AM

I have to say I agree with what P2 said. These are children we are talking about. My mom's doctor told her she and the baby would die if she carried my brother to term. Guess what, she carried him, and he is now 7 years old. When my mom refused to have him aborted, the doctors went behind her back to have my stepdad sign the papers. How sick and demented is that? Why don't doctors tell it like it is? I talked to a women who used to work in a clinic, and they made her turn the screen away from the women. They did this because too many women were walking out without having the abortion done. When they saw that at 5 weeks their baby had a heart beat, fingers, toes, eye socket, ect. they then realized it was a human life they were taking. Most woman who have an abortion say they will never have another one again. Well, what about the child who will never have a life at all.

One more thing I don't understand is that a person can get birth control at planned parenthood for free. What excuse do these women, and the men too, have? Seriously.

Posted by: ababyonce at February 9, 2005 03:09 PM

A further comment to my above opinion. In addition to not taking responsibility for their sexuality by using birth control, i.e., can not even be bothered to purchase a condom, bear in mind the EXPLOSION in STDs. This, again, relates to not bothering with protection. Please note again that I have access to medical information and I find it deplorable how nonchalantly people will have sex.

Posted by: P2 at February 10, 2005 09:31 AM

Most of you are absolutely nuts...How about you just let people make decisions on thier own...if that involves the life of thier unborn child...so be it. It's not worth all this hostility and the preaching. Get a hobby...go on vacation...but stop imposing you're moral values and beliefs on others. If the fetus can't live on its own...then it's not a baby..bottom line. Until that little sucker is kicking and screaming...it's not alive. I don't care how developed...or 'babylike', it's not alive...and the sooner we all agree on this, the sooner you can get back to praying and I can live in peace the way I want...my way.

Posted by: Tommy Gun at February 10, 2005 05:25 PM

OK, for anyone who thinks there AREN'T discarded body parts in those containers, I'll tell you what IS in them. Rocky Road ice cream, with crunchy nuts. Of course, it's all melted but hey, you can still eat it right?

*signature* I am anti-abortion! I oppose legalized murder! You will not mock my God, you will not silence my message, you will STOP KILLING YOUR CHILDREN!

Posted by: Catholicforlife at February 11, 2005 09:32 AM


Tommy gun;

If the "little sucker" is growing, (s)he is alive. Silent Screams at 10 weeks, and kicks not long after that...but long before birth.
If the DNA is human, the being is human...and, if growing, a human LIFE...BOTTOM LINE. Suppose your sister gave PREMATURE birth to a little girl or boy...say, two or three months premature (babies can survive outside the womb at even younger ages)...would we hold a baby shower or a fetus shower?

I'm also wondering, if I saw someone sneaking up behind you brandishing a machete, a gun, or some other weapon...would you want me to intervene and try to stop him from killing you, or just "get a hobby", "go on vacation" and "let him make his own decision"? I'm not wondering what the answer to that question is; I am wondering whether you have the honesty to admit it, and the intelligence to connect it, fairly, with similar efforts on behalf of those unborn children whose humanity and vitality are (at least) equal to yours...?! It is the least you can do, at least unless/until you are willing to submit to a little empirical test proving which way your own real sympathies lie...

It's certainly an imposition of your beliefs on an unborn child (or anyone else) to condemn him or her to execution.

But your last words say it all..."the way I want", "My way"...We wish you a safe passage from the "womb" of your own little egocentric fantasy world into the real one, soon. When you get here, you'll find that it's really NOT all about you, and that that's not really a bad thing, after all...at least, we hope you figure that much out. You'll survive a lot better and longer if you do.

Bon voyage!

Posted by: reality 101 at February 12, 2005 03:20 PM

Dear Reality 101,

Thank you for expressing yourself so well. Kudos!

Posted by: p2 at February 12, 2005 08:00 PM

WHy do you need to make such a big issue out of this?
How do you define life?..and yes if my sister gave premature birth..let's say...8 months early..
would that be a fetus or a baby?
No it wouldn't survive.

How do you know that it actually has a soul.
How do you know that it doesn't? You can't!

That's why i take no position.I can't take a position because I don't know enough.And I may never know.But i don't pretend everything is clear about this issue,and try judging everyone.

Who is to define when a baby is actually alive,and stop being a part of the mother's body?

if you kill a single fertilised cell is it still murder is it still alive?..It doesn't kick..(!)...
how about when it doubles.If you kill both of the cells is it murder,is it alive!?.

Who is to say when is exactly a baby ALIVE!?

I don't know if you can but I can't. So stop messing around with stuff you cannot explain.
Let them be judged by the one who knows.

Posted by: Sthwicked at February 18, 2005 12:46 PM

Sthwicked,

At 8 months early, your niece or nephew (he/she would be one or the other at that point)would still be a living, human being. As previously stated, the DNA (present from the moment of fertilization) proves species...if the DNA is human, the being is human. If (s)he is growing, (s)he is alive.

"Tommy Gun" mentioned the screaming and kicking as defining indices of vitality. While it is a false standard (If you don't scream and kick while you are asleep, or at other times, does that mean you are not human, not alive, or deserving of execution? Didn't think so...)

You fuss, fume & condemn(?!) those you accuse of messing with things [we] can't explain, but you repudiate (with no evidence) every explanation we have given you...sounds like you don't want explanations; and that is a definite stand of its own, though not a very sensible one.

As to ensoulment, since you cannot prove when this does or does not occur, doesn't it make sense to give the baby the benefit of the doubt?
Many people who don't believe that animals have souls don't think they should therefore be gratuitously tortured to death, which is what is done to preborn babies.

It goes back the old example of you standing before a locked door with a gun, ready to shoot the lock open. People of conscience & compassion would absolutely forbid you to shoot unless you were absolutely CERTAIN that there was not a human life on the other side of that door. You might question the basis for their views, but I don't think you would question them so loudly if it happened to be you on the other side of the door, and one of them holding the gun...

IT'S EASY TO BE PRO-"CHOICE"...AS LONG AS YOU'RE NOT THE ONE KILLED.

Just because you won't accept explanations does not mean we don't have them, or can't make them...so why not take your own advice and let us be judged by One Who Knows, and not yourself?

Posted by: reality 101 at February 18, 2005 01:55 PM

reality 101,

I wasn't judging anyone as I said.My position in this issue is nutral.I would really apreceate if your answers were not so ironic towords me.
Anything you have is welcome.I wouldn't be here if I didn't care.

First of all, I know how to accept answers if they come from the a good source.
Telling me staff about the DNA and how it is formed is irrelevant because everybody knows these staff.

You would agree with me that what separates us with the animals is the spirit we had from our Father.If this is not the case, then what we should be descussing now is Hunting deers/birds etc instead of abortion.

What i'm asking is not when the DNA comes in,because I could see flowers moving and reacting to it's surroundings(which describes a living organism) and still not being alowed to cut them,because I would take a life away.The issue with the baby embryo is When does actually the SOUL comes in to the body. I don't realy think you are able to answer this question,because first of all you need to define SOUL. What is a soul?when do you take the soul?
is it given to you at the same time your DNA is formed? and if so....who says so?

Thanx for time reality 101 and remember that I'm not attacking you.Intead of attacking back try to have a debate,

Sthwicked

Posted by: sthwicked at February 18, 2005 03:27 PM

Sw,

Again, the old example of you standing before a locked door with a gun, ready to shoot the lock open comes to mind. People of conscience & compassion would absolutely forbid you to shoot unless you were absolutely CERTAIN that there was not a human life on the other side of that door. You might question the basis for their views, but I don't think you would question them so loudly if it happened to be you on the other side of the door, and one of them holding the gun...

