Catholics-Abortion-9 Year Old Rape Victim

neal · 03-05-09 8:39 pm

The church in Brazil has come out against the abortion allowed for a 9 year old, 80 pound girl carrying twins after allegedly being raped by her step-dad. US Representative Michelle Bachmann and cohorts (and people like our own Bob) want this to be illegal in our country also.<blockquote><hr size=0><!-quote-!>quote:Brazil girl, alleged rape victim, aborts twins The procedure on the 9-year-old girl draws complaints from Catholic church updated 4:17 p.m. MT, Wed., March. 4, 2009 RIO DE JANEIRO - A 9-year-old girl who was carrying twins, allegedly after being raped by her stepfather, underwent an abortion Wednesday despite complaints from Brazil's Roman Catholic church. Police said the stepfather has been jailed since last week. Abortion is illegal in Brazil, but judges can make exceptions if the mother's life is in danger or the fetus has no chance of survival. ---<!-/quote-!><hr size=0></blockquote> Read the rest here: <a href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29515505/" target=_top>http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29515505/</a>

bob_2 · 03-05-09 9:01 pm

Neal, where have you every heard me talk about what I wanted for rape and incest cases. Unless you can put the link here, leave my name out of it. I am a Laura Bush fan on abortion, "They should be rare." And as she believes, Roe vs. Wade should not be overturned.

neal · 03-05-09 9:28 pm

You are pro-life and, if you are like Laura, you believe life begins at conception. Unless you want to be very specific under what circumstances you would approve of a woman's right to choose I will assume that you are against abortion in the case of rape/incest. Why? It takes a long time to convict somebody of rape. By then the baby is born. Do you propose some quickie trial system (which the defendant will overturn on denial of due process) for alleged rapists if the victim becomes pregnant? Its an unworkable system if you claim that you would allow abortions for rape/incest. Every girl that wants an abortion would claim rape! Rape!!!! It would be an assailant who she didn't get a good look at etc.

bob_2 · 03-05-09 9:43 pm

You are being silly again. Talk to Elaine and see if she feels the same lack of confidence in what women claim happened to them. The silly part is suggesting you have to wait for conviction of rape and incest to have a D&C which essentially is an abortion. By what I have said and Laura Bush has said we would be defined as Prochoice. Prolifers are absolute in their opposition to any form of abortion including morning after pills.

neal · 03-05-09 10:01 pm

This is false: By what I have said and Laura Bush has said we would be defined as Prochoice. Prolifers are absolute in their opposition to any form of abortion including morning after pills. <blockquote><hr size=0><!-quote-!>quote:First Lady Bush Says She's Pro-Life - "Abortion Should Be Rare" --- Sammon asked Mrs. Bush if she believed life begins at conception, to which she replied that she did. She reiterated support for her husband's position opposing abortion. He asked if she was pro-life, she replied that "Yes, I think abortion should be rare."<!-/quote-!><hr size=0></blockquote> <a href="http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2004/aug/04081905.html" target=_top>http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2004/aug/04081905. html</a> <blockquote><hr size=0><!-quote-!>quote:Mrs. Bush did not respond in the interview when asked if a woman had a right to an abortion.<!-/quote-!><hr size=0></blockquote> <a href="http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2004/aug/04081905.html" target=_top>http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2004/aug/04081905. html</a> And you said recently:<blockquote><hr size=0><!-quote-!>quote:Yeah, how could this guy vote for Obama who was pro-abortion??<!-/quote-!><hr size=0></blockquote> <a href="http://www.atomorrow.net/cgi-bin/discus/show.cgi?tpc=13&post=148#POST148" target=_top>http://www.atomorrow.net/cgi-bin/discus/show.cgi?t pc=13&post=148#POST148</a> (Message edited by neal on March 05, 2009)

bob_2 · 03-05-09 10:24 pm

<blockquote><hr size=0><!-quote-!>quote:WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Laura Bush, the wife of President-elect George W. Bush, said Friday she believes the country could do more to minimize the number of abortions, but also indicated she doesn't believe the 1973 Supreme Court ruling legalizing abortions should be overturned. "No, I don't think it should be overturned," Mrs. Bush told NBC's "Today Show" when asked about the high court's decision, Roe vs. Wade. ... Ari Fleischer, Bush's designated press secretary, said he would not discuss the "personal views" of the president-elect's family. ...<!-/quote-!><hr size=0></blockquote> <a href="http://archives.cnn.com/2001/ALLPOLITICS/stories/01/19/laurabush.abortion.02/" target=_top>http://archives.cnn.com/2001/ALLPOLITICS/stories/0 1/19/laurabush.abortion.02/</a> I can say life begins at conception, but if I believe a woman can have an abortion for any reason, I am Prochoice, no matter how much you argue, ask your local Prolifers, Neal, then get back to us.

