Post Reply
Page 2 of 2  •  Prev 1 2
Switch to Forum Live View Is Your State a Grade, "A" ? Check out the NARAL States map and see how choice makes the grade
4 years ago  ::  Aug 06, 2010 - 6:12PM #11
faith713
Posts: 3,892

Aug 6, 2010 -- 1:34PM, Weepingangelofthetrees wrote:


Aug 5, 2010 -- 12:39PM, faith713 wrote:


Aug 4, 2010 -- 8:38PM, Weepingangelofthetrees wrote:


State Profiles *LINK*


 


I have to admit I thought I'd clicked my way into a time machine, and regressed back to the 1920's when I investigated that map. Then I realized, no! I just happened to check out Utah!  


How does your State rank!? If you're pro-child and pro-choice, keep your eyes open and your rights on par. Check out your State's "Bill Tracker".  Freedom means not living by other peoples permission, when you as a free woman decide to choose your future. No matter how hard some work at forcing you to agree to the contrary, it was always a choice before it was ever a child.




You have the "freedom and choice" to abort for now, just be courageous and honest enough to finish the sentence:


I have the "choice and freedom" to end the life of my son or daughter who is growing helplessly in my womb.



Dear, I will always have the freedom to choose! No one alive will force me to remain pregnant against my will. The laws be damned. If they take away the right to choose in my State, I would go to one that provides the choice. And if there ever comes a time when there is no choice, there are far too many herbal concoctions at my disposal and to my knowledge, to insure I am forced to incubate against my will. 


Madame, you are free in ways that you never should be, for now. Yes, it is always your unjustifiable "choice" to poison your offspring. 


This is America! Not Iran.


 America is worse by condemning a son or daughter to death. Whereas Iranian citizens at least let their sons live.


And it is not a son nor a daughter, growing in the womb. It's a zygote, an embryo, a parasite in the truest definition. It's not a living soul, according to the Bible, until it draws it's first breath. It's not a human nor a citizen, by law, until it's born.


Why do PCers need to dishonestly/ignorantly define a ZEF as a parasite? 


 





"Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me."--John14:6

For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life.-- John 3:16

"We love Him because He first loved us."--1 John 4:9-10

"There is no fear in love; but perfect love casteth out fear ... "
1 John 4:18
Quick Reply
Cancel
4 years ago  ::  Aug 06, 2010 - 9:00PM #12
Weepingangelofthetrees
Posts: 2,053

Aug 6, 2010 -- 6:12PM, faith713 wrote:


Aug 6, 2010 -- 1:34PM, Weepingangelofthetrees wrote:


Aug 5, 2010 -- 12:39PM, faith713 wrote:


Aug 4, 2010 -- 8:38PM, Weepingangelofthetrees wrote:


State Profiles *LINK*


 


I have to admit I thought I'd clicked my way into a time machine, and regressed back to the 1920's when I investigated that map. Then I realized, no! I just happened to check out Utah!  


How does your State rank!? If you're pro-child and pro-choice, keep your eyes open and your rights on par. Check out your State's "Bill Tracker".  Freedom means not living by other peoples permission, when you as a free woman decide to choose your future. No matter how hard some work at forcing you to agree to the contrary, it was always a choice before it was ever a child.




You have the "freedom and choice" to abort for now, just be courageous and honest enough to finish the sentence:


I have the "choice and freedom" to end the life of my son or daughter who is growing helplessly in my womb.



Dear, I will always have the freedom to choose! No one alive will force me to remain pregnant against my will. The laws be damned. If they take away the right to choose in my State, I would go to one that provides the choice. And if there ever comes a time when there is no choice, there are far too many herbal concoctions at my disposal and to my knowledge, to insure I am forced to incubate against my will. 


Madame, you are free in ways that you never should be, for now. Yes, it is always your unjustifiable "choice" to poison your offspring.


You are frightening in your zeal for terrorism. I'm free in ways I never should be for now?!


Dear, the likes of your agenda will never change that, I assure you.  Your ideology is what has been the seed behind every civil right fight in America , from her inception 234 years ago. Your attitude is what compells women to fight for freedom, contrary to your belief women are entitled to be free. You are fully entitled to enslave yourself to an ideology and abdicate your personal privacy.
But in this free country madame, you will never be permitted to succeed.

And I realize, those bearing zealous agenda's like you example, resort to murder in order to effect their intent to command the female sex unto forced pregnancy quite against the individual woman's will. That proves the proactive agenda for life is a vicious lie. Born on the backs of babies, as the cause for terrorism, fascism, sexism and the ernest desire that this free Democratic Republic be coerced unto a platform like unto a Theocracy, even in spirit if not by policy.
You example the mind set of those persons who imagined long ago that it was against god, to give women the right to vote. To be entitled to employment, inheretence, and equality with men. That today, the last society in this free country, gays, are deserved of everything that happens against them by law, because they are an abomination. You imagine that freedom, is only codified by what you yourself agree defines it as such. And that your moral ideology is good enough for all women to live up to.


