I am encouraged . The Dobbs case that overturned Roe appears to be working as intended . Alabama has a law that the state Supreme Court misinterpreted to mean that IVF test tube frozen embryos are babies. There was confusion after the ruling . It caused a pause in IVF services in the state.

The good news is that Dobbs gives the legislature back the power to correct it . It appears that is what will happen.

Lawmakers file bills to address Alabama Supreme Court's IVF ruling (alreporter.com) (https://www.alreporter.com/2024/02/23/lawmakers-file-bills-to-address-alabama-supreme-courts-ivf-ruling/)

Nikki moves past DeSantis . That puts a target on her back by Trump - Page 3 (askmehelpdesk.com) (https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/showthread.php?t=850976&page=3&p=3896336#post3896336)


This is where the Repubs always shoots themselves in the foot . They are being pigeonholed into the appearance of being nut jobs . The Alabama Supreme Court went by the words of the law to interpret it to mean that a frozen embryo is a human life. 40-60 % of embryos do not get implanted naturally. They cannot possibly become a human until implantation or when some scientist comes up with a way to artificially grow them outside of the womb. But that is a science fiction discussion for another day.

Knowing this most states have not declared embryos to be humans . They are instead given "special respect" .

Embryos are not only used in freezing for later implanting . They are also used in stem cell medical use. Defining them as a person would logically end that also.

Alabama as I mentioned is taking steps to correct the language of the law.

But now the issue is going to be exploited

This is one of many election year gotchas .

Illinois Senator Tammy Duckworth introduced a bill that she is asking for unanimous consent.

New Duckworth, Murray, Wild Bill Would Protect Right to Access IVF, Other Assisted Reproductive Technology for Every American | U.S. Senator Tammy Duckworth of Illinois (senate.gov) (https://www.duckworth.senate.gov/news/press-releases/new-duckworth-murray-wild-bill-would-protect-right-to-access-ivf-other-assisted-reproductive-technology-for-every-american?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=newsletter_axiossneakpeek&stream=top)

Now some of the Senators may agree with the Alabama SC decision. Others may see the issue as I do as matter that SCOTUS correctly returned to the states . They will vote against . The bill will fail.

But it will then give the Dems a talking point into the election that the Repubs are out of touch religious extremist .

IVF Senate law: Republicans say they really, really want to protect IVF—but not enough to let this bill pass. (slate.com) (https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2024/02/ivf-alabama-senate-duckworth-republicans-congress-fertility-roe-abortion.html)

Over in the House Rep Nancy Mace (South Carolina) is introducing similar resolutions supporting "fertility care " . She will also introduce a bill supporting IVF

Nancy Mace pitches bill with nonbinding IVF protections - Live Updates - POLITICO (https://www.politico.com/live-updates/2024/02/27/congress/maces-ivf-alternative-00143590)

Now the Repubs ;again on the defensive ,will be forced to go on record to reject a position that they have not taken

Republicans Are Lying About Supporting IVF | The New Republic (https://newrepublic.com/post/179288/republicans-lying-supporting-ivf)

Republicans start to back off controversial Alabama IVF ruling | National | fairfieldsuntimes.com (https://www.fairfieldsuntimes.com/news/national/republicans-start-to-back-off-controversial-alabama-ivf-ruling/article_95cfd6a7-33ff-5437-9d88-bc3fce308527.html)

Why is an embryo not human?

I probably a related event ;there was an explosion outside the office of Alabama AG Steve Marshall.

Explosive detonated outside Alabama attorney general's office on Saturday - ABC News (go.com) (https://abcnews.go.com/US/explosive-detonated-alabama-attorney-generals-office-saturday/story?id=107560248)

Why is an embryo not human?
If it comes down to faith ,either you believe it or not. But that is not the science . 40-60% of fertilized human eggs fail to implant . I do not believe that God intends for half of all babies to die before there is a pregnancy .In this my belief is different than the stated position of my church.

For every fertilized egg artificially implanted there are many more that are produced in a lab that are never used for IVF . Wanted embryos can be frozen of course . Over time some of them are no longer viable.

What exactly should be done with them ? The alternative is to not have the procedure legal at all. Unwanted embryos need to either be destroyed or put to other productive use like research.


In my view Alabama did the right thing to clarify the difference between killing a baby and the destruction of IVF embryos .

Republican Alabama governor signs IVF protections into law | Reuters (https://www.reuters.com/world/us/republican-alabama-governor-signs-ivf-protections-into-law-2024-03-07/?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=Newsletter&utm_campaign=Daily-Briefing&utm_term=030724&user_email=3c836956fbef5ae572d6a01a09dfe9727855e3d c2d8cc3d02ca8b5d1d69897f2)

Just a quick update for those who thought the Dobbs decision was the death knell to abortion in the US .

