Pro-Life (6 views) Subscribe   
  From:  David (DavidABrown)    4/30/2001 8:00 pm  
To:  ALL   (1 of 71)  
 
  21.1  
 
*add your Pro-Life stories and events
Pro-Life
Genesis 1:27,28 So God created man in His own image, in the image of God created He him; male and female created He them. And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply (have lots and lots of babies)..


Psalm 139:14,16 I will praise Thee; for I am fearfully and wonderfully made: marvelous are thy works; and that my soul knoweth right well.. Thine eyes did see my substance, yet being unperfect; and in thy book all my members were written, which in continuance were fashioned, when as yet there was none of them.


Jeremiah 1:5 Before I (God) formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee, and I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations. 


The pro-life movement is the movement acknowledging that all human life is created in the image of God and is sacred to God. The individuals' lifespan is a work of God and needs to be committed to God. We as people do not end the life of other people no matter how young or how old or in what condition they are in. Being involved in Pro Life issues or any other, good, cause does not make us a Christian. Accepting the life of Jesus for our own personal sins reconciles us to God. There are many women who do not have an abortion and will never, remain in the presence of God, because of their own sin.


Unfortunately an abortion is nothing less than a satanic blood sacrifice to Satan. Satan desires the sacrifice of blood any blood; young, old, or middle aged. Abortion is a Satanic sacrifice to convince, choosing what is thought to be convenient, over love, obligation and responsibility. Psalm 127:3 Lo, children are a heritage of the LORD: and the fruit of the womb is His reward.


One of the major problems with abortion is that from the moment a woman becomes pregnant her body begins to radically change, creating hormones and chemicals that are involved in the pregnancy. When an abortion is preformed the woman's body does not know how to react to the sudden unexpected change of no longer carrying and caring for the baby. Without a baby the buildup of hormones and chemicals abruptly stops and now the woman's' body tells her that her child is missing. This is when the act of abortion becomes reality. It is now too late to do anything to undo the unfortunate choice, making the abortion experience even more devastating. This is where Post Abortion Stress occurs, when the physical, emotional, experience of the abortion becomes real. 


The one thing that can and should be done when an abortion has occurred is to turn to our Father in heaven. Our Father loves us. He has given humans the blessing to become one in reproduction, but God has not given us the authority over life and death. God has retained the important decisions for Himself. God alone will handle the spirit and soul of the unborn child. Sure we as people can make mistakes, but we cannot make a mistake that is to big to be committed to God. Our hope is in God who dwells in heaven, Job after the death of his children he was reunited with them in heaven.


We can't make right an abortion but God can and has, He died for us, and for the unborn as well, so that we can live together with Him in heaven. Let's not cheapen the sacrifice that Jesus has given for us, by saying that God's blood is not enough to cover our sins. The fact is, sinner's sin, God is not surprised by our actions, and He knows mankind. 


It is up to Christians to stand in this gap and to "Choose Life." One of the first functions of the early church in Rome was to rescue the babies and children left to die (their form of abortion) on the hills outside the city. 


Revelation 1:17,18 And when I (the Disciple John) saw Him (Jesus), I fell at His feet as dead. And He laid His right hand upon me, saying unto me, Fear not; I am the first and the last: I am He that liveth, and was dead; and behold, I am alive forevermore, Amen; and have the keys of hell and of death. 


Excerpt from
Basic Christian: Theology
By David A. Brown

Pro-Life Links:

National Right to Life

California Pro Life

Pro-Life Info: *Great e-mail Newsletter

Operation Save America

Operation Rescue, West

Yahoo, Pro-Life

Life Links

Pro-Life Links

Abortion Facts 




David A. Brown
Basic Christian: Forum
 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  BURRTON   5/17/2001 10:30 am  
To:  David (DavidABrown)    (2 of 71)  
 
  21.2 in reply to 21.1  
 
I believe the term might also 
be "anti-choice" as well as "pro-life". 
You appear to try to make your 
"choice" everyone elses as most Christians seem to do. 
They are right, everyone else is wrong, shame on you. 
 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
1.0 (2 votes) 
  
    
 


  From:  David (DavidABrown)    5/17/2001 11:15 am  
To:  BURRTON   (3 of 71)  
 
  21.3 in reply to 21.2  
 
The term is Pro-Life {Professing  Professor, for, in favor of} Life. 
The term choice is just another propaganda/spin term from people who are attempting to hide the truth about abortion. Fetus is also another term used to de-humanize babies in the womb, and attempt to legitimize abortion. 

Abortion is such a cruel & wicked way to treat defenseless little babies that abortion will Never be legitimate. Especially in the eyes of God. 





David A. Brown
Basic Christian: Forum
 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
5.0 (1 vote) 
  
    
 


  From:  R/C Floats (RachelsChild)   5/17/2001 11:39 am  
To:  David (DavidABrown)    (4 of 71)  
 
  21.4 in reply to 21.3  
 
Dear David.... 
I don't dispute your sentiments on abortion but what are your suggestions, answers to keep it from occuring? While it is neccesary and desirable to define a problem, finding solutions are more of a challenge. What do you say or do to help a woman who finds herself in an unplanned pregnancy?? Telling her the evils of abortion speaks the facts but does it really do much to change her circumstances or speak to her heart? 
R/C 


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Edited 5/17/01 2:40:45 PM ET by RACHELSCHILD 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
5.0 (1 vote) 
  
    
 


  From:  Bob Blaylock (Bob_Blaylock)   5/17/2001 12:16 pm  
To:  ALL   (5 of 71)  
 
  21.5 in reply to 21.2  
 
  I regard both the terms Pro-Life and Pro-Choice to be cowardly and dishonest euphemisms.  If you truly believe in the position you take, you should be willing to call this postion by a label which explictly and honestly represents what it is you are for or against.  Many who call themselves Pro-Life are in favour of killing in other circumstances, such as the death penalty for murderers.  Many who call themselves Pro-Choice are quite vehemently opposed to allowing people certain important choices, such as whether or not to exercise their Second Amendment right to carry a gun, where and how their children are to be educated, and numerous other vital choices regarding one's properties and businesses.

  I would describe myself as Anti-Abortion.  This is an honest label, which identifies what it is that I am opposed to.  I believe there is nothing wrong, nothing shameful, about being opposed to abortion, so I feel no need to hide this position behind a dishonest label like Pro-Life.

  Those who are in favour of abortion should similarly be honest, and describe themselves as Pro-Abortion.  If you truly feel there is nothing shameful or wrong about being in favour of abortion (or at least in favour of the right to an abortion) then there is no point to hide this position behind a cowardly and deceptive term like Pro-Choice.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 To email me, remove the string .nospam from the email address which appears below.  DO NOT send me any form of advertising, chain letters, or other such garbage.  Spammers will be dealt with very harshly!

bob-blaylock.nospam@usa.net  

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
5.0 (1 vote) 
  
    
 


  From:  BURRTON   5/17/2001 2:47 pm  
To:  David (DavidABrown)    (6 of 71)  
 
  21.6 in reply to 21.3  
 
In no way am I "for" abortion. 
I am, however, opposed to those telling me 
if it's something they don't like, no one else can do it either. 
I do believe there are circumstances where abortion could be 
justified, medical reasons, life-threatening either to the mother or the infant if the pregnancy should come full term. 
I don't think religion should be brought in to the discussion. 
Funny to me that a religion like Christianity, which as been responsible for the deaths of millions since it's beginings, should be concerned about the deaths of babies. Or maybe they just look at them as a possible addition to their little tax-exempt society. 
 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
2.0 (1 vote) 
  
    
 


  From:  David (DavidABrown)    5/18/2001 8:04 am  
To:  R/C Floats (RachelsChild)   (7 of 71)  
 
  21.7 in reply to 21.4  
 
2 Corinthians 1:3 Blessed be God, even the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of Mercies, and the God of all Comfort;

John 3:17 For God sent not His Son into the World to condemn the world; But that the world Through Him might be Saved.

I agree, it isnt the job of the Christian to discourage but to encourage. To encourage people to know the God that gives them life and loves them.

Abortion cannot be a viable solution to any situation. Abortion is a final irreversible act and an act in which the life of an innocent person, by the laws of man, has been condemned and killed. Abortion is not a safe and reliable procedure for the mother, it is a dangerous and risky procedure.

In this rush and hurry up world we want what seems like Instant answers and Instant solutions to our problems. Abortion is not the instant answer that it pretends to be, it is an irreversible decision that has to be lived with for an Entire lifetime.

There are many Pro-Life Crisis Pregnancy and assistance programs available for free. Where a person can go and get Doctor information, help, assistance and a variety of support. People women and men, should not have to feel alone and desperate during confusing and desperate times. A Christian Church or organization is just the place to go to find love and support in the name of Jesus.






David A. Brown
Basic Christian: Forum
 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
4.0 (1 vote) 
  
    
 


  From:  David (DavidABrown)    5/25/2001 10:14 am  
To:  ALL   (8 of 71)  
 
  21.8 in reply to 21.7  
 

Pro-Life Groups Continue Response to RU 486 Ads 
Washington, DC -- As abortion advocates prepare to run a six-month ad 
campaign promoting the dangerous abortion drug mifepristone, also known as 
RU-486, pro-life advocates realize there is little they can do but remind 
women what the ads won't tell them. 

The problem, they say, is that the print ads - which will run in 
Cosmopolitan, People and Vanity Fair, among other magazines - won't 
include details of the drug's risks and dangers. 

"This is extremely irresponsible to be promoting this dangerous drug 
without even warning women there are some consequences attached to it," 
said Wendy Wright, director of communications for Concerned Women for 
America. 

The National Abortion Foundation, a group of abortion facilities, is 
funding the $2-million ad campaign, which it hopes will reach more than 70 
percent of women between 18 and 49 during its July-to-November run. Since 
the pro-abortion organization isn't tied to the abortion pill's 
manufacturer, it doesn't have to follow FDA guidelines requiring 
disclosure of the drug's side effects. 

"This isn't a pharmaceutical ad," NAF executive director Vicki Saporta 
said. "We aren't a pharmaceutical company." 

While they may not be illegal, such ad practices are misleading, pro-life 
supporters say. 

"The sad thing for women is they won't get all the facts," said Heather 
Cirmo, a spokeswoman for the Family Research Council. "They're led into 
believing it's a quick fix." 

"It's not something that just makes your baby disappear. The baby passes 
through you, a potentially very traumatic experience, and that's something 
the abortion lobby doesn't come clean with for women," she said. 

The controversial ad features a woman gazing out a window, along with the 
words, "You have the freedom to choose. And now, you have another safe 
abortion choice." The ad lists a hotline run by the pro-abortion 
foundation. "This isn't really marketing, it's education," Saporta 
claimed. 

"Our phone has been ringing off the hook from women who want to know more 
about this safe early abortion option," said Saporto. However, she 
admitted "this option isn't right for everyone, but women need to know 
about it." 