To the best of anyone's knowledge, the life growing from the moment of fertilization is a HUMAN life, as is evident in the DNA, and the species of the parents. (I've never known anyone to get an abortion because they had concerns about bringing another cat, dog, mouse, fish, dragonfly, bird, daffodil, etc., into the world, have you? And, the women who either don't even consider abortion to begin with, or change their minds and turn away from abortion mills, don't think of the life they are carrying as anything other than "my baby". And...when the life is born, "it" is always a baby human...not a dog, fish, etc.)

We all know that within the human community, variations of ability (and disability) occur, at all ages & stages of development, but do not alter the species of any individual.

Who are you referring to as "our Father"? Would God meet your qualifications as "One Who knows"? If so, I think you'll find the matter of pre-natal personhood/ensoulment sufficiently affirmed by Him in the following texts:
Genesis 3:20, "Adam named his wife Eve (in Hebrew, this means "life"), because she would become the mother of all the living."

Exodus 20:13 "You shall not murder." (The Hebrew word translated "murder" means "to take the life of someone unjustly.")

Leviticus 18:18, "Love your neighbor as yourself." (Is any neighbor closer than the child in the womb?)

Psalm 22:9-10, "Yet you brought me out of the womb; you made me trust in you even at my mother's breast. From birth I was cast upon you; from my mother's womb you have been my God." Luke 1:41-44, "When Elizabeth heard Mary's greeting, the baby leaped in her womb, and Elizabeth was filled wit the Holy Spirit. In a loud voice she exclaimed: . . .'As soon as the sound of your greeting reached my ears, the baby in my womb leaped for joy.'"(God's care for a person is from the womb even before birth.)

Psalm 51:5-6, "Surely I was sinful at birth, sinful from the time my mother conceived me. Surely you desire truth in the inner parts; you teach me wisdom in the inmost place." (Scripture extends Personhood to the child in the womb.)

Psalm 139:13-16, "For you created my inmost being; you knit me together in my mother's womb. I praise you because I am fearfully and wonderfully made; your works are wonderful, I know that full well. My frame was not hidden from you when I was made in the secret place. When I was woven together in the depths of the earth, your eyes saw my unformed body. All the days ordained for me were written in your book before one of them came to be." (God is involved in the formation of human life from the moment of conception to the day one dies.)

Proverbs 24:11-12, "Rescue those being led away to death; hold back those staggering toward slaughter. If you say 'but we knew nothing about this,' does not he who weighs the heart perceive it? Does not he who guards your life know it? Will he not repay each person according to what he has done?" (We have a moral duty to protect the helpless and those being unjustly assaulted.")

Jeremiah 1:4, "The word of the Lord came to me, saying, 'Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, before you were born I set you apart; I appointed you as a prophet to the nations.'" Galatians 1:15, "But when God, who set me apart from birth and called me by his grace. . . ." (God's call of service is to a person while in his mother's womb.)

Romans 9:11-12, "Yet before the twins were born or had done anything good or bad--in order that God's purpose in election might stand: not by works but by him who calls--she was told, 'The older will serve the younger.'" (There is continuity of personhood from the child in the womb to the child born and growing to adulthood.)

Romans 13:9, "The commandment, 'Do not murder,' . . .is summed up in this one rule 'Love your neighbor as yourself.' Love does no harm to its neighbor. Therefore love is the fulfillment of the law." (If we act in love, we do not take life or harm life. This is God's commandment.)

These ought to suffice to satisfy any reasonable, & genuine, inquiry along those lines...

Posted by: r101 at February 19, 2005 10:53 AM

I would like to add to what r101 stated above. For those of you who are Chrtistians, or anyone else who claims to know God should listen to this. How would we get into the gates of heaven had Mary decided to get an abortion? What would have happened had Christ never been born? The bible states that the only way to get into heaven is through Christ himself. We would have all burned in hell for atternity. I for one am thankful for Mary's birthing of him. She of all women would have had an excuse. She didn't even have sex and everyone thought horrible things about her. Even her husband questioned her at first. It took one heck of a woman to deal with that.

God says he will never give us mroe than we can handle. Where is the trust in him, when we are killing what he already created? Did we all get weak? What is this saying about Christians today? We have taken this out of our Father's hands, and are know playing God. I am not perfect and I never claim to be, and that's why I can state my views on this.

For those of you who do not believe in Christ, feel free to ignore my statements, I am not trying to convert people to Christianity here. Do not claim to be a follower though and deny what I have said.

You will still believe as you chose, and that is your right. At least I can say that I have given all of you something to think about, and that my consciencios is clear in this department. God knows I don't need that sin ontop of my others.

MAY GOD BLESS AND FORGIVE US ALL!!!!!

Posted by: aliciadebord at February 22, 2005 09:47 AM

I live in Oregon- a Godless state for sure. If anyone cares to know, I have been litigating with Oregon for the past two years, on the grounds that ARTICLE I Sections II and III of the Oregon Constitution grant me the clear and obvious right to practice religion and keep a "clean conscience". Therefore, I have decided to not pay income taxes in oregon until oregon stops using the money to kill children. Oreogn actually uses tax money to fund abortion here- it is a very sick thing.

For other living in Oregon, here are the Constitutional provisions that every signle Christian should memorize:

“All men shall be secure in the Natural right, to worship Almighty God according to the dictates of their own consciences.”
- ARTICLE I Section II
of the Oregon Constitution

"No law shall in any case whatever control the free exercise, and enjoyment of religious opinions, or interfere with the rights of conscience."

-ARTICLE I Section III
of the Oregon Constitution

Pleas pray for me and my family... Thus far, the state has taken my home, and locked down my asetts- preventing me from getting an attorney.

God Bless everyone, keep up the faith.

Posted by: Michael Bowman at February 24, 2005 09:10 AM

fight against poverty and the starving chldren out there. it is so sad to see children that have no stomachs and you can see every single bon ein their poor little bodies. i not saying that should have been aborted but couples wnatibng to adoptarent adopting those children when they are plentiful. there are so many unwanted childern out there. take care of those children. i am pro choice and if women dont want their childern to go through poverty then so be it. i also would like t add another point. if you are a devout christian/catholic/whatever how do you feel about gay coulples wanting to adopt all those unwanted childern. please tell me that if the bible says its wrong to be gay. is it wrong for gays to want a child? or wrong for a pregnant woman to want an abortion.

Posted by: lauren at February 27, 2005 12:40 PM

What exactly is the problem with killing something yet to experience the world? In what manner could it truly be said to be alive? It is unfortunate that the only reasoning in support of an anti-arbortionist approach is founded in religious texts the very wording of which is evidently self-contradictory. From an imperfect base, you cannot hope to construct a valid and robust argument.

Posted by: Scott at February 27, 2005 01:29 PM

Scott,

a much less jaded, and more creative inquiry would be, WHAT ON EARTH IS THE PROBLEM WITH ALLOWING SOMEONE WHO HAS NOT YET EXPERIENCED THE WORLD OUTSIDE THE WOMB TO LIVE?

If (s)he is growing, then the manner in which
(s)he can be said to be alive is...TRUTHFULLY.

Yes, while several religions affirm the value of human life from fertilization until natural death (preferably), modern science has confirmed beyond doubt that the pre-born (zygote, embryo, fetus) is a living, unique human being; and, judically innocent of any capital offense (at least to any sane, thinking person of conscience), deserving of legal protection from harm, oppression, etc.

Then, there is the matter of your bashing religious texts without offering a shred of evidence against the validity of any of them.
'Tis your own wording that is self-contradictory, and your own pathetic excuse for an argument that is weak and invalid.