bob_2 · 03-05-09 10:34 pm

As far as this guy that live a year like Jesus, and voted for Obama. I stick by my words about Laura Bush. By what Laura said, she is Prochoice. I believe Jesus would have been compassionate to someone who had just has an abortion and say, go and sin no more. Laura probably beliefs that also. Jesus expanded the law so if you lust in your mind you have committed adultery, if you hate your brother you are a murderer, so he would probably be against abortion, and feel they should be rare. That is a Prochoice postion. Ask a Prolifer.

bob_2 · 03-05-09 10:40 pm

Neal, hear is the answer for you: <blockquote><hr size=0><!-quote-!>quote:What about abortion in the case of rape or incest? A child conceived through rape or incest does not deserve the death penalty for his or her father's crime. Most people who believe abortion should be legal in cases of rape or incest do so without considering the actual experiences of sexual assault victims who become pregnant. In the only large-scale study of pregnant rape victims ever conducted, Dr. Sandra Mahkorn found that approximately 80 percent chose not to abort [1]. Many sexual assault victims see giving birth as a selfless, loving decision that helps to heal themselves from the horrific experience of the rape itself. Women who abort children conceived through rape often say that they didn't feel that they had any real choice but to do so, since everyone around them assumed that they would not want to give birth to their rapist's baby. The case against abortion for pregnant victims of incest is even stronger. Incest victims hardly ever voluntarily consent to an abortion [2]. Rather than view the pregnancy as unwanted, the victim of incest more likely will see the pregnancy as a way to get out of the incestuous relationship because it exposes the abusive sexual activity that family members are afraid or unwilling to acknowledge. The pregnancy also poses a threat to the perpetrator, who frequently attempts to coerce his incest victim to have an unwanted abortion. The idea that the violent act of abortion is beneficial to victims of rape and incest is completely unfounded. On the contrary: evidence clearly shows that abortion in such cases compounds the unspeakable pain that such victims experience. <!-/quote-!><hr size=0></blockquote> <a href="http://prolifeaction.org/faq/stand.htm#rape" target=_top>http://prolifeaction.org/faq/stand.htm#rape</a> In my opinion that is sick, and Jesus still would say go and sin no more, but would not stone the girl.

neal · 03-05-09 10:42 pm

but if I believe a woman can have an abortion for any reason, I am Prochoice Tell me Bob's definition so I can be clear. What situations are you pro-choice? What situations are you anti-choice (anti-constitutional right to privacy)? As far as whether Barbara if for or against the repeal of Roe v Wade that is a tactical position on her part. Many Anti-Choice people are against fighting Roe v Wade. They are still against abortion. She refused to answer the direct question and says she is pro-life.

bob_2 · 03-05-09 11:37 pm

It was Laura not Barbara, although I think Barbara agrees with her daughter-in-law. I am labelled prochoice by prolifers becaus I believe in exceptions of rape, incest and life of the mother. Certainly you would agree sex with underage children is rape in your and my book. I am not for abortion on demand, for sex determination or birth control or public funding of it. Your definition of anti constitution, anti-privacy is yours, and certainly not everyone agrees with your opinion on that. I don't care if she refused to answer the question, I gave you the quote from the prolifers. Laura and Barbara are Prochoice if even one abortion is allowed in their view, not my definition but Prolife's.

neal · 03-06-09 8:15 am

I am labelled prochoice by prolifers becaus I believe in exceptions of rape, incest and life of the mother. Why do you care what somebody labels you as? Pro-choice people have some exceptions to- like aborting late-term without a legitimate reason. Do you believe in a WOMAN'S RIGHT TO CHOOSE? No, you do not. You LIMIT women to choice in a few RARE specific situations. Personally I don't care that you prefer to take the most extreme view of the most extreme pro-lifers and use their position to claim the term pro-choice for yourself. Your definition of anti constitution, anti-privacy is yours.... False. That is the ruling of the US Supreme Court. I gave you the quote from the prolifers I gave you the quotes from Laura herself. I think Laura (sorry, my bad about mixing her up with her MiL Barbara) can speak for herself or refuse to answer for herself as she has done.