Experts expected the FDA's approval of the dangerous abortion pill last 
fall to revolutionize abortion practices. But with less than a third of 
Planned Parenthood abortion facilities providing it nationally, and with 
more women rejecting the complicated procedure of multiple medical visits 
required for the pill, RU-486's market penetration has been modest. 

That has pro-life advocates believing the ad campaign is a desperate 
effort to revive popularity in a fading drug - the long-term effects of 
which are relatively unknown, they say. 

"I would surmise the National Abortion Foundation is using RU-486 as a 
manipulative tool to try to create the image that women can have a 
so-called easy abortion," Wright said. 

"We don't know what this could do to you. These women are being used as 
the guinea pigs." 

While the magazine Redbook refused to run the ad, a Vanity Fair 
spokeswoman said the magazine was leaving it up to its readers to decide 
how to respond to the ads. "We accept advertisement for a wide range of 
companies and organizations," a spokeswoman said. "Our readers are 
sophisticated ... and can make their own decisions." 

A copy of the ad can be found at: 
http://news.excite.com/photo/img/ap/abortion/pill/ads/20010524/wx102 

-- 
Find more information on the risks and dangers associated with RU 486 in 
the Abortion section of www.prolifeinfo.org. Please consider 
writing a letter to any women's magazine you see running the ad. 





David A. Brown
Basic Christian: Forum
 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
5.0 (1 vote) 
  
    
 


  From:  David (DavidABrown)    5/28/2001 3:30 pm  
To:  ALL   (9 of 71)  
 
  21.9 in reply to 21.1  
 
National Right to Life to Hold June Convention in Charlotte 
www.nrlc.org/ 
Washington, DC -- The National Right to Life Committee, the nation's 
largest pro-life organization, will hold its annual convention in 
Charlotte, North Carolina at the Adams Mark Hotel on June 28, 29 and 30, 
2001. 

Father Frank Pavone, director of Priests for Life, will keynote the 
closing banquet. 

A number of pro-life luminaries will speak at the convention including 
nationally renown entertainer Pat Boone; Sean Hannity, the co-host of the 
top-rated Fox News Channel show "Hannity and Colmes;" Mark Pickup, a 
disabled rights and anti-euthanasia activist; and Wesley Smith, one of the 
most highly-regarded experts on assisted suicide and euthanasia. 

Each year the convention features almost 75 workshops on topics ranging 
from the link between abortion and breast cancer, the risks and dangers of 
RU 486, helping women with crisis pregnancies, state and national 
legislative issues, and a look at contemporary medical ethics issues 
including cloning, stem cell research and human embryo research. 

Some workshop presenters include: Dr. Joel Brind, the leading researcher 
into the link between abortion and breast cancer; Mike and Vicky Conroy, 
who help women injured by abortion; and Richard M. Doerflinger, a pro-life 
spokesperson for the National Conference of Catholic Bishops; and Rev. 
James Lamb of Lutherans for Life. 

The convention also features a special conference for teenagers and one 
for college students. 

For more information on the convention and to register to attend, see 
www.nrlc.org/convention/index.html 





David A. Brown
Basic Christian: Forum
 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  David (DavidABrown)    5/31/2001 7:58 am  
To:  ALL   (10 of 71)  
 
  21.10 in reply to 21.1  
 
Roe and Doe to File Amicus Briefs in Case to Overturn Roe v. Wade 
Philadelphia, PA -- The plaintiffs in the two landmark Supreme Court cases 
of Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton, the two companion cases decided on 
January 22, 1973 which compelled legalized abortion throughout the nation, 
are appearing in Philadelphia on Thursday, May 31, 2001, to personally 
file Friend of the Court briefs with the United States Court of Appeals. 
In their briefs they tell the Courts why the decisions in their own 
landmark cases have proven to be harmful to the rights of women and why 
the decisions in their own cases should be overturned. 

Norma McCorvey (Jane Roe in Roe v. Wade) and Sandra Cano (Mary Doe of Doe 
v. Bolton) are filing their Friend of the Court briefs in the case of 
Donna Santa Marie, et al v. Christine Todd Whitman, et al. The Santa 
Marie case is a federal class action suit brought by five women (three of 
whom had abortions that were performed without voluntary or informed 
consent) who argue that New Jersey's abortion laws violate the most 
important constitutional rights of women. 

Harold Cassidy, lead counsel for the Santa Marie plaintiffs, known for his 
work advancing mother's rights (he was Chief Counsel, among other cases, 
in the famous Baby M surrogate mother case) stated that the underlying 
cases that prompted the Santa Marie plaintiffs to file the class action 
suit "demonstrate how abortion laws are destroying the real rights of 
women." 

There will be a press conference at 11:00AM on Thursday, May 31, at the 
Holiday Inn of Independence Park. Following the conference Norma McCorvey 
and Sandra Cano will address a group of women who have expressed support 
for the Santa Marie plaintiffs. The address will take place at the 
Liberty Bell Pavilion at Noon, just before Ms. McCorvey and Ms. Cano walk 
their briefs to the Court of Appeals for filing. 

The Santa Marie case represents the first instance in which women have 
brought law suits which attack Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton and seek to 
have the Supreme Court decisions in those cases set aside. Over the past 
twenty-five years, all of the federal suits which argued in support of a 
right to an abortion have only been brought by abortion doctors and 
abortion clinics. No women who wanted abortions have been plaintiffs in 
those cases, and the courts have allowed the abortion doctors to litigate 
what the doctors claimed were the constitutionally protected interests of 
the women. 

Now the two women who were the plaintiffs in the twenty-eight year old 
landmark cases of Roe v. Wade are joining forces with the women who are 
the Santa Marie plaintiffs in their opposition to the abortion industry, 
which they say has been destroying the real rights of women. 

The Santa Marie plaintiffs have gained the notice of many women throughout 
the country who feel they were mistreated by the abortion industry, and a 
new women's movement has begun behind their message. 

A short synopsis of the case and the plaintiffs' stories are available 
upon request. To obtain copies, or for further information about the 
cases, please contact Gene Tarne or Michelle Powers of Tarne, Powers & 
Associates at 703-684-8352. 

-- 
The Pro-Life Infonet is a daily compilation of pro-life news and 
information. To subscribe, send the message "subscribe" to: 
infonet-request@prolifeinfo.org. Infonet is sponsored by Women and 
Children First http://www.womenandchildrenfirst.org For more pro-life 
info visit http://www.prolifeinfo.org and for questions or additional 
information email ertelt@prolifeinfo.org 






David A. Brown
Basic Christian: Forum
 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  Zebra30   5/31/2001 11:47 pm  
To:  BURRTON   (11 of 71)  
 
  21.11 in reply to 21.2  
 
Well, since we're all talking about correct labels and such, Burrton, why don't you "pro-choice" types call yourselves what you really are; "pro-death" or "pro-abortion" rather than "pro-choice"? Actually,"pro-choice" is a really inaccurate term because the only "choice" that's talked about with any real enthusiasm is abortion. I almost never hear of any other option coming from the "pro-death"......er,uh.....I mean the "pro-choice" camp. I guess what I'm saying is let us all be honest about who we are. 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
4.0 (1 vote) 
  
    
 


  From:  Zebra30   6/1/2001 12:04 am  
To:  R/C Floats (RachelsChild)   (12 of 71)  
 
  21.12 in reply to 21.4  
 
There are plenty of crisis pregnancy or pregnancy help centers across the nation and around the world with more coming every day, I'm sure. As for how to stem the tide of unwanted pregnancies, I think that one way is to return a sense of dignity and wonder to the area of human sexuality. You know that most (though not all, certainly) of the abortions done today are done on those who have a...well....I guess you'd say a haphazard view of sex. What I'm talking about is the casual way that society views sex and sexuality. A lot of people today think that if you could just arm yourself with the necessary protective preparations (condoms, pills, diaphragms,etc.), somehow you could escape the consequences of a poorly thought-out decision. I'm saying that what we need is a whole new way (actually it's a very ancient way) of looking at sex beas long as men and women remain addicted to "recreational" (or as I like to call it, "barnyard)sex, I'm afraid that abortions will continue to be a national and social tragedy. 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
5.0 (1 vote) 
  
    
 


  From:  BURRTON   6/1/2001 10:34 am  
To:  Zebra30   (13 of 71)  
 
  21.13 in reply to 21.11  
 
Pro choice does'nt mean pro death. 
I am opposed to abortion. 
I don't however, feel I should prevent someone from 
doing something that does not affect me. 
It is none of my buisness and none of yours. 
The typical Christian responce is,, "If I don't like it, 
everyone else must feel the same way". 
Your pompous attitude saddens me. 
Again, I DO NOT approve of abortion, if I were female 
I would never have one. 
Let people make a choice, you made the choice to be 
Christian, but we don't all need that monkey on our backs. 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
2.0 (1 vote) 
  
    
 


  From:  David (DavidABrown)    6/1/2001 12:00 pm  
To:  BURRTON   (14 of 71)  
 
  21.14 in reply to 21.13  
 
Christianity is about Life and Death. 
To be a Christian is to be Spiritually Alive to God. 
To not be a Christian is to be dead in your own sins and trespasses against God. 
Your right, there is a monkey on your back but it is not the monkey of Christianity it is the monkey of Satan and Sin and unless you Repent and accept Jesus you will die from that monkey. That is the monkey that nobody needs. 

Jesus came and died for us to set us free from sin and death. There is no burden to being a Christian. Jesus took our burden on Himself on the Cross. We Christians don't have a burden we have the Glorious freedom in the Love of Christ Jesus. 





David A. Brown
Basic Christian: Forum




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Edited 6/1/01 3:02:43 PM ET by DAVIDABROWN 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  BURRTON   6/1/2001 12:15 pm  
To:  David (DavidABrown)    (15 of 71)  
 
  21.15 in reply to 21.14  
 
It is a crutch, I'm truely happy it works for you. 
Common sense tells me Christanity is responsible for 
the deaths of millions since it began. 
The "my god is better than yours" attitudes caused this. 
You told me "your" way is "the" way and I find that offensive. 
The Satan threat does not work for me either. 
satan was invented by the church as the "evil" alternative 
to the "jesus" thing. It's all about money and control. 
I want no part of it. I've never been arrested, never broke the law. 
The threat of sin, which is as man-made as Chritianity itself 
fails to make me cower and grovel. Please do not reply. 
seriously, I am glad religion works for you. 
I find it to be nothing short of mind control. 
 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
5.0 (1 vote) 
  
    
 


  From:  David (DavidABrown)    6/1/2001 12:36 pm  
To:  BURRTON unread  (16 of 71)  
 
  21.16 in reply to 21.15  
 
You say that Christianity has been responsible for the death of millions. Not everyone who calls themselves a Christian is a Christian. The Crusades were not carried out for God, man did that on his own. Nowhere in the Bible did God call for crusades. 
There are many people that visit this forum and call themselves Christian Witches are you going to hold true Christians accountable for the abominations of others that call themselves Christian. 

Convenient that you choose to ignore All of the good that Christians do in the name of Jesus. Drive down the street in any city and the hospitals have Christian names because Christians founded them. 