 


You're wrong!


And you'll live till the day you die, fighting against a community of strong independent sisters, who will prove that to you every step of the way. WE WILL NEVER GO BACK!
And we will never live up to your ideal that we are not entitled to be free to choose, just because we can get pregnant and choose not to be mothers.






This is America! Not Iran.


 America is worse by condemning a son or daughter to death. Whereas Iranian citizens at least let their sons live.


While daughteres are expendable.
"At least..." Why is it not surprising that you would think it good that a terrorist monotheistic ideology that compells such evil, has a redeeming quality in letting the males live. When of course you believe this American society should command women unto relinquishing their right of choice, by law, and no matter what!?


And it is not a son nor a daughter, growing in the womb. It's a zygote, an embryo, a parasite in the truest definition. It's not a living soul, according to the Bible, until it draws it's first breath. It's not a human nor a citizen, by law, until it's born.


Why do PCers need to dishonestly/ignorantly define a ZEF as a parasite?


Probably so as to watch PLer hypocrites twist, when they prove they're always too ignorant to look up the word; "Parasite" .




 


That women are legally permitted to live free to choose, enrages the likes of the proactive anti-woman agenda to no end. They imagine their personal choice should be forced upon every fertile woman alive, whether they like it or not. And they call that freedom, and choice in the same breath. Fascinating. It's the same evil that has born every seed in the Civil Rights fight to bear, and it will never stop. That fight against hate for individual freedom. That fear to live one's personal life and mind no one else's business by insisting they live up to one's personal standards, or else suffer the consequences. 


That agenda that says, you're as free as we permit you to be and in no wise are you entitled to think otherwise, is the mindset that was extant in the dark ages. When that same cowardly frightened platform, hanged people who dissented, burned them, or guillotined them, in the name of sending a message. Conform or die. And now in the 21st century it's here again. Only it's a bit cowed, in it's thirst for blood, because life without parole can be a strong deterrent, for many.


Now it's a matter of making insane statements like, you are free in ways that you never should be, for now. 


The great revenge effected against that level of mental illness and terrorist agenda is, yes! I am! I am free! Without your permission, forever!


 


And for all these long years, American women have been so, quite against your will. And proudly without your permission. Your America is not a free country. It's Iran, Afghanistan, China. It's  one who's politicians and women bow to the pressure of terrorism, so that all women live up to one ideal, that is so weak it's afraid of letting them live their choices.

We will never bow again. I promise you. Smile






 


 


 


"Remember, Jesus would rather constantly shame gays than let orphans have a family."
Stephen Colbert
Quick Reply
Cancel
4 years ago  ::  Aug 07, 2010 - 3:27PM #13
faith713
Posts: 3,892

Aug 6, 2010 -- 9:00PM, Weepingangelofthetrees wrote:


 Probably so as to watch PLer hypocrites twist, when they prove they're always too ignorant to look up the word; "Parasite" .



A parasite is not the same species as its host, in reality the ZEF does not fit the biological definition of a parasite since it is human like its mother:


Parasitism is, like most other animal associations defined in terms of two different species, who form a regular association, although this seems sensible, and it does exclude consideration of the mammalian foetus as being parasitic upon its mother...
http:// www.aber.ac.uk/~mpgwww/Edu/Para_ism/PaIsmTxt.html 


Why are you so unable/unwilling to accept that fact?




 


Aug 6, 2010 -- 9:00PM, Weepingangelofthetrees wrote:


That women are legally permitted to live free to choose, enrages the likes of the proactive anti-woman agenda to no end. 




Actually, the original founders of woman's rights were against abortion:


Victoria Woodhull 


"Every woman knows if she were free, she would never bear an unwished-for child, nor think of murdering one before its birth."


Elizabeth Cady Stanton 
"When we consider that woman are treated as property, it is degrading to women that we should Treat our children as property to be disposed of as we see fit." 


Did they also have a "proactive anti-woman agenda"?



"Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me."--John14:6

For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life.-- John 3:16

"We love Him because He first loved us."--1 John 4:9-10

"There is no fear in love; but perfect love casteth out fear ... "
1 John 4:18
Quick Reply
Cancel
4 years ago  ::  Aug 07, 2010 - 7:23PM #14
Marysara722
Posts: 2,548

Aug 7, 2010 -- 3:27PM, faith713 wrote:

Actually, the original founders of woman's rights were against abortion:


Victoria Woodhull 


"Every woman knows if she were free, she would never bear an unwished-for child, nor think of murdering one before its birth."


Elizabeth Cady Stanton 
"When we consider that woman are treated as property, it is degrading to women that we should Treat our children as property to be disposed of as we see fit." 


Did they also have a "proactive anti-woman agenda"?


