Murder Without Conscience

[B.Helto]

/edit: *Conscience

what's wrong with this picture?

http://marchtogether.blogspot.com/2006/07/...conscience.html (http://marchtogether.blogspot.com/2006/07/murder-without-conscience.html)


For some reason, this blog reminded me of someone who frequents this forum.

Enjoy.

[Proper Bo]

lol, people getting upset about peoples actions that have nothing to do with them.

[manker]

Killing unborn babies because they're inconvenient is wrong.

Sitting in my comfy chair, it's easy for me to say but there is always adoption at the end of a pregnancy.

Throwing pig blood over pregnant women and filing clerks who happen to work at the abortion clinic is also wrong but it isn't quite so bad as killing an unborn child.

This article (http://www.theonion.com/content/node/33680?issue=4227&special=1999) is great if you're a big fan of sarcasm - but it has little other value.

[Lilmiss]

Killing unborn babies because they're inconvenient is wrong.

:lol:

As much as I'd love to argue otherwise, I just can't be arsed.

[Busyman]

/edit: *Conscience

what's wrong with this picture?

http://marchtogether.blogspot.com/2006/07/...conscience.html (http://marchtogether.blogspot.com/2006/07/murder-without-conscience.html)


For some reason, this blog reminded me of someone who frequents this forum.

Enjoy.
:lol: :lol: That was funny.

[manker]

Killing unborn babies because they're inconvenient is wrong.

:lol:

As much as I'd love to argue otherwise, I just can't be arsed.
Pretty worthless comment, then.

[Lilmiss]

I guess it was, but I don't have the energy for people who put it in black and white like that.

I booked myself into an abortion clinic a few years back.
Didn't go through with it in the end, but that was my choice.

[manker]

I guess it was, but I don't have the energy for people who put it in black and white like that.

I booked myself into an abortion clinic a few years back.
Didn't go through with it in the end, but that was my choice.
I've posted my views on it several times on his forum - that above was a basic summation. It's hardly black and white but no matter how much I wrestle with the issue, I always tend to come to the same conclusion.

What you believe is personal to you and is just as valid as my own views. It's just an opinion. What I wouldn't do is say that I can't be bothered with people like you who disagree with me.

The reason being is because if I take the time to find out what others think, they might come at it from a different angle and I might see something I'd not thought of before. Obviously, I don't just mean this issue.

[Lilmiss]

Even if that is your opinion, I would have thought you of all lounge folk would have worded your statement with a little more sensibility.

Abortion isn't the easiest thing to consider doing, but it doesn't make someone a monster for thinking of the wellbeing of their unborn child.

Having a child through being dominated into thinking it's evil to terminate then being a dreadful mother is a far worse crime, in my opinion.

And I doubt you have ever been through pregnancy and labour, but the longer you carry a child for, the more attached you grow to it. Giving it up for adoption wouldn't be a feasible option for most mothers, I imagine.

[MagicNakor]

For those of you who don't know, The Onion is a satire site.

:shuriken:

[manker]

Even if that is your opinion, I would have thought you of all lounge folk would have worded your statement with a little more sensibility.

Abortion isn't the easiest thing to consider doing, but it doesn't make someone a monster for thinking of the wellbeing of their unborn child.

Having a child through being dominated into thinking it's evil to terminate then being a dreadful mother is a far worse crime, in my opinion.

And I doubt you have ever been through pregnancy and labour, but the longer you carry a child for, the more attached you grow to it. Giving it up for adoption wouldn't be a feasible option for most mothers, I imagine.I can see where you're coming from, I can also see that my initial statement was a bit stark.

I still won't agree that adoption isn't a feasible option even tho' the mother gets more attached to the child the longer she carries it. The same can be said of fathers too, if they see the mother everyday, albeit to a different extent.

To my mind, the heartwrenching decision to give up a child for adoption pales when compared with the heartwrenching decision to deprive the child of a chance to live.

Adoption of a baby my partner was carrying for 9 months might make me miserable and potentially give me a burden I might not be able to cope with for the forseeable future - but it would at least give the child a chance of being happy (that is, if I ((we)) felt truly unable to provide proper care for the child).

That, however, is a personal thing.


I know, it's impossible for me to speak from the point of view of a woman who has carried a child and it is very difficult for me to word these posts countering what you're saying, knowing the bits you've posted over the years about your situation. I feel uncomfortable doing so. Sorry if that sounds in the least bit condescending, or makes me sound like a complete tit - I really don't mean it to.

[manker]

For those of you who don't know, The Onion is a satire site.