Posted by: reality 101 at February 28, 2005 07:40 PM

Hey scott,
Tell me, do you enjoy your life? Have you accomplished anything that is helpful in our society? Maybe you have children and a family of your own. It would have been a shame for you to have been aborted huh?
Though I think that you are quite confused, I value your opinion none the less. However, in your previous piece you asked "What is wrong with killing...In what manner could it truly said to me alive. Tell me...Have you ever killed a ball or maybe even a peice of concrete. No, and that would be because it wasn't alive to begin with. You can not kill a nonliving thing. To abort a child is to admit in itself that it is living...and I have news for you it is human. Before a puppy is born it is a puppy, and a cat a cat. Not being born yet does not make you something else.
Do you know why abortion clinics turn the screens away from the women who are in to get their baby aborted? Because these women are not heartless, and when they saw fully featured babies with a heartbeat they got sick and walked out. Abortion clinics were losing to much money. If women knew the truth the numbers of abortion would decrease tremendesly.
I want to know if you have children. If so tell me how you would have felt if their mother had chosen to kill one of them. Maybe you don't have children yet. Do you have anybody important in your life? How would your life be without that person? Kinda harsh huh? By aborting what God has so perfectly created, people are taking away what could be a great friend to one of my kids or maybe someone who would have found the cure to cancer. Will we ever know? No, because they have been murder and thrown away with the rest of the weekly garbage.

Micheal B.,
Hang in there. I am proud of you. We need more people who call themselves religious to stand for what they belive, but instead, from a great song, they fall for anything.

Lauren,
You have brought up a good point. I also think gay relationships are wrong. Infact it does mention it in the bible, but I will have to look up the exact address before I can post it. I don't want to be inaccurate. However, this is a curupt world, and not everyone feels the way I do. One the point of not wanting their child to end up in a gay household, when you give your child up you can prepick the family or give specifics as to what you want. It is very common. On the point of the children in poverty, do you give money to those groups trying to help? People want to adopt a baby. Especially families that can't have children...they want a newborn. It is what they want. Newborn, are almost never in the system, they get adopted out emmediately. I know this because my family just adopted to little boys. One is 3 and the other 6.
I have to go...I hope I gave ya'll something to think about.
God Bless you all

Posted by: ababyonce at March 1, 2005 09:49 AM

Lauren,

Re: "gay" sex, (&hence, "gay" marriages),
this subject is directly addressed in the following biblical texts:

"And there came two angels to Sodom at even; and Lot sat in the gate of Sodom: and Lot seeing them rose up to meet them; and he bowed himself with his face toward the ground;
And he said, Behold now, my lords, turn in, I pray you, into your servant's house, and tarry all night, and wash your feet, and ye shall rise up early, and go on your ways. And they said, Nay; but we will abide in the street all night.
3And he pressed upon them greatly; and they turned in unto him, and entered into his house; and he made them a feast, and did bake unleavened bread, and they did eat.
But before they lay down, the men of the city, even the men of Sodom, compassed the house round, both old and young, all the people from every quarter:
And they called unto Lot, and said unto him, Where are the men which came in to thee this night? bring them out unto us, that we may know them.
And Lot went out at the door unto them, and shut the door after him,
And said, I pray you, brethren, do not so wickedly.
Behold now, I have two daughters which have not known man; let me, I pray you, bring them out unto you, and do ye to them as is good in your eyes: only unto these men do nothing; for therefore came they under the shadow of my roof.
And they said, Stand back. And they said again, This one fellow came in to sojourn, and he will needs be a judge: now will we deal worse with thee, than with them. And they pressed sore upon the man, even Lot, and came near to break the door.
But the men put forth their hand, and pulled Lot into the house to them, and shut to the door.
And they smote the men that were at the door of the house with blindness, both small and great: so that they wearied themselves to find the door.
And the men said unto Lot, Hast thou here any besides? son in law, and thy sons, and thy daughters, and whatsoever thou hast in the city, bring them out of this place:
For we will destroy this place, because the cry of them is waxen great before the face of the LORD; and the LORD hath sent us to destroy it.
And Lot went out, and spake unto his sons in law, which married his daughters, and said, Up, get you out of this place; for the LORD will destroy this city. But he seemed as one that mocked unto his sons in law.
And when the morning arose, then the angels hastened Lot, saying, Arise, take thy wife, and thy two daughters, which are here; lest thou be consumed in the iniquity of the city.
And while he lingered, the men laid hold upon his hand, and upon the hand of his wife, and upon the hand of his two daughters; the LORD being merciful unto him: and they brought him forth, and set him without the city.
And it came to pass, when they had brought them forth abroad, that he said, Escape for thy life; look not behind thee, neither stay thou in all the plain; escape to the mountain, lest thou be consumed.
And Lot said unto them, Oh, not so, my LORD:
Behold now, thy servant hath found grace in thy sight, and thou hast magnified thy mercy, which thou hast shewed unto me in saving my life; and I cannot escape to the mountain, lest some evil take me, and I die:
Behold now, this city is near to flee unto, and it is a little one: Oh, let me escape thither, (is it not a little one?) and my soul shall live.
And he said unto him, See, I have accepted thee concerning this thing also, that I will not overthrow this city, for the which thou hast spoken.
Haste thee, escape thither; for I cannot do anything till thou be come thither. Therefore the name of the city was called Zoar.
The sun was risen upon the earth when Lot entered into Zoar.
Then the LORD rained upon Sodom and upon Gomorrah brimstone and fire from the LORD out of heaven;
And he overthrew those cities, and all the plain, and all the inhabitants of the cities, and that which grew upon the ground." -Genesis 19:1-25 (Describes God's judgment of reprobate cities/countries; specifically references homosexuality as an index of reprobation)

"Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination."-- Leviticus 18:22
(Expressly forbids homosexual activity)

"...Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female,
And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh?
Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder." -- Matthew 19:4-6 (Unequivocally affirms marriage as a union between two members of opposite gender)

"For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;
Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.
For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:
Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.
Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,
And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.
Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves:
Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.
For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:
And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.
And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;
Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers,
Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,
Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful:
Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them." -Romans 1:18-32 (States that sexual perversion is a sign of declension in the unrepentant human mind and spirit, a sign that the individual so "disposed" is in danger of being cut off from God forever, of passing the "point of no return" to repentance, and fellowship with God.)

"Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,
Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.
And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God." -- I Corinthians 6:9-11 (States that homosexuality is a sin to be repented of, not a "sickness", much less a "viable alternative", or "genetic condition"; and that God can deliver anyone involved in it from that sin, and restore him/her to fellowship with Him and righteous, healthy living!)

