Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Re: Duke sez animals have souls!
5 views
Skip to first unread message
Message has been deleted
�RLMeasures
May 8, 2013, 8:57:38 AM5/8/13
to
In article <cbjio818b7nbqqjbe...@4ax.com>, Attila
<<proc...@here.now> wrote:
> On Tue, 07 May 2013 06:39:46 -0700, r...@somis.org (�RLMeasures) in
> alt.abortion with message-id <r-0705130...@10.0.1.3> wrote:
>
> >�� Many of the things in the Qur'an are trumped by Muslim traditions.
>
> Like many things in the bible are trumped by christian traditions.
>
> A pox on all their houses.
�� Catholics are as big on Traditions as are Shite Muslims - and that's
no shit. However, when it comes to ludicrous Traditions, Shites are #1 in
blood volume loss during flagellation, Shites have TBRCs BEAT by a mile.
<<proc...@here.now> wrote:
> On Tue, 07 May 2013 06:39:46 -0700, r...@somis.org (�RLMeasures) in
> alt.abortion with message-id <r-0705130...@10.0.1.3> wrote:
>
> >�� Many of the things in the Qur'an are trumped by Muslim traditions.
>
> Like many things in the bible are trumped by christian traditions.
>
> A pox on all their houses.
�� Catholics are as big on Traditions as are Shite Muslims - and that's
no shit. However, when it comes to ludicrous Traditions, Shites are #1 in
blood volume loss during flagellation, Shites have TBRCs BEAT by a mile.
JWD Wolfe
May 8, 2013, 11:06:52 AM5/8/13
to
Forced abortion under certain circumstances should be required.
For example, a fetus which has a heritable genetic, mental or physical
disease deleterious mutation or disorder. Any fetus which will tend to
degrade the human gene pool. Any fetus as a child which will become a
burden upon society.
Silen...@hotmail.com
May 8, 2013, 2:10:45 PM5/8/13
to
On Wed, 08 May 2013 07:33:54 -0400, PATRICK <pbark...@woh.rr.com>
wrote:
> Silen...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
>
>>>My point - since you came in late - is that you cannot always have
>>>proof or evidence for everything that we all understand and take for
>>>granted. If you cannot accept God without evidence, how can you
>>>accept the myriad of other things that also don't have the type of
>>>evidence that others demand?
>>
>>Because we've plenty of evidence for the things that you're claiming
>>we've no evidence for, rightard.
>>That was the point of my post and what you snipped away without
>>addressing.
>>The existence of emotion is supported by multiple, independent chains
>>of evidence.
>
>Your evidence is the same type of evidence I have tried to present to
>you.
No, rightard, it is not.
People reported experiencing emotion, and the scientific community has
been able to strongly correlate specific patterns of brain activity
specific reports of emotion across a broad spectrum of people.
All you've said is if one can't see an emotion, we can't know it's
real.
That's bullshit, rightard.
Neither is it enough to note an observed anomaly and attribute it to
God. One has to have a -reason- attribute an anomaly to God.
You're doing nothing but engage in nihilism.
Heh heh...
Lying racist rightard socialists...
Batshit crazy and dogshit stupid, every single last one of you.
>You will not accept my evidence. Why should I accept yours?
wrote:
> Silen...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
>
>>>My point - since you came in late - is that you cannot always have
>>>proof or evidence for everything that we all understand and take for
>>>granted. If you cannot accept God without evidence, how can you
>>>accept the myriad of other things that also don't have the type of
>>>evidence that others demand?
>>
>>Because we've plenty of evidence for the things that you're claiming
>>we've no evidence for, rightard.
>>That was the point of my post and what you snipped away without
>>addressing.
>>The existence of emotion is supported by multiple, independent chains
>>of evidence.
>
>Your evidence is the same type of evidence I have tried to present to
>you.
No, rightard, it is not.
People reported experiencing emotion, and the scientific community has
been able to strongly correlate specific patterns of brain activity
specific reports of emotion across a broad spectrum of people.
All you've said is if one can't see an emotion, we can't know it's
real.
That's bullshit, rightard.
Neither is it enough to note an observed anomaly and attribute it to
God. One has to have a -reason- attribute an anomaly to God.
You're doing nothing but engage in nihilism.
Heh heh...
Lying racist rightard socialists...
Batshit crazy and dogshit stupid, every single last one of you.
>You will not accept my evidence. Why should I accept yours?
Silen...@hotmail.com
May 8, 2013, 2:12:17 PM5/8/13
to
On Tue, 07 May 2013 22:56:12 -0400, Dreamer In Colore
<dreamer...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>On Tue, 07 May 2013 14:43:14 -0400, Silen...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
>>On Mon, 06 May 2013 23:28:46 -0400, Dreamer In Colore
>><dreamer...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>On Mon, 06 May 2013 18:26:50 -0700, Jeanne Douglas
>>><hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>In article <k7ufo8lj1pici4hod...@4ax.com>,
>>>> duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Sun, 05 May 2013 15:52:59 -0400, Silen...@hotmail.com wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> >>>We're not talking about who Gabriel was speaking for.
>>>>> >>>We're talking about who the quote was attributed to.
>>>>> >>Easy - God.
>>>>> >You're a dirty, filthy liar, Dook.
>>>>>
>>>>> What a numbnuts.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Oh, look, DiC, you're not the only one whose naughty bits dukie is
>>>>obsessed with. Are you jealous?
>>>
>>>If I'm in the same company as Otto, I think I'm doing pretty well, no?
>>>
>>>I don't do "jealous"... it's a colossal waste of time.
>>
>>Notice that Dook only seems to be interested in the "naughty bits" of
>>men?
>>
>
>How can I fail to notice? He brings them up at every opportunity.
>
>>With women, he's only interested in the position of their legs.
>>
>
>Me too! It's about the only thing we have in common.
He likes their knees together.
If you're like me, you prefer them apart.
<dreamer...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>On Tue, 07 May 2013 14:43:14 -0400, Silen...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
>>On Mon, 06 May 2013 23:28:46 -0400, Dreamer In Colore
>><dreamer...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>On Mon, 06 May 2013 18:26:50 -0700, Jeanne Douglas
>>><hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>In article <k7ufo8lj1pici4hod...@4ax.com>,
>>>> duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Sun, 05 May 2013 15:52:59 -0400, Silen...@hotmail.com wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> >>>We're not talking about who Gabriel was speaking for.
>>>>> >>>We're talking about who the quote was attributed to.
>>>>> >>Easy - God.
>>>>> >You're a dirty, filthy liar, Dook.
>>>>>
>>>>> What a numbnuts.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Oh, look, DiC, you're not the only one whose naughty bits dukie is
>>>>obsessed with. Are you jealous?
>>>
>>>If I'm in the same company as Otto, I think I'm doing pretty well, no?
>>>
>>>I don't do "jealous"... it's a colossal waste of time.
>>
>>Notice that Dook only seems to be interested in the "naughty bits" of
>>men?
>>
>
>How can I fail to notice? He brings them up at every opportunity.
