|
MistaUNGA
green crack GREEN CRACK!!



Registered: 10/01/06
Posts: 1,519
Loc: Kalifornien, im Süden...
|
Do NOT vote for RON PAUL!
#7497021 - 10/08/07 11:01 AM (16 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
A satire site.
http://7arp.info/
Funny video.
--------------------
Madtowntripper said:Or just give her a cloroform soaked rag and tell her it's ether!
|
Oracle Of Delphi
I, Phantom


Registered: 06/23/02
Posts: 1,135
Loc: State of Disrepair
Last seen: 15 years, 2 months
|
Re: Do NOT vote for RON PAUL! [Re: MistaUNGA]
#7497032 - 10/08/07 11:05 AM (16 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
cough
Edited by Oracle Of Delphi (10/08/07 12:09 PM)
|
bluedolphin
member

Registered: 07/09/03
Posts: 530
Last seen: 15 years, 4 months
|
|
Don't have to tell me not to vote for a racist prick Republican.
I mean that's a real no brainer LOL
|
bukkake


Registered: 05/28/05
Posts: 2,764
Loc: Classified
|
Re: Do NOT vote for RON PAUL! [Re: bluedolphin]
#7497899 - 10/08/07 03:15 PM (16 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
The anti-abortion libertarian rules.
|
Syle
Kenai Sigh


Registered: 10/16/05
Posts: 6,678
Loc: WA
Last seen: 10 months, 26 days
|
Re: Do NOT vote for RON PAUL! [Re: bluedolphin]
#7498071 - 10/08/07 03:47 PM (16 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
bluedolphin said: Don't have to tell me not to vote for a racist prick Republican.
I mean that's a real no brainer LOL
lol, just as you don't have to tell me not to vote for a commie pinko tax raising liberal.
cheers
-------------------- https://kenaisigh.bandcamp.com/ <- Just completed the 2021 RPM challenge for February - An EP in one month (5 songs or 20 minutes). Check it out!
|
moon_glue
Orwell's Post9/11 Era



Registered: 01/20/07
Posts: 2,264
Loc: Earth, today...
Last seen: 8 years, 10 months
|
Re: Do NOT vote for RON PAUL! [Re: Syle]
#7498167 - 10/08/07 04:07 PM (16 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
that was a funny video
i donated to RP, everyone should support what they believe in.
|
Chi Ro
Jive Ass Turkey


Registered: 09/22/07
Posts: 211
Loc: Right hurr!
Last seen: 12 years, 5 months
|
Re: Do NOT vote for RON PAUL! [Re: moon_glue]
#7498262 - 10/08/07 04:29 PM (16 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
He's anti-abortion but he leaves decision making up to the states, as it should be in the words of the wonderful piece of literature known as the Constitution.
--------------------
|
bukkake


Registered: 05/28/05
Posts: 2,764
Loc: Classified
|
Re: Do NOT vote for RON PAUL! [Re: Chi Ro]
#7498640 - 10/08/07 05:43 PM (16 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
The right of an innocent, unborn child to life is at the heart of the American ideals of liberty. My professional and legislative record demonstrates my strong commitment to this pro-life principle.
In 40 years of medical practice, I never once considered performing an abortion, nor did I ever find abortion necessary to save the life of a pregnant woman.
In Congress, I have authored legislation that seeks to define life as beginning at conception, HR 1094.
I am also the prime sponsor of HR 300, which would negate the effect of Roe v Wade by removing the ability of federal courts to interfere with state legislation to protect life. This is a practical, direct approach to ending federal court tyranny which threatens our constitutional republic and has caused the deaths of 45 million of the unborn.
I have also authored HR 1095, which prevents federal funds to be used for so-called “population control.”
Many talk about being pro-life. I have taken direct action to restore protection for the unborn.
As an OB/GYN doctor, I’ve delivered over 4,000 babies. That experience has made me an unshakable foe of abortion. Many of you may have read my book, Challenge To Liberty, which champions the idea that there cannot be liberty in a society unless the rights of all innocents are protected. Much can be understood about the civility of a society in observing its regard for the dignity of human life.
That is ridiculously contradicting. He wants to redefine life as beginning at conception, rip up Roe V. Wade, and "leave it to the states."
|
andrewss
precariously aggrandized