"And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea.
And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband.
And I heard a great voice out of heaven saying, Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and he will dwell with them, and they shall be his people, and God himself shall be with them, and be their God.
And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away.
And he that sat upon the throne said, Behold, I make all things new. And he said unto me, Write: for these words are true and faithful.
And he said unto me, It is done. I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end. I will give unto him that is athirst of the fountain of the water of life freely.
He that overcometh shall inherit all things; and I will be his God, and he shall be my son.
But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.
And there came unto me one of the seven angels which had the seven vials full of the seven last plagues, and talked with me, saying, Come hither, I will shew thee the bride, the Lamb's wife.
And he carried me away in the spirit to a great and high mountain, and shewed me that great city, the holy Jerusalem, descending out of heaven from God,
Having the glory of God: and her light was like unto a stone most precious, even like a jasper stone, clear as crystal;
And had a wall great and high, and had twelve gates, and at the gates twelve angels, and names written thereon, which are the names of the twelve tribes of the children of Israel:
On the east three gates; on the north three gates; on the south three gates; and on the west three gates.
And the wall of the city had twelve foundations, and in them the names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb.
And he that talked with me had a golden reed to measure the city, and the gates thereof, and the wall thereof.
And the city lieth foursquare, and the length is as large as the breadth: and he measured the city with the reed, twelve thousand furlongs. The length and the breadth and the height of it are equal.
And he measured the wall thereof, an hundred and forty and four cubits, according to the measure of a man, that is, of the angel.
And the building of the wall of it was of jasper: and the city was pure gold, like unto clear glass.
And the foundations of the wall of the city were garnished with all manner of precious stones. The first foundation was jasper; the second, sapphire; the third, a chalcedony; the fourth, an emerald;
The fifth, sardonyx; the sixth, sardius; the seventh, chrysolyte; the eighth, beryl; the ninth, a topaz; the tenth, a chrysoprasus; the eleventh, a jacinth; the twelfth, an amethyst.
And the twelve gates were twelve pearls: every several gate was of one pearl: and the street of the city was pure gold, as it were transparent glass.
And I saw no temple therein: for the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are the temple of it.
And the city had no need of the sun, neither of the moon, to shine in it: for the glory of God did lighten it, and the Lamb is the light thereof.
And the nations of them which are saved shall walk in the light of it: and the kings of the earth do bring their glory and honour into it.
And the gates of it shall not be shut at all by day: for there shall be no night there.
And they shall bring the glory and honour of the nations into it.
And there shall in no wise enter into it any thing that defileth, neither whatsoever worketh abomination, or maketh a lie: but they which are written in the Lamb's book of life.-- (Revelation 21; further affirms what those who do not repent of various sins, including sexual ones, and avail themselves of the saving grace of God while they can here will face in the hereafter, as well as what those who do repent and confess, and cling to, Christ as Savior and Lord, will enter there as well.)

Dr. James Dobson makes the following additional social arguments against sanctioning homosexual marriage/"civil unions":

There are very compelling arguments against marriage between homosexuals that should be considered by anyone who has not yet become familiar with the issues. Unfortunately, the American people, as a whole, have not yet thought through the consequences and measured the impact of this revolutionary concept. I could list fifty or more legitimate concerns. Let me focus on only eleven.

1. The legalization of homosexual marriage will quickly destroy the traditional family.

We’ve already seen evidence from the Scandinavian countries that de-facto homosexual marriage destroys the real McCoy. These two entities cannot coexist because they represent opposite ends of the universe. A book could be written on the reasons for this collision between matter and antimatter, but I will cite three of them.

First, when the State sanctions homosexual relationships and gives them its blessing, the younger generation becomes confused about sexual identity and quickly loses its understanding of lifelong commitments, emotional bonding, sexual purity, the role of children in a family, and from a spiritual perspective, the “sanctity” of marriage. Marriage is reduced to something of a partnership that provides attractive benefits and sexual convenience, but cannot offer the intimacy described in Genesis. Cohabitation and short-term relationships are the inevitable result. Ask the Norwegians, the Swedes, and the people from the Netherlands. That is exactly what is happening there.36

Second, the introduction of legalized gay marriages will lead inexorably to polygamy and other alternatives to one man/one woman unions. In Utah polygamist Tom Green, who claims five wives, is citing Lawrence v. Texas as the legal authority for his appeal.37 In January 2004, a Salt Lake City civil rights attorney filed a federal lawsuit on behalf of another couple wanting to engage in legal polygamy.38 Their justification? Lawrence v. Texas. The ACLU of Utah has actually suggested that the state will “have to step up to prove that a polygamous relationship is detrimental to society”—as opposed to the polygamists having to prove that plural marriage is not harmful to the culture.39 Do you see how the game is played? The responsibility to defend the family now rests on you and me to prove that polygamy is unhealthy. The ACLU went on to say that the nuclear family “may not be necessarily the best model.”40 Indeed, Justice Antonin Scalia warned of this likelihood in his statement for the minority in the Lawrence case.41 It took less than six months for his prediction to become a reality.

Why will gay marriage set the table for polygamy? Because there is no place to stop once that Rubicon has been crossed. Historically, the definition of marriage has rested on a foundation of tradition, legal precedent, theology and the overwhelming support of the people. After the introduction of marriage between homosexuals, however, it will be supported by nothing more substantial than the opinion of a single judge or by a black-robed panel of justices. After they have reached their dubious decisions, the family will consist of little more than someone’s interpretation of “rights.” Given that unstable legal climate, it is certain that some self-possessed judge, somewhere, will soon rule that three men or three women can marry. Or five men and two women. Or four and four. Who will be able to deny them that right? The guarantee is implied, we will be told, by the Constitution. Those who disagree will continue to be seen as hate-mongers and bigots. (Indeed, those charges are already being leveled against Christians who espouse biblical values!) How about group marriage, or marriage between cousins, or marriage between daddies and little girls? How about marriage between a man and his donkey? Anything allegedly linked to “civil rights” will be doable. The legal underpinnings for marriage will have been destroyed.

The third reason marriage between homosexuals will destroy traditional marriage is that this is the ultimate goal of activists, and they will not stop until they achieve it. The history of the gay and lesbian movement has been that its adherents quickly move the goal line as soon as the previous one has been breached, revealing even more shocking and outrageous objectives. In the present instance, homosexual activists, heady with power and exhilaration, feel the political climate is right to tell us what they have wanted all along. This is the real deal: Most gays and lesbians do not want to marry each other. That would entangle them in all sorts of legal constraints. Who needs a lifetime commitment to one person? The intention here is to create an entirely different legal structure.

With marriage as we know it gone, everyone would enjoy all the legal benefits of marriage (custody rights, tax-free inheritance, joint ownership of property, health care and spousal citizenship, and much more) without limiting the number of partners or their gender. Nor would “couples” be bound to each other in the eyes of the law. This is clearly where the movement is headed. If you doubt that this is the motive, read what is in the literature today. Activists have created a new word to replace the outmoded terms infidelity, adultery, cheating, and promiscuity. The new concept is polyamorous. It means the same thing (literally “many loves”) but with the agreement of the primary sexual partner. Why not? He or she is probably polyamorous, too.

Liberal columnist Michael Kinsley wrote a July 2003 op-ed piece in The Washington Post titled, “Abolish Marriage: Let’s Really Get the Government Out Of Our Bedrooms.”42 In this revealing editorial, Kinsley writes, “[The] solution is to end the institution of marriage, or rather, the solution is to end the institution of government monopoly on marriage. And yes, if three people want to get married, or one person wants to marry herself and someone else wants to conduct a ceremony and declare them married, let ’em. If you and your government aren’t implicated, what do you care? If marriage were an entirely private affair, all the disputes over gay marriages would become irrelevant.” Otherwise, the author warns, “it’s going to get ugly.”43

Judith Levine, writing in The Village Voice, offered support for these ideas in an article titled “Stop the Wedding: Why Gay Marriage Isn’t Radical Enough.”44 She wrote, “Because American marriage is inextricable from Christianity, it admits participants as Noah let animals on the ark. But it doesn’t have to be that way. In 1972 the National Coalition of Gay Organizations demanded the ‘repeal of all legislative provisions that restrict the sex or number of persons entering into a marriage unit; and the extension of legal benefits to all persons who cohabit regardless of sex or numbers.’ Group marriage could comprise any combination of genders.”45

Stanley Kurtz, a research fellow at the Hoover Institution, summed up the situation in a recent Weekly Standard article. He noted that if gay marriage is legalized, “marriage will be transformed into a variety of relationship contracts, linking two, three or more individuals (however weakly or temporarily) in every conceivable combination of male and female . . . the bottom of this slope is visible from where we now stand.”46

We must all become soberly aware of a deeply disturbing reality: The homosexual agenda is not marriage for gays. It is marriage for no one. And despite what you read or see in the media, it is definitely not monogamous.