There were more than a million baby snuffings in 2023 in the US despite the Dobbs decision. That is a 10% INCREASE in the number since 2020.

Many of them were done through mail order chemical murder with the use of mifepristone aka the 'abortion pill'.

FDA finalizes rule change allowing mail-order abortion pills | PBS NewsHour (https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/fda-finalizes-rule-change-allowing-mail-order-abortion-pills)

The national availability of this death drug will be the next challenge for SCOTUS .

There are a pair of cases SCOTUS agreed to hear ;and the timing is perfect for guaranteeing that the abortion issue will be front and center in the fall campaign.

Food and Drug Administration v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine - SCOTUSblog (https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/food-and-drug-administration-v-alliance-for-hippocratic-medicine-2/)

Danco Laboratories, L.L.C. v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine - SCOTUSblog (https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/danco-laboratories-l-l-c-v-alliance-for-hippocratic-medicine/)


SCOTUS will hear arguments this summer .Expect the antics outside the court to be the same zoo atmosphere that the Dobbs hearings were

I have no doubt that Schmuck Shumer's prediction of a whirlwind being released will have been prophetic. During those hearings Kavanaugh was stalked by an assassin.

Chuck Schumer Threatens Supreme Court Justices Gorsuch & Kavanaugh (youtube.com) (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qQQY8vbIjC8)

FBI says man accused of attempting to kill Brett Kavanaugh said he was ‘shooting for 3’ justices | CNN Politics (https://www.cnn.com/2022/07/27/politics/kavanaugh-roske-arrest-warrant/index.html)

Schumer's approach is basically this. If you will not support the killing of unborn children, then we will kill you. It is breath-taking that a U.S. senator is allowed to issue such a threat. All of the whiners who protested on this site so much about the Jan. 6 riot have been strangely, and yet predictably, silent on this issue. Shame.

Based on the oral arguments I predict the government is going to win it's case to nationally distribute the mifepristone murder pill to pharmacies regardless of ,and despite state abortion laws.

SCOTUS will decide that the plaintiffs ;Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine, were not able to prove "standing ". They could not identify a physician that was harmed by the decision.

The conservatives in the court have used the issue of standing to squash cases recently .So I guess that is a fair way to make a non-decision.

My best guess is that the real issue is deference to the administrative state. As I suggested here ;this is one of the main reasons the Leviathan administrative state has been able to grow virtually unchecked.
Quick hits (askmehelpdesk.com) (https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/showthread.php?t=851130&p=3895317#post3895317)

The court is probably reluctant to take on FDA decisions about which drug should be allowed .........even if the drug's sole reason is baby killing.

The cause of death marches on. These issues are never isolated. The disregard of human life is a natural outgrowth of our growing rejection of the authority of God. We shake our fists at Him and proclaim that we will do as we please, forgetting that His fist is a great deal more powerful than ours.

God gave us free will.

And what will happen to all those unwanted babies that will get born?

We could just kill them. After all, according to what certainly seems to be your logic, if a child is unwanted, either pre or post birth, then killing the child is the best solution. Correct???

It is true that God gave us free will. It is equally true that God will hold us accountable for what we do with our free will.

I did not state any "logic". I asked you a question. You refused to answer it because you have no clue.

I read about how you use your free will and then shudder.

You have asked a question concerning what to do with babies that are born to mothers. Throughout all of history, the mother, and usually the father, raise the child, so I don't see how you consider that to be so remarkable. Any mother too sorry to raise her own child should put the child up for adoption. The demand for adopted children right now is enormous.

You are clearly using the "unwanted child" approach as a justification for continuing to kill unborn children in abortion. It is your logic, though I can see why you would want to deny that.

I asked YOU a question. And guess how many babies are languishing, waiting to be adopted. Heck, let's add hundreds more to that number. The demand right now is NOT enormous.

You are trying desperately to find fault with me by a faulty reading of my mind. You are very incorrect. Stop it!

And I answered your question above.

Sorry, but you simply don't know what you're talking about concerning adoption.


But that is not actually true. Adopting a baby or toddler is much more difficult than it was a few decades ago. Of the nearly 4 million (https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/births.htm) American children who are born each year, only about 18,000 (https://indd.adobe.com/view/4ae7a823-4140-4f27-961a-cd9f16a5f362) are voluntarily relinquished for adoption. Though the statistics are unreliable, some estimates suggest that dozens of couples (https://ifstudies.org/blog/cultivating-a-pro-adoption-culture) are now waiting to adopt each available baby. Since the mid-1970s (https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/series/sr_23/sr23_027.pdf)—the end of the so-called baby-scoop era (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baby_Scoop_Era), when large numbers of unmarried women placed their children for adoption—the percentage of never-married women who relinquish their infants has declined from nearly 9 percent to less than 1 percent.