Registered: 08/17/07
Posts: 8,725
Loc: ohio
Last seen: 1 month, 13 days
|
Re: Do NOT vote for RON PAUL! [Re: bukkake]
#7499089 - 10/08/07 07:29 PM (16 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
omg omg abortion... I really care about it!!! Oh wait...
I suppose I would agree that it ought to be an issue for the states, but I dont know...
He is a libertarian that is against abortion, makes sense to me, he believes that an abortion is harm to another person. You can believe otherwise, but thats just what he believes on the matter. Not surprising since he delivers babies.
Personally I think abortion is ridiculous, only way it makes sense to me is if you are raped. Otherwise take some responsibility for your actions maybe? Abortion is a cop out IMO
-------------------- Jesus loves you.
|
DieSpectra
Stranger

Registered: 05/08/06
Posts: 109
Last seen: 11 years, 1 month
|
Re: Do NOT vote for RON PAUL! [Re: andrewss]
#7499160 - 10/08/07 07:45 PM (16 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Life does start at conception... Whether or not you believe it is ok to terminate it or not.
I'm not making any judgment on whether it is or isn't... I'm just saying.
I deeply respect Ron Paul's position though as a OBGYN doctor.
|
andrewss
precariously aggrandized

Registered: 08/17/07
Posts: 8,725
Loc: ohio
Last seen: 1 month, 13 days
|
Re: Do NOT vote for RON PAUL! [Re: DieSpectra]
#7499182 - 10/08/07 07:49 PM (16 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
^ yeah, EARLY term abortions are "ok" anything thats late term just seems so wrong to me, sorry if thats "close minded" but I just cannot understand how someone could choose to end the life of a baby like that.
-------------------- Jesus loves you.
|
bukkake


Registered: 05/28/05
Posts: 2,764
Loc: Classified
|
Re: Do NOT vote for RON PAUL! [Re: andrewss]
#7499267 - 10/08/07 08:05 PM (16 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
This reminds me of the scene in Jesus Camp where they show the children the figure of a one day old "unborn baby" with full features.
|
a_guy_named_ai
Stranger

Registered: 09/24/07
Posts: 767
Last seen: 15 years, 7 months
|
Re: Do NOT vote for RON PAUL! [Re: bukkake]
#7499512 - 10/08/07 09:04 PM (16 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
You're all just grown up fetuses.
Even if life didn't begin at conception, it's still a disgusting practice that degrades society and disregards something incredibly sacred.
There is no need for abortion. There is a need for selflessness and respect for live and the earth that God created.
Instead of opening up this cop out for irresponsible heartless scum they should be held accountable for their actions and deal with the consequences. perhaps then people will think much harder before they put thier penis in a womans vagina or vice versa just for simple pleasures, they will have more consideration and respect for the miracle and blessing, the infinitely greater joy of the natural outcome, a human life like you and me.
Noone will ever prove to everyone that human life begins at conception. This would require to prove something supernatural, and secular science which rules out that possibility a priori will never consider that.
If they prove the child is alive at 2 months, they'll kill the child at 1 months and 29 days. If they prove the child is alive at 2 weeks they'll kill the child at 1 week and 6 days. This sick and heartless society will continue to trample upon everything that it sacred and continually push the limits until there is nothing left for them to cherish.
|
C20H25N3O
Calico Kahlia


Registered: 02/01/04
Posts: 1,390
Last seen: 3 days, 13 hours
|
|
I like paul. A lot of his libertarian ideas, and economic ideas have made a lot of sense to me. I do not agree with him on some social issues. For example, abortion. I believe women have a right to chose, although late-term, or the proper definition, is not right. Paul, is against abortion. I believe some of his reasons are due to the laws he is under when he delivers, or advises a mother as an obstrotrition(sp).
But, I like how he explains, and understands that it is not the Federal governments position to outlaw aborition, but that it is the states right. For example, California medical marijuana should be illegal, and the Federal Government should make no laws otherwise.
-------------------- Calico Kahlia come tell me the news Calamity's waiting for a way to get to her Rosy red and electric blue I bought you a paddle for your paper canoe Say you'll come back when you can Whenever your airplane happens to land Maybe I'll be back here too It all depends on what's with you
|
KaptKid
Spaced Pirate