What will happen sociologically if marriage becomes anything or everything or nothing? The short answer is that the State will lose its compelling interest in marital relationships altogether. After marriage has been redefined, divorces will be obtained instantly, will not involve a court, and will take on the status of a driver’s license or a hunting permit. With the family out of the way, all rights and privileges of marriage will accrue to gay and lesbian partners without the legal entanglements and commitments heretofore associated with it.

These are just a few reasons why homosexual marriage is truly revolutionary. Legalizing it will change everything, especially for the institution of the family.

2. Children will suffer most.

The implications for children in a world of decaying families are profound. Because homosexuals are rarely monogamous, often having as many as three hundred47 or more partners in a lifetime—some studies say it is typically more than one thousand48—children in those polyamorous situations are caught in a perpetual coming and going. It is devastating to kids, who by their nature are enormously conservative creatures. They like things to stay just the way they are, and they hate change. Some have been known to eat the same brand of peanut butter throughout childhood.

More than ten thousand studies have concluded that kids do best when they are raised by loving and committed mothers and fathers.49 They are less likely to be on illegal drugs, less likely to be retained in a grade, less likely to drop out of school, less likely to commit suicide, less likely to be in poverty, less likely to become juvenile delinquents, and for the girls, less likely to become teen mothers. They are healthier both emotionally and physically, even thirty years later, than those not so blessed by traditional parents.50

Social scientists have been surprisingly consistent in warning about the impact of fractured families. If present trends continue, the majority of children will have several “moms” and “dads,” perhaps six or eight “grandparents,” and dozens of half-siblings. It will be a world where little boys and girls are shuffled from pillar to post in an ever-changing pattern of living arrangements; where huge numbers of them will be raised in foster-care homes or living on the street, as millions do in countries all over the world today. Imagine an environment where nothing is stable and where people think primarily about themselves and their own self-preservation. And have you considered what will happen when homosexuals with children become divorced? Instead of two moms and two dads, they will have to contend with four moms or four dads. How would you like to be a new husband a generation later who instantly had four or six or eight mother-in-laws.

We must also consider a world of the future where immorality is even more rampant than today, where both unbridled homosexual and heterosexual liaisons are the norm. The apostle Paul described such a society in the book of Romans, referring apparently to ancient Rome. He wrote, “They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice. They are gossips, slanderers, God-haters, insolent, arrogant and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil; they disobey their parents; they are senseless, faithless, heartless, ruthless” (Romans 1:29–31).

It appears likely now that the demise of families will accelerate this type of decline dramatically, resulting in a chaotic culture that will rip kids apart emotionally.

3. Public schools in every state will embrace homosexuality.

With the legalization of homosexual marriage, every public school in the nation will be required to teach this perversion as the moral equivalent of traditional marriage between a man and a woman. Textbooks, even in conservative regions, will have to depict man/man and woman/woman relationships, and stories written for children as young as elementary school, or even kindergarten, will have to give equal space and emphasis to homosexuals. How can a child, fresh out of toddlerhood, comprehend the meaning of adult sexuality? The answer is, they can’t, but it is happening in the state of California already.51

4. Adoption laws will be instantly obsolete.


From the moment that homosexual marriage becomes legal, courts will not be able to favor a traditional couple of one man and one woman in matters of adoption. Children will be placed in homes with parents representing only one sex on an equal basis with those having a mom and a dad. Even the polyamorous couples won’t be excluded. The prospect of fatherless and motherless children will not be considered in the evaluation of eligibility. It will be the law.

5. Foster-care programs will be impacted dramatically.


Foster-care parents will be required to undergo “sensitivity training” to rid themselves of bias in favor of heterosexuality, and will have to affirm homosexuality in children and teens. Moral training, at least as it applies to sexuality, will be forbidden. Again, this is the current law in California.52

6. The health care system will stagger and perhaps collapse.

This could be the straw that breaks the back of the insurance industry in Western nations, as millions of new dependents become eligible for coverage. Every HIV-positive patient needs only to find a partner to receive the same coverage as offered to an employee. It is estimated by some analysts that an initial threefold increase in premiums can be anticipated; even with that, it may not be profitable for companies to stay in business.


And how about the cost to American businesses? Will they be able to provide health benefits? If not, can physicians, nurses, and technicians be expected to work for nothing or to provide their services in exchange for a vague promise of payments from indigent patients? Try selling that to a neurosurgeon or an orthopedist who has to pay increased premiums for malpractice insurance. The entire health care system could implode. Is it possible? Yes. Will it happen? I don’t know.

7. Social Security will be severely stressed.


Again, with millions of new eligible dependents, what will happen to the Social Security system that is already facing bankruptcy? If it does collapse, what will that mean for elderly people who must rely totally on that meager support? Who is thinking through these draconian possibilities as we careen toward “a brave new world”?

8. Religious freedom will almost certainly be jeopardized.


In order to get a perspective on where the homosexual activist movement is taking us, one can simply look at our neighbors to the north. Canada is leading the way on this revolutionary path. I could cite dozens of examples indicating that religious freedom in that country is dying. Indeed, on April 28, 2004, the Parliament passed bill C 250, which effectively criminalized speech or writings that criticize homosexuality.53 Anything deemed to be “homophobic” can be punished by six months in prison or by other severe penalties.54

Pastors and priests in Canada are wondering if they can preach from Leviticus or Romans 1 or other passages from the writings of the apostle Paul. Will a new Bible be mandated that is bereft of “hate speech”? Consider this: A man who owned a printing press in Canada was fined $3,400 for refusing to print stationary for a homosexual activist organization.55

Censorship is already in full swing. One of our Focus on the Family radio programs on the subject of homosexuality was judged by the Canadian Radio and Television Commission to be “homophobic.” The radio station that carried the broadcast was censured for airing it, and I have not been able to address the issue since.

Is that kind of censorship coming to the United States. Yes, I believe it is. Once homosexual marriage is legalized, if indeed that is where we are headed, laws based on what will be considered “equality” will bring many changes in the law. Furthermore, it is likely that non-profit organizations that refuse to hire homosexuals on religious grounds will lose their tax exemptions. Some Christian colleges and universities are already worrying about that possibility.

9. Other nations are watching our march toward homosexual marriage and will follow our lead.


Marriage among homosexuals will spread throughout the world, just as pornography did after the Nixon Commission declared obscene material “beneficial” to mankind.56 Almost instantly, the English-speaking countries liberalized their laws against smut. America continues to be the fountainhead of filth and immorality, and its influence is global. Dr. Darrell Reid, president of Focus on the Family Canada, told me recently that his country is carefully monitoring what is happening in the United States. If we take this step off a cliff, the family on every continent will splinter at an accelerated rate. Conversely, our Supreme Court has made it clear that it looks to European and Canadian law in the interpretation of our Constitution.57 What an outrage! That should have been grounds for impeachment, but the Congress, as usual, remained passive and silent.

10. The gospel of Jesus Christ will be severely curtailed.

The family has been God’s primary vehicle for evangelism since the beginning. Its most important assignment has been the propagation of the human race and the handing down of the faith to our children. Malachi 2:15 reads, referring to husbands and wives, “Has not the Lord made them one? In flesh and spirit they are His. And why one? Because He was seeking godly offspring. So guard yourself in your spirit, and do not break faith with the wife of your youth.” That responsibility to teach the next generation will never recover from the loss of committed, God-fearing families. The younger generation and those yet to come will be deprived of the Good News, as has already occurred in France, Germany, and other European countries. Instead of providing for a father and mother, the advent of homosexual marriage will create millions of motherless children and fatherless kids. Are we now going to join the Netherlands and Belgium to become the third country in the history of the world to “normalize” and legalize behavior that has been prohibited by God himself? Heaven help us if we do!