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2021/10/adopt-baby-cost-process-hard/620258/



As to your position on abortion, I don't need to read your mind. I only need to read your posts. "The 'mistake' is a child whom you refuse to allow to be aborted once the woman realizes she's pregnant," You keep forgetting about the very capable search feature on this site. And that's not to mention your previously stated opinion that a baby is not a living soul until it takes its first breath, a silly idea since you don't even believe the account you are depending on in Genesis 2 even happened, thus meaning you are making a fact appeal to a work of fiction, a truly novice mistake. Would you like for me to link that for you as well?

https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/showthread.php?t=842470&page=25&p=3833210#post3833210

But if you've changed your mind the past few years, then please feel free to outline your views on abortion. I'd love to read about them.

I'm against abortion. As a professional counselor, I have done everything possible to keep my clients secure and happy in their marriages and relationships so that abortion doesn't become an issue.

I'm against abortionWhy are you against abortion?

If you are against abortion, then why did you characterize my opposition to abortion as a "mistake"?

Why are you against abortion?
Why is there a fetus?

Answering a question with a question. Evasion, your name is Wondergirl.

But I am happy to show you how it is done. There is a fetus because the woman conceived and that independent human life is growing under its own genetic direction.

Now, answer the question please. Why are you against abortion?

There is a fetus because the woman conceived and that independent human life is growing under its own genetic direction.
How did the woman conceive? Was she raped? Is she happily married - or not? Did she give consent to intercourse? How old is she? Questions to ask....

Answer my question first. Why are you against abortion?

Abortion is killing. The Fifth Commandment states: "Thou shalt not kill."

Then why did you say I made a “mistake” in opposing abortion?

Then why did you say I made a “mistake” in opposing abortion?
Plus cite the number of the frame in which I said that.

The link takes you right to it. 484.

The link takes you right to it. 484.
Because you wash your hands of the situation and give no financial or moral support to a female who wants or needs an abortion.

How do you know that? Rather judgmental of you don’t you think?

How do you know that? Rather judgmental of you don’t you think?
Just trying to emulate you....

How many women/teen girls/molested girls have you counseled and/or helped financially?

What if tests show the fetus has no head? Or limbs? or is dead?

Just trying to emulate you....Just once I'd like to see you have the moral courage to be responsible for your own actions.

Help those women? My wife and I have done so many times. If you will lift up your head and look, you will find that practically all crisis pregnancy centers are funded by pro-life groups. The pro-aborts want the taxpayers to do it so it won't cost them anything.

A child with no head is dead. A child that is dead is dead. A dead child, tragically, will be delivered. I never considered that to be a great mystery that needed to be explained. There are many people who have lost limbs and yet led fulfilling lives. I don't want to see them killed either before or after they are born. Don't they fall under the sixth commandment you appealed to?

So in appealing to the sixth commandment, are you now saying you are pro-life and are politically and morally opposed to abortion???

So if the fetus is dead early in the pregnancy, the mother must carry that dead fetus to term and have an OB deliver it?

SIXTH commandment?????

So if the fetus is dead early in the pregnancy, the mother must carry that dead fetus to term and have an OB deliver it?Can't be done. The baby will spontaneously abort in that case. And, of course, an abortion of an already dead baby can be done as well. Happens rather frequently. It's called a miscarriage.


SIXTH commandment?????Yes. That's the one you referred to. "Thou shall not kill." More accurately, it is a command not to commit murder.

Yes. That's the one you referred to. "Thou shall not kill." More accurately, it is a command not to commit murder.
In my Bible, and during all of my years of Christian education, "Thou shalt not kill" is the Fifth Commandment.

The fifth commandment is to honor mom and dad. And I will happily admit that while I know them, I don’t know them in order. I always look it up as I did in this case.

4th Commandment is honor your father and mother.

What church/denomination do you belong to?

Nope. Fourth commandment is to honor the Sabbath.

49589

Evidently I belong to the branch of the church that knows the Ten Commandments.