bob_2 · 03-06-09 10:47 am

She did speak for herself say Roe vs Wade should not be reversed. That's good enough for me. Also that abortions should be rare, not that they should be eliminated. That is Prochoice even if she tries not to create a problem for her husband by the label. As far as privacy ruling, what was the split of the judges, the minority report??? I am not in favor of late term abortions, if a lady is raped, victim of incest, they shoudl know early on that they wish to terminate the preganancy not at 8 months or later. Most doctors will not do third trimester abortions. Partial birth abortion should be outlawed as an exception to Roe vs. Wade. I can't think of one situation where the mother's life would be in jeopardy so they would have to perform that procedure. Most women should us early D&C procedures as they realize they are pregnant from incest or rape or endangerment to themselves.

neal · 03-06-09 11:07 am

I can say life begins at conception Why do you insist on taking a position which is contradictory to what the Bible teaches? Genesis 2:7 the LORD God formed the man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being. Ezekiel 37:10 So I prophesied as he commanded me, and breath entered them; they came to life and stood up on their feet—a vast army. 1 Kings 17:17 And it came to pass after these things, that the son of the woman, the mistress of the house, fell sick; and his sickness was so sore, that there was no breath left in him. A fetus is not considered to be a human life because the biblical penalty for causing a miscarriage is only a fine to be paid to the woman's husband but for death of a born, breathing LIFE it is life for life (Leviticus 24:17-21). Even an infant under the age of one month is considered to be worth a lot less than an adult (Leviticus 27:1-8, Numbers 3:15,28,34,39,40,43). Also, God once punished David by killing his newborn son (II Samuel 12:14-19); so apparently the right-to-life of the infant was not important. Also, an adulterous woman is to be killed (Lev.20:10). It didn't matter whether she was pregnant or not. Your God didn't even care about about a bastard kid if it WAS BORN because it nor its descendants for 10 generations couldn't even go to church. Luckily, Jesus was past the 10th generation threshold wasn't he? On second thought, Jesus himself was a bastard kid as God or the Angel or whatever impregnated her was NOT HER HUSBAND.

neal · 03-06-09 12:34 pm

As far as privacy ruling, what was the split of the judges, the minority report??? I don't know and don't care. In majority rule like the Supreme Court the minority is worthy to study for future cases but is meaningless in fact. As Ike said, "the meaning of the Constitution is what the Supreme Court says it is." Amen to that. Personally, I don't think the Repubs want Roe v Wade overturned because a lot of people vote for them due to Roe v Wade. Look, I think 7 of the 9 justices were appointed by repub presidents. Its been almost 40 years. They STILL can't overturn it. I don't think they WANT to overturn it.

bob_2 · 03-06-09 11:56 pm

Neal, how come you want to use Bible standards one day and modern standards, rules not principles, another. Neal we were talking of what Laura Bush and I believed. Nothing is said about abortion in the Bible, so whatever you are putting forth in the last post is your view, and taken as such.

john8verse32 · 03-07-09 11:30 am

Nothing is said about abortion in the Bible, but what is potentially worse.... the ancients we hold in such high esteem thought nothing of killing their own kids to please their deity!!! ..."child sacrifice"... or killing neighboring kids to ethnically cleanse and take their land (but saving the virgins to "use") or celebrating a holiday even today where their deity is said to have killed innocent firstborn kids in Nazi like terrorist fashion.....instead of simply waterboarding the allegedly guilty Pharoah. then, lets not forget, that the writers of their deity's biography claim HE killed unknown hundreds of thousands if not millions of innocent kids with an undocumentable worldwide flood just because he was sorry he had made them. presuming, you continue to believe the ancient stories literally.... the problem with the issue of abortion beyond the ethical questions, is that the people who believe it should be feeely available, at least are willing to help diseminate info and products which help obviate the need for abortion, and later they are willing to help support the kids who are not aborted... while the people who oppose abortion, are also opposed to the disemination of info and products which help avoid the need for abortion... and when that doesn't work, they don't want your and my money taxed to take care of the out-of-wedlock kids. its all sdrawkcab. I'm normally a libertarian... lassez-faire... let live... as long as it doesn't hurt others... there is a problem here...does it hurt viable future humans? maybe we should put birth control in the cities water supplies where the problem is the greatest, and require education and proof of citizenship and means test those who want the antidote before they actually get married and "order" kids!!! that way, society would not be overrun with poor, inner city, homeless kids... and those who believe in "free love", don't have to worry about paying the consequences... while those who want to raise a family, would have to prove they can afford it and will act responsibly!!! unlike the current Obamunisim we are putting in place <img src="http://www.atomorrow.net/discus/messages/13/727.jpg" alt="">

bob_2 · 03-07-09 3:36 pm

John, you are abroken record. I have shown where when children were sacrificed by Israel or those around them it was during their time they turned from God. The test with Abraham was just that a test of loyalty and faith.