David A. Brown
Basic Christian: Forum
 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  janlcc   6/1/2001 8:40 pm  
To:  BURRTON unread  (17 of 71)  
 
  21.17 in reply to 21.2  
 
Being anti-abortion is not a Christian stance. It is a human stance. I am not a Christian, and I am as anti-abortion as anyone you will ever meet. Abortion is the taking of a human life. Period. It takes a lot of distortion and outright lying to oneself to make it into anything else.
I told my children that abortion is murder, not as a religious belief, but as an incontrovertible fact. My oldest was raped, and impregnated during the attack. She was nearly delirious with the pain of the situation, but never once did she desire to murder the child. Never. That child is now my beloved son, a true child of God with a faith so simple and pure it would touch even your heart. My daughter is now a happy wife and mother, a state she could never have achieved under your views. You see, she did the right thing. She can look in the mirror every day and know that. She can see the joy my son brings to me and his father, and rejoice in the beautiful gift she gave us and my son -- his life. She was neither deluded nor selfish.

God bless you, and may he open your eyes to life.
 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  janlcc   6/1/2001 9:04 pm  
To:  BURRTON unread  (18 of 71)  
 
  21.18 in reply to 21.13  
 
That, unfortunately, is the coward's way out that society is being encouraged to take. Choice? When God sent down the 10 Commandments, they were NOT suggestions.
Burrton, wrong is wrong. Why is it wrong for you? Why, if you were a woman, would you never have an abortion?

It's wrong for all of us. It's murder. And it has opened the door to horrors I think you do not know about. Do some research on the "harvesting" of foetal tissue, a thriving industry that makes the Nazis look angelic.

It's a blessing that you know abortion is wrong. It is a revoltingly selfish and destructive act, cruel and wanton infanticide. And it is a curse to our nation and our souls.
 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  teloss (JAMES1810)   6/2/2001 11:18 am  
To:  BURRTON   (19 of 71)  
 
  21.19 in reply to 21.2  
 
<<<I believe the term might also 
be "anti-choice" >>> 
May I ask you why you see pro-life as anti-choice? 




te


You are the salt of the earth. . . You are the light of the world.. (Matthew 5:13a-14a)


 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


   From:  teloss (JAMES1810)   6/2/2001 11:22 am  
To:  Zebra30   (20 of 71)  
 
  21.20 in reply to 21.11  
 
<<<Actually,"pro-choice" is a really inaccurate term because the only "choice" that's talked about with any real enthusiasm is abortion>>> 
Good point! 


te


You are the salt of the earth. . . You are the light of the world.. (Matthew 5:13a-14a)


 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit  
 
From:  teloss (JAMES1810)   6/2/2001 11:27 am  
To:  BURRTON   (21 of 71)  
 
  21.21 in reply to 21.13  
 
<<<It is none of my buisness and none of yours. 
The typical Christian responce is,, "If I don't like it, 
everyone else must feel the same way". >>> 
I do not see that as the typical Christian response at all! There are reasons why Christians are actively involved in such matters, and you must have had the wrong kind of exposure perhaps to come to this conclusion! 

Are you aware of the reasons why Christians tend to be pro-life, or are you just clumping them all together from the brief exposure you had? 



te


You are the salt of the earth. . . You are the light of the world.. (Matthew 5:13a-14a)


 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  BURRTON   6/2/2001 11:32 am  
To:  teloss (JAMES1810)   (22 of 71)  
 
  21.22 in reply to 21.21  
 
You might change the term to "anti-choice". 
This in no way means I'm for abortion, I'm not. 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  teloss (JAMES1810)   6/2/2001 11:35 am  
To:  BURRTON   (23 of 71)  
 
  21.23 in reply to 21.13  
 
<<<Let people make a choice, you made the choice to be 
Christian, but we don't all need that monkey on our backs.>>> 
For years we have always given people a choice! Yet, as gentle as we were, whenever we would approach a gal so that a choice could be made in this most important decision, we found rather quickly that the issue is not really choice at all. In fact, I thought that they would have applauded simply because we were really offering a choice! However, that is just a buzz word meaning very little! The choice had already been made for the folks thinking they were making a choice! They were going to kill their baby for no other reason that it was simply not convenient for them to have one! Oh sure, there are exceptions, but the vast majority of such so called choices are based upon inconvenience. 

I am all for people having a choice! Let's have equal time . . . equal education . . . let's make it as some folks would say . . . fair! I mean, that is the buzz word today isn't it . . . to be fair! But choice is really not the issue here is it?


te


You are the salt of the earth. . . You are the light of the world.. (Matthew 5:13a-14a)


 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  BURRTON   6/2/2001 11:40 am  
To:  teloss (JAMES1810)   (24 of 71)  
 
  21.24 in reply to 21.19  
 
The answer is obvious. 
The pro-life groups, as they call themselves, strive 
to "make" everyone adhere to their attitudes on abortion. 
I, myself, do not approve of abortion, however I'm not 
arrogant enough to attempt to prevent someone who's circumstances I know nothing about from obtaining one. 
As far as a biblical argument, I'm at a loss. 
Maybe you would know as you appear far more knowlegable 
in biblical information than me, is abortion mentioned in the Bible? 
I haven't found anything. Yes, I own a Bible. 
Please don't refer to "Thou shalt not kill", I beleive 
one must be born first in order to die. 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  teloss (JAMES1810)   6/2/2001 11:41 am  
To:  BURRTON   (25 of 71)  
 
  21.25 in reply to 21.15  
 
<<<You told me "your" way is "the" way and I find that offensive>>> 
Wait! This does need to be fair! I mean, certainly we cannot have one person on one end of the matter being offended. Is it ok that I be offended at your response? Or does that make me intolerant? Unloving? UnChristian? 

I guess fairness means you can tell us your way of thinking without any reaction on our part, but, if we share anything with you and you are bothered with it, that is ok . . . is that how I understand the rules here? Is that the way this works? 




te


You are the salt of the earth. . . You are the light of the world.. (Matthew 5:13a-14a)


 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  teloss (JAMES1810)   6/2/2001 11:44 am  
To:  BURRTON   (26 of 71)  
 
  21.26 in reply to 21.22  
 
<<<You might change the term to "anti-choice". >>> 
I am a little confused . . . who is anti-choice? You? The people? The choicers? Christians? 



te


You are the salt of the earth. . . You are the light of the world.. (Matthew 5:13a-14a)


 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  teloss (JAMES1810)   6/2/2001 11:46 am  
To:  BURRTON   (27 of 71)  
 
  21.27 in reply to 21.24  
 
<<<The answer is obvious. 
The pro-life groups, as they call themselves, strive 
to "make" everyone adhere to their attitudes on abortion. >>> 
No sir! I am afraid you miss the point! Nobody I know is interested in making people conform! There is a whole new dimension here that you have never considered! 



te


You are the salt of the earth. . . You are the light of the world.. (Matthew 5:13a-14a)


 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  BURRTON   6/2/2001 11:47 am  
To:  teloss (JAMES1810)   (28 of 71)  
 
  21.28 in reply to 21.23  
 
to an extent, I agree with you. 
Abortion is wrong. 
There are, as you said, exceptions. 
I'm not trying to justify abortion, I think 
everyone should be talked out of it if at all possible. 
I don't think laws should be made to legislate morality, 
ESPECIALLY someone else's morality. 
I find ther older I get, the more liberal I become. 
Maybe that's a bad thing, maybe not, but that's 
the way I am. 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  teloss (JAMES1810)   6/2/2001 11:51 am  
To:  BURRTON   (29 of 71)  
 
  21.29 in reply to 21.24  
 
<<<Maybe you would know as you appear far more knowlegable 
in biblical information than me, is abortion mentioned in the Bible? >>> 
The term as a word, no! The concept, yes . . . overwhelmingly! But the concept is not simply a biblical principle of life! It is also a constitutional one as well! And with each decision or lack of decision sets the direction for a complete view of life! 

Are you interested in this view and the basic tenants behind it, or is the issue simply a reaction to perceived and perhaps imagined arrogance on the part of Christian folks? 

This is not a trick question, as I am truly interested in how you came to believe as you do . . . and what happened that may have caused these reactions. 

Also to be fair, I may not be able to respond for a couple of days as I just changed professions. Actually, this is my first time here in this forum and I just became intrigued by your posts! 



te


You are the salt of the earth. . . You are the light of the world.. (Matthew 5:13a-14a)


 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  teloss (JAMES1810)   6/2/2001 11:53 am  
To:  BURRTON   (30 of 71)  
 
  21.30 in reply to 21.28  
 
<<<I'm not trying to justify abortion, I think 
everyone should be talked out of it if at all possible. >>> 
I do sense that in you and did not see you as justifying anything, just reacting a tad. Read my previous post and you will get an idea of where I am coming from. 




te


You are the salt of the earth. . . You are the light of the world.. (Matthew 5:13a-14a)


 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  teloss (JAMES1810)   6/2/2001 11:54 am  
To:  BURRTON   (31 of 71)  
 
  21.31 in reply to 21.28  
 
<<<I find ther older I get, the more liberal I become. 
Maybe that's a bad thing, maybe not, but that's 
the way I am.>>> 
This is interesting simply because the older I get, the more conservative I tend to become! Strange huh? 


te


You are the salt of the earth. . . You are the light of the world.. (Matthew 5:13a-14a)


 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  David (DavidABrown)    6/2/2001 1:33 pm  
To:  BURRTON   (32 of 71)  
 
  21.32 in reply to 21.28  
 
Burrton, 
I am 100% Pro-Choice!!! 






David A. Brown
Basic Christian: Forum
 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  David (DavidABrown)    6/2/2001 1:38 pm  
To:  BURRTON   (33 of 71)  
 
  21.33 in reply to 21.28  
 
I think the baby has a 100% Choice of whether it want's to be murdered or if it wants to live. 
How come no-one Cares about what the baby wants! 

Don't babies have any rights or is just because we can't hear their screams that we are so brutal towards the unborn.




David A. Brown
Basic Christian: Forum




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Edited 6/2/01 4:53:11 PM ET by DAVIDABROWN 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  Rowan (POTIONS)    6/2/2001 2:00 pm  
To:  David (DavidABrown)    (34 of 71)  
 
  21.34 in reply to 21.33  
 
If you truly wish for medical abortions to disappear, then you must be willing to take on the responsibility to rasie those children. I do NOT see ANY of the "pro-lifers" offering to pay for these births of unwanted children nor adopting them. 
Don't get me wrong here, I am not FOR abortion, but I also have been in a position to understand where the mindsets of these girls / women are. 

I know I am only one voice here, but like I said, If you are truly anti-abortion, then off a workable solution to the problem other than leaving unwanted babies in the hands of: birth mothers barely finished playing with dolls, rape victims, abused women, or females who have simply made a mistake and know they are not equiped to deal with a child. Please do not suggest "FosterCare" as that has been proven to be a malfunctioning social service. 