11. The culture war will be over, and the world may soon become “as it was in the days of Noah” (Matthew 24:37).

This is the climactic moment in the battle to preserve the family, and future generations hang in the balance. This apocalyptic and pessimistic view of the institution of the family and its future will sound alarmist to many, but I think it will prove accurate unless—unless—God’s people awaken and begin an even greater vigil of prayer for our nation.

This reticence on behalf of Christians is deeply troubling. Marriage is a sacrament designed by God that serves as a metaphor for the relationship between Christ and His church. Tampering with His plan for the family is immoral and wrong. To violate the Lord’s expressed will for humankind, especially in regard to behavior that He has prohibited, is to court disaster...-Dr. Dobson, "Marriage Under Fire"

One of the cruellest, saddest aspects of the whole "Gay rights" movement is the fact that it is war on Gays themselves, disguised as a promotion of their "rights" for the "benefit" of secularist/satanic social engineers who want the population reduced. (Homosexuality serves that pernicious end very ably, since so many of it's participants die young, spread fatal diseases, and don't reproduce.)

Yes, it is wrong for a woman to want an abortion; studies have shown that children in utero can sense that rejection of/hostility towards their existence, and that it does considerable emotional/psychological harm to these children that is very difficult to reach for healing later in life. (It's sort of like trying to undo damage done to a tree in it's first year of life when the tree is 10, 20, 30...years old; obviously, the more rings have grown around...and in terms of...the one originally damaged, the harder it will be to get to that one...this is an imperfect analogy, but there is much clinically documented truth to it.)
Christ taught that to hate a person -- i.e., to desire, much less try to create, a world in which that person does not exist, is tantamount to murdering him/her; and murder, esp. of innocent children, is clearly forbidden.

As to whether or not it is wrong for gays to want children...yes, it is wrong for them to seek to recruit children; it is wrong for them to seek to persuade children (or anyone else) that their sin is an acceptable way to live. The desire to reproduce children isn't wrong in itself, but it is very wrong to knowingly/deliberately deprive the child of the male & female parenting partnership intended by God and proven to be beneficial to children when it's done right. There is hope; I know of several ex-gays who have repented and come completely out of that deathdance, and are now happily married. Some of them are very successfully fathering families of one to ten children.

As regards your interest in helping the starving children of the world "instead of" the unborn, you may be interested to know that the one-child per couple policy in China is actually contributing to, not alleviating, the hunger in that country. A couple, for instance, who farm rice for a living (many do in China)can get soooo much more accomplished towards feeding themselves and others with the help of several strong sons (or daughters)...but the Chinese government won't give them that --hold onto your hat-- CHOICE.

Someone once said that the trouble with looking down on the world is that nothing, from a cabbage to a king, can be accurately seen as it is; it will invariably appear foreshortened and deformed, in the eye of the beholder, from that angle. (try it sometime!) And the population control freak/proabortion frequently betray this lack of perspective when they denigrate the unborn children they want to annihilate as "just more mouths to feed", conveniently -- and blindly-- ignoring the fact that those mouths are, as a rule, joined to heads that can learn, think, see, hear, smell which are (unless separated by abortion) joined to bodies with arms to strengthen, hands to create and work, feet to stand, walk, run, dance...

Don't be deceived, lauren. And don't think for a minute that the proabortion movement is about "choice for women". NARAL (now NARRAL)co-founder Bernard Nathanson has, since his 180%conversion to a prolife position, stated repeatedly that when he helped coin the phrases "freedom of choice"/"reproductive freedom"/"right to choose", that he knew then how cynically misleading they were, (China's abortion policy certainly bears him out on this...), but they were invented to make a holocaust and a violent act towards a mother and her child appealing...and to conceal the real agenda, which was to promote a government's/ doctor's right to kill those they felt burdened by...And once the first innocent human life has been taken with impunity, the holocaust has begun. There is a cure for hunger; a hungry child can be healed with just a little food and time; and many Christian (and other) pro-lifers contribute time and resources to addressing those needs, contrary to what you evidently have been misled to believe. But there is no cure for death...no treatment will bring an aborted child back to life, the mother's copious post-abortion tears notwithstanding...as you have apparently been just as gravely misled to slight & ignore...

Posted by: the mcnutts at March 2, 2005 02:14 PM

I can't believe how SICK some of the people are in this forum! I've always said that any woman who wants to have an abortion must be mentally insane. Even animals have a natural instinct that helps them care for their young and protect them, to the point of giving up their lives. That's just an instinct! How could any HUMAN want to kill its own young? There's something wrong with that person...

Some people said above that the matter has nothing to do with religion. I will be praying for you, because if you truly believe that when you die, then you will be going to HELL. Not that I want you to go to hell, or I think that you will be going to hell (that would be judging), just that you must change your opinions in order to avoid it. But of course, arguing with someone who doesn't believe in religion by using religion is just as effective as starting a conversation with your pet dog to try to get it to roll-over at your command. Honestly, I think that those people are either choosing not to see the truth, or they are simply too stupid to see it, in which case I'm sure God would show mercy. For the most part though, it seems to be a decision.

After seeing those pictures, I really wanted to cry. After reading some of these posts, I've gotten rather angry. I have to deal with people like this on a daily basis, and I'm growing weary of it all.
For those Bible believers out there, "By their fruits you will know them." The Catholic Church is one of the only few religions out there that has never changed its teachings on the matter of abortion, and, I believe, the ONLY religion left in the world that has never changed its views on anything concerning faith or morals. What is true once will never stop being true. Truth lasts forever. Meaning, for those abortionists out there that are trying to change the Church's policies, it can't be done! It is physically impossible to "convince" the Church to accept a change in something that was once considered truth to false. That includes abortion and gay marriage, among many other things, but those are the only two I think that are directly connected with the purpose of this site.

Posted by: novus est at March 15, 2005 08:52 PM

Hi there-
My name's Basia. I'm thirteen years old. I live in California. I am very pro-life, and have been since I was young. My parents aren't, I think, so you can't say my parents 'pressured' me into this, or was 'raised that way'. I am not a Christian, in fact I don't really have a religion. i think abortion is horrible! I know of many families that wait for years to adopt a child, while countless children are murdered right before our very eyes. Why don't these mothers at least give the baby up for adoption, if they still don't want the child. This is wrong! If you don't want the damn child, you need to be careful, use protection. dont be an idiot and go through the possibility of DEATH from the procedure. I want to sit these women down and scream at them until my throat is raw and their ears are bloody. Every night I cry, and think about little innocent children that never did anything, pure, clean little children that might have made a difference in this world. I absolutely HATE anyone who is pro-abortion. I am starting a memorial for little children that have been killed at the hands of ruthless, blood-thirsty abortionists. If you know any names of the children that should have been, or if you want to send some nice words or names to these children, my email adress is basia bee@excite.com

Posted by: Basia Marie at March 18, 2005 03:49 PM

The pictures contained on this site are nauseating, indeed. Who could deny that?

Have you seen pictures of soldiers blown apart by bombs in the current Iraq war? Have you seen pictures of the innocent Iraqi men, women and children who are ripped to shreds from gun fire and warheads?

Those pictures, too, would make you weep. But no one seems to be devastated by that. There is a war currently underway that is snuffing out the lives of human beings in tremendous proportion and, for some reason, that doesn't seem ugly to people. Now, terminate an embryo smaller than a grain of rice and people clutch their chests in horror.

The hypocrisy is staggering!