Registered: 12/11/03
Posts: 6,252
Loc: Bright Side of the Sun
Last seen: 3 years, 11 months
|
Re: Do NOT vote for RON PAUL! [Re: C20H25N3O]
#7499614 - 10/08/07 09:35 PM (16 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Vote for Frank Zappa, Maybe he will come back from the dead
or
maybe we should just try 4 years with out anyone.
As long as we the people don't unit, they (who ever that is, crime inc, Elvis........) will do what they want.
Vote for Bonzo, he needs a banna.
-------------------- Child of the 60's, Tripping ever since.
|
MiddleFinger
Is cooler thanyou

Registered: 02/12/06
Posts: 1,402
Last seen: 14 years, 7 months
|
Re: Do NOT vote for RON PAUL! [Re: KaptKid]
#7499632 - 10/08/07 09:39 PM (16 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Kucinich FTW.
-------------------- History says, Don't hope On this side of the grave. But then, once in a lifetime The longed-for tidal wave Of justice can rise up And hope and history rhyme.
|
OpFoxdie
SociopoliticalAnalyst

Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 84
Last seen: 13 years, 5 months
|
Re: Do NOT vote for RON PAUL! [Re: MiddleFinger]
#7499758 - 10/08/07 10:19 PM (16 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
LOL, a week ago, a coworker said if George Bush could run again, she would head his campaign.....
Bush '08.... and '12, '16,
And then the new Bush Empire!
Back on topic, I agree with jonathon-206, sex is a beautiful thing to be cherished and most people do it for cheap satisfaction, without any of the inevitable consequences.
|
bukkake


Registered: 05/28/05
Posts: 2,764
Loc: Classified
|
Re: Do NOT vote for RON PAUL! [Re: OpFoxdie]
#7500835 - 10/09/07 08:50 AM (16 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
It's the sex police!
|
DebuteMachine

Registered: 09/29/06
Posts: 6,457
|
Re: Do NOT vote for RON PAUL! [Re: MistaUNGA]
#7500891 - 10/09/07 09:19 AM (16 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Aw geez here we go again
|
heartofalion
dancing with the cosmos



Registered: 06/01/07
Posts: 976
Last seen: 4 years, 5 months
|
|
i love all the people against any abortion, you obviously have never had a pregnancy scare. A cop out? So your telling me youve never fucked up and wanted a second chance? I use to be 100% pro-life until i had a preg scare with my ex, then i understood, i would never force her to abort and if she chose to have it i would support it cuz i fucked up, but still having the option is nice, i just think some abuse it.
--------------------
|
moon_glue
Orwell's Post9/11 Era



Registered: 01/20/07
Posts: 2,264
Loc: Earth, today...
Last seen: 8 years, 10 months
|
Re: Do NOT vote for RON PAUL! [Re: heartofalion]
#7500993 - 10/09/07 09:49 AM (16 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
death rate is just as important to life on earth as birthrate.
i really dont care what happens to a fetus, it's not like they're hard to make. Since there is no natural selection in modernized society, what difference does it make.
hell, make abortion free. put the centers in strip malls and 7-11's. maybe in a few years we will see trafic reduce, poorly parented kids reduce, white trash pez dispenser mothers reduced, ect.... seems like theres only positive to gain from haveing less people around and more space for the living.
|
a_guy_named_ai
Stranger