>
>>With women, he's only interested in the position of their legs.
>>
>
>Me too! It's about the only thing we have in common.
He likes their knees together.
If you're like me, you prefer them apart.
PATRICK
May 8, 2013, 4:33:37 PM5/8/13
to
On Wed, 08 May 2013 08:44:42 -0400, Attila <<proc...@here.now>
wrote:
>On Wed, 08 May 2013 07:44:14 -0400, PATRICK <pbark...@woh.rr.com> in
>alt.abortion with message-id
><55eko8lonql0aspe8...@4ax.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method
>>>
>>>This is the best starting point. It will help you realize that matters
>>>of science and faith are forever separate and can't be mixed, no matter
>>>what. At the least, perhaps you can learn the difference between theory
>>>and conjecture.
>>
>>"Scientific inquiry is generally intended to be as objective as
>>possible in order to reduce biased interpretations of results. Another
>>basic expectation is to document, archive and share all data and
>>methodology so they are available for careful scrutiny by other
>>scientists, giving them the opportunity to verify results by
>>attempting to reproduce them. This practice, called full disclosure,
>>also allows statistical measures of the reliability of these data to
>>be established (when data is sampled or compared to chance)."
>>
>>Excellent Quote.
>>
>>"The goal of a scientific inquiry is to obtain knowledge in the form
>>of testable explanations that can predict the results of future
>>experiments. This allows scientists to gain an understanding of
>>reality, and later use that understanding to intervene in its causal
>>mechanisms (such as to cure disease). The better an explanation is at
>>making predictions, the more useful it is, and the more likely it is
>>to be correct. The most successful explanations, which explain and
>>make accurate predictions in a wide range of circumstances, are called
>>scientific theories."
>>
>>Otto, you are correct in your statement that matters of science and
>>faith are forever separate. I wish your pals, lunchbox, at ala, andy,
>>les, liz and the other dorks -- would try to understand this.
>
>But you keep presenting these 'faith' items as if they are in fact
>scientific realities when they are not. And you refuse to admit they
>are not.
I am merely identifying other "scientists" who actually state that
they do have evidence or proof or whatever you are looking for.
>
>>
>>Although it would take away all my fun if they stopped asking for
>>"evidence" or "proof" of God.
wrote:
>On Wed, 08 May 2013 07:44:14 -0400, PATRICK <pbark...@woh.rr.com> in
>alt.abortion with message-id
><55eko8lonql0aspe8...@4ax.com> wrote:
>
>>WTS." <m1...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>
>>>> My point - since you came in late - is that you cannot always have
>>>> proof or evidence for everything that we all understand and take for
>>>> granted. If you cannot accept God without evidence, how can you
>>>> accept the myriad of other things that also don't have the type of
>>>> evidence that others demand?
>>>Start here:
>>WTS." <m1...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>
>>>> My point - since you came in late - is that you cannot always have
>>>> proof or evidence for everything that we all understand and take for
>>>> granted. If you cannot accept God without evidence, how can you
>>>> accept the myriad of other things that also don't have the type of
>>>> evidence that others demand?
>>>
>>>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method
>>>
>>>This is the best starting point. It will help you realize that matters
>>>of science and faith are forever separate and can't be mixed, no matter
>>>what. At the least, perhaps you can learn the difference between theory
>>>and conjecture.
>>
>>"Scientific inquiry is generally intended to be as objective as
>>possible in order to reduce biased interpretations of results. Another
>>basic expectation is to document, archive and share all data and
>>methodology so they are available for careful scrutiny by other
>>scientists, giving them the opportunity to verify results by
>>attempting to reproduce them. This practice, called full disclosure,
>>also allows statistical measures of the reliability of these data to
>>be established (when data is sampled or compared to chance)."
>>
>>Excellent Quote.
>>
>>"The goal of a scientific inquiry is to obtain knowledge in the form
>>of testable explanations that can predict the results of future
>>experiments. This allows scientists to gain an understanding of
>>reality, and later use that understanding to intervene in its causal
>>mechanisms (such as to cure disease). The better an explanation is at
>>making predictions, the more useful it is, and the more likely it is
>>to be correct. The most successful explanations, which explain and
>>make accurate predictions in a wide range of circumstances, are called
>>scientific theories."
>>
>>Otto, you are correct in your statement that matters of science and
>>faith are forever separate. I wish your pals, lunchbox, at ala, andy,
>>les, liz and the other dorks -- would try to understand this.
>
>But you keep presenting these 'faith' items as if they are in fact
>scientific realities when they are not. And you refuse to admit they
>are not.
I am merely identifying other "scientists" who actually state that
they do have evidence or proof or whatever you are looking for.
>
>>
>>Although it would take away all my fun if they stopped asking for
>>"evidence" or "proof" of God.
PATRICK
May 8, 2013, 4:34:40 PM5/8/13
to
On Wed, 08 May 2013 08:42:07 -0400, Attila <<proc...@here.now>
wrote:
>On Tue, 07 May 2013 17:00:39 -0400, PATRICK <pbark...@woh.rr.com> in
>alt.abortion with message-id
Evidence of magnetic poles.
wrote:
>On Tue, 07 May 2013 17:00:39 -0400, PATRICK <pbark...@woh.rr.com> in
>alt.abortion with message-id
><snqio899aqkei1m5j...@4ax.com> wrote:
>
>>If you cannot accept God without evidence, how can you
>>accept the myriad of other things that also don't have the type of
>>evidence that others demand?
>
>Such as what?
>
>>If you cannot accept God without evidence, how can you
>>accept the myriad of other things that also don't have the type of
>>evidence that others demand?
>
Evidence of magnetic poles.
Free Lunch
May 8, 2013, 4:41:36 PM5/8/13
to
On Wed, 08 May 2013 16:34:40 -0400, PATRICK <pbark...@woh.rr.com>
wrote in alt.atheism:
Yes, there is scientific evidence about magnetic poles.
You don't have a clue what the word "evidence" means.
wrote in alt.atheism:
You don't have a clue what the word "evidence" means.
Jeanne Douglas
May 8, 2013, 5:38:43 PM5/8/13
to
In article <rleko8lb5jjm4i4c4...@4ax.com>,
PATRICK <pbark...@woh.rr.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 07 May 2013 18:33:02 -0700, Jeanne Douglas
> <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
> >In article <97mho8pnsk7t3ab97...@4ax.com>,
> > PATRICK <pbark...@woh.rr.com> wrote:
> >> On Mon, 06 May 2013 22:32:18 -0400, Silen...@hotmail.com wrote:
> >> >Now, where is your evidence for God?
> >>
> >> Measurements of electro-chemical activity
> >
> >What electro-chemical activity. If you're talking about the brain, then
> >all you're measuring is the belief in god; in no way is believing in god
> >evidence that any god exists.
>
> Ahhhh... you are wrong in so many ways.
Let's have a list of some of those ways.