And again.

https://www.the-ten-commandments.org/the-ten-commandments.html

And then one more time.
Exodus 20:20 And God spoke all these words:
2 “I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of Egypt, out of the land of slavery.
3 “You shall have no other gods before[a (https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=EXODUS%2020&version=NIV#fen-NIV-2055a)] me.
4 “You shall not make for yourself an image in the form of anything in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below. 5 You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin of the parents to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me, 6 but showing love to a thousand generations of those who love me and keep my commandments.
7 “You shall not misuse the name of the Lord your God, for the Lord will not hold anyone guiltless who misuses his name.
8 “Remember the Sabbath day by keeping it holy. 9 Six days you shall labor and do all your work, 10 but the seventh day is a sabbath to the Lord your God. On it you shall not do any work, neither you, nor your son or daughter, nor your male or female servant, nor your animals, nor any foreigner residing in your towns. 11 For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, but he rested on the seventh day. Therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy.
12 “Honor your father and your mother, so that you may live long in the land the Lord your God is giving you.
13 “You shall not murder.
14 “You shall not commit adultery.
15 “You shall not steal.
16 “You shall not give false testimony against your neighbor.
17 “You shall not covet your neighbor’s house. You shall not covet your neighbor’s wife, or his male or female servant, his ox or donkey, or anything that belongs to your neighbor.”


Need more???

Sorry, you must not be Protestant.

Have it your way. In a day when men can believe they are women, you can certainly believe that the sixth commandment is the fifth commandment, and the fifth commandment is the fourth commandment, even when the Protestant scripture used by the Lutherans disagrees with you. I guess the first commandment is, for you, the zeroeth commandment???

Exodus 20 NRSVUE - The Ten Commandments - Then God spoke - Bible Gateway (https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=exodus+20&version=NRSVUE)

At least you have seen that abortion is a violation of the whatever it is commandment against murder. I will happily take that as being significant progress.

Good grief!! Even Young's Literal Translation somehow messed it up. I'm going to get those people to call you so you can set them straight on the Nine Commandments. [a little humor]

Exodus 20 YLT - `And God speaketh all these words, - Bible Gateway (https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=exodus+20&version=YLT)

And here is the solution. Turns out we are both correct.


The “Ten Commandments” of Exodus 34:28 is literally “ten words” in Hebrew. Because the Bible does not enumerate the ten words, people have assigned different numerical values to them. That explains the three systems of numbering the Ten Commandments that have long existed.Martin Luther did not restructure the Ten Commandments; he simply retained the numbering system of the Roman Catholic Church.
A second system that most Protestant churches use splits the First Commandment into two commandments and contains one commandment on coveting.
A third system frames the first “word” as an introduction: “I am the LORD your God, who brought you out of Egypt, out of the land of slavery” (Exodus 20:2). There is then one commandment on idolatry and one commandment on coveting.
None of the numbering systems omit the content of the Ten Commandments. The systems simply arrange the content differently.


Numbering of Ten Commandments – WELS (https://wels.net/faq/numbering-of-ten-commandments/#:~:text=Because%20the%20Bible%20does%20not%20enum erate%20the%20ten,the%20numbering%20system%20of%20 the%20Roman%20Catholic%20Church.)

The Ten Commandments (Exodus 20:1-17)

God gave Moses the Ten Commandments on Mount Sinai.


1. I am the Lord, your God, you shall have no other gods before me.
2. You shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain.
3. Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy.
4. Honor your father and mother.
5. You shall not kill.
6. You shall not commit adultery.
7. You shall not steal.
8. You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.
9. You shall not covet your neighbor's house.
10. You shall not covet your neighbor's wife, or his manservant, or his maidservant, or his cattle, or anything that is your neighbor's.

Please read what was posted above in 38.

And again, you now agree that abortion is a violation of the, for you, fifth commandment. That's real progress.

Please read what was posted above in 38.

And again, you now agree that abortion is a violation of the, for you, fifth commandment. That's real progress.
I read it after you posted it.

Progress? I always have believed that and have helped counseling clients figure out a better way.

You've always believed that abortion is a violation of God's law? Huh. I would never have thought considering past remarks you've made. Just in the past two days you made the ones below. They are scarcely a stalwart, highly principled defense of the rights of unborn children to be born and not killed by abortion. You did, of course, state that you were against abortion, and yet months ago you claimed I was MISTAKEN for opposing abortion. So you seem to be terribly confused about the subject.


And what will happen to all those unwanted babies that will get born?

And guess how many babies are languishing, waiting to be adopted. Heck, let's add hundreds more to that number. The demand right now is NOT enormous.

Why is there a fetus?

How did the woman conceive? Was she raped? Is she happily married - or not? Did she give consent to intercourse? How old is she?

Because you wash your hands of the situation and give no financial or moral support to a female who wants or needs an abortion.

How many women/teen girls/molested girls have you counseled and/or helped financially?

What if tests show the fetus has no head? Or limbs? or is dead?

So a 12-year-old girl who was raped and made pregnant by her uncle must carry that baby for nine months and then deliver it. Of course!!!

Says the person who wants others to believe she is against abortion because it violates God's law against murder.

Says the person who wants others to believe she is against abortion because it violates God's law against murder.
If that girl is your granddaughter, what would you advise?