Registered: 09/24/07
Posts: 767
Last seen: 15 years, 7 months
|
Re: Do NOT vote for RON PAUL! [Re: moon_glue]
#7502222 - 10/09/07 05:08 PM (16 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
I don't see how killing unwanted children (unwanted children, how messed up is that)is going to automatically make parenting better. I think personally, not to attack anyone but that that's a pathetic arguement. There are many many people out there who want to have children and do and are terrible parents. In fact I would say they would make up almost all of the terrible parents population, even if abortion was illegal.
So what if abortion was illegal? Would it really hurt society? Absolutely not. The only people it would hurt is selfish immature people who don't think before their actions. You know condoms work right?
Would it do any good if it is illegal? Absolutely. Whether abortion is right or not, it's a dirty degrading practice that gives the impression that human life is merely a commodity. Remember, people's excuse for abortion is that they messed up.It's not supposed to happen either way.
When you talk about having less people, without considering the sacredness of human life, like in having less traffic or it would be better for the world because of overpopulation, I want to tell you, that is straight Eugenics. That is straight up nazi right there.
And actually you'd be suprised how much of a role the u.s. had in this type of ideaolgy. A book on it is called "The Nazi Connection: Eugenics, American Racism, and German National Socialism".
http://www.amazon.com/Nazi-Connection-Eugenics-American-Socialism/dp/0195149785
I'm not trying to say all of this to attack anyone or be hateful, don't get me wrong. But I honestly hate abortion and feel it's totally uneccesary and wrong, and I'm telling you my honest opinion.
And on a last note,the fetus never goes through a fish stage.
|
MiddleFinger
Is cooler thanyou

Registered: 02/12/06
Posts: 1,402
Last seen: 14 years, 7 months
|
|
A woman is raped by her father The baby has downs and will be horribly disfigured and retarded for the rest of it's life. The pregnancy will be dangerous and may put mom's life in jeopardy.
Your rebuttal?
-------------------- History says, Don't hope On this side of the grave. But then, once in a lifetime The longed-for tidal wave Of justice can rise up And hope and history rhyme.
Edited by MiddleFinger (10/09/07 05:13 PM)
|
Bikerfool
Your Local Edgelord



Registered: 11/21/05
Posts: 1,577
Last seen: 5 months, 13 days
|
Re: Do NOT vote for RON PAUL! [Re: MiddleFinger]
#7502266 - 10/09/07 05:23 PM (16 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
I completely agree with moon-glue. If you want to label me a nazi that's fine. Humans can't keep their own population in check so abortion works. Disease will catch up soon enough though.
-------------------- Just an angsty teen contributing to the pubs decline with contentless posts.
|
bukkake


Registered: 05/28/05
Posts: 2,764
Loc: Classified
|
|
Quote:
jonathan_206 said: I don't see how killing unwanted children (unwanted children, how messed up is that)
First sentence of argument that makes the entirety of it fall apart. A fetus is not a human life. If the fetus could survive without the mother or without being a parasite to the womb (feeding on it), you would be onto something.
Two year olds have the mental capacity of a dog. What makes the two year old anymore precious? It would not be able to survive on its own.
|
RipVanWinkle
The Benzodiazethang




Registered: 06/11/06
Posts: 4,700
Loc: Near Memphrica, TN
Last seen: 2 years, 2 months
|
Re: Do NOT vote for RON PAUL! [Re: bukkake]
#7502489 - 10/09/07 06:18 PM (16 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
When someone runs over your two year old baby and leaves it on the side of the road, just remember, it's not any more precious than a dog anyways. Just bury it in your backyard and go make another...
That said, I believe abortion should be legal, but Ron Paul has so many other great stances on things that the abortion deal can be looked over. He's not perfect but he's a hell of alot better than the other choices. I don't reckon I'll be stickin around too much longer if Hillary wins (which wouldn't surprise me since all the stupid motherfuckers will be voting for her just so they can say "I helped elect the first woman president!")
-------------------- Those who danced were thought to be quite insane by those who could not hear the music.
|
a_guy_named_ai
Stranger

