Texas Republicans Continue War on Women's Health

Great post TC. Thanks for pointing out the true goal of PP.

 

No Crabtownboy; no matter how you phrase it you are supporting the murder of the unborn just as your leader Obama and all his cabal on the radical left.

 

There are othe organizations that perform the needed services , but don't do abortions. Democrats do not want the money to go to them because most of them are church based.

They'd rather murder babies.

 

In your blood-lust-induced blindness in search of any available excuse to slaughter infants...you may have missed articles such as this:

http:////www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24888923/

How many more heart-warming stories such as this are we robbed of since the infanticide enthusiasts deny such occurences and insist on murdering the infant prior to the opportunity to do more research and hopefully increase the survivability rate of these tragedies?

 

I did read your other entries.... I know what you claim; I just don't actually believe you. I'm sorry. That is a judgement on my part, I realize that. But I can't honestly say that I take your claim to being pro-life very seriously.

...And You have a blessed day too.

 

Does that mean you are willing to sacrifice 3% of the unborn children?

If you willing to sacrifice even one child then you are pro abortion.

John

 

It is this kind of statement which makes people call you pro-abortion...you are suggesting a moral equivalence between the refusal to take tax-payer money (a fundamentally passive thing) to pay for the intentional taking of human life (a fundamentally active evil). It is only equivalent if the state of Texas were using tax-payer money to line poor women up against the wall and shoot them. (except that abortion is more physically brutal). By not funding yet one more government program in order to comply with a state law (there is an equivalent Federal law called the Hyde Ammendment BTW). you are suggesting that it is morally equivalent to actively supporting with $ intentional infanticide. This Federal judge is trying to require the state of Texas to do something the Federal Government will not do....This is why conservatives hate judicial activism.

That and perhaps your insistence on calling it a "fetus" in lieu of "baby"

 

You like your straw man arguments don't you.

 

Would seek God to guide in the process, taking man's ideology out of it and allow God to work, how do we know HE won't work in a miraculous way and both survive. Aborting babies and following man's advice is just what satan wants believers to do, can God intervene and ensure both survive? What is God's desire in this maybe like Jesus said with Lazerus in:

John 11:4 When Jesus heard that, he said, This sickness is not unto death, but for the glory of God, that the Son of God might be glorified thereby.

Maybe God wants to receive glory for a miracluous work in the completion of the birth and life of the mother being spared. After all Doctors know medically what they see but we see God's will in it all. Man interferes with God's work sometimes and for you to say if you don't abort both will die that is the worlds philosophy.

 

CTB - I posted some statistics in messages 54 and 55; I re-posted 55 here because it's directly related to your latest hypothetical.

How? Because it's playing the odds. You say I have to choose whether to have the abortion and save my wife's life, or risk her death; the World Health Organization says she's more than twice as likely to die from the induced abortion.

If you choose the abortion, then you actually increase her odds of dying. How does that make any sense?

 

No, you are not following my logic....notice your own words....

...that is passive, but a State which actively takes money from taxpayers to FUND abortion is not a passive action. Then your conclusion here:

I will not take the time to challenge you to demonstrate how Texas is "allowing" the death of any woman....no woman will die as a result of this change....not one....if you read the article...you would note that the program being threatened is only one which effects women NOT covered by (do not qualify for) Medicaid. I make roughly 45k $ a year and my wife still qualifies for Medicaid... Are we the poor and impoverished....who will DIE!!! if Medicaid will not cover us?? In your dreams....

Again...statements like this....when it comes to Government funding of abortion....yes...we absolutely do...live in such a world. "Shades of Gray" on the issue of infanticide only exist in the minds of people who are pro-abortion, such as yourself.

Oh, o.k. widely acknowledged by whom? Arianna Huffington whom you seem to like to link to?? I referred to judicial activism....as a scenario wherein a Federal Judge imposes upon an individual State a mandate that the Federal Government itself would not adhere to....Liberals, do not differentiate the two I understand your confusion here.....and "Precedent"...as you say, is only the sacred cow of Liberals, Stare Decesis is an important concept, but it is NOT the end-all-be-all of legal theory....To conservatives....for instance....it is the Constitution...not "Precedent". (which is what I think you meant to say)...when liberals can't get the majority of sane normal Americans to agree with their insane ideas through the passing of laws through duly-elected representatives...they merely nominate immovable philosopher-kings to proclaim rulings tyrrannically from on high (judges) and then scream about "precedent"....Do you worship "precedent" in the Dred Scott decision???? Do you??? Huh, huh...?

O.K....but you won't like the answer....she herself, and I agree with her....will NEVER permit one of our children to be aborted....we will prayerfully hope for the Great Physician to spare the life of her, the child, or both....we will pray for the miraculous, but we will place our faith and future in His hands....You see CTB.....I married a woman who IS PRO-LIFE you are no such thing.

 

:wavey::thumbsup::thumbsup::applause: What is this????? Do you have some kind of like....Biblical World-view or something????.....Weird...

 

If I had the choice to save 40 million people, or save one, I would choose the 40 million.


Take that any way you want to.

 

Let me see what I can remember from my college health classes oh yes 100% of all fallopian tube or tubal pregnancies end in a miscarriage because the baby cannot survive. The baby would never survive so the point is moot about aborting it, in other words this is not an abortion. God made natural ways in the woman to miscarry this child and with that we aren't speaking of funding abortions. PP is an abortion factory which will terminate normal pregnancies with funding received, so your point is moot. Any OB GYN would by means of ultra-sound know exactly where the child was attached and know in advance this was the condition. Guess what in Texas all uninsured pregnent women are eligible for medcaid during pregnancy. My daughter has had 3 babies and she was able to get medicaid with all 3. The last one she had low plancenta with, which by your belief she should have aborted because it is a high risk pregnancy and PP would have advised her that way. She instead went on bed rest and had the baby without complication and our granddaughter while small is now a thriving toddler. When the natural course of the body is allowed to be used properly the fallopian pregnancy while monitered will always abort itself, sorry that is not a man caused abortion that is caused by the natural process God built in. You see what the state of Texas is trying to prevent are normal pregnancies from being aborted and activist liberal judges are trying to force the funding of this type of abortion. Sorry the arguement doesn't hold H2O.