Pat Winstanley wrote:
In article ,
says...

(Psalm 36:9) The Bible makes it
clear that to Jehovah God the unborn child developing inside the womb
is far more than mere fetal tissue.



Yet the so called god also arranges for millions of foetuses and embryos
to die every year...

... what's good for the gander...

DYING and KILLING Pat. Two very different things.

You still don't (or won't) get it, do you?

In article ,
says...
(Psalm 36:9) The Bible makes it
clear that to Jehovah God the unborn child developing inside the womb
is far more than mere fetal tissue.


Yet the so called god also arranges for millions of foetuses and embryos
to die every year...

.... what's good for the gander...

On Thu, 19 May 2005 12:25:50 GMT, Thrasher Remailer
wrote:
.....

of the situation. Abortion is simply not the answer!

Who made you Lord High Dictator to decide what is or is not the answer
for millions of others? Especially given the massive bigotry you
display.

In article ,
says...
Pat Winstanley wrote:
In article ,
says...

(Psalm 36:9) The Bible makes it
clear that to Jehovah God the unborn child developing inside the womb
is far more than mere fetal tissue.



Yet the so called god also arranges for millions of foetuses and embryos
to die every year...

... what's good for the gander...

DYING and KILLING Pat. Two very different things.

If the woman kills an embryo because it dies having been removed from
her body, then your omnipotent, omniscient 'god' kills an embryo by
separting it from the woman's body.

Eitrhr both the woman and the god kill, or neither of them do....

You can't have it both ways! ;-))

Pat Winstanley wrote:
In article ,
says...

Pat Winstanley wrote:

In article ,
says...


(Psalm 36:9) The Bible makes it
clear that to Jehovah God the unborn child developing inside the womb
is far more than mere fetal tissue.



Yet the so called god also arranges for millions of foetuses and embryos
to die every year...

... what's good for the gander...

DYING and KILLING Pat. Two very different things.


If the woman kills an embryo because it dies having been removed from
her body, then your omnipotent, omniscient 'god' kills an embryo by
separting it from the woman's body.

Oh dear, dear me.

Eitrhr both the woman and the god kill, or neither of them do....

You can't have it both ways! ;-))

Paul Anderson wrote:
of the situation. Abortion is simply not the answer!

Who made you Lord High Dictator to decide what is or is not the
answer
for millions of others? Especially given the massive bigotry you
display.

A very interesting question. Here is another, Who supercedes the rights
of a parent if a teen, a minor, want to abort but does not want the
parents to know?

In article ,
says...
DYING and KILLING Pat. Two very different things.


If the woman kills an embryo because it dies having been removed from
her body, then your omnipotent, omniscient 'god' kills an embryo by
separting it from the woman's body.

Oh dear, dear me.


Indeed... you are the one that describes the separation of an
embryo/foetus from a woman's body as 'killing'. And that's exactly what
your god is claimed to do!

Oh dear, poor two-faced you! ;-))

Pat Winstanley wrote:
In article ,
says...

DYING and KILLING Pat. Two very different things.


If the woman kills an embryo because it dies having been removed from
her body, then your omnipotent, omniscient 'god' kills an embryo by
separting it from the woman's body.

Oh dear, dear me.



Indeed... you are the one that describes the separation of an
embryo/foetus from a woman's body as 'killing'. And that's exactly what
your god is claimed to do!

Oh dear, poor two-faced you! ;-))

...and with that, Pat "Mad Bat" Winstanley exposed the tragic depths of
her psychotic sociopathy.

Thrasher Remailer wrote:
“When my pregnancy-test results came out positive,” recalls Judy,
“my boyfriend immediately demanded that I get an abortion. He even
gave me the money for it.” Judy was 17 years old.

It makes a joke of the idea that most women have much in the way of
"choice" when it comes to abortion, but that is whst these psychopathic
misogynists would have us believe, along with the idea that abortion has
no emotional or psychological ramifications.

On 19 May 2005 07:51:56 -0700, "Gantz" wrote:


Paul Anderson wrote:
of the situation. Abortion is simply not the answer!

