The Real Pro-abortion Agenda

All women should have the right to choose an abortion at any time it is medically feasible.

That right is recognised by most of the world, barring the religious lunatic fringe (such as Bush and the Taliban). The Catholic Church, in forbidding people the use of any form of contraception, contributes to large scale backstreet abortions and to untold amounts of misery for women.

The Catholic Church even lies to people about how AIDS can be caught, saying it can get through unbroken condoms. This undermines education and again contributes to the misery and death of millions. There is a famous quote from Mother Theresa that illustrates the Catholic ethos quite well. When asked if she was worried about the terrible poverty and ill health large amounts of unplanned babies in Calcutta were born into she replied no she was not. All that mattered was that the baby drew one breath and therefore was another soul for God. The woman was all heart eh? Damn lunatic and purveyor of misery is more accurate.

Someone has already pointed out how inaccurate your assesment of the original memo is, so no need to add to that.

One last thing, you have zero right to interfere in your daughters choices if she becomes pregnant (oh and if you are catholic, that is quite likely to happen). You have zero right to even offer advice if the girl does not want it. Parents can have input if the young person wants it, or they can stfu if the person does not want it. Maybe if you weren't so against good sex education, these girls would not get pregnant in the first place though.

If the girl wants comforting, she will talk to you if you have a good relationship. However you cannot, and should not, be allowed to demand anything - even the right to comfort them if they do not want it.

Quote:

---

The Catholic Church even lies to people about how AIDS can be caught, saying it can get through unbroken condoms. This undermines education and again contributes to the misery and death of millions. There is a famous quote from Mother Theresa that illustrates the Catholic ethos quite well. When asked if she was worried about the terrible poverty and ill health large amounts of unplanned babies in Calcutta were born into she replied no she was not. All that mattered was that the baby drew one breath and therefore was another soul for God. The woman was all heart eh? Damn lunatic and purveyor of misery is more accurate.

---

This is actually true. In the condoms most common in Africa they use a different material, where only the sperm doesn’t seep through, but the STDs do. Also, Mother Theresa had made numerous pro-life statements:

"I feel that the greatest destroyer of peace today is abortion, because it is a war against the child, a direct killing of the innocent child, murder by the mother herself."

"Any country that accepts abortion is not teaching its people to love, but to use violence to get what they want. That is why the greatest destroyer of love and peace is abortion"

"Many people are concerned with children of India, with the children of Africa where quite a few die of hunger, and so on. Many people are also concerned about the violence in this great country of the United States. These concerns are very good. But often these same people are not concerned with the millions being killed by the deliberate decision of their own mothers. And this is the greatest destroyer of peace today- abortion which brings people to such blindness."

There are always limitations to one woman’s choice. A woman can obviously choose to get pregnant. She can obviously choose to leave a country. She can obviously choose to have sexual intercourse or not. However, nobody has a choice to do anything they want, especially killing their own children, or rather allowing their children do be killed. Since the fetus is a human being -- not by Christian principles, not even any religious ones, but scientifically, a human being – then nothing else matters. The fetus automatically has a full right to life. Nobody can ever take that from the fetus. It is a living, heart-beating, human being. Even at 12 weeks it can feel some pain, and by 22 weeks feel complete pain.

So what if somebody went through an “unwanted pregnancy”? She shouldn’t have had sex. If she was raped, honestly that’s sad, but it still doesn’t justify murder.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1234@8 January 2004 - 13:47
All women should have the right to choose an abortion at any time it is medically feasible.

That right is recognised by most of the world, barring the religious lunatic fringe (such as Bush and the Taliban). The Catholic Church, in forbidding people the use of any form of contraception, contributes to large scale backstreet abortions and to untold amounts of misery for women.

The Catholic Church even lies to people about how AIDS can be caught, saying it can get through unbroken condoms. This undermines education and again contributes to the misery and death of millions. There is a famous quote from Mother Theresa that illustrates the Catholic ethos quite well. When asked if she was worried about the terrible poverty and ill health large amounts of unplanned babies in Calcutta were born into she replied no she was not. All that mattered was that the baby drew one breath and therefore was another soul for God. The woman was all heart eh? Damn lunatic and purveyor of misery is more accurate.

Someone has already pointed out how inaccurate your assesment of the original memo is, so no need to add to that.

One last thing, you have zero right to interfere in your daughters choices if she becomes pregnant (oh and if you are catholic, that is quite likely to happen). You have zero right to even offer advice if the girl does not want it. Parents can have input if the young person wants it, or they can stfu if the person does not want it. Maybe if you weren't so against good sex education, these girls would not get pregnant in the first place though.