If that girl is your granddaughter, what would you advise?Asks the person who really thinks others will believe that she is against abortion.

I would advise her not to have her unborn child murdered. It's the same advice I would give her if she had a newborn that was a problem for her. The reason is that I actually take the fifth/sixth commandment seriously. It's not just lip service for a message board. If you are genuinely against abortion, your posts should reflect that.

So you would allow, even encourage, your granddaughter, who probably doesn't even understand how she got pregnant and even all the ramifications of pregnancy, and that she has nearly nine months of possible physical and emotional misery ahead of her, to drop out of school meanwhile and look foward to having a cute little baby.

Yeah. You’re the person is who is against abortion. Right.

My granddaughter would have great physical and emotional support. She would be able to live the rest of her life with a clean conscience. And she would be encouraged not engage in the use of cheap, meaningless cliches.

I'm asking YOU, sweetie, to make sure you know what tortures you may create for loved ones. Since you've never been female and unwillingly pregnant, especially at 12 in an undeveloped body, apparently obeying an OT commandment is more important to you than showing Christ's love.

The usual excuses for you. It never ends.

The same avoidance for you. It never ends. You'd rather be punitive and obey a commandment instead of reflecting and reaching out with God's wondrous love.

So you appeal to God's wondrous love to justify the brutal killing of an innocent child? To you, it's all done because of the love of Jesus? It can evidently excuse any perverse desire of yours.

I avoid nothing. I am opposed to abortion and I am consistent in that belief. You do what is convenient and you are consistent in that belief as well.

If you want to endorse abortion, then be honest enough to just come out with it. Everyone knows where you stand anyway.

I will pray for you.

You justify an abortion by appealing to Gods love. Wow. I will pray for you as well.

I did not!

Your reading comprehension is slipping badly.

That's exactly what you did, and now you want to deny it.


obeying an OT commandment is more important to you than showing Christ's love.It's pretty clear. Just go ahead and end the baby's life because of Christ's love.

Now if that was not your intended meaning, then here's your opportunity to clear up the misunderstanding. What did you mean to say?

Which is more important: that unwanted baby created by force and lust or the mental and physical health of the young girl who was raped and every day for nine months (and more) is reminded of that? The OT commandments were rewritten by Jesus' love and sacrifice in the NT and are now our guides in life, not "have to"s.

Which is more important: that unwanted babyPerhaps you can tell me what could ever be more important than the life of that baby. The fact that, in your view, it is "unwanted" is appalling to me. And the idea that you would justify the killing of that baby by appealing to the love of Jesus just shows how little you understand His love. Just tragic.

What you are doing is typical of how the pro-abortion crowd tries to frame the issue. You find a 1/10,000 case and suggest that a baby from rape could never be wanted and is thus available for killing. It is their desperate effort to make a pro-death position seem noble. It fails always.

You should be very careful. The day might very well come when you are unwanted. Then what?

Perhaps you can tell me what could ever be more important than the life of that baby. The fact that, in your view, it is "unwanted" is appalling to me. And the idea that you would justify the killing of that baby by appealing to the love of Jesus just shows how little you understand His love. Just tragic.

What you are doing is typical of how the pro-abortion crowd tries to frame the issue. You find a 1/10,000 case and suggest that a baby from rape could never be wanted and is thus available for killing. It is their desperate effort to make a pro-death position seem noble. It fails always.

You should be very careful. The day might very well come when you are unwanted. Then what?
A product of rape? A 12-year-old girl who has to drop out of school for at least a year, throughout her life remembering the terrors of the rape, and whose immature body struggles with that thing growing inside her and robbing her of nutrients.

Genesis 2:7 (KJV): And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

Until that fetus takes its first breath, it is not a living soul.

Genesis 2:7 (KJV): And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

Until that fetus takes its first breath, it is not a living soul.Your dishonesty is just shocking, You are making a factual appeal to what is, for you, a work of fiction. It doesn't get much worse than that. And that has been shown to you repeatedly. You just have no interest in being honest, and this shows how empty your thinking is. Even worse, the comparison is not valid to begin with since Adam was never in his mother's womb. It's an argument with absolutely no merit.


A product of rape?So if the baby is carried to term and born, is it still worthless and unwanted to you?

Look at your language. "...whose immature body struggles with that thing growing inside of her, robbing her of nutrients." So it's a thing to you, and a thief that robs its mother of nutrients? Well, I guess that makes you feel a little less uncaring. The best advice to give that girl is for her to do what she can be proud of in ten years. Killing an innocent life is just not a solution at all.

This is the great difference between the two of us. I value human life, born or unborn. All human life is of great value having been made in God's image. You are a great advertisement for the pro-life cause.

Wondergirl's "thing" at twenty weeks. A worthless thief??