Who made you Lord High Dictator to decide what is or is not the
answer
for millions of others? Especially given the massive bigotry you
display.

A very interesting question.

With, of course, no answer given.

Here is another, Who supercedes the rights
of a parent if a teen, a minor, want to abort but does not want the
parents to know?

What "rights of a parent" are you talking about? FWIW, I'm in
California so you can refer to the California Code for your citation:
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/calaw.html

Paul Anderson wrote:
On 19 May 2005 07:51:56 -0700, "Gantz" wrote:


Paul Anderson wrote:
of the situation. Abortion is simply not the answer!

Who made you Lord High Dictator to decide what is or is not the
answer
for millions of others? Especially given the massive bigotry you
display.

A very interesting question.

With, of course, no answer given.

Here is another, Who supercedes the rights
of a parent if a teen, a minor, want to abort but does not want the
parents to know?

What "rights of a parent" are you talking about? FWIW, I'm in
California so you can refer to the California Code for your citation:
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/calaw.html


I reviewd the codes pertinent. Did not find what I was looking for.
However in some state a pregnant minor can go to a school counselour to
request an abortion. They can go to a judge and a judge can order the
abortion without the parents ever knowing.

to answer your previous question it seem that certain legislative
bodies becomes "high lords" dictating policy even to Parents who
disagree. The constitution of the USA gives me the right to to voice my
opinion or to publish an opinion in agreement to mine stating:
Abortion is not the answer, or not the way, or it is dead wrong to
others who live in the borders of the United States, via a public
medium as Usenet.

Do you have a problem with this?

On 19 May 2005 14:45:13 -0700, "Gantz" wrote:


Paul Anderson wrote:
On 19 May 2005 07:51:56 -0700, "Gantz" wrote:


Paul Anderson wrote:
of the situation. Abortion is simply not the answer!

Who made you Lord High Dictator to decide what is or is not the
answer
for millions of others? Especially given the massive bigotry you
display.

A very interesting question.

With, of course, no answer given.

Here is another, Who supercedes the rights
of a parent if a teen, a minor, want to abort but does not want the
parents to know?

What "rights of a parent" are you talking about? FWIW, I'm in
California so you can refer to the California Code for your citation:
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/calaw.html


I reviewd the codes pertinent. Did not find what I was looking for.
However in some state a pregnant minor can go to a school counselour to
request an abortion. They can go to a judge and a judge can order the
abortion without the parents ever knowing.

The question was What "rights of a parent" are you talking about?
The question was not what can minors do.

to answer your previous question it seem that certain legislative
bodies becomes "high lords" dictating policy even to Parents who
disagree.

That does not answer the previous question as to Who made you Lord
High Dictator to decide what is or is not the answer for millions of
others? Which was in response to the claim that Abortion is simply
not the answer!

The constitution of the USA gives me the right to to voice my
opinion or to publish an opinion in agreement to mine stating:
Abortion is not the answer, or not the way, or it is dead wrong to
others who live in the borders of the United States, via a public
medium as Usenet.

Do you have a problem with this?

You did not state it as an opinion. I am asking you to support your
position or to admit that your opinion is a pile of crap. Do you have
a problem with that? (FWIW I do not expect either to happen.)

Paul Anderson wrote:
The question was What "rights of a parent" are you talking about?

The right of a parent to determine what a child to do with their body
regarding health issues.


to answer your previous question it seem that certain legislative
bodies becomes "high lords" dictating policy even to Parents who
disagree.

That does not answer the previous question as to Who made you Lord
High Dictator to decide what is or is not the answer for millions of
others? Which was in response to the claim that Abortion is simply
not the answer!

First I did not write article. I was reffering to my right to give an
opinion and use the writen article to reflect my way of thinking.
If I decide that abortion is not the answer, then the decision is made.
As for it being a load of crap, is an opinion by you, who as well as we
know, is not Lord High Dictator either, and since you are not him,
please find someone who has the authority to ask.