--
JD
"Osama Bin Laden is dead and GM is alive."--VP Joseph Biden
PATRICK <pbark...@woh.rr.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 07 May 2013 18:33:02 -0700, Jeanne Douglas
> <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
> >In article <97mho8pnsk7t3ab97...@4ax.com>,
> > PATRICK <pbark...@woh.rr.com> wrote:
> >> On Mon, 06 May 2013 22:32:18 -0400, Silen...@hotmail.com wrote:
> >> >Now, where is your evidence for God?
> >>
> >> Measurements of electro-chemical activity
> >
> >What electro-chemical activity. If you're talking about the brain, then
> >all you're measuring is the belief in god; in no way is believing in god
> >evidence that any god exists.
>
> Ahhhh... you are wrong in so many ways.
Let's have a list of some of those ways.
--
JD
"Osama Bin Laden is dead and GM is alive."--VP Joseph Biden
Jeanne Douglas
May 8, 2013, 6:57:14 PM5/8/13
to
In article <hStit.30116$Tl3....@fx29.fr7>,
No one can make that choice except the pregnant woman.
nature bats last
May 8, 2013, 10:27:20 PM5/8/13
to
On May 8, 1:34 pm, PATRICK <pbarker...@woh.rr.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 08 May 2013 08:42:07 -0400, Attila <<procho...@here.now>
> wrote:
>
> >On Tue, 07 May 2013 17:00:39 -0400, PATRICK <pbarker...@woh.rr.com> in
> >alt.abortion with message-id
fair amount of news in the area of current physics -- no
one I've read of claims that magnetic monopoles have
been proven to exist.
They're a theoretical construct, one implied in some
versions of particle theory, but I have never seen a
claim that they have been found.
But not for want of trying.
Note that historically, some particles which were
predicted purely from theoretical considerations were
subsequently found -- the neutrino and the positron
come immediately to mind -- were subsequently
demonstrated experimantally.
But the magnetic monopole? No.
(and that's "magnetic monopoles".
if you want evidence for "magnet poles",
I'll point you to my refrigerator)
Not to get involved in your debate;
it just triggered my pedantic reflex.
I'll stop now.
NBL
> On Wed, 08 May 2013 08:42:07 -0400, Attila <<procho...@here.now>
> wrote:
>
> >On Tue, 07 May 2013 17:00:39 -0400, PATRICK <pbarker...@woh.rr.com> in
> >alt.abortion with message-id
> ><snqio899aqkei1m5jqq1of1k9h2n63d...@4ax.com> wrote:
>
;
> >>If you cannot accept God without evidence, how can you
> >>accept the myriad of other things that also don't have the type of
> >>evidence that others demand?
;
> >Such as what?
;
> Evidence of magnetic poles.
Actually, no physicist I know of -- and I read a pretty
>
;
> >>If you cannot accept God without evidence, how can you
> >>accept the myriad of other things that also don't have the type of
> >>evidence that others demand?
;
> >Such as what?
;
> Evidence of magnetic poles.
fair amount of news in the area of current physics -- no
one I've read of claims that magnetic monopoles have
been proven to exist.
They're a theoretical construct, one implied in some
versions of particle theory, but I have never seen a
claim that they have been found.
But not for want of trying.
Note that historically, some particles which were
predicted purely from theoretical considerations were
subsequently found -- the neutrino and the positron
come immediately to mind -- were subsequently
demonstrated experimantally.
But the magnetic monopole? No.
(and that's "magnetic monopoles".
if you want evidence for "magnet poles",
I'll point you to my refrigerator)
Not to get involved in your debate;
it just triggered my pedantic reflex.
I'll stop now.
NBL
linuxgal
May 8, 2013, 11:36:52 PM5/8/13
to
nature bats last wrote:
> Actually, no physicist I know of -- and I read a pretty
> fair amount of news in the area of current physics -- no
> one I've read of claims that magnetic monopoles have
> been proven to exist.
They'll find 'em when they build the Circumlunar Supercollider.
> Actually, no physicist I know of -- and I read a pretty
> fair amount of news in the area of current physics -- no
> one I've read of claims that magnetic monopoles have
> been proven to exist.
--
Halftime at Circvs Maximvs, and the Lions lead the Christians 326-0
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Jason
May 9, 2013, 2:08:48 AM5/9/13
to
In article <hlwdjsd2-0329C6...@news.giganews.com>, Jeanne
Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
> In article <hStit.30116$Tl3....@fx29.fr7>,
> JWD Wolfe <Lo...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>
> > Forced abortion under certain circumstances should be required.
> > For example, a fetus which has a heritable genetic, mental or physical
> > disease deleterious mutation or disorder. Any fetus which will tend to
> > degrade the human gene pool. Any fetus as a child which will become a
> > burden upon society.
>
>
> No one can make that choice except the pregnant woman.
Miracles do happen. I agree with you. shocking.
> In article <hStit.30116$Tl3....@fx29.fr7>,
> JWD Wolfe <Lo...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>
> > Forced abortion under certain circumstances should be required.
> > For example, a fetus which has a heritable genetic, mental or physical
> > disease deleterious mutation or disorder. Any fetus which will tend to
> > degrade the human gene pool. Any fetus as a child which will become a
> > burden upon society.
>
>
> No one can make that choice except the pregnant woman.
Devils Advocaat
May 9, 2013, 2:23:54 AM5/9/13
to
deleterious mutations do.
Jeanne Douglas
May 9, 2013, 2:35:19 AM5/9/13
to
In article
<Jason-08051...@66-53-219-125.lsan.mdsg-pacwest.com>,
Why the surprise?
I've only ever said I'm for pro-choice. That means decisions on whether
to continue a pregnancy can only be made by the woman. Forced abortion
is just as evil as forced birthing.
Choice.
<Jason-08051...@66-53-219-125.lsan.mdsg-pacwest.com>,
I've only ever said I'm for pro-choice. That means decisions on whether
to continue a pregnancy can only be made by the woman. Forced abortion
is just as evil as forced birthing.
Choice.
skye...@yahoo.com
May 9, 2013, 3:18:01 AM5/9/13
to
*not* abort. Whether to carry a pregnancy to term or not should be
nobody's decision but the woman's.
--
Brenda Nelson, A.A.#34 and A+ atheist
BAAWA Knight of the Golden Litterbox
EAC Professor of Feline Thermometrics and Cat-Herding
skyeyes nine at cox dot net OR
skyeyes nine at yahoo dot com
--
W.T.S.
May 9, 2013, 4:46:57 AM5/9/13
to
In article <Jason-08051...@66-53-219-125.lsan.mdsg-pacwest.com>,
Jason-...@ProLiar.biz says...
No, miracles are myths, Jason, they don't happen in real life. But, it
is the woman's choice, no matter what the results are for her and for
any others. No, not even you or I.
>
We are indeed Carcinoma Sapiens, destroying, by insane fecundity, that
which we need to survive.
>
As always, organized religion opposes progress -
>
See what RELIGION does to peoples' minds?
>
Adults no longer believe in the Tooth Fairy - but they still torture and
kill each other over ancient myths and superstitions.