Personally, I think if you are going to stop someone from aborting their child, you ought to not only provide a home and care for the birth mother, but keep the child to raise and truly invest something of yourself in the future of these infants. [No picking and choosing of race or color either! They are all gifts from above.] 

But---- Thats just MY opinion. [And YES, I have done just those things I challange YOU to do!]


Contemplate the little things in life and then enjoy them all!..... Rowan





Many thanks to Valcali at Creative Signatures, who took my dream and made it real! 


Creative Signatures


For wonderful herbal products, please go to:


Medicine Song's Moon Lair

For you perfume or aroma items, please visit me at:


Common Scents Perfumes

 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  David (DavidABrown)    6/2/2001 2:08 pm  
To:  Rowan (POTIONS)    (35 of 71)  
 
  21.35 in reply to 21.34  
 
Then you are making an accusation that you know nothing about. 
The Hallmark of the Pro-Life movement is Mother and Child care. 
Most of what the Pro-Life movement does is provide shelter, clothing, food, medical and care to mothers and babies. 

Just curios but arent the new religions supposed to be kind? Why does you religion support child killing? 





David A. Brown
Basic Christian: Forum
 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  Rowan (POTIONS)    6/2/2001 2:32 pm  
To:  David (DavidABrown)    (36 of 71)  
 
  21.36 in reply to 21.35  
 
Where did THAT come from? 
What religeon are you assuming I belong too and since WHEN does a challange to take over the care and rearing of unwanted children allow you to accuse me of "Baby Killing" or supporting it? Must be YOU can't read as I clearly explained MY views in my previous post. 

I know about the religeous charities that "support" mothers and infants. I worked for several and most of what they do is push those girls into keeping babies they do NOT want nor are in most cases old enough to care for and end up dumping anyway or abusing . Their [ these "support groups] other solution is to warehouse them in the system in some form. I am advocating HOMES provided immediately upon birth. BIG DIFFERENCE! Especially if YOU define a home as a loving nurturing environment? 

How many of these children have YOU reared and nurtured? I myself have taken in 3 with my own and did it as a single parent too so that is NO excuse! 

Before you assume , since we ALL know what assuming does to one, ask what a person believes? I have not insulted you nor accused you of anything, please offer the same respect that has been given to you. Or am I assuming that you have respect for any opinion BUT your own? 




Contemplate the little things in life and then enjoy them all!..... Rowan





Many thanks to Valcali at Creative Signatures, who took my dream and made it real! 


Creative Signatures


For wonderful herbal products, please go to:


Medicine Song's Moon Lair

For you perfume or aroma items, please visit me at:


Common Scents Perfumes

 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  Rowan (POTIONS)    6/2/2001 2:34 pm  
To:  David (DavidABrown)    (37 of 71)  
 
  21.37 in reply to 21.35  
 
BTW, I make it a habit to practice what I preach? If I ask or challange anyone, it is knowing that I am also obligated to do it.

Contemplate the little things in life and then enjoy them all!..... Rowan





Many thanks to Valcali at Creative Signatures, who took my dream and made it real! 


Creative Signatures


For wonderful herbal products, please go to:


Medicine Song's Moon Lair

For you perfume or aroma items, please visit me at:


Common Scents Perfumes

 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  Star Storm (siskama)    6/2/2001 3:25 pm  
To:  David (DavidABrown)    (38 of 71)  
 
  21.38 in reply to 21.14  
 
You are SICK Dave to go around dispensing DEATH SENTENCES to people you dont even know....SICK SICK SICK .....We all DIE fer God's sake WE ALL die and your view, complete with hell is purely CONJECTURE taken from something that someone told you and mine of NO hell is conjecture taken simply from what I choose to believe....So YUP, all the people you damn will die, as well as all the ones you dont......BUT NO ONE REALLY knows whats next!! You run over "THERE" and then run back here and tell us all y'hear? MS 

 
For Spell Crafting,Incense Powders, Flying Ointment,Power and Attraction Oils, Body Nourishment,Salves and various other Herbal Products, please go to Medicine Song's Majikal Moon at address below...Thank you ! Medicine Song's Majikal Moon
VERY SENSUAL SCENTED MASSAGE and BODY OILS and Crystal Point Wands etc....
Seekers of Olde Knowledge
TO DIE FOR PERFUMES & HOME SCENTS, for Body & Soul,Please visit: THE ROWAN'S PLACE 

COMMON SCENTS !


  
 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  Star Storm (siskama)    6/2/2001 3:30 pm  
To:  David (DavidABrown)    (39 of 71)  
 
  21.39 in reply to 21.16  
 
Dave dave dave.....How dare thee to call me an abomination...HOW very pompous and bloated and UNCHRISTIAN of you...... Hope the Lord MY GOD isnt too awfully disappointed that you have slipped through and made people think you are a true Christian...a TRUE Christian would NEVER Call another an ABOMINATION....For shame for shame dave...You have just finally shown your true colors....Yellow and green Yellow as a Coward who dares to label people he doesnt know, and green with envy at a True Christian Pagans Happiness in the face of Vitriol like you spew..... Ummm ummm ummm.... 

 
For Spell Crafting,Incense Powders, Flying Ointment,Power and Attraction Oils, Body Nourishment,Salves and various other Herbal Products, please go to Medicine Song's Majikal Moon at address below...Thank you ! Medicine Song's Majikal Moon
VERY SENSUAL SCENTED MASSAGE and BODY OILS and Crystal Point Wands etc....
Seekers of Olde Knowledge
TO DIE FOR PERFUMES & HOME SCENTS, for Body & Soul,Please visit: THE ROWAN'S PLACE 

COMMON SCENTS !


  
 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


   From:  Star Storm (siskama)    6/2/2001 5:19 pm  
To:  David (DavidABrown)    (40 of 71)  
 
  21.40 in reply to 21.35  
 
That is a Crock....they leave them to social services...WOULD YOU take one of the little Crack babies that is a different color than you? would you hold it and rock it and love it and clean and feed and give it the meds it might need all its life from a drugbirth??? 

 
For Spell Crafting,Incense Powders, Flying Ointment,Power and Attraction Oils, Body Nourishment,Salves and various other Herbal Products, please go to Medicine Song's Majikal Moon at address below...Thank you ! Medicine Song's Majikal Moon
VERY SENSUAL SCENTED MASSAGE and BODY OILS and Crystal Point Wands etc....
Seekers of Olde Knowledge
TO DIE FOR PERFUMES & HOME SCENTS, for Body & Soul,Please visit: THE ROWAN'S PLACE 

COMMON SCENTS !


  
 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit  
 
From:  BURRTON   6/2/2001 11:48 pm  
To:  David (DavidABrown)    (41 of 71)  
 
  21.41 in reply to 21.33  
 
I think alot of people don't consider something, 
or someone that has'nt been born to be alive. 
It would seem one would have to be born in order to die. 
I do see your point and agree with it. 
Abortion, in most cases, is just an "easy way out" for 
covering up either loose or negligent behavior. 
Bringing religion in to the discussion always makes 
me frustrated as I've always had a problem with it. 
The Christians I've met have mostly been arrogant, intollerant 
individuals who condemn others constantly. 
I don't want you to think I'm referring to you, I'm not. 
The fact that we "mostly" agree on the abortion discussion 
has already re-newed my "faith", as it were, in Christians. 
At least you have taken the time to argue and did'nt threaten 
me immediatly with Hell. I thank you for that. 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  Zebra30   6/4/2001 6:15 pm  
To:  BURRTON   (42 of 71)  
 
  21.42 in reply to 21.13  
 
"Pro-choice" means EXACTLY that, Burrton. My words are not pompous as you think. I'm just tired of the word games people such as yourself play when discussing this issue. Yes, I made the choice to follow Jesus, but that baby in the womb (yes, I said "baby") hasn't had a "choice" to make about anything. That's what I'd like to uphold. 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  Zebra30   6/4/2001 6:28 pm  
To:  BURRTON   (43 of 71)  
 
  21.43 in reply to 21.15  
 
Then why are you visiting this messageboard, Burrton? Because whether you want to admit it or not, something is really bothering you. Something deep within your subconscious drives you to visit a messageboard whose beliefs and doctrines you don't share. As for Christianity being responsible for the crimes of history, what was man doing before Jesus Christ arrived in the world? I can give you quite a long list too numerous to go into right now. It isn't because someone says that,as you put it, "my god is better than your god". It is because mankind continues to want to go its own way. As to crutches, I suppose that we all have our own little crutches. I'm pretty sure that you have some of your own, Burrton. Nobody exists in this world without needing something or someone to lean on. As one of your secular writers or philosophers (I'm not sure which he is right now) puts it, "no man is an island". Think about that next time you talk about "crutches". 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  BURRTON   6/4/2001 11:24 pm  
To:  Zebra30   (44 of 71)  
 
  21.44 in reply to 21.43  
 
Great response. 
I must say I agree with you on everything you said. 
Yes, something troubles me, what, I have no idea. 
As for crutches, I can't think of any I 
have offhand, I even gave up caffeine! 
Thanks for such a polite reply. 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  Bob Blaylock (Bob_Blaylock)   6/5/2001 6:25 pm  
To:  Rowan (POTIONS)    (45 of 71)  
 
  21.45 in reply to 21.34  
 
Rowan (POTIONS) wrote:
If you truly wish for medical abortions to disappear, then you must be willing to take on the responsibility to rasie those children. I do NOT see ANY of the "pro-lifers" offering to pay for these births of unwanted children nor adopting them.

Don't get me wrong here, I am not FOR abortion, but I also have been in a position to understand where the mindsets of these girls / women are.

I know I am only one voice here, but like I said, If you are truly anti-abortion, then off a workable solution to the problem other than leaving unwanted babies in the hands of: birth mothers barely finished playing with dolls, rape victims, abused women, or females who have simply made a mistake and know they are not equiped to deal with a child. Please do not suggest "FosterCare" as that has been proven to be a malfunctioning social service.
  I remember, some time ago, watching a segment on one ofthose TV news programs (20/20 or 48 Hours or Dateline or one of those types of shows) about the problems that some families were getting mixed up in when they tried to adopt orphan children from other nations.  During the course of this segment, this statistic was cited:  For every child that is put up for adoption here in the United States, there are twenty six childless married couples seeking to adopt.  Much of the point of this segment was to show how desperately some of these couples wanted to adopt a child, to show the risks they would take, and the expenses they would bear, and the bureaucratic red tape they would endure, in pursuit of adoptable children.

  The point is this:  There is no reason for any healthy child to be unwanted.  If a child's birth mother does not want him, or is not prepared to care for him, there are plenty of other couples who would be delighted to adopt this child, and to love him and raise him as their own.  To pay the costs of supporting the birth mother through her pregnancy would be trivial compared to the expenses that many couples are now going through in pursuit of a child to adopt.



