Rhea

On the contrary - WE do not have any license. I do not have a license to perform an abortion. Our government REQUIRES me to have one to legally perform an abortion.

You do not need a license to "get" a skunk killed.
You do not need a license to "get" a baby killed.
You DO need a license to kill a skunk (I guess - where you live, not here though)
You DO need a license to "kill a baby".

So you can see where your claim about how oppressed you are because is untrue. Completely untrue and therefore a spurious claim about your alleged oppression.

capisce?

Spaz

damn that was fast, I corrected it as soon as I saw it, lol, I should have gotten that one right, I use html all the time

Radorth

No kiddin'. You learn something new at II every day.

As for Weathers, he can speak for himself. I could be wrong, but when he says "I did think about it for a few days," he seems rather unsure of how people would react. In any case I supposedly fit in your little "religious right" box, and I think his "article" is one of the longest lists of gratuitous assertions ever called an "article," but I would never send him hate mail. Does that surprise YOU?

Also, how does he know the "religious right" didn't see it? Does he just ASSUME they would send hate mail if they did? How else would he know? Maybe lots of them read it and wrote it off as unsupported nonsense, as I did, and didn't bother to write. It seems rather narcisistic to claim otherwise without factual evidence of who it got to or didn't.

Rad

NOGO

The right to abortion is not a license to kill babies.
A license to kill babies means that I can kill any babies, anywhere.

A woman walks into a hospital for a broken leg and the doctor decides to abort her baby because he has a license to kill babies.
Another woman walks into an abortion clinic and wants an abortion. The doctor gives her that service.

I am sure even you, Radorth, can see the difference. So don't talk nonsense.

On can say that women have the right to kill there own unborn babies and that is none of your business. It is called a right.

hezekiah jones

Originally posted by NOGO
... Radorth ... don't talk nonsense.

I don't really think it's fair to make such unreasonable demands on people.

Bree

<sigh>

The above conversation is rather entertaining, however, it is almost entirely outside the scope of the topic of this thread. If you'd like to continue, please do so either in PM or in another thread.

Radorth

Which effectively gives the woman a license to kill her baby. The next day she can be heavily fined for killing a skunk. Pick nits all you want. The law is a fool and has shown itself utterly useless in promoting human rights of any kind.

To a true blue legalist, there is no irony here. The law is worthy of worship if it secures such "rights" for inconvenienced mothers and skunks. I suppose vacuuming an 8.5 month partially born child's brains out is a "right" as well. It all depends on what the LAW says. Am I correct?

I suspect the word "right" has at least 100 different definitions on II, so this discussion is definitely nonsensical. Of course we all know what a great record "progressive" atheists have in protecting human rights, even to this day.

Is there an atheist pro-lifer in the house BTW? I certainly hope so.

Rad

Family Man

Fenton, if you want to know the Don McLean song, it's American Pie . It's a song primarily about the American music scene of the 1960's, but McLean, a Catholic, included some religious imagery in it.

Frankly, I've always wondered what he meant by "Can music save your mortal soul?"

Radorth

Oh he quite publically mentioned Jesus. In fact he said native Americans ought to to teach their children "above all the religion of Jesus Christ."

Yes he was careful not to offend anyone, just as Bush is. The fact that some atheist here are offended by Bush and not Washigton speaks volumes about their intellectual honesty IMO.

Rad

Biff the unclean

The Constitution plagarizes the earlier writings of Locke and especially Hooker, and the NT concept of "willing mutual submission" is the only reason it survives today IMO.
or
The law is a fool and has shown itself utterly useless in promoting human rights of any kind.

So Jesus wants you to have willing mutual submission to the law. That would include Roe vs Wade. You are calling Jesus a fool.