>
"We all remember how many religious wars were fought for a religion of
love
and gentleness; how many bodies were burned
alive with the genuinely kind intention of saving souls from the eternal
fire of hell." --- Karl Popper
>
"When one person suffers from a delusion, it is called insanity. When
many
people suffer from a delusion, it is called Religion."
--- Robert M. Pirsig
>
Either God wants to abolish evil and cannot, or he can but does not want
to.
If he wants to but cannot he is impotent. If he can
but does not want to, he is wicked. If he neither can nor wants to, then
he
is both powerless and wicked.
--- Epicurus, Greek philosopher, circa 300 B.C.
>
"Act of God" disasters like the Japanese earthquake expose the myth.
Either
God can do nothing to stop catastrophes like
this, or he doesn't care to, or he doesn't exist. He is thus either
impotent, evil, or imaginary.
--- CNN Belief Blog, 3-20-11
>
"With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things
and
evil people doing evil things. But for good people
to do evil things, that takes religion."
--- Steven Weinberg, quoted in The New York Times, April 20, 1999
>
"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from
religious conviction." --- Blaise Pascal.
>
"Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as
false,
and by rulers as useful."
--- Seneca the Younger (4? BC - 65 AD)
>
"Religion once ruled the world. It was called the Dark Ages." --- Ruth
Green.
>
"Science flies you to the moon. Religion flies you into buildings." ---
Victor Stenger.
>
"I don't believe in God because I don't believe in Mother Goose." ---
Clarence Darrow
>
"As my ancestors are free from slavery, I am free from the slavery of
religion." --- Butterfly McQueen
>
"Religion was invented when the first con-man met the first fool." -
Mark
Twain
>
"Faith is believing what you know ain't so." --- Mark Twain
>
"The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character
in
all fiction." --- Richard Dawkins
>
"Cult today, religion tomorrow."
>
The Freedom From Religion Foundation: http://ffrf.org/
The Secular Coalition for America: www.secular.org
Secular Student Alliance: www.secularstudents.org
www.infidels.org
www.humaniststudies.org
www.atheistalliance.org
www.americanhumanist.org
Jason-...@ProLiar.biz says...
is the woman's choice, no matter what the results are for her and for
any others. No, not even you or I.
>
We are indeed Carcinoma Sapiens, destroying, by insane fecundity, that
which we need to survive.
>
As always, organized religion opposes progress -
>
See what RELIGION does to peoples' minds?
>
Adults no longer believe in the Tooth Fairy - but they still torture and
kill each other over ancient myths and superstitions.
>
"We all remember how many religious wars were fought for a religion of
love
and gentleness; how many bodies were burned
alive with the genuinely kind intention of saving souls from the eternal
fire of hell." --- Karl Popper
>
"When one person suffers from a delusion, it is called insanity. When
many
people suffer from a delusion, it is called Religion."
--- Robert M. Pirsig
>
Either God wants to abolish evil and cannot, or he can but does not want
to.
If he wants to but cannot he is impotent. If he can
but does not want to, he is wicked. If he neither can nor wants to, then
he
is both powerless and wicked.
--- Epicurus, Greek philosopher, circa 300 B.C.
>
"Act of God" disasters like the Japanese earthquake expose the myth.
Either
God can do nothing to stop catastrophes like
this, or he doesn't care to, or he doesn't exist. He is thus either
impotent, evil, or imaginary.
--- CNN Belief Blog, 3-20-11
>
"With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things
and
evil people doing evil things. But for good people
to do evil things, that takes religion."
--- Steven Weinberg, quoted in The New York Times, April 20, 1999
>
"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from
religious conviction." --- Blaise Pascal.
>
"Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as
false,
and by rulers as useful."
--- Seneca the Younger (4? BC - 65 AD)
>
"Religion once ruled the world. It was called the Dark Ages." --- Ruth
Green.
>
"Science flies you to the moon. Religion flies you into buildings." ---
Victor Stenger.
>
"I don't believe in God because I don't believe in Mother Goose." ---
Clarence Darrow
>
"As my ancestors are free from slavery, I am free from the slavery of
religion." --- Butterfly McQueen
>
"Religion was invented when the first con-man met the first fool." -
Mark
Twain
>
"Faith is believing what you know ain't so." --- Mark Twain
>
"The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character
in
all fiction." --- Richard Dawkins
>
"Cult today, religion tomorrow."
>
The Freedom From Religion Foundation: http://ffrf.org/
The Secular Coalition for America: www.secular.org
Secular Student Alliance: www.secularstudents.org
www.infidels.org
www.humaniststudies.org
www.atheistalliance.org
www.americanhumanist.org
duke
May 9, 2013, 7:29:21 AM5/9/13
to
On Tue, 07 May 2013 11:27:32 -0400, Silen...@hotmail.com wrote:
>I've never abused an alter boy, Dook.
Neither have I, any priest I know, nor the huge majority of priests.
The dukester, American - American
********************************************
Repeal Obama
You simply can't fix stupid.
********************************************
>I've never abused an alter boy, Dook.
Neither have I, any priest I know, nor the huge majority of priests.
The dukester, American - American
********************************************
Repeal Obama
You simply can't fix stupid.
********************************************
PATRICK
May 9, 2013, 7:38:30 AM5/9/13
to
On Wed, 08 May 2013 23:21:24 -0400, Attila <<proc...@here.now>
wrote:
>On Wed, 08 May 2013 16:33:37 -0400, PATRICK <pbark...@woh.rr.com> in
>alt.abortion with message-id
>evidence. Why am I not surprised?
Stop asking.
wrote:
>On Wed, 08 May 2013 16:33:37 -0400, PATRICK <pbark...@woh.rr.com> in
>alt.abortion with message-id
><9idlo89ug5j429p09...@4ax.com> wrote:
>
>>>But you keep presenting these 'faith' items as if they are in fact
>>>scientific realities when they are not. And you refuse to admit they
>>>are not.
>>
>>I am merely identifying other "scientists" who actually state that
>>they do have evidence or proof or whatever you are looking for.
>>>
>
>I keep asking for evidence and you keep providing everything but
>
>>>But you keep presenting these 'faith' items as if they are in fact
>>>scientific realities when they are not. And you refuse to admit they
>>>are not.
>>
>>I am merely identifying other "scientists" who actually state that
>>they do have evidence or proof or whatever you are looking for.
>>>
>
>evidence. Why am I not surprised?
Stop asking.
duke
May 9, 2013, 7:39:36 AM5/9/13
to
duke
May 9, 2013, 7:40:36 AM5/9/13
to
On Wed, 08 May 2013 15:57:14 -0700, Jeanne Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com>
wrote:
>In article <hStit.30116$Tl3....@fx29.fr7>,
> JWD Wolfe <Lo...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>
>> Forced abortion under certain circumstances should be required.
>> For example, a fetus which has a heritable genetic, mental or physical
>> disease deleterious mutation or disorder. Any fetus which will tend to
>> degrade the human gene pool. Any fetus as a child which will become a
>> burden upon society.
>No one can make that choice except the pregnant woman.