Personally, I think if you are going to stop someone from aborting their child, you ought to not only provide a home and care for the birth mother, but keep the child to raise and truly invest something of yourself in the future of these infants.
  Killing a child is wrong.  No matter what spin you put on it, it is evil.  Your statement makes little more sense than saying something like this:  Personally, I think that anyone who wants to stop someone from robbing a bank should assume responsibility for the material care of this prospective bank-robber.  Opposing any evil does not mean that we are obligated to take upon us the burden of providing for the prospective evildoer that which this person sought to gain by doing evil, or of helping this person to avoid whatever consequences he sought to avoid by doing evil.  As it so happens, in the case we are discussing, this isn't necessary either.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 To email me, remove the string .nospam from the email address which appears below.  DO NOT send me any form of advertising, chain letters, or other such garbage.  Spammers will be dealt with very harshly!

bob-blaylock.nospam@usa.net  

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  Rowan (POTIONS)    6/5/2001 9:02 pm  
To:  Bob Blaylock (Bob_Blaylock)   (46 of 71)  
 
  21.46 in reply to 21.45  
 
And yet every one of us who crabs about welfare is complaining about doing just that.... taking financial responsibility for the welfare of these children without any emotional input. Without the emotional imput, it is easy to tell someone else what to do with their lives. You don't have to live with or look at the results.

Contemplate the little things in life and then enjoy them all!..... Rowan





Many thanks to Valcali at Creative Signatures, who took my dream and made it real! 


Creative Signatures


For wonderful herbal products, please go to:


Medicine Song's Moon Lair

For you perfume or aroma items, please visit me at:


Common Scents Perfumes

 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  Hangin n there (juzmeagain)   6/5/2001 9:35 pm  
To:  Rowan (POTIONS)    (47 of 71)  
 
  21.47 in reply to 21.46  
 
Just as prochoice dont have to look at the remains of the babies that are aborted. The fetus,s or the little hands and feet that are sucked out with a vacuum and dumped like garbage into the receptacles. It is murder plain and simple. There are thousands and thouseands of people out there ready and willing to take any child and raise it as thier own. So as it has already been said here, there is no need for abortion, just becuase it is an inconveniene to have the child. Ive raised four kids on my own already and if I knew a person that was fixing to have an abortion, and I was young enough now to take care of it, then I would do my best to talk them out of it and pay for all cost till that baby was born. IM too old now to parent a child. But beleive me, I would if I could. Abortion is murder. I stand on that with all that is in me.



Raven Photography

Today I am feeling 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  Star Storm (siskama)    6/5/2001 10:39 pm  
To:  Bob Blaylock (Bob_Blaylock)   (48 of 71)  
 
  21.48 in reply to 21.45  
 
Yadadadada yadadada Stats.....Adopt one.......!

 
For Spell Crafting,Incense Powders, Flying Ointment,Power and Attraction Oils, Body Nourishment,Salves and various other Herbal Products, please go to Medicine Song's Majikal Moon at address below...Thank you ! Medicine Song's Majikal Moon
VERY SENSUAL SCENTED MASSAGE and BODY OILS and Crystal Point Wands etc....
Seekers of Olde Knowledge
TO DIE FOR PERFUMES & HOME SCENTS, for Body & Soul,Please visit: THE ROWAN'S PLACE 

COMMON SCENTS !


 
 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  Rowan (POTIONS)    6/6/2001 12:36 am  
To:  Hangin n there (juzmeagain)   (49 of 71)  
 
  21.49 in reply to 21.47  
 
Obviously, You have only read one post? 
I have said nothing about pro choice so I do not know where that came from. 
Perhaps you need to scroll back just a few to read the original post I made? 


Contemplate the little things in life and then enjoy them all!..... Rowan





Many thanks to Valcali at Creative Signatures, who took my dream and made it real! 


Creative Signatures


For wonderful herbal products, please go to:


Medicine Song's Moon Lair

For you perfume or aroma items, please visit me at:


Common Scents Perfumes

 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  Rowan (POTIONS)    6/6/2001 12:46 am  
To:  Hangin n there (juzmeagain)   (50 of 71)  
 
  21.50 in reply to 21.49  
 
Besides 
I have said NOTHING about being pro-abortion? 
So....... Why are you yelling at me? 
As before, please inform yourself before condemning someone else? 
Why does everyone here leap to conclusions before finding out the facts? What harm would it have done to ask for an explanation or information before jumping to conclusions that do not fit the scenario? 

David judged me heathen without any info to support it, and now you judge me as baby killer? 

Well, if it makes you happy to have someone to condemn without a trial, please feel free as I have very broad shoulders. 

One question? 
What do you consider too old?


Contemplate the little things in life and then enjoy them all!..... Rowan





Many thanks to Valcali at Creative Signatures, who took my dream and made it real! 


Creative Signatures


For wonderful herbal products, please go to:


Medicine Song's Moon Lair

For you perfume or aroma items, please visit me at:


Common Scents Perfumes

 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  Hangin n there (juzmeagain)   6/6/2001 12:59 am  
To:  Rowan (POTIONS)    (51 of 71)  
 
  21.51 in reply to 21.50  
 
First off let me apologize to you, as I mistook you for someone else. We all do make mistakes and I made one. I wasnt yelling or didint intend to make it look that way either. And in answer to your age question,.....IM 46 with a terminal heart problem that will not give me a very long life expectancy. So IM doing good to raise this last child I have. Normally, a person of my age could raise one. My illness wont let me. But I do support pro choice and work with a lady that has a unwanted pregnancy clinic where the girls are talked to and offered support and help with thier pregnancys. Fortuneatly 90% of these girls and women opt to have thier babies and have them adopted into good homes. Again,IM sorry if I offended you and I will take the time to read who it was I was supposed to be posting to. 



Raven Photography

Today I am feeling 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  Rowan (POTIONS)    6/6/2001 8:15 pm  
To:  Hangin n there (juzmeagain)   (52 of 71)  
 
  21.52 in reply to 21.51  
 
I am truly sorry for your health problems and if there is anything i can do for you, please call on me. In "The Real World" I am an RN Thantanologistan know of what you face. 
I accept your apology and offer one of my own for being rude to you. There is enough insanity in the world with my adding to it unnecessarily. 

Please tell me more about your friend's clinic?


Contemplate the little things in life and then enjoy them all!..... Rowan





Many thanks to Valcali at Creative Signatures, who took my dream and made it real! 


Creative Signatures


For wonderful herbal products, please go to:


Medicine Song's Moon Lair

For you perfume or aroma items, please visit me at:


Common Scents Perfumes

 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  Hangin n there (juzmeagain)   6/6/2001 8:56 pm  
To:  Rowan (POTIONS)    (53 of 71)  
 
  21.53 in reply to 21.52  
 
Thanks for accepting my apologies as I accept yours as well. My freind runs a pregancy counseling center. Mostly for unwed pregnant girls. But she does get married woman too. She counsels them and lets them know that there is an option if they dont or cant keep thier babies for one reason or another. Sometimes it is becuase of lack of money, home, or career of just becuase they are too young. It is a prolife clinic all the way though. Sometimes, there is no talking them out of it, but most of the time, the girls do go there becuase they want to keep thier babys or give birth to them, but dont know where to turn to. Debbie, the woman that runs the clinic will counsel them and set them up if need be in a hme where they can go full term with room and board paid for until the baby is born. This home also is an adoption agency. So by the time the baby is born, the new adoptive parents have met the girl, and are in close contact all the way to birth. It has been a very sucessful clinic and very few have opted out for an abortion. The clinic also provides sources for those that want to keep thier babys to where to go for help with housing, money for clothes, formula and such. Theres probaby a lot Im leaving out here, but this is a little bit about it. 



Raven Photography

Today I am feeling 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  Rowan (POTIONS)    6/7/2001 4:12 pm  
To:  Hangin n there (juzmeagain)   (54 of 71)  
 
  21.54 in reply to 21.53  
 
It sounds like a working solution, unlike so many I have seen and been involved with. 
Thanks for the info.

Contemplate the little things in life and then enjoy them all!..... Rowan





Many thanks to Valcali at Creative Signatures, who took my dream and made it real! 


Creative Signatures


For wonderful herbal products, please go to:


Medicine Song's Moon Lair

For you perfume or aroma items, please visit me at:


Common Scents Perfumes

 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  David (DavidABrown)    6/14/2001 9:20 am  
To:  ALL   (55 of 71)  
 
  21.55 in reply to 21.2  
 

Right to Life of Michigan on New Michigan Abortion Web Site 
Grand Rapids, MI -- The Michigan Department of Community Health unveiled a 
new web site designed to assist women who are facing unexpected 
pregnancies. The web site, www.mdch.state.mi.us will provide women with 
factual information regarding fetal development, adoption, abortion 
methods, complications related to abortion and alternatives to abortion.{I tried the "Informed Consent for Abortion" selection and got an Error Msg. I will e-mail info net to let them know} 

The web site was designed to meet the informational needs of women 
contemplating abortion. In Michigan, abortion providers are required, by 
the Women's Right to Know law, to provide women with basic information 
before an abortion is performed. A woman must be given information about 
what abortion procedure she will have, the name of the doctor who will 
perform the abortion, depiction of the gestational age of her unborn 
child, other options to abortion like adoption, and at least one day to 
review the material. 

The state operated web site became a reality when Michigan lawmakers 
realized evidence began to mount that abortion providers were attempting 
to avoid a Women's Right to Know law by setting up web sites that 
contained false information and advertisements for no waiting period with 
"informed" consent through their web sites. Although the state web site 
will not answer every question or concern regarding abortion, it will 
provide a foundation of information. 

Right to Life of Michigan President Barbara Listing said, "Abortion 
providers have resisted offering women complete, accurate information 
regarding abortion. I applaud Michigan lawmakers for showing concern for 
women seeking information regarding abortion and making allowances for 
women to get accurate information on this important issue." 

Abortion is a procedure that has complications, risks, and alternative 
options. "A woman has the right to know what is going to happen to her 
body and to her unborn child before she decides to have an abortion," 
Listing said. 

Right to Life of Michigan encourages women who are facing a crisis 
pregnancy or who are dealing with the pain of a past abortion to call 
1-800-57WOMAN for assistance. 

Right to Life of Michigan is a nonpartisan, nonsectarian, nonprofit 
organization of diverse and caring people united to peacefully protect the 
precious gift of human life from fertilization to natural death. 

-- 
Are you looking for a pro-life speaker at your event or a guest on a radio 
program? Contact the Pro-Life Infonet at infonet@prolifeinfo.org 






David A. Brown
Basic Christian: Forum
 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  David (DavidABrown)    6/14/2001 9:21 am  
To:  ALL   (56 of 71)  
 
  21.56 in reply to 21.2  
 
Woman Can Sue Abortion Facility Anonymously Re Forced Abortion 
Melbourne, FL -- A federal appeals court panel has overturned a lower 
court decision and ruled that a woman can proceed anonymously in her 
lawsuit against an abortion facility. 

The three-member panel of the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta 
ruled that the woman can continue the lawsuit against the Aware Woman 
Center abortion facility under the name Jane Roe II. 

"A number of decisions have pointed to abortion as the paradigmatic 
example of the type of highly sensitive and personal matter that warrants 
a grant of anonymity," the panel said in the Friday ruling. 

