XPost: alt.abortion, alt.abortion.inequity, alt.flame.bill-clint   
   n.abortion.partial-birth   
   XPost: alt.support.abortion   
   From: wxpprofessional@msn.com   
      
   "Mark Sebree"  wrote in message   
   news:1139349936.232200.273810@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...   
   >   
   > askme@bellsouth.net wrote:   
   >> On 7 Feb 2006 13:46:35 -0800, "Mark Sebree"    
   >> wrote:   
   >>   
   >> >   
   >> >Johnny wrote:   
   >> >> "Mark Sebree"  wrote in message   
   >> >> news:1139346829.682781.53040@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...   
   >> >> >   
   >> >> > Johnny wrote:   
   >> >> >> Since the judges who ruled that partial birth abortions are   
   >> >> >> unconstitutional, we know where to look for the culprits of these   
   >> >> >> fires.   
   >> >> >   
   >> >> > Among the anti-choice people that you adore would be a good start.   
   >> >>   
   >> >> Stop trying to shift the blame, asshole.   
   >> >>   
   >> >   
   >> >I am not shifting the blame.  The fires that you want to throw people   
   >> >into should have people like anti-choice advocates and bigots like you   
   >> >thrown into it to start with.   
   >> >   
   >> >> > You don't even understand the reason why the acts were ruled   
   >> >> > unconstituional.   
   >> >>   
   >> >> I do understand.   
   >> >   
   >> >Then prove it by not stating that women should die.  Try finding out   
   >> >WHY Intact Dialation and Extractions are done, and then try giving some   
   >> >alternatives that do not result in the death of the woman.  And yes,   
   >> >without the abortion, the woman will almost certainly die.  That is why   
   >> >she is getting the abortion.  The other reason is that the fetus is   
   >> >already dead and starting to decompose inside her body, another   
   >> >circumstance that can cause her death.   
   >>   
   >> ok if there is no heartbeat aborting could be an option   
   >   
   > As it is when the woman does not want to remain pregnant.  As it is   
   > when the pregnancy goes wrong and the woman is subjected to greater   
   > than normal danger from the pregnancy or the fetus is non-viable.   
   >   
   >>   
   >> but if you have one it is a living being   
   >>   
   >   
   > Your point?  The woman is not a slave nor a walking incubator.  She is   
   > a free person, and her life and opinion comes first.   
      
   Why do you think that men are supposed to be enslaved to your crap?   
      
   > The embryo/fetus can only use her body with her continuous permission.   
      
   Wrong. The embryo/fetus needs no permission from the woman.   
   How do you think its life began?   
   Do you think it sought permission from the female first?   
      
   > Once that is retracted, assuming that it was ever given, then the woman is   
   > free to   
   > take whatever means are necessary to end her pregnancy.   
      
   Too bad you never asked the fetus what it wanted.   
      
   > Her life, her body, her choice.   
      
   Its life, its body, its choice.   
   Why do you promote denial so much of individuals?   
      
   >>   
   >> Please come to Pelzer for some worship!   
   >   
   > Why would I want to do something stupid like that, especially if you   
   > are a typical example of the results of their brainwashing?   
      
   Your brain is what has been washed over with ignorance.   
   How did you let it sink in and take hold?   
      
   > Mark Sebree   
   >   
   > [meaningless drivel snipped]   
      
   Musta been something you wrote.   
   >   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)