elaine · 03-07-09 8:08 pm

Talk to Elaine and see if she feels the same lack of confidence in what women claim happened to them. Not sure what you're asking. But regardless, abortion should finally be the woman's choice and no one should rob her of her humanity or privacy by assuming to make such very personal and private decisions for her. Would you, Bob, like to defer to someone else to decide: how many children you should have? who you should marry? Where you should live? What vocation you should pursue? Can you think of any more personal decision than to be a parent? And you would allow someone else, or the government to decide such a decision for you? Tell me a single man who would allow the government to decide whether he should seek permission for impregnating a female. Yet, there are millions who feel that women are so ignorant and unable to make such decisions that someone should decide for them. Misogyny?

bob_2 · 03-07-09 9:48 pm

When a doctor has to "invade" or be "invasive" to perform a surgery, if you will, it is different than the decision to impregnate. My feeling is, at least in America, no woman need be pregnant with as much knowledge of contraception and women's right. If she is pregnant except in underage or rape situation, the woman wants to be pregnant. Then when they want their insurance to pay to terminate the pregnancy, why shouldn't the insurance company or government be involved in whether they are going to pay for it????

neal · 03-07-09 9:54 pm

Neal, how come you want to use Bible standards one day and modern standards, rules not principles, another. I am not USING Bible standards. I was showing you what the Bible says about when 'life' starts. Again, YOU stated that life begins at conception. You are claiming to know more than God Himself. The Bible does NOT consider a fetus to be alive. The law is life for a life, but to cause a miscarriage the perpetrator had to pay some compensation to the husband IF the husband wanted it. If God thought the fetus was a "life" the guy causing the miscarriage would have been sentenced to death. In fact, God put more value on a man's balls than He did a fetus. If a woman damaged a man's private parts she got her hand cut off. If a man destroys a fetus he might have to pay not the mother but the husband a fine. For myself, using the knowledge of modern SCIENCE and REJECTING the Word of God as nothing more than the Word of Goat Herders, I believe, as you do, that life begins at conception. Hitchens stated during the debate at CU that he is prolife. How did the likely most outspoken anti-religionist in the world come to the same conclusion you have come to? The Bible? Does the conclusion of Hitchens agree with the teaching in the Bible of when life starts? Of course not. You are parroting the talking points of christians who, like most christians, don't even know that their position is contrary to their sacred book. Nothing is said about abortion in the Bible, so whatever you are putting forth in the last post is your view, and taken as such. If you read back through the post I did not even mention the term abortion. Why? Because I was giving you a Bible study on when the Bible says life begins. The Bible clearly contradicts your assertion that life begins at conception. Feel free to believe that life begins at conception. Its definitely heretical and probably borderline blasphemous as you are claiming to know more than God Himself. But, go for it dude. It would be ironic to have the abortion doctor go to heaven and the right-to-lifer burn in Hades.

neal · 03-07-09 10:03 pm

If she is pregnant except in underage or rape situation, the woman wants to be pregnant. False. No birth control is 100% effective.

bob_2 · 03-07-09 10:23 pm

Note: <blockquote><hr size=0><!-quote-!>quote:Question: "Does the Bible teach that life begins at conception?" Answer: The Bible does teach that life begins at conception. Every culture's view of when human life begins changes as society's values, moral standards, and knowledge about the process of embryonic development change. Prior to the 1973 U.S. Supreme Court decision that allowed abortion on demand, developing embryos were considered unborn persons. Now, even a fetus that could survive on its own outside its mother's womb could be aborted, under certain medical circumstances. This demonstrates that we do not consider an unborn child to be a true human being. Science tells us that human life begins at the time of conception. From the moment fertilization takes place, the child's genetic makeup is already complete. Its gender has already been determined, along with its height and hair, eye and skin color. The only thing the embryo needs to become a fully-functioning being is the time to grow and develop. More importantly, God reveals to us in His Word that not only does life begin at conception, but He knows who we are even before then (Jeremiah 1:5). King David said this about God's role in our conception: "For you created my inmost being; you knit me together in my mother's womb . . . your eyes saw my unformed body. All the days ordained for me were written in your book before one of them came to be." (Psalm 139:13, 16). Society continually seeks to devalue the lives of the unborn, creating its own definitions of humanity based on distorted views of morality. But the undeniable fact is that life begins at creation, and a human is created as soon as he or she is conceived. God is present at our creation; He is, in fact, our Creator. Our value as human beings created in His image is conceived even before we are. <!-/quote-!><hr size=0></blockquote> <a href="http://www.gotquestions.org/life-begin-conception.html" target=_top>http://www.gotquestions.org/life-begin-conception. html</a>