In the lawsuit, the woman accused workers at the Melbourne abortion 
facility of preventing her from leaving. That's in violation of the 
federal Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances law, which provides civil 
remedies for people whose access to reproductive services is denied, the 
lawsuit alleges. 

The woman points out that when she went to the abortion facility in March 
1997 for an abortion she experienced pain in her stomach. She demanded 
that abortion practition William Egherman stop the abortion and call an 
ambulance for her. 

In the lawsuit, she demonstrates that four assistants held her down while 
the abortion went on without her consent. 

The woman was eventually taken by ambulance to an emergency room. She 
suffered a perforated uterus and a colon laceration, and after the rmains 
of her unborn child was removed from her uterus, she underwent surgery to 
repair internal organs damaged by the abortion. 

The district judge in Orlando ruled that the woman couldn't continue in 
the case anonymously and granted a motion to dismiss the case because the 
woman had failed to show that abortion facility workers prevented her from 
getting reproductive health services. The judge, however, allowed her to 
file an amended complaint, which she never did. 

The appellate panel's ruling allows the woman to file an amended complaint 
anonymously. 

"I was pleased to see it," said Chris Sapp, one of two attorneys for the 
woman. "We waited a long time, but it was worth the wait." 

Sapp, of Fort Myers, Florida, said Tuesday an earlier decision by a 
federal judge in Orlando requiring his client's name was, he believes, the 
first time a woman had been barred from proceeding anonymously in an 
abortion case in this country. "It's very gratifying to find that the 11th 
Circuit is willing to protect the rights of women vis--vis abortion," he 
said. 

Sapp said the opposing side may seek a rehearing by the 11th Circuit and 
later appeal that ruling to the U.S. Supreme Court. If the anonymity 
ruling does not stand, he said, his client will drop her case against 
Aware Woman Center for Choice Inc. rather than reveal her identity. 

Attorneys for the abortion facility had argued that past abortion cases in 
which the plaintiff was allowed to remain anonymous, such as Roe v. Wade, 
challenged government activity or laws. The case against Aware Woman 
Clinic didn't meet that standard. 

The abortion facility in question has since closed. 






David A. Brown
Basic Christian: Forum
 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  David (DavidABrown)    6/14/2001 9:24 am  
To:  ALL   (57 of 71)  
 
  21.57 in reply to 21.2  
 

Pro-Life Win at U.N. Sparks Call for Action 
New York, NY -- Pro-life groups won an unexpected victory Tuesday in their 
efforts to shield children worldwide from abortion, but more effort is 
needed to further ensure their protection. 

The breakthrough came as a panel of United Nations (U.N.) delegates from 
various countries were hammering out language in the U.N. Convention on 
the Rights of the Child, an international treaty that promises sweeping 
protections for children around the world. 

At the prodding of the Bush administration's U.S. delegation, a member of 
the pro-abortion Canadian delegation admitted that countries could 
interpret the document's call for children's access to "reproductive 
health services" as a call for children to have access to abortion, as 
well. 

The phrase proposed for a draft document to be presented at the September 
United Nations World Summit for Children was, "full gender equality and 
equal access to services, such as education, nutrition, health care, 
including sexual and reproductive health care." 

During the late-night session, negotiations had tightened as deliberations 
moved toward paragraph 21 of the draft document, where problematical 
phrases would need careful review. The Canadian delegate took the floor 
and replied with exasperation, "The distinguished delegate of the United 
States knows that, of course - and I hate to use the word - but in 
'services' is included abortion." 

The stunning admission prompted a heated debate over inclusion of the 
term. 

"In that case," said U.S. delegate Terry Miller, "brackets must go around 
that word." Brackets mark the text for later negotiations. Miller 
continued, "Now that we have had the explicit definition of services as 
including abortion, I would be amazed if my delegation is the only 
delegation to object to the use of 'services.'" 

Pro-life delegations were adamant that if "services" meant abortion, they 
could not accept such language. The delegate from Chile, who serves as a 
spokesman for the 10-nation Rio Group, was clear: "In my country, abortion 
is illegal. We by no means support abortion in the use of 'services' and 
so we delete 'services.'" 

A South American delegate echoed that sentiment: "Never before have we 
heard that 'services' included abortion." 

Msgr. Reinert of the Holy See delegation was emphatic: "My delegation - 
and personally, I am shocked - we will have to re-examine the entire 
document for the word 'service' if it means abortion. Every time the U.N. 
uses 'services,' if it means basic social services that is acceptable, but 
not including abortion." 

The nation of Bahrain supported the Holy See as did other countries. 

"Each nation ought to be respected for its culture and historical as well 
as religious traditions," remarked a delegate from Mexico. The Mexican 
delegation under Vincente Fox is split over abortion issues but is 
expected to confirm the pro-life position. 

Sudan, also serving as a spokesman for a group of nations, was tenacious 
in its refusal to be cowed by what is known as the "northern nations," a 
reference to the northern European nations that have pro-abortion and 
euthanasia policies. 

Austin Ruse, with the pro-life UN-lobbying group Catholic Family and Human 
Rights Institute, said pro-life groups for years have fought for such an 
admission from abortion supporters at the U.N. 

"The significance is that at long last somebody actually told the truth," 
Ruse said. "Generally, they try to sneak funny words in and then they 
obfuscate the definitions. And in a rare moment of blinding candor, the 
Canadian delegation said that phrase -- 'reproductive health and services' 
-- means abortion. And there was an explosion." 

During the 1990s, several United Nations conferences have sought to make 
abortion a universal right. Pro-life non-governmental organizations and 
pro-life nations have fought close battles to keep abortion a matter 
reserved to individual nations and not codified in international covenants 
and legal instruments. Each successive conference has become a testy 
battleground between nations with pro-abortion laws, such as Sweden and 
Norway, and the nations where abortion is not legal. Pro-life policy 
planners have viewed with alarm the World Summit for Children document as 
it has progressed through several drafts. They see the trend toward 
granting children 0-18 years old more autonomy as an unhealthy trend that 
divides parents and children. The "right" for minors to seek an abortion 
without parental knowledge or consent is just one of the many contentious 
issues under discussion at the U.N. this week. 

Peter Brandt, issues response director for Focus on the Family, praised 
the U.S. delegation for helping to expose pro-abortion advocates' agenda, 
but warned that the battle is far from over. 

"We need to have the White House instruct the delegation to make sure that 
there's no other words with hidden meaning (in the document)" Brandt said. 

TAKE ACTION: Contact President Bush and thank him for the U.S. 
delegation's work in protecting the sanctity of life in the U.N. 
Convention on the Rights of the Child. Ask him to have the delegation 
continue to press for the removal of any other terms that could give the 
world's children access to abortion. 

President Bush 
Comment line: 202-456-1111 
E-mail: president@whitehouse.gov 






David A. Brown
Basic Christian: Forum
 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  David (DavidABrown)    6/15/2001 8:32 am  
To:  ALL   (58 of 71)  
 
  21.58 in reply to 21.1  
 
Source: Concerned Women for America; June 14, 2001 
Whistleblower Nurse to Testify at Born Alive Congressional Hearing 

Washington, DC -- Jill Stanek, the nurse that blew the whistle on 
live-birth abortions, will testify at a congressional hearing on the Born 
Alive Infant Protection Act. The hearing will take place Thursday, June 
21, at 10:00 a.m. in Rayburn Office Building, Room 2226. 

The Born Alive Infant Protection Act is sponsored by Rep. Steve Chabot 
(R-Ohio), Chairman of the House Subcommittee on the Constitution, Sen. 
Rick Santorum (R-Pennsylvania), Rep. Sue Myrick (R-North Carolina) and 
Rep. Melissa Hart (R-Pennsylvania). 

Jill Stanek's reports of hospital personnel deliberately leaving babies to 
die sparked an investigation by the Illinois Attorney General. Federal 
legislation to give legal protection to babies born alive passed 
overwhelmingly in the U.S. House of Representatives last year, and 
numerous states have introduced similar legislation. 

Her hospital rewarded Mrs. Stanek's courageous, compassionate, and 
unrelenting stand by putting her on probation. She has endured harassment 
from superiors. Christ Hospital continues the practice of inducing labor 
then leaving the premature babies that survive to die from lack of 
attention or medical care. 

Karen Hayes, State Director for Concerned Women for America of Illinois, 
has worked closely with Mrs. Stanek to try to end this practice. 
Recently, her efforts resulted in three separate bills being introduced in 
the Illinois legislature. Mrs. Hayes will accompany Mrs. Stanek to the 
congressional hearing. 

-- 
Pregnancy Centers Online 
www.pregnancycenters.org 






David A. Brown
Basic Christian: Forum
 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit  
 
From:  David (DavidABrown)    6/15/2001 8:34 am  
To:  ALL    
 
    
 
Subject: The Politics of "Choose Life" License Plates 
Source: Washington Times; June 14, 2001 
The Politics of "Choose Life" License Plates 