Registered: 09/24/07
Posts: 767
Last seen: 15 years, 7 months
|
Re: Do NOT vote for RON PAUL! [Re: bukkake]
#7506640 - 10/10/07 06:59 PM (16 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
bukake:
Quote:
Quote:
jonathan_206 said: I don't see how killing unwanted children (unwanted children, how messed up is that)
First sentence of argument that makes the entirety of it fall apart. A fetus is not a human life. If the fetus could survive without the mother or without being a parasite to the womb (feeding on it), you would be onto something.
How does deriving food from it's mother make it unhuman? It doesn't. We all "feed off" food from nature. i suppose we're all unhuman parasites then? Of course not. That fact that it assimilates food into it's own separate bodily functions actually points to the fact that it is a seperate entity.
Quote:
Two year olds have the mental capacity of a dog. What makes the two year old anymore precious? It would not be able to survive on its own.
Which brings me to another important point, see below.
middlefinger:
Quote:
A woman is raped by her father The baby has downs and will be horribly disfigured and retarded for the rest of it's life. The pregnancy will be dangerous and may put mom's life in jeopardy.
Your rebuttal?
A woman being raped by her father by itself has no weight on whether the unborn child is human or not. Neither does the fact that the child is retarted. If a child is retarted, that does not give you the right to kill it. It has a right to life just as much as you do. "The pregnancy will be dangerous and may put mom's life in jeopardy." Well even if that was true, it doesn't give the mother the right by itself to kill the unborn child. Murder is never right. But it happens that this is a tactic of worst case scenario. While worst case scenarios are not always logically invalid, your use of it shows the undermining of common arguements for abortion. But it great that we have the testimony of a doctor on this very thread, who has delivered thousands of babies and has never felt the need to perform an abortion for the sake of it's mother. You cannot deny that experience. That is a valid scientific testimony indeed. Our incredible gain of knowledge and betterment of techniques in the modern medical field has done a great deal to make that excuse largely invalid to that extent.
A person can preach about a womans right to choose, but then talk about a health care system where people are obligated to support another person's sick and twisted views. It can be acknowledged how disgusting and degrading abortion is, but then how can someone talk about it as something acceptable. It is a contradiction.The ends do not justify the means, even so both the means and the ends are both unacceptable to any person with a heart. Eugenics and disregard for the sacredness of life which degrades the very fabric of society is unnaceptable. There is no valid excuse for abortion. When carefully examined, even from a secular view there is nothing left but worst case scenarios which upon closer inspection not only undermine the common case for abortion, but fall apart themselves when we recognize the potential of every unborn human child.
Quote:
As John Jefferson Davis writes, "Our ability to have conscious experiences and recollections arises out of our personhood; the basic metaphysical reality of personhood precedes the unfolding of the conscious abilities inherent in it."27 Therefore, an ordinary unborn human entity is a person, and hence, fully human. In other words, because the unborn human is a person with a certain natural inherent capacity (i.e., her essence), she will function as a person in the near future, just as the reversibly comatose and the temporarily unconscious will likewise do because of their natural inherent capacity. The unborn are not potential persons but persons with much potential.
Along the same lines, Ray has made the observation that the view of human person as a natural "kind" which provides a ground for certain functions, rather than as an emergence of certain functions, is more consistent with our general moral intuitions. For "the recognition of the rights of the young is less dependent on their actual, current capacities than on their species and potential [i.e., their natural inherent capacity]."
For example, no one doubts that day-old human children have fewer actual capacities than day-old calves. Human infants, in terms of environmental awareness, mobility, etc., are rather unimpressive in comparison to the calves, especially if one calculates their ages from conception. But this comparison does not persuade us to believe that the calves have greater intrinsic worth and an inherent right to life. For if human infants were sold to butchers (let us suppose for the high market value of their body parts) in the same way that farmers sell calves to humane butchers, we would find such a practice deeply disturbing. Yet if intrinsic worth is really contingent upon current capacities rather than natural inherent capacity, we should have no problem with the selling of human infants to butchers. But Ray points out why we do find such a practice morally repugnant: "The wrongness would consist not merely in ignoring the interest that society might have in the children, but in violating the children's own rights. Yet if those rights are grounded in current capacities alone, the calves should enjoy at least the same moral status as the children, and probably higher status." What follows is that "the difference in status is plausibly explained... only with reference to the children's humanity, their natural kind."28