If the girl wants comforting, she will talk to you if you have a good relationship. However you cannot, and should not, be allowed to demand anything - even the right to comfort them if they do not want it.

---

I haven't witnessed such rampant ignorance since the heyday of Zardoz.

As is apparent from your ranting posts, you haven't the slightest idea of intellectualizing a response, effective or otherwise, to any decently presented argument.

That is to say, even if I WERE wrong, YOU are not capable of explaining the "how" or "why" of it.

Your posting personifies inflammatory and extremist rhetoric at it's worst, compounded by the fact of your factual and logical "bereftness".

You may commence with your imminent further attempts at my abasement, none of which will have the slightest effect, I assure you.

BTW-

You haven't any children, have you?

Nor would you, I suspect.

I suppose that is a good thing, given your addled and high-strung state of mind..

It is also good this occurs in cyberspace; else I fear we'd all be soaked by your spittle.

:)

Quote:

---

This is actually true. In the condoms most common in Africa they use a different material, where only the sperm doesn’t seep through, but the STDs do.

---

No this is NOT true. Show me the evidence of it, the WHO has already condemned the Vatican for it's scaremongering on the issue. The molecular mesh of a condom does not allow STD's to pass and never has. It is simply a lie created by the Vatican in it's efforts to stop people using birth control. Remember, the Vatican does not say certain African condoms (though that is still a lie) - it states that ALL condoms allow STD infection. It promotes the lie in all corners of the globe, not just Africa.

On those quotes from Theresa, none contradict the quote I gave. In that she states that any suffering is alright as long as god has more souls. People think Theresa ran a hospital in Calcutta, she didn't. She ran a hospice with some of the worst sanitary conditions seen even in Indian establishments. She had no interest in dealing with the causes of the disease and malnutrition that fed her hospice, just taking more souls for her god. She was an evil woman in my, and many other peoples, eyes.

Quote:

---

Since the fetus is a human being -- not by Christian principles, not even any religious ones, but scientifically, a human being – then nothing else matters.

---

A foetus is not a human being in my countries laws or in US law unless I am mistaken. I do not regard a foetus as a human being until it can survive outside the womb unaided. So yes, that means I am against very late term elective abortions without a strong medical reason (of which there can be many).

Quote:

---

I haven't witnessed such rampant ignorance since the heyday of Zardoz.

---

You mean you cannot answer my points? Blanket statements like that just show your lack of real arguments.

Quote:

---

As is apparent from your ranting posts, you haven't the slightest idea of intellectualizing a response, effective or otherwise, to any decently presented argument.

That is to say, even if I WERE wrong, YOU are not capable of explaining the "how" or "why" of it.

Your posting personifies inflammatory and extremist rhetoric at it's worst, compounded by the fact of your factual and logical "bereftness".

You may commence with your imminent further attempts at my abasement, none of which will have the slightest effect, I assure you.

---

Heh, I am thinking you lied about your age tbh. I find only teenagers and early 20's people resort to dragging out the thesaurus and totally mangling sentance structures in their desire to be seen as witty and erudite. Nice try though, I guess.

As for the gist of your mish mash of found words, yes I am presenting a cogent reply in my previous post and this one. You just cannot find a reply.

Quote:

---

You haven't any children, have you?

Nor would you, I suspect.

---

Married father of 2 (one girl).

Quote:

---

I suppose that is a good thing, given your addled and high-strung state of mind...

---

Ah, anyone who disagrees with you must be addled? Again, a common tactic of the young and poorly informed. You really are doing yourself no favours with this post you know.

Try debating the points raised instead of going to dictionary.com and using it's thesaurus. Your random flailings in this reply just show the lack of depth in your views.

Quote:

---

It is also good this occurs in cyberspace; else I fear we'd all be soaked by your spittle.

---

Oh I'm crushed. The man has wit and bite worthy of Wilde or Shaw at their best.

Oh wait, he is just another kid on the net who, when faced with an argument they cannot reply to, opts for juvenile insults.

Go you :)

A senior Vatican spokesman backs the claims about permeable condoms, despite assurances by the World Health Organisation that they are untrue.

Quote:

---

No this is NOT true. Show me the evidence of it, the WHO has already condemned the Vatican for it's scaremongering on the issue. The molecular mesh of a condom does not allow STD's to pass and never has. It is simply a lie created by the Vatican in it's efforts to stop people using birth control. Remember, the Vatican does not say certain African condoms (though that is still a lie) - it states that ALL condoms allow STD infection. It promotes the lie in all corners of the globe, not just Africa.