:shuriken:
I thought I mentioned that :dabs:
This article (http://www.theonion.com/content/node/33680?issue=4227&special=1999) is great if you're a big fan of sarcasm - but it has little other value.

[B.Helto]

Killing unborn babies because they're inconvenient is wrong.

If that's what actually happened in the article I posted, I might agree with you.


This article (http://www.theonion.com/content/node/33680?issue=4227&special=1999) is great if you're a big fan of sarcasm - but it has little other value.

Actually it's satire - and there's a really good a point behind it. The fictitious woman who wrote the fictitious article is a typical straw dog that pro-lifers always conjure up to reinforce their points. She doesn't exist.

The fact that this story was so easily embraced and accepted as truth proves the point. In the end, nobody even seems to be bothered much whether the story is true or not, only if it agrees with their particular viewpoint. The religious right seems to fall for it most of all.

Another example:

from Wired News (http://www.wired.com/news/culture/1,63048-1.html)

And it seems that one reason many people fall for Onion stories is that they're too close to the subject matter to see humor in it.

"Some people are so desperate for proof of their point of view, they'll seize upon any old e-mail forward that floats by," Chris Taylor, the San Francisco bureau chief for Time magazine, said.

As an example, Carol Kolb, the editor of The Onion, points to a 2000 story titled, "Harry Potter Books Spark Rise in Satanism Among Children," which prompted some Christian groups to go nuts.

Indeed, an e-mail blasting Harry Potter author J.K. Rowling moved at light speed through fundamentalist groups online, decrying the books' satanic influence on children and Rowling's supposed pride at being behind it.

The e-mail further tried to whip up anti-Potter fury with the inclusion of an inflammatory Rowling quote from The Onion story.

"I think it's absolute rubbish to protest children's books on the grounds that they are luring children to Satan," Rowling was said to have told a London Times reporter. "People should be praising them for that! These books guide children to an understanding that the weak, idiotic Son of God is a living hoax who will be humiliated when the rain of fire comes, and will suck the greasy cock of the Dark Lord while we, his faithful servants, laugh and cavort in victory."

Kolb, of course, chuckles at the notion that anyone took the story seriously.

...the fact that they do speaks volumes.

[manker]

If that's what actually happened in the article I posted, I might agree with you.


This article (http://www.theonion.com/content/node/33680?issue=4227&special=1999) is great if you're a big fan of sarcasm - but it has little other value.

Actually it's satire - and there's a really good a point behind it. The fictitious woman who wrote the fictitious article is a typical straw dog that pro-lifers always conjure up to reinforce their points. She doesn't exist.

The fact that this story was so easily embraced and accepted as truth proves the point. In the end, nobody even seems to be bothered much whether the story is true or not, only if it agrees with their particular viewpoint. The religious right seems to fall for it most of all.

Another example:

from Wired News (http://www.wired.com/news/culture/1,63048-1.html)

And it seems that one reason many people fall for Onion stories is that they're too close to the subject matter to see humor in it.

"Some people are so desperate for proof of their point of view, they'll seize upon any old e-mail forward that floats by," Chris Taylor, the San Francisco bureau chief for Time magazine, said.

As an example, Carol Kolb, the editor of The Onion, points to a 2000 story titled, "Harry Potter Books Spark Rise in Satanism Among Children," which prompted some Christian groups to go nuts.

Indeed, an e-mail blasting Harry Potter author J.K. Rowling moved at light speed through fundamentalist groups online, decrying the books' satanic influence on children and Rowling's supposed pride at being behind it.

The e-mail further tried to whip up anti-Potter fury with the inclusion of an inflammatory Rowling quote from The Onion story.

"I think it's absolute rubbish to protest children's books on the grounds that they are luring children to Satan," Rowling was said to have told a London Times reporter. "People should be praising them for that! These books guide children to an understanding that the weak, idiotic Son of God is a living hoax who will be humiliated when the rain of fire comes, and will suck the greasy cock of the Dark Lord while we, his faithful servants, laugh and cavort in victory."

Kolb, of course, chuckles at the notion that anyone took the story seriously.

...the fact that they do speaks volumes.
I really did get that you were highlighting the ludicrous article on the pro-lifers site countering the made up article.

I wanted to point out that there were faults on both sides. Both the protesters with their methods and babies being thought of by some as inconvenient.

My point really was that you don't have to be some kind of screaming sensationalist to believe that abortion is, essentially, wrong.