neal · 03-07-09 10:33 pm

Bob Jeremiah, writing about himself, claims that God had a special purpose for him before he was even conceived. This would be a great verse for people preaching predestination. However, if a man had hit Jeremiah's mother in the belly and he had become a miscarriage statistic the man would not have been held to the "life for a life" LAW OF GOD but would have possibly paid some fine to the expectant father. Going off this verse, you could argue that life begins the first time the testosterone-laden guy sees the hot babe at mandatory Friday night vespers during their academy years. One thing leads to another and before you know it there's a baby crawling around. Please explain the hand-for-a-man's-nut but a fine-for-a-miscarriage but a life-for-a-life. You are holding a losing hand of cards here.

neal · 03-07-09 10:37 pm

PS The Jeremiah verse and the Psalm verses NEVER mention when life starts. As every hebrew KNEW life involves breath. A fetus does not breathe (it DOES, however, have gills at one stage of its development! What's the penalty for destroying a fish?).

neal · 03-07-09 10:53 pm

God is present at our creation Sacred Sex? Are believers supposed to pray before sex? Ask for God to please not create a retard?

Adventists for Tomorrow

Announcement

#1 03-05-09 8:39 pm

Catholics-Abortion-9 Year Old Rape Victim

#2 03-05-09 9:01 pm

Re: Catholics-Abortion-9 Year Old Rape Victim

#3 03-05-09 9:28 pm

Re: Catholics-Abortion-9 Year Old Rape Victim

#4 03-05-09 9:43 pm

Re: Catholics-Abortion-9 Year Old Rape Victim

#5 03-05-09 10:01 pm

Re: Catholics-Abortion-9 Year Old Rape Victim

#6 03-05-09 10:24 pm

Re: Catholics-Abortion-9 Year Old Rape Victim

#7 03-05-09 10:34 pm

Re: Catholics-Abortion-9 Year Old Rape Victim

#8 03-05-09 10:40 pm

Re: Catholics-Abortion-9 Year Old Rape Victim

#9 03-05-09 10:42 pm

Re: Catholics-Abortion-9 Year Old Rape Victim

#10 03-05-09 11:37 pm

Re: Catholics-Abortion-9 Year Old Rape Victim

#11 03-06-09 8:15 am

Re: Catholics-Abortion-9 Year Old Rape Victim

#12 03-06-09 10:47 am

Re: Catholics-Abortion-9 Year Old Rape Victim

#13 03-06-09 11:07 am

Re: Catholics-Abortion-9 Year Old Rape Victim

#14 03-06-09 12:34 pm

Re: Catholics-Abortion-9 Year Old Rape Victim

#15 03-06-09 11:56 pm

Re: Catholics-Abortion-9 Year Old Rape Victim

#16 03-07-09 11:30 am

Re: Catholics-Abortion-9 Year Old Rape Victim

#17 03-07-09 3:36 pm

Re: Catholics-Abortion-9 Year Old Rape Victim

#18 03-07-09 8:08 pm

Re: Catholics-Abortion-9 Year Old Rape Victim

#19 03-07-09 9:48 pm

Re: Catholics-Abortion-9 Year Old Rape Victim

#20 03-07-09 9:54 pm

Re: Catholics-Abortion-9 Year Old Rape Victim

#21 03-07-09 10:03 pm

Re: Catholics-Abortion-9 Year Old Rape Victim

#22 03-07-09 10:23 pm

Re: Catholics-Abortion-9 Year Old Rape Victim

#23 03-07-09 10:33 pm

Re: Catholics-Abortion-9 Year Old Rape Victim

#24 03-07-09 10:37 pm

Re: Catholics-Abortion-9 Year Old Rape Victim

#25 03-07-09 10:53 pm

Re: Catholics-Abortion-9 Year Old Rape Victim

Board footer