Forums before death by AOL, social media and spammers... "We can't have nice things"
|    alt.out-of-body    |    I guess everyone needs a self-vacation    |    7,897 messages    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
|    Message 7,827 of 7,897    |
|    Richard Silk to Voter    |
|    Re: Aborting in the First Three Months i    |
|    16 Jul 18 05:34:44    |
      From: dicksilk@gmail.com              Choosing "LIFE" for the mother while simultaneously choosing "DEATH" for the       child is hypocrisy. Hypocrisy rips the soul into pieces, bit by bit.              Of course, libtards are far too stupid to comprehend this, but that's their       problem.              On Monday, July 16, 2018 at 2:42:56 AM UTC-5, Voter wrote:       > Aborting a fetus in the first three months is not only 100% moral, but it is       > immoral not to abort. There is no brain in the fetus for the first three       months,       > and no ghost either. If you read people's stories of memories of being in       the       > womb, they have real memories of being babies alive in the womb. These same       > people yet have memories of reincarnation - of being a Ghost and then being       in the       > womb for less than 9 months. Of being in the womb probably no more than five       > months at most. Read their stories. _IF_ there is no brain, and no ghost,       in the       > fetus, then not aborting is making a decision to get pregnant. While       obviously       > the day before the baby is born, it is just two people attached, but you       have a       > right to detach your body, vs. an ethical requirement to throw someone a       rope.       > Carrying a baby who eats your body for 6 months is more onerous than throwing       > someone a rope. It is perhaps closer to jumping into an icy cold river to       save       > someone. Someone you don't want or know. If you were on a 6 month trek       through       > the wilderness, with only 2,000 calories per day to feed you, and you met a       > starving person, would you starve _with_ them, eating 1,000 calories for the       rest       > of your 6 month trek through the wilderness, to emerge skinny and weak, but       alive?       > Would it be a crime not to feed them? Carrying a baby is letting a baby eat       your       > body. What if the woman could just pull the fetus out of her? Would that       be a       > crime? You weren't born Siamese twins. Your body is not theirs. If you went       > through the Star Trek transporter and came out attached to someone, and they       were       > using your kidney, and their kidney didn't make the transport, and there was       6       > months to wait for a kidney, would you stay attached to this stranger for 6       months       > to let them live? What if you both had guns, and you were like, we're going       to go       > get detached, and they were like, no, we're not, and you were like, if you       kill       > me, you'll die, but if I kill you, I'll live. What if it was more than 6       months       > to wait for a kidney, like 9 years? What if you were in excruciating pain       that       > could only be relieved by separation, but they would die? What if you could       just       > pull yourself off of them, and they would die, and you would live? Would it       be a       > crime to do so? What if the woman could just pull the fetus out of her?        What if       > they could be detached from you, and re-attached to someone else to live?        Would       > those people be like paid surrogates, and does a fetus thus get free health       care,       > to bring all babies to life?       >       > What if aliens land and lay eggs, which crawl in our feet, or we ingest       > accidentally through fruit, and 3 foot by 8 inch caterpillars gestate in our       > stomachs, accidentally for over 3 years, until they finally crawl out our       mouths,       > and eventually turn into beautiful harmonic, human-sized butterflies who       teach the       > nations? And these butterflies are more intelligent than humans, and wholly       > benevolent and helpful. What if this accidental insemination happens       frequently.       >       > What if aliens land, and just generally infect everyone's legs with their       young.       >       > You can't abort a rapist's insemination any more than you can kill a 30 year       old       > product of rape, if you can't kill a normal fetus. A rapist's insemination       is as       > much a living person as a normal fetus is. And yet you have a right to       separate       > your body so far as I've suggested.       >       > What if a Siamese twin kills? Do they both go to prison? Has this ever       happened?       > Is the law not bunk, and is not self defense the solution? Should we not       be       > letting the chips fall where they may, and doing away with the law, to       replace it       > with an benevolent and helpful advocate which recognizes and promotes the       humanity       > in all humankind?       >       > _IF_ there is no brain, and no ghost, in the fetus, then not aborting is       making a       > decision to get pregnant. There's no person living in you for at least the       first       > three months. If you don't abort, it's just like you decided to get       pregnant. If       > a sperm and an egg were sitting next to each other in a petri dish, and then       the       > sperm impregnated the egg, would you believe, that was a human with a brain       and a       > ghost? Do you believe that you came out of a zygote? Are you a materialist,       > atheist, deathist who believes only in the material world? There is life       after       > death. There is life before life. The ghost enters the fetus at various       times in       > its development. This begs the question, could a baby be born without a       ghost;       > especially in Africa, where there are tons and tons of babies, and no one       would       > want to be born in Africa. But I imagine it would be born stillborn.       >       > Unplanned childbirth is the scourge of nations. Unplanned childbirth is the       cause       > of overpopulation. There are too many people for the property. There is not       > enough capital for the labor. Rather than a Holocaust as was caused by the       Great       > Depression, the solution is to stop unplanned pregnancies. The human race       is an       > animal like any other, that can kill off its habitat and resultingly die en       masse.       > Like a Kuala Bear group that needs to be culled, but the solution is to       stop       > unplanned pregnancy. 37% of American society is unplanned. Babies born to       > mother's who didn't plan them certainly face a life of likely greater       poverty and       > hardship. Drug abusers certainly don't practice abstinence if they are       reckless       > enough to abuse drugs. People using needles, and injecting Heroin, get       pregnant       > at 19. The last thing they need is a baby. The first thing they need is an       > abortion. This is not theoretical. This is solid fact. Only 40% of all       > unplanned pregnancies, or nearly 1 million are happily terminated in       abortion.       > Sadly, 60% of all unplanned pregnancies or 1.5 million, are not. 1.5       million out       > of 4 million babies born per year are unplanned. This is 37%. This is       > outrageous. This is certainly going to have a negative socio-economic       effect on       > our so-called civilization. Half the unplanned pregnancies and childbirths,              [continued in next message]              --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05        * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
(c) 1994, bbs@darkrealms.ca