Posted by: Hanna Greene at March 19, 2005 06:43 PM

1. Satan represents indulgence, instead of abstinence!
2. Satan represents vital existence, instead of spiritual pipe dreams!
3. Satan represents undefiled wisdom, instead of hypocritical self-deceit!
4. Satan represents kindness to those who deserve it, instead of love wasted on ingrates!
5. Satan represents vengeance, instead of turning the other cheek!
6. Satan represents responsibility to the responsible, instead of concern for psychic
vampires!
7. Satan represents man as just another animal, sometimes better, more often worse than
those that walk on all-fours, who, because of his "divine spiritual and intellectual
development", has become the most vicious animal of all!
8. Satan represents all of the so-called sins, as they all lead to physical, mental, or
emotional gratification!
9. Satan has been the best friend the church has ever had, as he has kept it in business all
these years!

Posted by: concered for your spirit at March 21, 2005 10:58 AM

to "concered...",

God is much more likely to tell you the truth about Satan, and anything else you want to know, that Satan is to tell you about God...or anything else.

Posted by: concerNed for the truth at March 21, 2005 02:33 PM

Great article!

IS THE RELIGIOUS RIGHT GULLIBLE, NAÏVE, OR WILLINGLY IGNORANT?

By Pastor Chuck Baldwin

March 12, 2005

NewsWithViews.com

It is time to ask some hard questions about the preponderance of leaders and organizations commonly identified as the Religious Right. Are they gullible, naïve, or willingly ignorant? How can anyone who truly believes that unborn babies deserve the right to life continue to support President George W. Bush? His track record on the life issue screams betrayal! Let's get real: on the subject of protecting the lives of unborn babies, Bush is just so much hot air!

American Life League president Judy Brown, columnist Thomas Droleskey, Howard Phillips, Covenant News.com web host Jim Rudd, and many others have provided the American people with incontrovertible documentation regarding G.W. Bush's dismally pathetic record on the life issue. They have chronicled facts including:

Practically everyone in Bush's cabinet is pro-abortion. Bush is the first president to authorize stem cell research. In fact, his appointee to directorship of the National Institute of Health, Dr. Elias Zerhouni, is a pioneer in embryonic stem cell research. President Bush even blocked a vote on a congressional amendment that would have banned the patenting of human embryos.

President Bush has done nothing to remove abortifacients such as RU-486 from the shelves. He even supported the National Organization of Women (NOW) in their racketeering suit against Joe Scheidler and other pro-life advocates.

President Bush has approved millions of taxpayer dollars in funding for Planned Parenthood. He has authorized federal funding for abortion providers overseas to levels even higher than those authorized by President Bill Clinton!

Speaking of overseas funding for abortion, President Bush's $15 billion AIDS package provides payments to organizations that provide abortions including the International Planned Parenthood Federation.

President Bush even admitted his opposition to overturning Roe v Wade by stating emphatically, "there will be abortions. That's a reality." Of course, the President's wife Laura has also publicly said she is opposed to overturning Roe v Wade.

President Bush has repeatedly said that he has no litmus test on the life issue when it comes to appointing federal judges. Why does the Religious Right claim he intends to do something he has plainly and repeatedly denied? Again, are they gullible, naïve, or willingly ignorant?

Beyond that, how far will the Religious Right go in their compromise and surrender of the life issue? Indications are there is practically no limit to their sellout.

We are already hearing leaders within the Religious Right say they will support the Republican presidential nominee in 2008 even if that nominee is openly pro-abortion. Such talk is obviously an attempt to begin calming potential concerns among pro-life conservatives if and when the Republican Party nominates a pro- abortion presidential candidate, which appears very likely to happen.

For example, a recent national gathering of Republicans voted Rudy Guiliani and Condi Rice as the top two choices to lead the GOP ticket in 2008. Of course, both Guiliani and Rice are pro- abortion.

It will more than interesting to listen to leaders of the Religious Right postulate on how a pro-abortion Democrat is evil but a pro- abortion Republican is righteous! Again, is the Religious Right gullible, naïve, or willingly ignorant?

Perhaps disgusting is a more appropriate word to describe the behavior of the Religious Right. In order to keep its most favored special interest group status, it has compromised and capitulated just about every cardinal principal, including the life issue.

As a result, Republican presidents and congresses will continue to come and go, the Religious Right will continue to bask in the warm glow of Republican acceptance, and millions of pre-born babies will continue to have their little bodies torn apart by the abortionist's scalpel.

Do not fear, however. At least a Democrat is not in the White House. Obviously, that matters little to the more than 4 million unborn babies who have been slaughtered in the wombs of their mothers since G.W. Bush became President. What does matter, of course, is that the Religious Right is happy to embrace the Republican presidential candidate, his or her commitment to the unborn notwithstanding.

Is the Religious Right gullible, naïve, or willingly ignorant? It really doesn't matter. Whatever the motive or whatever the cause, the Religious Right has ceased to be a credible proponent of protecting the lives of unborn children, which leads to the greater question: who will pick up the mantle as the voice for the unborn?

© 2005 Chuck Baldwin - All Rights Reserved

Sign Up For Free E-Mail Alerts

E-Mails are used strictly for NWVs alerts, not for sale


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Chuck Baldwin is Founder-Pastor of Crossroads Baptist Church in Pensacola, Florida. In 1985 the church was recognized by President Ronald Reagan for its unusual growth and influence.

Dr. Baldwin is the host of a lively, hard-hitting syndicated radio talk show on the Genesis Communications Network called, "Chuck Baldwin Live" This is a daily, one hour long call-in show in which Dr. Baldwin addresses current event topics from a conservative Christian point of view. Pastor Baldwin writes weekly articles on the internet http://www.ChuckBaldwinLive.com and newspapers.

To learn more about his radio talk show please visit his web site at: www.chuckbaldwinlive.com. When responding, please include your name, city and state.

E-mail: chuck@chuckbaldwinlive.com

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Home

Do not fear, however. At least a Democrat is not in the White House. Obviously, that matters little to the more than 4 million unborn babies who have been slaughtered in the wombs of their mothers since G.W. Bush became President.




Posted by: jeff at March 21, 2005 04:27 PM

Jeff,

Several of us who support ORW and regularly read, and contribute to, this website share your expressed differences with the Republican Party's performance re: abortion.

But we also find Baldwin's repeated references to "the Religious Right", which are invariably negative, confusing and offensive, in that that term was invented by the Left purely to target, and denigrate, people who don't agree with their agenda. There is, for the record, no such organization, no card-carrying members; the term, I repeat, is just a pejorative one designed to demean, dehumanize, and intimidate people whose political and religious views are basically Judeo-Christian and conservative. It was intended to attenuate Christian influence in public, particularly political life, and while we agree with Baldwin on many things, his use of their invalid term in a negative sense is not one of them.

Posted by: jt mcnutt at March 22, 2005 12:24 PM

psssssssssssssssssst.

abortion is legal. i can have an abortion because it is my CHOICE. These pictures have NOTHING to do with a woman's CHOICE. Keep your rosaries off my ovaries.

Pro-Woman, Pro-Family, Pro-Family Planning, PRO CHOICE!

There is nothing you can do. Woman will keep having abortions and abortion providers will keep saving the women's lives. And don't say they kill babies! There isn't nothing HUMAN about what they remove.

Get the facts straight! Planned Parenthood reduces more abortions than any healthcare provider.

GET IT RIGHT! you will NEVER TAKE AWAY OUR CHOICE!

Nice try. It's legal for a reason, sweets.

Posted by: Kathryn at March 23, 2005 04:01 PM

I am sorry, but COME ON! What do these pictures show, NOTHING!

You could find these same pictures in any hospital room! Ortho office would have the same thing!

Doesn't mean there are BABIES in there!

YOU NUTS! You are sick, sad people and I will continue to PRAY FOR YOU!

Posted by: Marty at March 23, 2005 06:36 PM

I heard this website reference on the radio today.