Then she's the only one that can be called a murderess.
wrote:
>In article <hStit.30116$Tl3....@fx29.fr7>,
> JWD Wolfe <Lo...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>
>> Forced abortion under certain circumstances should be required.
>> For example, a fetus which has a heritable genetic, mental or physical
>> disease deleterious mutation or disorder. Any fetus which will tend to
>> degrade the human gene pool. Any fetus as a child which will become a
>> burden upon society.
>No one can make that choice except the pregnant woman.
duke
May 9, 2013, 7:41:27 AM5/9/13
to
duke
May 9, 2013, 7:42:40 AM5/9/13
to
On Thu, 9 May 2013 00:18:01 -0700 (PDT), "skye...@yahoo.com"
<skye...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>On May 8, 8:06�am, JWD Wolfe <L...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>> Forced abortion under certain circumstances should be required.
>> For example, a fetus which has a heritable genetic, mental or physical
>> disease deleterious mutation or disorder. Any fetus which will tend to
>> degrade the human gene pool. Any fetus as a child which will become a
>> burden upon society.
>
>Forcing a woman to abort is just as malicious as forcing a woman to
>*not* abort. Whether to carry a pregnancy to term or not should be
>nobody's decision but the woman's.
It's not anyway's. That way she's the one that lives in the flames forever.
<skye...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>On May 8, 8:06�am, JWD Wolfe <L...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>> Forced abortion under certain circumstances should be required.
>> For example, a fetus which has a heritable genetic, mental or physical
>> disease deleterious mutation or disorder. Any fetus which will tend to
>> degrade the human gene pool. Any fetus as a child which will become a
>> burden upon society.
>
>Forcing a woman to abort is just as malicious as forcing a woman to
>*not* abort. Whether to carry a pregnancy to term or not should be
>nobody's decision but the woman's.
default
May 9, 2013, 8:33:03 AM5/9/13
to
it will be the politicians that want this power.
�RLMeasures
May 9, 2013, 10:30:40 AM5/9/13
to
In article <to5mo8ljrj7afk9kf...@4ax.com>, Attila
<<proc...@here.now> wrote:
> On Wed, 08 May 2013 05:57:38 -0700, r...@somis.org (�RLMeasures) in
> alt.abortion with message-id <r-0805130...@10.0.1.3> wrote:
>
> >In article <cbjio818b7nbqqjbe...@4ax.com>, Attila
> ><<proc...@here.now> wrote:
> >
> >> On Tue, 07 May 2013 06:39:46 -0700, r...@somis.org (�RLMeasures) in
> >> alt.abortion with message-id <r-0705130...@10.0.1.3> wrote:
> >>
> >> >�� Many of the things in the Qur'an are trumped by Muslim traditions.
> >>
> >> Like many things in the bible are trumped by christian traditions.
> >>
> >> A pox on all their houses.
> >
> >�� Catholics are as big on Traditions as are Shite Muslims - and that's
> >no shit. However, when it comes to ludicrous Traditions, Shites are #1 in
> >blood volume loss during flagellation, Shites have TBRCs BEAT by a mile.
>
> They are all batshit crazy and dogshit dumb.
�� indeed Mr. Hun. .
<<proc...@here.now> wrote:
> On Wed, 08 May 2013 05:57:38 -0700, r...@somis.org (�RLMeasures) in
> alt.abortion with message-id <r-0805130...@10.0.1.3> wrote:
>
> >In article <cbjio818b7nbqqjbe...@4ax.com>, Attila
> ><<proc...@here.now> wrote:
> >
> >> On Tue, 07 May 2013 06:39:46 -0700, r...@somis.org (�RLMeasures) in
> >> alt.abortion with message-id <r-0705130...@10.0.1.3> wrote:
> >>
> >> >�� Many of the things in the Qur'an are trumped by Muslim traditions.
> >>
> >> Like many things in the bible are trumped by christian traditions.
> >>
> >> A pox on all their houses.
> >
> >�� Catholics are as big on Traditions as are Shite Muslims - and that's
> >no shit. However, when it comes to ludicrous Traditions, Shites are #1 in
> >blood volume loss during flagellation, Shites have TBRCs BEAT by a mile.
>
> They are all batshit crazy and dogshit dumb.
�� indeed Mr. Hun. .
W.T.S.
May 9, 2013, 12:01:10 PM5/9/13
to
In article <ll2no8pd3gracs11i...@4ax.com>, duckgumbo32
@cox.net says...
@cox.net says...
> On Wed, 08 May 2013 11:06:52 -0400, JWD Wolfe <Lo...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>
> >Forced abortion under certain circumstances should be required.
> >For example, a fetus which has a heritable genetic, mental or physical
> >disease deleterious mutation or disorder. Any fetus which will tend to
> >degrade the human gene pool. Any fetus as a child which will become a
> >burden upon society.
>
> If you murder it, you yourself are already a member of the mutated gene pool.
Aborting a fetus makes you a living Saint! Abortion is beautiful!
>
> >Forced abortion under certain circumstances should be required.
> >For example, a fetus which has a heritable genetic, mental or physical
> >disease deleterious mutation or disorder. Any fetus which will tend to
> >degrade the human gene pool. Any fetus as a child which will become a
> >burden upon society.
>
> If you murder it, you yourself are already a member of the mutated gene pool.
W.T.S.
May 9, 2013, 12:02:32 PM5/9/13
to
In article <0o2no8p6v1rv9t06b...@4ax.com>, duckgumbo32
@cox.net says...
Good point. Aborting fetus filth does make women into Saints.
@cox.net says...
> On Wed, 08 May 2013 15:57:14 -0700, Jeanne Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> >In article <hStit.30116$Tl3....@fx29.fr7>,
> > JWD Wolfe <Lo...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> >
> >> Forced abortion under certain circumstances should be required.
> >> For example, a fetus which has a heritable genetic, mental or physical
> >> disease deleterious mutation or disorder. Any fetus which will tend to
> >> degrade the human gene pool. Any fetus as a child which will become a
> >> burden upon society.
>
> >No one can make that choice except the pregnant woman.
>
> Then she's the only one that can be called a living Saint.
> wrote:
>
> >In article <hStit.30116$Tl3....@fx29.fr7>,
> > JWD Wolfe <Lo...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> >
> >> Forced abortion under certain circumstances should be required.
> >> For example, a fetus which has a heritable genetic, mental or physical
> >> disease deleterious mutation or disorder. Any fetus which will tend to
> >> degrade the human gene pool. Any fetus as a child which will become a
> >> burden upon society.
>
> >No one can make that choice except the pregnant woman.
>
Good point. Aborting fetus filth does make women into Saints.
W.T.S.
May 9, 2013, 12:04:07 PM5/9/13
to
In article <sq2no89aimcise16m...@4ax.com>, duckgumbo32
@cox.net says...
>
> Exactly.
Ditto!
@cox.net says...
> On Wed, 8 May 2013 23:23:54 -0700 (PDT), Devils Advocaat <manky...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> >On 8 May, 16:06, JWD Wolfe <L...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> >> Forced abortion under certain circumstances should be required.