[Lilmiss]

To my mind, the heartwrenching decision to give up a child for adoption pales when compared with the heartwrenching decision to deprive the child of a chance to live.

I do believe abortion is wrong in the later stages of pregnancy and also as a quick way out option. But if you wanted the child so badly, yet knew you couldn't finacially or emotionally support it? It would break my heart having to give away something I'd grown so attached to.

You've no need to feel uncomfortable telling me your views as I've heard it all before, so you can't upset or shock me with them. I'm just feeling a bit high at the mo, and the first comment you posted made me pish myself laughing.

[manker]

Yeah, that's my point really. Knowing it would break MY heart would be a price I'd be willing to pay to give the child a chance to live and be happy with a different family.

Glad yer cool with my clumsy words, anyhow :)

[JPaul]

But if you wanted the child so badly, yet knew you couldn't finacially or emotionally support it? It would break my heart having to give away something I'd grown so attached to.


The options being to give him / her away or to take their life.

My opinions on this matter are well discussed here, the child's right to life outweighs your feeling of loss having to give it up.

[Lilmiss]

Are you saying that all terminations are morally wrong or is the morning after pill allowed? When exactly, does it become the childs right to live?

[Skweeky1]

Or when exactly is it a child?

I had an abortion myself about 1.5 years ago. I had no money, no job, my boyfriend at the time was emotionally blackmailing to give up the baby, I had no place to go at all.

No, I didn't want to give up the baby, but at that point in time what other option did I have?

You're all entitled to your opinions but don't judge other people on it if you've not been in the situation yourself.

[manker]

No-one is judging anyone.

All I'm saying is that if I was in that situation, I feel I'd do things differently and have posted reasons why I would do so.

Obviously, I can't be in that situation but I don't think it makes my opinion invalid, does it?

[JPaul]

Are you saying that all terminations are morally wrong or is the morning after pill allowed? When exactly, does it become the childs right to live?
I was specifically answering your post, I didn't quote the whole thing as it didn't seem necessary given the context, my mistake. What you said was

"I do believe abortion is wrong in the later stages of pregnancy and also as a quick way out option. But if you wanted the child so badly, yet knew you couldn't finacially or emotionally support it? It would break my heart having to give away something I'd grown so attached to."

I also don't intend going into great details about this again, my views are all posted here if you are interested in them.

[JPaul]

Or when exactly is it a child?

I had an abortion myself about 1.5 years ago. I had no money, no job, my boyfriend at the time was emotionally blackmailing to give up the baby, I had no place to go at all.

No, I didn't want to give up the baby, but at that point in time what other option did I have?

You're all entitled to your opinions but don't judge other people on it if you've not been in the situation yourself.
I wasn't judging you or anyone else. If it came across that way, I apologise.

[manker]

I also don't intend going into great details about this again, my views are all posted here if you are interested in them.
Actually, most of them have been deleted.

That member specific database crash we had that deleted and restored a few members' posts but mysteriously left your own unrecovered.

[JPaul]

I also don't intend going into great details about this again, my views are all posted here if you are interested in them.
Actually, most of them have been deleted.

That member specific database crash we had that deleted and restored a few members' posts but mysteriously left your own unrecovered.
Good point, well presented. I hadn't thought of that.

That cunt of a database really musn't have liked my posts.

Damned database.

[Skweeky1]

I apologise, I have overreacted a bit and didn't mean to imply that you were.
Just a bit of a touchy subject.

Sorry

[JPaul]

I apologise, I have overreacted a bit and didn't mean to imply that you were.
Just a bit of a touchy subject.

Sorry
:flowers:

Stop making me do nice / sincere thing. Who knows where it will end up.

JPaul = Scotch manker.

noooooooooooooo.

[Skweeky1]

:lol:

I don't think I've ever seen you use that smiley before.

Suspicious...

[JPaul]

:lol:

I don't think I've ever seen you use that smiley before.

Suspicious...
You've just not seen me do sincere before, it may well be a while before you see it again. There are so few people I give enough of a fuck about to bother with it.

Now go and get some ironing done or summit.

[Skweeky1]

I only buy clothes that don't wrinkle. I'm too busy playing on tinternet too bother with mundialities like ironing :snooty:

Difficult word to pronounce btw

eye-or-ning

[manker]

I only buy clothes that don't wrinkle. I'm too busy playing on tinternet too bother with mundialities like ironing :snooty:But plenty of time to invent new words that enrich our already pulchritudinous language :wub:

[JPaul]

I only buy clothes that don't wrinkle. I'm too busy playing on tinternet too bother with mundialities like ironing :snooty:

Difficult word to pronounce btw

eye-or-ning
http://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/AHD4/GIF/ibreve.gifhttp://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/AHD4/GIF/prime.gifhttp://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/AHD4/GIF/schwa.gifr-nhttp://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/AHD4/GIF/ibreve.gifng

True Story

[Skweeky1]

I suppose the word I was looking for was mundanities.