Washington, DC -- Florida's approval of "Choose Life" specialty license 
plates has encouraged prolife groups in several states to promote 
legislation authorizing the sale of plates bearing the motto. But 
pro-abortion activists are stymieing their efforts. 
Pro-abortion opponents of the plates, including the National 
Organization for Women, the Center for Reproductive Rights (CRLP) in New 
York and the American Civil Liberties Union, say states should not endorse 
one side of a political issue. They have combined forces to stall the bill 
process in the courts. 
But there are other obstacles. Not least is the fear that if pro-life 
groups are allowed the Choose Life plates, pro-abortion groups must be 
allowed to produce "Choose Choice" plates or their equivalent. 
At least 12 states considered a "Choose Life" vanity plate bill 
during their 2001 legislative sessions: California, Pennsylvania, Texas, 
North Carolina, West Virginia, Mississippi, Ohio, South Carolina, 
Minnesota, Virginia and Alabama. 
Individuals or groups from 20 additional states and Canada are 
inquiring about how to start a "Choose Life" license-plate campaign. Some 
states, such as Missouri and Kansas, where previous bills were defeated, 
are trying again. 
"We're building public support and talking with interested 
legislators," says Joan Hawkins, executive director of Kansans for Life. 
She says the new bill probably will not be introduced again until January. 
Only two states have actually passed legislation permitting the 
"Choose Life" plates: Louisiana and Florida. But there the courts have 
intervened. 
Acting on a request by the pro-abortion New York-based Center for 
Reproductive Law and Policy, Planned Parenthood lobbyist Russell Henderson 
and others, Judge Stanwood R. Duval Jr. of the U.S. District Court in New 
Orleans issued an injunction against sale of the plates. The judge 
declared the pro-life plate is discriminatory because it offers just one 
point of view. 
The ban took effect two weeks after the bill became law in August 
1999 and is now being appealed. 
But Kathleen Benfield, director of the American Family Association of 
New Orleans, says, "A license plate isn't a public forum. [The judge's 
rationale] is not relevant because [pro-abortion forces] haven't even 
tried. No one has applied for a 'Choose Death' license plate." 
CRLP attorney Brigitte Amiri says, "It's very, very doubtful that the 
Louisiana Legislature would pass a pro-choice license plate or that the 
governor would sign for it." Polls have shown that Louisiana is possibly 
the most pro-life state. 
Until recently, Florida's "Choose Life" plates could not be 
distributed because of a lawsuit filed by the National Organization for 
Women that argued the plates violate the separation between church and 
state. 
However, Circuit Judge Nikki Ann Clark of Leon County, Fla., denied 
NOW's recall request last Friday. She said she will hear a complaint that 
the "Choose Life" license plate violates free speech, but the plates may 
remain on sale during that legal process. NOW has 30 days to file the 
amended complaint and the state of Florida has 20 days thereafter to 
respond. 
The Florida tag sales have totaled more than $440,000 since the 
pro-life plates went on sale in August. At least 70 percent of funds 
raised by the plate provide for "the material needs of pregnant women who 
are committed to placing their children for adoption," the legislation 
states. 
A Mississippi bill that would create a dozen specialty license 
plates, including a "Choose Life" tag, was defeated on the last day of the 
three-month 2001 legislative session. One reason for the defeat was that 
backers of the plate did not want a future tag that would urge motorists 
to choose abortion. 
"The House stance was so pro-life that [representatives] didn't want 
to leave a loophole that would allow the opposition to have a tag of their 
own," said Shana Holt, president of the Choose Life Advisory Council, a 
Mississippi group established solely to oversee the marketing strategy 
that will promote the plate for next year's legislative session. 
In West Virginia, state Delegate Bobbie Warner, a Democrat from 
Harrison, proposed a bill to create specialty plates for veterans, 
volunteer firefighters and pro-lifers. The latter plate contained the 
words 'Pro-Life' instead of 'Choose Life.' 
The bill passed in the House after being amended to provide 
additional plates for the NAACP and United Mine Workers of America. It was 
then sent to the Senate for review. But the Senate rejected the measure 
and it died in the final moments of the last day of the legislative 
session, when the original paperwork for the bill vanished. 
The state's constitution requires that only the original bill can be 
passed. No bill can become law without the original paperwork and attached 
amendments. 
Karen Cross, executive director of West Virginians for Life, was an 
eyewitness to the legislative session. She said, "The senators [Democrats 
Oshel Craigo and Mike Ross] were asking why their bill had not been 
presented yet, because so many resolutions were being passed. They began 
to look through the papers and realized it wasn't there. The bill 
reappeared that next Monday night." 
Mrs. Cross says she overheard a staff member for one of the opposing 
senators predict the failure of the bill to pass hours before the 
paperwork mysteriously disappeared. The disappearing act has happened 
before with other controversial bills, she notes. 
"People were really excited about the plate, and it's a shame that 
someone had to completely thwart the legislative process," Mrs. Cross 
said. 
Traditionally, specialty license plates pass through legislative 
sessions with minimum trouble, mostly because they are income generators 
for the state, particularly in West Virginia, which retains all the 
proceeds. Most other states send the plate revenue to maternity homes and 
crisis-pregnancy centers. 

-- 
The Pro-Life Infonet is a daily compilation of pro-life news and 
information. To subscribe, send the message "subscribe" to: 
infonet-request@prolifeinfo.org. Infonet is sponsored by Women and 
Children First www.womenandchildrenfirst.org. For more pro-life 
info visit www.prolifeinfo.org and for questions or additional 
information email ertelt@prolifeinfo.org 






David A. Brown
Basic Christian: Forum
 
From:  R/C Floats (RachelsChild)   6/19/2001 5:52 pm  
To:  Zebra30   (60 of 71)  
 
  21.60 in reply to 21.12  
 
Hi Zebra.... 

Well I do understand the desire to promote and keep sexual relations sacred, I can't agree with your methodology. 
I do not hink people engage in "barnyard sex" or "recreational" sex as such, many as are looking for relationshipsin all the wrong places and by the wrong means to fill unmet needs. 
Your terminology offends the very human creature God made. Refering and debasing them in such a way does little to identify what really out of order in their lives. 
Just my POV. 
R/C 
 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit  
From:  Bob Blaylock (Bob_Blaylock)   6/19/2001 9:45 pm  
To:  R/C Floats (RachelsChild)   (61 of 71)  
 
  21.61 in reply to 21.60  
 
RACHELSCHILD wrote to ZEBRA30:
Well I do understand the desire to promote and keep sexual relations sacred, I can't agree with your methodology. I do not think people engage in "barnyard sex" or "recreational" sex as such, many as are looking for relationships in all the wrong places and by the wrong means to fill unmet needs. Your terminology offends the very human creature God made. Refering and debasing them in such a way does little to identify what really out of order in their lives.
  Perhaps it's just my imagination, but I think I sense a certain amount of defensiveness and rationalization here.

  What offends and debases the very human creature God made is not the terminology which ZEBRA30 has used, but the behavior which is being described by this terminology.  In any event, I think ZEBRA30's terminology cuts right to the heart of much of our society's ills.  Let's face some facts, here  Sex is one of the most powerful forces with which God has entrusted Mankind.  As with all powerful forces, it has the ability, when used properly, to bring about great and wonderful, things, including, in this case, the strengthening of the marital bond, and the creation of new human life.  Used carelessly and irresponsibly, it has the potential to bring about devastating consequences.

  If you think about it, I think you'll come to realize that many of the ills in our society can be traced to the careless and irresponsible use of this power.

  There is, of course, the spread of diseases, some of them very nasty diseases.  But more significant, I think, are when the primary positive effects of this power occur in inappropriate situations.

  The creation of a new child, within a family that is set up to sustain and provide for this child's needs, is a wonderful thing.  The creation of a child in the absense of this situation can have very adverse, far-reaching consequences.  Illegitimacy leads to poverty, and it leads to children who grow up very often without the vital sense of family responsibility.  Absent this sense of responsibility, they very often perpetuate the problem by creating further generations of illegitimate offspring, as well as engaging in other anti-social activities which fill the vacuum meant to be occupied by their family responsibilities.

  The bond of sexual intimacy is a vital force in uniting a man and his wife, to form a lifetime relationship.  Our psyches are not meant to withstanding having this bond repeatedly created and broken in short-term relationships, and I remain convinced that the psychological and spiritual damage caused by repeatedly making and breaking what was meant to be a lifetime bond is, itself, a cause of much behavior which is antisocial, abusive, and self-destructive.  I guess I can't really prove this, but I firmly believe it to be so.

  I'm afraid I'm not saying much of this very well.  I have thoughts in my head which are very clear, and very powerful, but (as often seems to be the case with my most important thoughts) my attempts to put these thoughts into words are going very poorly, and I fear that a great deal of their meaning is being lost in the translation.

  I ask you to consider this truth:  Every known human society that has ever prospered has been based upon family units, formed by marriage betwene men and women, committed to their relationship with one another, and to the task of raising any children which might be produced by this relationship.  There have always been individual deviations in any society from this format, but whenever a society as a whole has sancioned such deviations, and accepted them as normal and proper, that society has experienced significant adverse consquences, such as our own society is now experiencing.
The average age of the worlds greatest
civilizations has been two hundred years.
These nations have progressed through
this sequence:

   From bondage to spiritual faith.
   From spiritual faith to great courage.
   From courage to liberty.
   From liberty to abundence.
   From abundence to selfishness.
   From selfishness to complacency.
   From complacency to apathy.
   From apathy to dependence.
   From dependence back again to bondage.
 
Alexander Fraser Tyler,  c. 1750




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 To email me, remove the string .nospam from the email address which appears below.  DO NOT send me any form of advertising, chain letters, or other such garbage.  Spammers will be dealt with very harshly!

bob-blaylock.nospam@usa.net  

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Edited 6/20/01 1:00:16 AM ET by BOB_BLAYLOCK 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  Zebra30   6/19/2001 11:47 pm  
To:  Bob Blaylock (Bob_Blaylock)   (62 of 71)  
 
  21.62 in reply to 21.61  
 
Very well said,Bob. You didn't miss a beat. 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  R/C Floats (RachelsChild)   6/20/2001 5:00 am  
To:  Rowan (POTIONS)    (63 of 71)  
 
  21.63 in reply to 21.34  
 
Hi and AMEN to your post. 
R/C  
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  R/C Floats (RachelsChild)   6/20/2001 5:11 am  
To:  Bob Blaylock (Bob_Blaylock)   (64 of 71)  
 
  21.64 in reply to 21.45  
 
Bob..... 
This is exactly where pro lifers miss the mark. The woman is the mother not some evil doer!!! So your solution is to tell the woman not to abort but have her place her child into adoption as pennance for her sin of receiving a child God placed in her womb? 
You folks miss the whole package of the sacredness of human life, mother and child as an unseperable, God created unit!... all the the pro lifers rant on about the sanctity of human life...it rings hollow in most woman's ears because it is hollow. 
R/C 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  R/C Floats (RachelsChild)   6/20/2001 6:28 am  
To:  Bob Blaylock (Bob_Blaylock)   (65 of 71)  
 
  21.65 in reply to 21.61  
 
Hi Bob: 
No, my Christain brother I am not defensive/rationalizing or going soft on sin or the effects of sin. However, I am soft on the sinner. 
All ills of our world go back to the original sin in the Garden of Eden. The original sin did not involve sex. The sin of the garden is what ails all of mankind and has produced every evil thereof: human pride. Beleiving and buying into the lie that we can circumvent our needs and desires, above and apart from God. We sin as our father the devil did and his sin of pride produced the way that sin works: we steal, kill and destroy from ourselves and our fellow brother. 

I might remind you Eve did not conceive and bring forth the first human baby till after the Fall. Cain was not born into a perfect family. The sin of the original family unit was PRIDE and that sin 
produced envy, jealousy and eventually murder Abel's murder. The first family's foundation/sanctity was destroyed by pride. There are no perfect family units for any human soul to be born into, even married Christians cannot produce one, Godly sex/marriage is not the source or answer to produce a Godly home. 

What was the root cause of disfunction, murder in that original family? Sexual misconduct? Hardly. In fact it takes a few generations before that sin begins to surface. What ails the human family is not sex run amuck, it is our seperation from God. Only God can meet our every need. The family, society, power, politics, causes, the church 
cannot fix what is the rooy of what is wrong with us. Sex, murder, mahem, love of money, each one is a symptom of seperation from God and that is the reality of living in a fallen world. Their is no magic fix, we need God's miracle of redeemed and sanctified lives. 

You've lost the foundation when you focus so intently on these symptoms/practices of our fallen nature. How we love to point fingers at the sinners caught up in their sin... blame them for what ails every wrong in our world. What sin brother seperated you from God? I dare say it was the same as all of us, as every human creature ever born. 