49593

Is it breathing?

With all your contacts, find a few teen or pre-teen girls who've been molested, raped, and made pregnant. Have an honest chat with them.

Yes, a "worthless thief" if it's inside your abdominal cavity, screwing up your hormones and daily functioning. Your schooling gets grossly delayed, your friends desert you, you fall apart mentally and physically.

Is it breathing?Please stop with the dishonesty.


Yes, a "worthless thief" if it's inside your abdominal cavity,Well, that pretty well sums up your view. All unborn children are mere "things" and worthless thieves.

In my experience, if I let a person talk long enough, the truth will come out. It certainly happened here.

Here's one for you. She was not advised to get rid of the worthless thief in her abdomen.

Women who conceived through rape: 'My baby was part of my healing' (liveaction.org) (https://www.liveaction.org/news/women-conceived-rape-baby-part-healing/)


It is often assumed that a woman who conceives a child in rape will want to abort that child, or if she gives birth, will regret doing so because the child will be a “reminder” of her rape. But according to many women in this situation, that isn’t the case; most don’t regret having given birth to their children.
Christina, pregnant by rape, went to Planned Parenthood. She says workers there urged her to abort, but instead she had her baby (http://juda4praise.com/TestimoniesChristina.htm). She writes:
Had I listened to PP, I would have ended the life of a spectacular human being…. She played softball from kindergarten to college. She was the athlete of the year, her senior year of high school.
She grew up to get married … She has given us 2 beautiful grandchildren…. She is a police officer now…. I cannot imagine the void there would have been without her.

Was she 12 when raped and made pregnant?

Sorry WG, but you're toast after this. "Yes, a "worthless thief" if it's inside your abdominal cavity." Your noble counselor effort has failed mightily. You would want a pregnant woman to say, "This worthless thing of a thief inside my abdominal cavity is at five months now."

It's over. That's the most cold-hearted comment I've heard in a long time. Your effort to hide behind love is done since the truth about your feelings is quite evident. I actually find it hard to imagine that any person could have such a belief. I can only hope you correct yourself.

Worth repeating. "In my experience, if I let a person talk long enough, the truth will come out. It certainly happened here."

You misquoted me. Always cherry picking arntcha. The topic was a 12 yo girl who was raped.

I quoted you exactly. Toast.

You cherry-picked to make me look bad. YOU first used "worthless thief". I merely subsequently quoted your use of that term you spit out in post 62.

Nope. They were your words. Now you regret it, or at least I hope you do. It was a sick comment. You did a perfectly adequate job of making yourself look extremely bad.

Please tell me in which post I used that term. (Note your use of the term in posts 61 and 62.)

Worthless thief in 63. Thing in 60.

No doubt you will blame it on someone else. That is your usual practice.

You are guilty!!!! I was quoting you!

Has your primary doctor given you a cognitive test lately? If not, please ask for that to be done.

More whining and lying. You said, "Yes, a "worthless thief" if it's inside your abdominal cavity." It is your thought and you have to own it. And that was after saying, "...whose immature body struggles with that thing growing inside her and robbing her of nutrients." So it's all yours. First you make an outrageous statement, and then you are too cowardly to own up to it. Just pitiful. And I even tried to give you a chance to back out of it. "Look at your language. '...whose immature body struggles with that thing growing inside of her, robbing her of nutrients.' So it's a thing to you, and a thief that robs its mother of nutrients?" You could have cleaned up the mess right there, but you didn't because you liked what you said.

See if you can find someone else to try this craziness with. It gets old in a hurry.

Toast is toast.

I'm finished. Goodbye.

Might as well. It seems to be what you typically do when you are stuck in a corner. And I assure you this appalling statement will not be soon forgotten. It's still shocking to read.


Yes, a "worthless thief" if it's inside your abdominal cavity,You really should have simply clarified your meaning, but you chose not to. Too bad. I sincerely hope you don't really feel that way.

I was quoting YOU!!!

I posed, very clearly as a question, this. "A worthless thief??" It had an accompanying pic. You replied in the affirmative. "Yes, a 'worthless thief' if it's inside your abdominal cavity."

So you are being completely dishonest, WG. You made a horrible comment. I would suggest that you make haste in correcting it unless, of course, you honestly view it in the way YOU described, a "thing" and a "worthless thief". And "thief", of course, came from your description of that "thing" that women carry as one who is "robbing her". That is what thieves do.

I quoted you regarding "worthless thief".

You answered a question as "yes", so this belongs to you. "Yes, a 'worthless thief' if it's inside your abdominal cavity." It is how you characterized an unborn child.

You are guilty as charged. Whining will get you nowhere.