It's been proven that an unborn child is a separate entity from the mother from conception. I don't want to hear "It's my body" ever again. It's not. It is a scientific fact, and it is abortionists who disregard science, love, and reason.
Quote:
Abortion argument unravels
How the unborn child defends itself against its mother, confirming that it is a separate human being from the start
by Alex Williams, Australia
November 16, 2004
While the demand for abortion grows,1 so does the scientific case against the arguments often used to support it. Recent powerful evidence comes from immunology.
Half a century ago, when the amazing mechanism of the human immune system was first being uncovered, Nobel prize-winning biologist Sir Peter Medawar made a significant comment. He declared that the survival of the genetically different child within a mother’s womb contradicted the immunological laws that were thwarting their attempts at tissue transplantation.2 The immune system normally detects the presence of any “foreign” tissue in the body and it immediately sets up a defence against it (primarily what is now called the “killer T cell” mechanism).
This caused early experiments in organ transplantation to fail—the recipient’s immune system attacked and rejected the donor’s “foreign” organ tissue. So why doesn’t the mother’s womb detect the presence of the “foreign” tissue of the developing embryo and try to attack and reject it?
We now know that it does! And this is the cause of many miscarriages. Recent research has shown that the developing child puts up a very specific defence against the killer T cell attack. And as long as the defence mechanism works properly, the pregnancy will proceed to full term. However, when the defence mechanism fails, miscarriage results. Tumour hijacks fetal enzyme
The lead author of the 1998 paper on IDO referred to in the main text, David Munn, has continued his research on IDO’s role elsewhere in the body and found an exactly parallel process to the pregnancy case at work in the body’s tolerance of tumours.1 Just as the embryo produces IDO to protect itself from the mother’s immune system, so rogue tumour cells also use the same trick to stop a person’s immune system from attacking and rejecting the tumour. These insights are helping to find new ways of treating tumours and reducing the rejection rate of surgical transplants. Reference
1. Munn, D.H. and Mellor, A.L., IDO and tolerance to tumours, Trends in Molecular Medicine 10(1):15–18, 2004.
In a landmark 1998 paper, researchers at the Medical College of Georgia, in Augusta, USA, found that the mammalian embryo (they worked with mice) produces a special enzyme, called indoleamine 2,3-dioxygenase, or “IDO,” which suppresses the mother’s T cell reaction and allows pregnancy to proceed.2 Follow-up work in humans revealed the same effect, and it was also demonstrated that the IDO was produced on the embryo side of the placental membrane (which separates mother from child) and not on the mother’s side.3 Further work in mice showed that IDO production peaked during the formation of the placenta—the most crucial time for establishing that vital link between mother and child.4 And the most recent work in humans has established beyond doubt that IDO is a specific mechanism at the mother-child interface for preventing the mother’s immune system from rejecting the child.5
But what does this have to do with abortion? Well, a common argument in favour of abortion is that a mother has the right to control what happens to her own body.6 However, this research shows very clearly that the baby is not part of the mother’s body. The baby has a unique genetic makeup (only half its chromosomes come from the mother, the other half come from the father, and each combination of chromosomes is unique) and that condition is sufficient to cause the mother’s immune system to identify the baby as “foreign” and it mounts an attack via the killer T cell system. In the mouse experiments, when IDO production was artificially suppressed, the mother’s womb rapidly rejected the embryos.2 It is only because the baby is normally well prepared for life in the womb by producing IDO and suppressing the mother’s T cell reaction, that pregnancy can be healthy and go full term.
This research also highlights the fact that the child’s individuality—its unique genetic makeup—exists from the moment of conception. At conception, the new person’s genetic instructions come together for the first time—in a single cell called the zygote. But it is not until day 6 that IDO production kicks in.5 Why day 6? Well day 6 is a preparation for day 7, when the new embryo first attaches itself to its mother’s womb so that it can draw nutrients from its mother’s bloodstream.7 This is exactly the time when the mother’s killer T cells would normally begin to attack and reject it—if not for the amazing protection already provided by IDO production on the previous day.
Abortionists are enemies of humanity. They cannot say they are for humanity, and at the same time disregard the humanity of us all. Noone should listen to such people or have them in any position of authority.
|
|