Let me just say, I believe in God, I am a republican, and I am a catholic-

But, I do NOT agree with your website.

I am Pro-Choice because I want to save children and women's lives.

That is all I have to say- besides you have a lot of misinformation on this website.

Posted by: Sandra at March 23, 2005 08:15 PM

I'm Christian but i dont beleive in denying women abortions. Tell a woman or girl that has been raped or the wmoan or girl that addicted to drugs or alcohol and will do it while pregnant to keep the baby. I myslef would abort a baby from rape. You can bring up whatveer point you want but it wouldnt change my mind
If you want to save children adopt children who have been abused and thrown away in orphanages and been to several foster homes. What about them they are alive and here and need help now so practice what you preach and save those children. What? Not going to?
Yeah, i thought so.

Posted by: Lana at March 24, 2005 11:54 AM

I believe in my God and my God does not judge me. He allows me to make CHOICES. No ONE is PRO-ABORTION and I am saddened that you got that titled of PRO-LIFE because we ARE ALL PRO-LIFE!

I am pro-family planning, I am pro-child, I am pro-woman and I am PROUDLY a woman of God who is PRO CHOICE.

If you would work on all the children in this world that need adopting or fed, as you do this issue, there would be a lot more cared for children.

Pathetic. God have mercy on all of you.

Pro-Choice.

Posted by: Carolyn Daniels at March 25, 2005 01:48 PM

Woman should have a choice and you are NOT a credible source for women to come and find information. Your leader was arrested for taking part of a child and waving it in front of a Planned Parenthood last April- looks like the apple doesn't fall far from the tree.

Yikes, you all need help.

Having an abortion is not anything, anybody wants, but it is legal for a reason! Get a life and start helping babies that are uncared for instead of waving partial babies in front of people's faces. Sick, you are very sick people.

God have mercy on your souls.

Posted by: Sylvia Thomas at March 25, 2005 08:35 PM

are any of you against ultrasound???

Posted by: spork at March 30, 2005 11:13 PM

What on earth do ultrasounds have to do with any of this? You'll have to explain that because it seams extremely irrelevent.

Posted by: ababyonce at March 31, 2005 09:37 AM

HAHA You people are pathetic. You look at some bloody pictures and then point a blaming finger at who? At women in trouble. Raped women too. And you DARE blame them for murder based on some religious crap. Luckily USA is the only place you are allowed to be as stupid as you folks, and luckily we don't have a G.W.Bush in Finland.

You should all have been aborted

Thanks.

Posted by: someone at April 7, 2005 03:26 AM

to "someone"
We are not the ones going around killing our children. Only 1% of abortions are because of rape. 3% are because the children could not be afforded. The rest are for very selfish reasons alone. I am not pathetic I only feel that these babies are put in these wombs for a reason. You are a very heartless person. I only hope that you get your just punishment. You are cruel and hateful. Your carma is going to bite you in the ass and I hope it hurts like hell.

Posted by: ababyonce at April 8, 2005 11:05 AM

You people are the problem, not the solution. Your ignorance, and skewed "facts" are brainwashing many of the general public. People have the right to make their own choices. If you look in your little book there, YOUR "god" gave mankind free will, and that in turn means that people can make up their minds to do as they see fit, per your god. Your god gave us that right. Now while I don't personally subscribe to the whole "abortion as a means of birth control" I do feel that women should have the option. It's not my body nor yours so here's an idea, why don't you just SHUT YOUR FUKIN' IGNORANT, RETARDED MOUTHS!!! Eat my sh1t, @ss-bags...

Posted by: BBJ at April 8, 2005 01:00 PM

bbj,i think you are right,so does that mean if you have a child that is born you have the free will to kill it because you to not want to take care of it,it should be free will to kill your child at any age if you to not want it,if you do why should the cops say anything it was your child you killed,im sure everyone would understand you right to make a choice

Posted by: jackson at April 9, 2005 10:12 PM

God gave us freewill but that doesn't make these things right. It is every Christian's job to try and help as many people to see the light as we can. I should not have said the things I said in my last posting. I apologize. I was outa line. It just angers me to hear about all these abortions. There are so many other ways. It makes me cry to think of all the little babies that could have been. I don't think that women who have abortions are bad people, I just wish they were a little more conciderate of the life they carry. Regardless of whether or not it is fully formed it is alive. If I have hurt the feelings of any woman I AM SORRY! I do not wish to pass judgement on you. God knows I have sinned. The bible says he who hath not sinned shall cast thy first stone. Well, I won't be throwing any.
I only hope that those of you have had abortions and are looking for someone to talk to find a true friend to lean on. Those fo you who are yet to have an abortion and are questioning it try to find someone who has had one before. Maybe they can talk to you and halp you when you need it.
By the way: that was very well put Jackson.

Posted by: ababyonce at April 11, 2005 09:24 AM


I personally am not religious. I don't push my darwin -scientific beliefs upon others. I expect those who believe in "god" and "heaven and hell" to keep it to themselves and not push their beliefs upon me. If a woman chooses to have a pregnancy terminated its her own business. Those who dont believe in abortions should keep heir religious lifestyle to themselves. Mind your own business or get a social life.

Posted by: Michael at April 15, 2005 01:02 AM

Personally I think all you religious anti-abortion people are a little crazy to think you can force your beliefs upon anyone you want. People like you make the U.S. nervous by thinking that murder and arson are acceptable ways to express a thought

Posted by: Duke at April 15, 2005 01:06 AM

Mike and Duke, Your belief that it is ok to kill unborn babies is very self-serving and very convenient to you personally should you ever impregnate someone.

And by the way, I would be pro-life if I was an athiest because of the BIOLOGICAL FACTS of prenatal development and the violence of the abortion procedures. In fact, you should check out the MANY non-religious pro-life groups like Athiests for Life, Democrats for life, Wiccans for LIfe, Agnostics for Life, Pro-Life Gays and Lesbians, Liberals for Life, Feminists for Life....need I go on.

So my question to you both is when are YOU going to stop forcing YOUR beliefs on helpless babies?

Posted by: kris miller at April 15, 2005 02:45 PM

abortion is murder ,a crime to the innocent and abortion is a mans issue too. What about half of all the people dying from abortions are MALE (half of the babies aborted are MALE) ,and what about all the fathers who have no say in the matter ,someone can MURDER their baby and they can't do anything about it!People need to stop being so selfish !!! An adults TEMPORARY inconvience of carrying a baby to term is NEVER and I repeat NEVER justifies taking a beautiful life of an innocent child ! People talk all about choice ,nobody asked the preborn baby if it wanted to be pulled a part and tortured ,nobody gave them a choice ,or the chance we all deserve, the right to LIVE ,

Posted by: julie at April 19, 2005 02:11 PM

I would of been a good candidate for the slaughter houses(A.K.A TILLER THE KILLER) I was pregnant at 15 , before the baby was born they said she might have down sydrome but I still didnt want her to DIE needlessly so I said if she was downsyndrome then I would adopt her out,well guess what they were wrong she is Perfectly normal if I had aborted her it would of been the worst mistake of my life! 2weeks
after my 16 birthday, I had a beautiful healthy babygirl who deserves to live just as much as I do! she just turned 9 and she is healthy,smart well adjusted girl who is happy to be alive oh and by the way I never once regret having her she lights up the room and to think that she could be decaying in one of those buckets is absolutly disgusting and repulsive . Howcan people justify this holocaust???????

Posted by: julie at April 19, 2005 02:28 PM
Post a comment
Comments are welcome. Please keep your comments to the topic or story at hand. ORW reserves the right to remove any comment for whatever reason. While some opposing views are tolerated for the purposes of discussion, this is not a place to verbally attack ORW or it's supporters. Thank you for understanding.










Remember personal info?