But if you want to become honest, simply say whether or not you agree with the statement. You said "yes" to that yesterday. Is it still "yes"? I'll even go first. I would give a resounding "NO!" to both your "thing" statement and your "worthless thief" agreement.

You?

"If your granddaughter is 12 and has been raped by her uncle" was the beginning of that story.

I knew you wouldn’t answer. You consider unborn children to be nothing more than things and thieves. I have found that if I ask you the right questions, you usually avoid them, like now, but if you answer, like yesterday, you dig yourself a hole that your ideology won’t allow you to escape from.

Please ask your primary physician to give you a cognitive test.

So scared of answering a simple question? Doesn’t that cowardice get embarrassing? Now if you want me to treat you like the sweet little old lady at the church picnic then I can, but I had hoped you were better than that. I guess not.

You are the scared one. I asked ages ago a what-if your 12 yo granddaughter got raped. I hear only crickets chirping.

And as anyone interested in the truth already knows, I answered that on post 46. Kind of beginning to wonder about someone's memory. Since you clearly can't find it, then here is the question you asked. "If that girl is your granddaughter, what would you advise?" And I answered as follows.


I would advise her not to have her unborn child murdered. It's the same advice I would give her if she had a newborn that was a problem for her. The reason is that I actually take the fifth/sixth commandment seriously. It's not just lip service for a message board. If you are genuinely against abortion, your posts should reflect that.

I know why you are so fearful, and I can understand why. When you answer questions, you come up with horrible answers such as, " "Yes, a 'worthless thief' if it's inside your abdominal cavity." Then, having been induced to reveal what is evidently your true view on the subject, you get angry because you've been had. It is exactly why you won't answer the current question. You hardly ever do. It is the behavior of moral cowards.

I'll post the question again in case you can summon the courage to answer it. Note that I have already done so.


But if you want to become honest, simply say whether or not you agree with the statement. You said "yes" to that yesterday. Is it still "yes"? I'll even go first. I would give a resounding "NO!" to both your "thing" statement and your "worthless thief" agreement.

If I was you, I would answer (as I did above) just to show that I have the courage to do it.

What's the current question?

It's the other one.

Ah, you don't know either.

Post 31. But you will just evade. Fearful.

"Yes, a 'worthless thief' if it's inside your abdominal cavity."

Post 31. But you will just evade. Fearful.
The lsst thing I am is fearful. It's difficult to get past your twists and turns to have a rational discussion with you.

Yes, a 'worthless thief' if it's inside your abdominal cavity."
I was merely quoting your very judgmental term, "worthless thief". And we were discussing an immature 12 yo girl who had been raped by her uncle.

Post 31. But you will just evade. Fearful.No answer. Fearful.


I was merely quoting your very judgmental term, "worthless thief".Sorry, but that's a lie. You were "merely" affirming your belief that babies are worthless thieves. It's why you started with "yes". I don't mean that to be ugly, but truth is truth. You were asked a question and you answered it, and now you are trying to extricate yourself with dishonesty.

Why not just answer the post 81 question and make your views clear? I did. Waiting on you now. Here it is.


But if you want to become honest, simply say whether or not you agree with the statement. You said "yes" to that yesterday. Is it still "yes"? I'll even go first. I would give a resounding "NO!" to both your "thing" statement and your "worthless thief" agreement.
Unborn children are not "things" and are not "worthless thives".

Post 31:
https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/images/misc/quote_icon.png Originally Posted by jlisenbe https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/images/buttons/viewpost-right.png (https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/showthread.php?p=3896668#post3896668)
Yes. That's the one you referred to. "Thou shall not kill." More accurately, it is a command not to commit murder.

In my Bible, and during all of my years of Christian education, "Thou shalt not kill" is the Fifth Commandment.
****************************************
Because of Christ's suffering, death, and resurrection, the commandments are only a guide now. Obedience to them ("work righteousness") will not save us. Jesus, because of His great love for us, suffered and died and rose again. All He asks of us is to love each other like He loves us.

You will not answer. I knew it. So predictable.

The rest of your post is lunacy. So not stealing, murdering, and lying are merely guidelines now??? It's an idea supported nowhere in the Bible and is an absurdity.

In Christ's name and surrounded by His love, plus His love is reflected off us onto others, we don't steal, murder, and lie.

Read Micah 6:8.

Any female who wants an abortion should talk with a trained counselor about it. Reasons are varied. Testing will have to be done, decisions made. Not a simple, easy walk-through. Yet God's love and forgiveness will prevail.

Your first sentence is reasonable. It's much better than suggesting the Ten Commandments have become the Ten Guidelines.

If a woman walks in the love of Christ, she will not allow a doctor to kill her unborn child. It is not a "thing" or a "worthless thief".

Why would a female want an abortion?

