Forums before death by AOL, social media and spammers... "We can't have nice things"
|    rec.drugs.misc    |    Misc. recreational drugs    |    5,419 messages    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
|    Message 5,359 of 5,419    |
|    Bobbie Sellers to Intelligent Party    |
|    Re: THERE IS NO GHOST IN THE FETUS IN TH    |
|    06 May 23 13:36:20    |
      XPost: alt.activism.drug-war, talk.politics.drugs, uk.politics.drugs       XPost: alt.drugs, rec.drugs.smart       From: bliss@mouse-potato.com              On 5/6/23 00:39, Intelligent Party wrote:       > There is no ghost in the fetus in the first 17.333 Weeks = FOUR MONTHS.                      No evidence of any ghost at any stage of life from conception to death.        The so-called immortal soul is just a way to con the believer and make       them submissive to the dictates of organized religion's grift.               I won't bother with the rest of your remarks because in many respects I       agree.              >       > Women with FOUR MONTHS to abort, who do not abort; are COMMITTED to the       > pregnancy, and do not seek an abortion after four months. (While in       > illegal unholy States, women WITHOUT four months to abort, may still be       > seeking an abortion, after four months, as they have been DENIED, their       > human right to abortion).       >       > After FOUR MONTHS, of ability to abort, some women may still seek to       > abort a HANDICAPPED fetus. But there is likely NO GHOST in a       > handicapped fetus, BECAUSE the ghost comes in, BETWEEN four months and       > birth, and why would a ghost enter a handicapped fetus, until the last       > minute!?       >       > Furthermore, you have an ABSOLUTE right to separate your body,       > absolutely, so forced surrogate mothers of a handicapped fetus, is a CRIME!       >       > Would you bring a handicapped baby into the world, and tell it to live       > its whole entire life handicapped from birth? Even if there WAS a ghost       > in the fetus at some point, it looses WHAT? by reincarnating? It looses       > it's body, it's intelligence, it's property, it's friends, it's career;       > it has none! If your ONE YEAR OLD, got in an accident and lost its arms       > and its legs, would you put it to death, for its own sake? Would you       > wait until it was FIVE, to say, maybe you should take these suicide       > pills or a do a Heroin overdose tonight?       >       > Yet infant male Circumcision is a CRIME. Female Genital mutilation is a       > CRIME. Sexual assignment surgery of infant Hermaphrodites/Intersex is a       > CRIME. Female genital mutilation is like cutting the male dickhead       > off. Infant male circumcision is like trimming an infant female's pussy       > lips. Doing this to a baby is like doing this to an ADULT AGAINST THEIR       > WILL. All three atrocities are obviously against the Hippocratic oath       > and should be OUTLAWED!       >       > Yet the RELIGIOUS RIGHT, believe in life before life, and life after       > death, so why would they believe, you come out of a zygote? Every       > religion confirms reincarnation. (Jesus confirmed John the Baptist is       > the reincarnation of Elijah. Reincarnation is not the only option, yet a       > common choice.)       >       > It's all population vs. property; it's all labor vs. capital. Poverty       > and unequal poverty are the root of all kinds of evil, and       > overpopulation is the root of poverty. Overpopulation is the scourge of       > our nation! Bankrupt unskilled immigrants, from poor countries, are let       > in by Democrats, and Bankrupt unskilled unplanned children, are let in       > by Republicans! Both parties are OUT OF IT, and deserve redemption!       >       > Yet we SHOULD have FREE ABORTIONS, in the FIRST FOUR MONTHS, for       > EVERYONE, but parental consent is a CRIME! EVERY TEEN HAS AN ABSOLUTE       > RIGHT TO ABORTION, WITHOUT THEIR PARENTS PERMISSION, NOR NOTIFICATION!       > Further, children are meant to be BROUGHT UP, and not belittled, eleven       > year olds are adults, and should be treated as such, and afforded the       > EQUAL RIGHTS OF MAN.       >       > Yet if you do not use birth control, you will get pregnant tonight, in a       > single sex act. Use hormonal plus one, of either condoms, pull-out, or       > diaphragm, OR use all the other three, condoms, pull-out, and diaphragm,       > concurrently.       >       > For on the pill alone, in twelve years, you will be pregnant.       >       > For sporadic sex, Men should use condoms and pull-out concurrently.       > For ongoing sex, men should use hormonal plus one, or all the other       > three, concurrently.       > For both sporadic and ongoing sex, Women should always use hormonal plus       > one, or all the other three concurrently, since they initially have no       > control over pull-out anyway, to keep it simple.       >       > While using hormonal birth control, should basically be a woman's       > independent choice; AS ONLY 25% of women actually are ON hormonal birth       > control, and IUDs; its basically going to be condoms and the pull-out       > method, or you additionally get a diaphragm going, or bring back the       > Today Sponge, to the market, who's patent has expired, and anyone can       > now commercially produce (or add the rhythm method).       >       > For sporadic sex, men merely use condoms and pull-out.       >       > For ongoing sex, men use HORMONAL PLUS ONE, or all the other three, of       > condoms and pull-out and diaphragm.       >       > Women always use hormonal plus one, or all the other three of condoms       > and pull-out and diaphragm (to remain simple, as control over the       > pull-out with a new friend is limited anyway).       >       > (so there are two analytical questions: 1) whether ongoing or sporadic,       > and 2) whether using hormonal or not; means four possibilities).       >       > What actually *is* sporadic, is a question: While the number of sex       > acts used to determine the risks is 80-100 per year, (eight per month),       > it MAY be, that as few as just TWO acts per month (24 per year) may       > actually make it just as dangerous as eight times per month. 30% of       > couples, trying, get pregnant in 1 month, 30% in 3 months, 20% in 6       > months, 20% in 12 months or longer.       >       > Women who do not have access to either hormonal or a diaphragm, may want       > to consider learning the rhythm methods, and using condoms and pull-out,       > two weeks out of month when safe, and abstaining from intercourse other       > two weeks. This makes for TWO methods, rhythm and condoms, INITIALLY,       > and then THREE when, control over pull-out is more possible with an       > ongoing more trusted partner.       >       > And keeping semen out of orifices is a general good idea for sporadic       > sex. And for sporadic sex you want condoms for STDs.       >       > So for ongoing, you have more sex, which makes it more dangerous for       > pregnancy, but you don't have to worry as much about STDs (assuming you       > have only one partner) especially if you get tested for HIV, Gonorrhea,       > Chlamydia, & Syphilis. (NO tests for Herpes, Crabs, Scabies,       > Trichomoniasis; but be vaccinated for HPV/Warts & Hepatitis A and B).       >       > Sex is a positive holy religious activity, which should NOT be       > condemned, but unsafe sex is immoral, for unplanned childbirth is the       > scourge of nations. Thus, slut pride, not slut shame!       >              [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