> >> For example, a fetus which has a heritable genetic, mental or physical
> >> disease deleterious mutation or disorder. Any fetus which will tend to
> >> degrade the human gene pool. Any fetus as a child which will become a
> >> burden upon society.
> >
> >Fetuses degrade the gene pool, mature adults must abort them!
> wrote:
>
> >On 8 May, 16:06, JWD Wolfe <L...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> >> Forced abortion under certain circumstances should be required.
> >> For example, a fetus which has a heritable genetic, mental or physical
> >> disease deleterious mutation or disorder. Any fetus which will tend to
> >> degrade the human gene pool. Any fetus as a child which will become a
> >> burden upon society.
> >
>
> Exactly.
Ditto!
W.T.S.
May 9, 2013, 12:05:46 PM5/9/13
to
In article <pr2no8lhm6f5r68k2...@4ax.com>, duckgumbo32
@cox.net says...
Saint!
@cox.net says...
> On Thu, 9 May 2013 00:18:01 -0700 (PDT), "skye...@yahoo.com"
> <skye...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >On May 8, 8:06 am, JWD Wolfe <L...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> >> Forced abortion under certain circumstances should be required.
> >> For example, a fetus which has a heritable genetic, mental or physical
> >> disease deleterious mutation or disorder. Any fetus which will tend to
> >> degrade the human gene pool. Any fetus as a child which will become a
> >> burden upon society.
> >
> >Forcing a woman to abort is just as malicious as forcing a woman to
> >*not* abort. Whether to carry a pregnancy to term or not should be
> >nobody's decision but the woman's.
>
> It's not anyway's. That way she's the one that lives in the flames forever.
Nonsense! Failure to abort damns a woman. Aborting makes her a living
> <skye...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >On May 8, 8:06 am, JWD Wolfe <L...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> >> Forced abortion under certain circumstances should be required.
> >> For example, a fetus which has a heritable genetic, mental or physical
> >> disease deleterious mutation or disorder. Any fetus which will tend to
> >> degrade the human gene pool. Any fetus as a child which will become a
> >> burden upon society.
> >
> >Forcing a woman to abort is just as malicious as forcing a woman to
> >*not* abort. Whether to carry a pregnancy to term or not should be
> >nobody's decision but the woman's.
>
> It's not anyway's. That way she's the one that lives in the flames forever.
Saint!
W.T.S.
May 9, 2013, 12:07:52 PM5/9/13
to
In article <7p5no89mril0bup5n...@4ax.com>, no...@noname.net
says...
Doctors should decide! Forced abortion is a great advance for
civilization.
says...
civilization.
Silen...@hotmail.com
May 9, 2013, 2:50:29 PM5/9/13
to
On Thu, 09 May 2013 06:29:21 -0500, duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>On Tue, 07 May 2013 11:27:32 -0400, Silen...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
>>I've never abused an alter boy, Dook.
>
>Neither have I, any priest I know, nor the huge majority of priests.
None of which changes the fact that many priests -did- abuse alter
>On Tue, 07 May 2013 11:27:32 -0400, Silen...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
>>I've never abused an alter boy, Dook.
>
>Neither have I, any priest I know, nor the huge majority of priests.
boys, Dook, and anyone else they could get their hot little hands on.
And, the RCC helped to hide their crimes from the authorities.
Heh heh...
Lying racist rightard socialists...
Batshit crazy and dogshit stupid, every single last one of you.
Message has been deleted
PATRICK
May 9, 2013, 5:42:21 PM5/9/13
to
On Thu, 09 May 2013 14:50:29 -0400, Silen...@hotmail.com wrote:
>On Thu, 09 May 2013 06:29:21 -0500, duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 07 May 2013 11:27:32 -0400, Silen...@hotmail.com wrote:
>>
>>>I've never abused an alter boy, Dook.
>>
>>Neither have I, any priest I know, nor the huge majority of priests.
>
>None of which changes the fact that many priests -did- abuse alter
>boys, Dook, and anyone else they could get their hot little hands on.
what is an alter boy?
>On Thu, 09 May 2013 06:29:21 -0500, duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 07 May 2013 11:27:32 -0400, Silen...@hotmail.com wrote:
>>
>>>I've never abused an alter boy, Dook.
>>
>>Neither have I, any priest I know, nor the huge majority of priests.
>
>None of which changes the fact that many priests -did- abuse alter
>boys, Dook, and anyone else they could get their hot little hands on.
Jeanne Douglas
May 9, 2013, 6:49:32 PM5/9/13
to
In article <7p5no89mril0bup5n...@4ax.com>,
Talk about the irony. The people who hate government, who want it out of
their lives completely, are the same ones who want the government
monitoring every single one of the millions of pregnancies every year.
their lives completely, are the same ones who want the government
monitoring every single one of the millions of pregnancies every year.
linuxgal
May 9, 2013, 9:41:30 PM5/9/13
to
Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> Talk about the irony. The people who hate government, who want it out of
> their lives completely, are the same ones who want the government
> monitoring every single one of the millions of pregnancies every year.
They just want the gummint out of boardrooms, not bedrooms.
> Talk about the irony. The people who hate government, who want it out of
> their lives completely, are the same ones who want the government
> monitoring every single one of the millions of pregnancies every year.
--
Halftime at Circvs Maximvs, and the Lions lead the Christians 326-0
linuxgal
May 9, 2013, 9:46:15 PM5/9/13
to
PATRICK wrote:
Castrati?
�RLMeasures
May 9, 2013, 10:40:19 PM5/9/13
to
duke
May 10, 2013, 7:11:00 AM5/10/13
to
>>Neither have I, any priest I know, nor the huge majority of priests.
>
>None of which changes the fact that many priests
Some.
>
>None of which changes the fact that many priests
duke
May 10, 2013, 7:12:22 AM5/10/13
to
default
May 10, 2013, 8:20:08 AM5/10/13
to
On Thu, 9 May 2013 11:07:52 -0500, "W.T.S." <m1...@earthlink.net>
wrote:
>In article <7p5no89mril0bup5n...@4ax.com>, no...@noname.net
>says...
>> On Wed, 08 May 2013 11:06:52 -0400, JWD Wolfe <Lo...@bellsouth.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >Forced abortion under certain circumstances should be required.
>> >For example, a fetus which has a heritable genetic, mental or physical
>> >disease deleterious mutation or disorder. Any fetus which will tend to
>> >degrade the human gene pool. Any fetus as a child which will become a
>> >burden upon society.
>>
>> And which scum sucking politicians get to decide? - because you know
>> it will be the politicians that want this power.
>Doctors should decide! Forced abortion is a great advance for
>civilization.
>>
I don't disagree on the basic premise that there are too many people
and we'd be better off with fewer. But implanted contraception or
random sterilization makes more sense.
Any effort to try to "strengthen" the gene pool by tinkering with
procreation is bound to have a lot of unwanted side effects.