---

Firstly, it wasn’t the Vatican who made the statement. The statement was made by a Bishop in Uganda (who, by the way, was assassinated recently). The Vatican simply supported the statement, although the Liberal Guardian UK is saying the Vatican did it, in the report stated that it was made by a bishop. The condoms most common in Uganda are not polyurethane or rubber like they are here- they’re made of a more cloth-like material (it’s not cloth), where the semen can’t pass through but STDs can. No, the Vatican never said “all condoms”, and the African Bishop didn’t either. What’s happening is that people are telling themselves that it’s OK to have sex now because they won’t get pregnant, and so they have sex more and more often. This simply makes the risk of getting STDs and pregnancy higher, because people are having sex above limits.

Quote:

---

People think Theresa ran a hospital in Calcutta, she didn't. She ran a hospice with some of the worst sanitary conditions seen even in Indian establishments. She had no interest in dealing with the causes of the disease and malnutrition that fed her hospice, just taking more souls for her god. She was an evil woman in my, and many other peoples, eyes.

---

Yes, she had a hospice. There were already many hospitals in India. Creating a hospital costs a lot of money. We must remember that the vow Missionaries take isn’t to save lives, but to assist the poor. If they were to open hospitals, automatically they would put all their funds into it like many other orders did, because hospitals are so expensive. That’s not what the Missionaries do. They feed the poor, house the poor, teach the poor, et cetera. They’re not taking a vow to save their lives if they can’t afford it.

People like to attack Mother Theresa because she was Catholic. Look at Ghandi- he had many benefits too. People think he was really holy person and was very good to the poor et cetera. This is true in one sense, but he had much luxery as well. He was a lawyer, we must remember. The only reason why he starved was because he was fasting himself. He had plenty of food. He was very wealthy.

Quote:

---

A foetus is not a human being in my countries laws or in US law unless I am mistaken. I do not regard a foetus as a human being until it can survive outside the womb unaided. So yes, that means I am against very late term elective abortions without a strong medical reason (of which there can be many).

---

Law doesn’t define truth. The US said that slaves weren’t humans, but was it correct? No.

About living outside the womb, in 1950 only 7 month old fetuses could survive outside of the womb. In 1970 6-month olds could survive. Today, we can save 5-month-olds fetuses. So are you saying that in 1950 the fetus wasn’t human, but today it is human? What?? Many people can’t survive on their own. However, as technology grows, more and more people can.

Indeed, one can see a time when there will be no requirement for the womb at all.

In the UK, scientists have invented an artificial womb. If it works, this will completely change embryology as we know it.

Not just embryology I suspect - ah! the brave new world.

However, I am far from being a Luddite and, by and large, I hold to the view that these are indeed the good old days (if we wait a while).

Your own link shows that the Vatican is making that claim, and repeating the claim worldwide. It is false, always was false and always will be. The condoms available in Uganda are from organisations such as WHO and are made of the same material as condoms in the West. I saw the program that article is referencing, and if you read the transcripts (available at bbc.co.uk/panorama) the evidence against the Vatican is overwhelming. Interviews with Cardinals in which they state all condoms kind of renders your protestations irrelavent.

It is a lie with no evidence to back it up that is costing the lives of who knows how many people. Why are you defending that lie? Let me guess, you are catholic and are bound by dogma to defend any Papal decree due to Papal Infallibility.

The Catholic church is one of the richest institutions known to man. If it wanted to it could open 100 hospitals in India tomorrow. However it doesn't, and Theresa didn't even feed the poor or tend to them very well. Her hospice was an utter disgrace and many catholic nurses have come out and said so. They arrived thinking they would be helping the people of India and came to realize it was just a place to get people to convert to Catholicism out of desperation. It was filthy and full of malnourished people. I attack Theresa not because she was catholic, but because she was a woman without human compassion who reveled in misery.

Spare me the crap about poverty too, go take a look at the Vatican (or any other catholic establishment) and tell me they are short of cash.

Do you know why Ghandi fasted? He did it to stop the violence in India. He didn't do it to glorify himself (though I am sure he was not totally without ego) but to force his followers to renounce the use of violence. That is a worthy use of spirituality, not the counting of souls while disregarding their care.

You misread my statement on foetus', read it again. I said "survive outside the womb unaided". Births at 4 months premature do not survive unaided. You are then into the realm of man's interference in the natural order, something as a catholic (assumption I know) you should abhor (cf birth control).

Every fetus is able to survive unaided outside the womb - eventually.