However, mundialities sounds better. So we'll stick to that from now on. Basta!

[manker]

I suppose the word I was looking for was mundanities.

However, mundialities sounds better. So we'll stick to that from now on. Basta!
I like your plan :naughty:

I make up new words most days, just to see if anyone notices.

Either they don't or they simply don't care enough to comment :emo:

[JPaul]

I suppose the word I was looking for was mundanities.


I think you may even be struggling with that. Stick to "the mundane" I think that's probably for the best.

[JPaul]

I suppose the word I was looking for was mundanities.

However, mundialities sounds better. So we'll stick to that from now on. Basta!
I like your plan :naughty:

I make up new words most days, just to see if anyone notices.

Either they don't or they simply don't care enough to comment :emo:
You only think you're making them up. They're real, obscure words that you've forgotten you knew.

[Skweeky1]

Nope, mundialities it is from now on.
I'm going to start making up new words as well.

I suspect j2k4 does it as well. There's always too many words in his posts I don't understand. Surely they can't ALL be real words?

[JPaul]

Nope, mundialities it is from now on.
I'm going to start making up new words as well.

I suspect j2k4 does it as well. There's always too many words in his posts I don't understand. Surely they can't ALL be real words?
Yup, they are.

He just doesn't know what they actually mean.

That's the problem with an on-line thesaurus.

[Skweeky1]

Don't pretend you understand them. NO ONE is that clever :snooty:

[JPaul]

Don't pretend you understand them. NO ONE is that clever :snooty:
Oh Lord no, heaven forfend you should suggest such a thing.

[manker]

Don't pretend you understand them. NO ONE is that clever :snooty:
He tends to go thro' cycles.

After you've looked up a word like 'anent', for example, it's good for a wee while until he looks some more words up lest people actually understand what he's trying to say - because the truth is horrible :no:

[Skweeky1]

I bet he'll struggle with mundialities :snooty:

[j2k4]

I bet he'll struggle with mundialities :snooty:

Not on your life.

I hope I am given more to proper orchestration than mere polysyllabism for it's own sake.

BTW-

The short odds are that this thread was aimed at yours truly, eh?

As JP says, we've done it to a fare-thee-well, and there're no surprises left.

[Skweeky]

Orchestration:Arrangement or control: orchestration of events.

Polysyllabism:The quality or state of being polysyllabic.

Polysyllabic: Having more than two and usually more than three syllables.
Characterized by words having more than three syllables.




Yup, manker was right. even translated it doesn't make any sense :lol:

Short odds? :o

[manker]

I was about to launch into a witty spiel about j2's, erm, what was it ... nope - it's no good I've been distracted by the new avatar boobie pic now.

[Skweeky]

I've changed it into a Harvey Lee Oskitten. If bf logs on by accident he'll go mental.

I'll keep the one on the other account though

Hehehe

[Proper Bo]

I thought it was her cat:unsure:


edit: she posted before me and spoilt it:dabs:

[Skweeky]

That's for not coming to see me when I was in Whitley Bay :snooty:

[Proper Bo]

You never said you were coming:snooty:

[Skweeky]

You could've asked :snooty:

[Proper Bo]

typical woman:no2:

[Proper Bo]

wouldn't have wanted to meet you anyway, damn foreigners, coming over here, taking our jobs etc:fist:

[Skweeky]

:lol:

[manker]

I've changed it into a Harvey Lee Oskitten. If bf logs on by accident he'll go mental.

I'll keep the one on the other account though

Hehehe
He wouldn't know it was you, the pic was too small - it looked like Alanis Morissette to me :sly:

[Proper Bo]

Marilyn Manson:no2:

[spenz]

Abortion is bad, excuses such as no support,no father, too young etc.. etc.. is just an excuse that in the end is still wrong and will make you go to hell. Why did you let your boyfriend impregnated you in the ist place, accident? there is no such thing if you won't engage is sexual activity, since you had the courage to do sex, you should have the courage to face the consequesnce that might happen. If you really can't support the baby there are other alternative ways, but killing is the least you need to do. or should i say clearly, you must not do. I guess that is my opinion, my stand. ^_^