What you keep refusing to realize here faith, with those Suffrage Sisters, was not about abortion.  They were for women TAKING their own reproductive matters under their own CONTROL.   IOW, they WERE, no matter how you look at it, totally for choice.
For women to CHOOSE WHEN they themselves WANTED to HAVE SEX.
For women to CHOOSE WHEN they themselves DESIRED to become pregnant. 
For women to CHOOSE to SPACE their children out, and not every 10 months apart.
And not at the command of their husbands, boyfriends, lovers, etc. within their lives.

What part of that can't you understand about those Suffrage years since 1848?
It was ALL ABOUT women controlling their own lives which included their reproductive matters as well.  Especially since THAT ruled the majority of a woman's life because it was made up mostly by our reproductive years back then when women tended to die early deaths because their bodies were run down from bearing umpteen children on end and with no end in sight for some of them. [One of my own great-grandmothers was still producing children in her mid 40's while at the same time, her oldest child (a daughter) was producing her own children.  My youngest great-aunts & uncles are in the same age-range as the oldest 1st cousins.]


Please remember, that back then, women WERE NOT ALLOWED TO SAY NO to the sexual demands of her partner!
A woman could have been taken anywhere & anytime her husband [man] so desired & commanded. 
Regardless if she only gave birth 4 weeks ago, if he wanted sex, he took it. 
If she were sick with a flu and he wanted sex, he just took it. 
If she were 3 weeks away from giving birth and he wanted sex, then he just took it. 
If he beat her up and she was all bruised & battered but he still wanted sex, then by his god, he would just take it!  After all, IT WAS his god-given RIGHT!


That was their point back then.  Women were not only slaves but they were sexual objects & sexual slaves as well.
So speak to that point faith and then see what really have when you quote those Suffrage Sisters of 1848.  I've read many of their books and biographies about them and believe me, abortion wasn't on their radar in the way that today's so-called Pro-LifeMovement would like to make every women think they were.
It's a farce and the PLM knows it!


And since the topic of this thread is about each State of the Union's Report Card that still involves reproductive matters/issues for women today, 160 years later, I think it's pretty pitiful that these used-car-salesmen who think they're politicians that can still command women's lives today.  A century and one half later plus another decade since the Suffrage Sisters started their battles.   And today's Conservative/Repulican women who are against women having their own control over their own reproductive matters/issues are just like those other women of Yester-Century who fought against the 1848 Seneca Falls Suffrage Sisters. 
If it were up to those other women back then, we wouldn't of had the VOTE in 1920!

Quick Reply
Cancel
4 years ago  ::  Aug 07, 2010 - 10:18PM #15
Bei1052
Posts: 986

The above post is revisionist history in the worst way. It's a fact that the early feminists were against abortion. Because you can't dispute this fact, you instead argue that they didn't consider it a big deal, as when compared to other issues, which doesn't make anything Faith typed out false.

Quick Reply
Cancel
4 years ago  ::  Aug 14, 2010 - 1:51PM #16
Marysara722
Posts: 2,548

Aug 7, 2010 -- 10:18PM, Bei1052 wrote:

The above post is revisionist history in the worst way.


Really?  Well for the love of John, how so?
Or perhaps instead of providing your personal opinion, would you care to provide a rebuttal then?  If at all.

<<< It's a fact that the early feminists were against abortion. >>>


Again, please provide some facts other then one [or two] sentences [sound bytes] taken out of context in relation to the whole picture involving Women's Rights that the PLM has taken from entire letters, books, speeches and articles involving the whole Women's Rights Movements from those earlier days of when.


<<< Because you can't dispute this fact, you instead argue that they didn't consider it a big deal, as when compared to other issues >>>


Well which was it? --And yet here you are just providing your opinion and not "disputing" anything at all but "you instead argue" against me personally "instead" of providing a factual rebuttal. 
So, once again, which was it?
Was or wasn't abortion their main focus or not within the general scheme of the various Women's Movements since the 1700's and foward to 1920? [And I would say that it includes America as well as The Mother Country of England if one wants to get real technical.]


<<< which doesn't make anything Faith typed out false.  >>


I take anything that's said with a grain of salt.  It melts when you throw hot [or cold] water on it.

Quick Reply
Cancel
4 years ago  ::  Aug 18, 2010 - 12:37AM #17
Bei1052
Posts: 986

Because, as has been pointed out to you, the assertion was that the original feminists were against abortion. Because you cannot dispute this fact (Honestly. Do you really want to get into a quote mine war, of which you will lose?), you turn around argue something to the effect of, "Well, sure they didn't hold favorable views of abortion, but it wasn't a big part of their movement", to which the inevitable response is "So what?". The point is that they were against abortion, which is what Faith said. You're just trying to play revisionist history because what Faith stated is historically and factually accurate.


 


 


edited by justme333 to conform to local board guidelines

Moderated by Justme333 on Aug 18, 2010 - 02:11AM
Quick Reply
Cancel
Page 2 of 2  •  Prev 1 2
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing
    Advertisement

    Beliefnet On Facebook