This has become beyond tiresome. You are asking why a woman wants to have her unborn child killed. It's on the same level as finding out that a man murdered his wife, and then wanting to ask why he did so as some means of providing justification. It makes no difference. Innocent human lives should not be destroyed.

It's the destruction of an innocent human life in my view, and the destruction of a "thing" and a "worthless thief" in your view. That is an irreconcilable difference between the two of us.

To avoid unwanted pregnancies, men must keep their pants zipped up.

WG's real name. "Avoid the real issue at all costs." Men should be more responsible. Women, who have far more to lose, should be more responsible. None of that makes it OK to have an abortion.

There won't be a reason or need or desire for an abortion if men keep their pants zipped up.

You libs live in such a strange world. You shout loudly that women should have control over their own bodies, and yet when it comes to women avoiding pregnancy, those weak and silly women are evidently either too stupid or too lazy to make wise decisions to protect themselves, so they must depend on men to do that for them. Hmmm.

I'm very convinced that women are quite capable and have the capacity to protect themselves. I would suggest, "If you want intimacy with me, you'll need to commit yourself to marriage."

We have discussed this enough. I'll leave with this. "It's the destruction of an innocent human life in my view, and the destruction of a 'thing' and a 'worthless thief ' in your view. That is an irreconcilable difference between the two of us." You stated the "thing" element and agreed ("Yes") to the second element and have refused multiple chances to correct those horrid statements.

How many times have you wrestled with a female in order to get her on her back and be able to pull off her clothes? Or laid on the charm to accomplish the same thing? Too often, it's too late for her to object and escape. He's driven into a cornfield or to a bluff overlooking the lake. He pulls apart her clothing for easy access. Next act will be his zipper pulled down.

Only sick-minded perverts think in that way.

How does a female get pregnant? (Apparently, you've never been been on a date with a male teen--or older guy.)

Done. Too much sick, perverted thinking for my taste.

Done. Too much sick, perverted thinking for my taste.
Sick? Perverted? My life growing up in a farm and orchard community, dating Christian farmers' sons who had one thing on their minds.

Dems are using the Alabama passing of life at conception law to target Repubs in swing districts nation wide. Ads accuse them of being anti-IVF .


The ads will be displayed in districts represented by Republican Reps. David Schweikert (AZ-01), Mike Garcia (CA-27), Michelle Steel (CA-45), Marianette Miller-Meeks (IA-01), Don Bacon (NE-02), and Scott Perry (PA-10). The campaign will also target two former members who are running to return to Congress: Yvette Herrell in New Mexico and Marya Flores in Texas.

Democrats hit vulnerable Republicans over IVF, support of Life At Conception Act : NPR (https://www.npr.org/2024/04/02/1242107932/democrats-target-republicans-ivf-billboard-campaign)

The law is already having an impact in Alabama Dem Marilyn Lands crushed her Repub opponent in Alabama District 10 special election.

Now it is in Huntsville where there are a lot of transplants from other parts of the country due to a military base and Aerospace industry. But that could be an even better indicator of how the vote will go nationally.

Democrat Marilyn Lands flips District 10 Alabama House seat (mynbc15.com) (https://mynbc15.com/news/local/democrat-marilyn-lands-flips-alabama-district-10-in-huntsville-area)

She campaigned heavily on the issue of abortion /IVF

England, in the 18th and 19th centuries, flipped its position on both the slave trade and slave ownership because of a concerted effort by Christians led by Wilberforce, Wesley, and others. That black Africans were human beings made in God's image was the core of their argument. It took several decades, and yet they prevailed. Here, the church has largely abandoned the pro-life cause, and the so-called news media is very much anti-life in this regard. Until the church takes up the cause in an impassioned and well-informed way, then it's going to be tough sledding. That's a shame because the truth is very much in our favor.

The Catholics are unambiguous .They oppose abortion and IVF.

I break ranks with them over IVF. I don't think that a pregnancy begins until implanting. Before then ;even naturally ,more than half the fertilized eggs don't implant . Some implanted embryos spontaneously abort without the woman ever knowing she was pregnant.


Are we to believe that God would allow half the children of the world to die ?

Human life beginning at conception means that everyone in the artificial insemination business from the scientists to the people who donate sperm and egg are complicit in murder.

Human life beginning at conception means that everyone in the artificial insemination business from the scientists to the people who donate sperm and egg are complicit in murder.Without question life itself begins at conception. I say that since the ovum is very much alive and contains all of the genetic information it will ever have. It is unarguably human since it cannot be otherwise. What are we to say, that it is canine? Choosing the point of implantation seems rather arbitrary to me. Still, if you want to say that human life begins at implantation, then at least that would be the end of abortion as we think of it. It would certainly be a major step forward.