The family as precious and sacred as it is cannot save our selves from ourselves. Our cornerstone of salvation is Christ Jesus and only in Him can all things be made right again. 
RachelsChild 
 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  Bob Blaylock (Bob_Blaylock)   6/20/2001 7:53 am  
To:  R/C Floats (RachelsChild)   (66 of 71)  
 
  21.66 in reply to 21.64  
 
RACHELSCHILD wrote:
This is exactly where pro lifers miss the mark. The woman is the mother not some evil doer!!! So your solution is to tell the woman not to abort but have her place her child into adoption as pennance for her sin of receiving a child God placed in her womb?
  First, let me say that I reject the label Pro-Life as a dishonest and cowardly euphemism.  I am honest about where I stand, so I will label myself as anti-abortion.  I call upon those of the opposing view to similarly reject the dishonest and cowardly label Pro-Choice, and to adopt a label which more honestly and accurately characterizes their position.

  This said, your characterization of the anti-abortion position is unfair.  Speaking for myself, anyway, it is not my position that the mother of an illegitimate child needs to be punished, or that having her bear the child and put it up for adoption is a suitable punishment.  I advocate adoption because it is the best solution for a bad situation, being better than having the child raised in an environment which lacks the ability to provide for the child's needs, and certainly being a better solution than murdering the child.

  Yes, this will be difficult and unpleasant for the birth mother, and this is unfortunate.  But the birth mother engaged in careless behavior, of a sort which has unpleasant consequences.  You seem to believe that she is entitled to the choice which will best relieve her of these consequences of her own foolishness, regardless of its impact on the innocent child which she has brought into the situation.  Obviously, I disagree.  The child is not responsible for his birth-mother's folly, and should not be made to bear the consequences of it.  The child deserves (and perhaps can be fairly said to be entitled to) a complete, intact family which is equipped to properly raise him and see to his needs.  Adoption is the best way to provide this.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 To email me, remove the string .nospam from the email address which appears below.  DO NOT send me any form of advertising, chain letters, or other such garbage.  Spammers will be dealt with very harshly!

bob-blaylock.nospam@usa.net  

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  R/C Floats (RachelsChild)   6/20/2001 8:22 am  
To:  Bob Blaylock (Bob_Blaylock)   (67 of 71)  
 
  21.67 in reply to 21.66  
 
Dear Bob: 
The idea of relieving the mother of the child via adoption extols the same message as abortion: Get rid of the resposibility God has now given you. 
The idea my friend is to affirm the life God put in the Mother's womb.To transfer her responsibility of rearing the child God created in her womb, onto a *worthy family* negates God's desire to work within the family He allowed to be created in the first place. Who children are born to is no accident or mistake. 

Yes, the child is not responsible for the mother's "foolishness" or "folly", as is no child born unto any mother/father, married or not. 

A child is entitled to the mother God placed him/her with, not a man made manufactured one. Help the mother fulfill her responsibilty and you will best help the child. 
R/C 


 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  Bob Blaylock (Bob_Blaylock)   6/20/2001 10:14 am  
To:  R/C Floats (RachelsChild)   (68 of 71)  
 
  21.68 in reply to 21.67  
 
RACHELSCHILD wrote:
The idea of relieving the mother of the child via adoption extols the same message as abortion: Get rid of the resposibility (sic) God has now given you.
  You're missing the point.  It's not about the mother; it's about the child, and what's best for the child.  What's best for the child is not be be raised by a single mother that is unprepared and unable to properly care for him.  What's best for the child is most certainly not to be killed by way of an abortion.  What's best fo rthe child is to be in a complete, intact family, with both a mother and a father.  The god-given responsibility of the young woman who gives birth is to see that the child's needs are met, to the best of her ability to do so.  In many instances, this will mean putting the child up for adoption so that he will be cared for by a family that is better equipped to care for him than she is.



The idea my friend is to affirm the life God put in the Mother's womb.To transfer her responsibility of rearing the child God created in her womb, onto a *worthy family* negates God's desire to work within the family He allowed to be created in the first place. Who children are born to is no accident or mistake.

Yes, the child is not responsible for the mother's "foolishness" or "folly", as is no child born unto any mother/father, married or not.

A child is entitled to the mother God placed him/her with, not a man made manufactured one. Help the mother fulfill her responsibilty and you will best help the child.
  Where young single women have chosen to keep the children they've borne, the results are often disasterous, for the child, for the mother, and for society as a whole.  We have seen generation after generation of illegitimate children being raised by single mothers, supported by a corrupt socialist welfare system.  Lacking proper parental role models, these children grow up knowing nothing of self-sufficiency, or family responsibility.  They grow up believing that the world owes them a living, because the only living they have ever known is from money that nobody has earned.  (Well, that's not entirely correct.  The taxpayers who are robbed to support this welfare system earned the money that is thus taken from them.)  They do not understand the concept of supporting themselves from honest work, for this is not how they were supported as children.  And worst of all, they don't understand the responsibilities associated with that greatest power with which God has entrusted us, the power to create new life.  As their parents did, they themselves misuse this power, and thus spawn a whole new generation of illegitimi, to whom the same (lack of) values will be passed.  Surely this is not what God wants or intends for any of Mankind.  And we all end up bearing the burden of supporting this parasitical situaltion by way of the corrupt welfare system, as well as the consequences of the crimes committed by young men who grew up lacking proper guidance from their absent fathers.  What you seem to be advocating is leaving the care of these children in the hands of, as another participant in this thread has put it, birth mothers barely finished playing with dolls, rape victims, abused women, or females who have simply made a mistake and know they are not equiped to deal with a child.  How can you not see the destructive folly of this?



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 To email me, remove the string .nospam from the email address which appears below.  DO NOT send me any form of advertising, chain letters, or other such garbage.  Spammers will be dealt with very harshly!

bob-blaylock.nospam@usa.net  

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  R/C Floats (RachelsChild)   6/20/2001 11:28 am  
To:  Bob Blaylock (Bob_Blaylock)   (69 of 71)  
 
  21.69 in reply to 21.68  
 
Bob: 

If we've had generation after generation of "parasitical" welfare situations, I don't see it. Every generation including our immigrant ancestors has been made up of the poor, and much of the poverty was from foolish choices, ie... laziness, drunkedness, poor work habits, ignorance, adultery and on down the sin list. 
I do see generation after generation of sin from all stratas of society...including and not to limited to, white middle class. Whose sins appear classier that's for sure but are just as deadly and perverse. 

What hope do you offer any welfare recipient? A good lecture, alengthy preach and make sure they get their comeupence too? and while your at it don't forget "the likes of you can never bring up a child, hand the child over to us too because only we holy sinners know how to treasure children." 

Pro life....pro child? I don't believe it when I read your solutions for the woman and children in need. What I do see in the pro life movement is the child being held up as the prize, the commodity to be gleaned. If we are pro life, we should be pro humanity. One life should not held up as more valuable, more redemptable then another. 

I do not see much room for Jesus in the pro life community. My Bible doesn't quite paint Him as the mean spirted and hard task master you propose. He came to heal the sick and needy. The only group of people He ever went after with punishment was the money keepers. The only group of people he ever verbally, publically chastised were the Pharisees who He did call "a brood of vipers" 
and "white washed tombs." 

I see no hope for rescuing the perishing untill we stop beating the sheep. 
R/C 



 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  David (DavidABrown)    6/20/2001 8:14 pm  
To:  R/C Floats (RachelsChild)   (70 of 71)  
 
  21.70 in reply to 21.69  
 
You have made a very valid point and I appreciate it. I have been rethinking the prolife movement and do see your point. 
I think the primary option should be to keep families together. There are niches in the pro-life movement that specialize in keeping families together, but most offer adoption as the end all. 

I think that as the pro-life movement Matures it needs to head this direction of less adoption and more responsibility. 

Im a volunteer for a pro-life center and Im going to bring up this point at our next meeting. 





David A. Brown
Basic Christian: Forum
 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


   From:  David (DavidABrown)    7/5/2001 8:42 am  
To:  ALL   (71 of 71)  
 
  21.71 in reply to 21.8  
 
From: The Pro-Life Infonet infonet@prolifeinfo.org 
Reply-To: Steven Ertelt infonet@prolifeinfo.org 
Subject: New NOW President Clashes With Pro-Lifers on Abortion 
Source: Cybercast News Service, Associated Press; July 2, 2001 
New NOW President Clashes With Pro-Lifers on Abortion 

Washington, DC -- The new president of the pro-abortion National 
Organization for Women wasted little time in causing a stir with the 
pro-life community. After being elected on Sunday, Kim Gandy said her 
first priority would be to block efforts by President George W. Bush to 
nominate Supreme Court justices opposed to abortion 

Gandy said NOW will make sure the U.S. Senate, which must approve Bush's 
choices to the high court, understands the importance of the abortion 
issue. "They have more to fear from women's votes than they have to fear 
from right-wing political and religious zealots," said Gandy. 

Pro-life groups immediately criticized Gandy, voted to replace outgoing 
president Patricia Ireland, for her comments, arguing that as a feminist 
group, NOW should not have been focusing on abortion rights but rather, 
the causes of abortion. 

"We are concerned that Gandy is going to make abortion her top priority. 
She is on the wrong track," said Serrin Foster, President of Feminists for 
Life. 

Foster said NOW should be trying to combat domestic violence as well as 
coming up with ideas for women to combine their jobs with their families. 

"The majority of women won't combine career and family. We also notice a 
lot of hardships being experienced by pregnant women in college due to a 
lack of finances and child support issues. Gandy should be focusing on 
issues that drive women to abortion and try to find solutions," Foster 
said. 

A spokeswoman for Concerned Women of America (CWA) said the pro-life 
women's group will counter any efforts by NOW to derail the nomination of 
pro-life Supreme Court justices. 

"NOW has not been successful in the past and it is a dying organization 
that does not have the numbers they claim to have. But they will try to 
neutralize nominees or scare off nominees that are pro-life," said CWA 
Communications Director Wendy Wright. 

"Like the way we did with the Ashcroft nomination, we will support and 
educate people on the nominees who do not just make laws from the bench. 
We will tell the people about what NOW and their left-wing cohorts are 
lying about," she said. 

Gandy's predecessor, Patricia Ireland, expressed confidence in her. She 
said under Gandy's leadership, NOW will continue to enact more 
groundbreaking laws that ensure abortion, elect more pro-abortion 
candidates to the different levels of government and prevent "the packing 
of courts with anti-women's rights nominees." Ireland had served as NOW 
president for the past 10 years. 

If a Supreme Court justice is confirmed who wants to stop abortion, Gandy 
threatened, ``The senators who voted for that person are going to be put 
out of office." 

Gandy has been involved with NOW since 1973 and served as vice president 
for the feminist group during Ireland's 10 years as president. Gandy also 
served as a senior assistant district attorney in New Orleans before 
opening a private practice focusing on "women's rights issues." 

-- 
The Pro-Life Infonet is a daily compilation of pro-life news and 
information. To subscribe, send the message "subscribe" to: 
infonet-request@prolifeinfo.org. Infonet is sponsored by Women and 
Children First www.womenandchildrenfirst.org For more pro-life 
info visit www.prolifeinfo.org and for questions or additional 
information email ertelt@prolifeinfo.org 






David A. Brown
Basic Christian: Forum
 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit  
 