We may, for instance, focus on advancing some good traits and run the
risk of making us susceptible to some diseases, simply because we
didn't know, or don't fully understand.
Then too, if left in the hands of politicians, I would expect them to
favor docile, unimaginative, easily led, worker drones, and consumers.
Creative people are much harder to control, but they contribute more.
I doubt you could meld creative with docile - those traits seem
contradictory to me.
Would you want to live in world populated by people a Catholic pope
might consider ideal?
AND in the effort to determine what traits are worth augmenting, our
corporate masters would forge ahead and create all kinds of
measurement and testing criteria to determine what people currently
alive best embody THEIR idea of the ideal, and anyone not measuring up
(down) could be shuffled to the side or live with the stigma of being
deemed not worth replacing.
Simple solutions are often anything but simple once all the
ramifications are felt.
wrote:
>In article <7p5no89mril0bup5n...@4ax.com>, no...@noname.net
>says...
>> On Wed, 08 May 2013 11:06:52 -0400, JWD Wolfe <Lo...@bellsouth.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >Forced abortion under certain circumstances should be required.
>> >For example, a fetus which has a heritable genetic, mental or physical
>> >disease deleterious mutation or disorder. Any fetus which will tend to
>> >degrade the human gene pool. Any fetus as a child which will become a
>> >burden upon society.
>>
>> And which scum sucking politicians get to decide? - because you know
>> it will be the politicians that want this power.
>Doctors should decide! Forced abortion is a great advance for
>civilization.
>>
and we'd be better off with fewer. But implanted contraception or
random sterilization makes more sense.
Any effort to try to "strengthen" the gene pool by tinkering with
procreation is bound to have a lot of unwanted side effects.
We may, for instance, focus on advancing some good traits and run the
risk of making us susceptible to some diseases, simply because we
didn't know, or don't fully understand.
Then too, if left in the hands of politicians, I would expect them to
favor docile, unimaginative, easily led, worker drones, and consumers.
Creative people are much harder to control, but they contribute more.
I doubt you could meld creative with docile - those traits seem
contradictory to me.
Would you want to live in world populated by people a Catholic pope
might consider ideal?
AND in the effort to determine what traits are worth augmenting, our
corporate masters would forge ahead and create all kinds of
measurement and testing criteria to determine what people currently
alive best embody THEIR idea of the ideal, and anyone not measuring up
(down) could be shuffled to the side or live with the stigma of being
deemed not worth replacing.
Simple solutions are often anything but simple once all the
ramifications are felt.
•RLMeasures
May 10, 2013, 8:55:01 AM5/10/13
to
In article <cflpo8deph96b18pc...@4ax.com>, duke
<duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
> On Thu, 09 May 2013 19:40:19 -0700, r...@somis.org (•RLMeasures) wrote:
>
> >In article <c16oo8lgvhpmd8hm3...@4ax.com>, PATRICK
> ><pbark...@woh.rr.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On Thu, 09 May 2013 14:50:29 -0400, Silen...@hotmail.com wrote:
> >>
> >> >On Thu, 09 May 2013 06:29:21 -0500, duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >>On Tue, 07 May 2013 11:27:32 -0400, Silen...@hotmail.com wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >>>I've never abused an alter boy, Dook.
> >> >>
> >> >>Neither have I, any priest I know, nor the huge majority of priests.
> >> >
> >> >None of which changes the fact that many priests -did- abuse alter
> >> >boys, Dook, and anyone else they could get their hot little hands on.
> >>
> >> what is an alter boy?
> >
> >• an altar-boy who has been sodomized?
>
> Also a aborted boy.
>
• who sodomizes them Duke?
> On Thu, 09 May 2013 19:40:19 -0700, r...@somis.org (•RLMeasures) wrote:
>
> >In article <c16oo8lgvhpmd8hm3...@4ax.com>, PATRICK
> ><pbark...@woh.rr.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On Thu, 09 May 2013 14:50:29 -0400, Silen...@hotmail.com wrote:
> >>
> >> >On Thu, 09 May 2013 06:29:21 -0500, duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >>On Tue, 07 May 2013 11:27:32 -0400, Silen...@hotmail.com wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >>>I've never abused an alter boy, Dook.
> >> >>
> >> >>Neither have I, any priest I know, nor the huge majority of priests.
> >> >
> >> >None of which changes the fact that many priests -did- abuse alter
> >> >boys, Dook, and anyone else they could get their hot little hands on.
> >>
> >> what is an alter boy?
> >
> >• an altar-boy who has been sodomized?
>
> Also a aborted boy.
>
Silen...@hotmail.com
May 10, 2013, 9:56:06 AM5/10/13
to
On Thu, 09 May 2013 17:42:21 -0400, PATRICK <pbark...@woh.rr.com>
You theists just keep getting more and more pathetic.
wrote:
>On Thu, 09 May 2013 14:50:29 -0400, Silen...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 09 May 2013 06:29:21 -0500, duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>>
>>>On Tue, 07 May 2013 11:27:32 -0400, Silen...@hotmail.com wrote:
>>>
>>>>I've never abused an alter boy, Dook.
>>>
>>>Neither have I, any priest I know, nor the huge majority of priests.
>>
>>None of which changes the fact that many priests -did- abuse alter
>>boys, Dook, and anyone else they could get their hot little hands on.
>
>what is an alter boy?
You can't figure out a word with one typo'd letter, rightard?
>On Thu, 09 May 2013 14:50:29 -0400, Silen...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 09 May 2013 06:29:21 -0500, duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>>
>>>On Tue, 07 May 2013 11:27:32 -0400, Silen...@hotmail.com wrote:
>>>
>>>>I've never abused an alter boy, Dook.
>>>
>>>Neither have I, any priest I know, nor the huge majority of priests.
>>
>>None of which changes the fact that many priests -did- abuse alter
>>boys, Dook, and anyone else they could get their hot little hands on.
>
>what is an alter boy?
You theists just keep getting more and more pathetic.
Silen...@hotmail.com
May 10, 2013, 9:57:29 AM5/10/13
to
On Fri, 10 May 2013 06:11:00 -0500, duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>On Thu, 09 May 2013 14:50:29 -0400, Silen...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
>>>Neither have I, any priest I know, nor the huge majority of priests.
>>
>>None of which changes the fact that many priests
>
>Some.
Many, Dook.
>On Thu, 09 May 2013 14:50:29 -0400, Silen...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
>>>Neither have I, any priest I know, nor the huge majority of priests.
>>
>>None of which changes the fact that many priests
>
>Some.
Your attempt to minimize the scandal... Again... Is noted and
rejected.
Heh heh...
Lying racist rightard socialists...
Batshit crazy and dogshit stupid, every single last one of you.
>
duke
May 11, 2013, 6:43:24 AM5/11/13
to
�RLMeasures
May 11, 2013, 10:26:05 AM5/11/13
to
In article <358so851ageof5569...@4ax.com>, duke
Does this make sense?
<duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
> On Fri, 10 May 2013 05:55:01 -0700, r...@somis.org (�RLMeasures) wrote:
>
> >In article <cflpo8deph96b18pc...@4ax.com>, duke
> ><duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
> >
> >> On Thu, 09 May 2013 19:40:19 -0700, r...@somis.org (�RLMeasures) wrote:
> >>
> >> >In article <c16oo8lgvhpmd8hm3...@4ax.com>, PATRICK
> >> ><pbark...@woh.rr.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> On Thu, 09 May 2013 14:50:29 -0400, Silen...@hotmail.com wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> >On Thu, 09 May 2013 06:29:21 -0500, duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
> >> >> >
> >> >> >>On Tue, 07 May 2013 11:27:32 -0400, Silen...@hotmail.com wrote:
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>>I've never abused an alter boy, Dook.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>Neither have I, any priest I know, nor the huge majority of priests.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >None of which changes the fact that many priests -did- abuse alter
> >> >> >boys, Dook, and anyone else they could get their hot little hands on.
> >> >>
> >> >> what is an alter boy?
> >> >
> >> >� an altar-boy who has been sodomized?
> >>
> >> Also a aborted boy.
> >>
> >� who sodomizes them Duke?
>
> Nobody. I responded to the question.
>
� First aborted boys take it in the ass, now Nobody sods aborted boys.
> On Fri, 10 May 2013 05:55:01 -0700, r...@somis.org (�RLMeasures) wrote:
>
> >In article <cflpo8deph96b18pc...@4ax.com>, duke
> ><duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
> >
> >> On Thu, 09 May 2013 19:40:19 -0700, r...@somis.org (�RLMeasures) wrote:
> >>
> >> >In article <c16oo8lgvhpmd8hm3...@4ax.com>, PATRICK
> >> ><pbark...@woh.rr.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> On Thu, 09 May 2013 14:50:29 -0400, Silen...@hotmail.com wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> >On Thu, 09 May 2013 06:29:21 -0500, duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
> >> >> >
> >> >> >>On Tue, 07 May 2013 11:27:32 -0400, Silen...@hotmail.com wrote:
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>>I've never abused an alter boy, Dook.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>Neither have I, any priest I know, nor the huge majority of priests.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >None of which changes the fact that many priests -did- abuse alter
> >> >> >boys, Dook, and anyone else they could get their hot little hands on.
> >> >>
> >> >> what is an alter boy?
> >> >
> >> >� an altar-boy who has been sodomized?
> >>
> >> Also a aborted boy.
> >>
> >� who sodomizes them Duke?
>
> Nobody. I responded to the question.
>
Does this make sense?
duke
May 11, 2013, 1:50:39 PM5/11/13
to
�RLMeasures
May 11, 2013, 5:14:34 PM5/11/13
to
duke
May 12, 2013, 9:05:17 AM5/12/13
to
�RLMeasures
May 12, 2013, 10:12:49 AM5/12/13
to
HVAC
May 12, 2013, 4:27:24 PM5/12/13
to
On 5/8/2013 11:06 AM, JWD Wolfe wrote:
>
> Forced abortion under certain circumstances should be required.
> For example, a fetus which has a heritable genetic, mental or physical
> disease deleterious mutation or disorder. Any fetus which will tend to
> degrade the human gene pool. Any fetus as a child which will become a
> burden upon society.
I'm in favor of paying any woman who comes in for an abortion $500.00.
>
> Forced abortion under certain circumstances should be required.
> For example, a fetus which has a heritable genetic, mental or physical
> disease deleterious mutation or disorder. Any fetus which will tend to
> degrade the human gene pool. Any fetus as a child which will become a
> burden upon society.
She can come in as often as she likes, we keep the dead fetus.
--
"OK you cunts, let's see what you can do now" -Hit Girl
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CjO7kBqTFqo
Jason
May 12, 2013, 4:28:39 PM5/12/13
to
In article <kmotob$91i$1...@dont-email.me>, HVAC <harlowc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 5/8/2013 11:06 AM, JWD Wolfe wrote:
> >
> > Forced abortion under certain circumstances should be required.
> > For example, a fetus which has a heritable genetic, mental or physical
> > disease deleterious mutation or disorder. Any fetus which will tend to
> > degrade the human gene pool. Any fetus as a child which will become a
> > burden upon society.
>
>
> I'm in favor of paying any woman who comes in for an abortion $500.00.
> She can come in as often as she likes, we keep the dead fetus.
<http://www.americandailyherald.com/history/american-history/item/margaret-sanger-eugenics-and-genocide>
> On 5/8/2013 11:06 AM, JWD Wolfe wrote:
> >
> > Forced abortion under certain circumstances should be required.
> > For example, a fetus which has a heritable genetic, mental or physical
> > disease deleterious mutation or disorder. Any fetus which will tend to
> > degrade the human gene pool. Any fetus as a child which will become a
> > burden upon society.
>
>
> I'm in favor of paying any woman who comes in for an abortion $500.00.
> She can come in as often as she likes, we keep the dead fetus.
HVAC
May 12, 2013, 4:33:40 PM5/12/13
to
On 5/12/2013 4:28 PM, Jason wrote:
>
>>> Forced abortion under certain circumstances should be required.
>>> For example, a fetus which has a heritable genetic, mental or physical
>>> disease deleterious mutation or disorder. Any fetus which will tend to
>>> degrade the human gene pool. Any fetus as a child which will become a
>>> burden upon society.
>>
>>
>> I'm in favor of paying any woman who comes in for an abortion $500.00.
>> She can come in as often as she likes, we keep the dead fetus.
>
> <http://www.americandailyherald.com/history/american-history/item/margaret-sanger-eugenics-and-genocide>
I'm not talking about eugenics, I'm talking about reducing the
>
>>> Forced abortion under certain circumstances should be required.
>>> For example, a fetus which has a heritable genetic, mental or physical
>>> disease deleterious mutation or disorder. Any fetus which will tend to
>>> degrade the human gene pool. Any fetus as a child which will become a
>>> burden upon society.
>>
>>
>> I'm in favor of paying any woman who comes in for an abortion $500.00.
>> She can come in as often as she likes, we keep the dead fetus.
>
> <http://www.americandailyherald.com/history/american-history/item/margaret-sanger-eugenics-and-genocide>
population across the board.
Jeanne Douglas
May 12, 2013, 6:34:43 PM5/12/13
to
Ksuvo
May 13, 2013, 5:05:23 AM5/13/13
to
"HVAC" <harlowc...@gmail.com> kirjoitti
viestissä:kmotob$91i$1...@dont-email.me...
birthed...
duke
May 13, 2013, 7:43:25 AM5/13/13
to
HVAC
May 13, 2013, 8:14:56 AM5/13/13
to
On 5/13/2013 5:05 AM, Ksuvo wrote:
>
>>> Forced abortion under certain circumstances should be required.
>>> For example, a fetus which has a heritable genetic, mental or physical
>>> disease deleterious mutation or disorder. Any fetus which will tend to
>>> degrade the human gene pool. Any fetus as a child which will become a
>>> burden upon society.
>>
>>
>> I'm in favor of paying any woman who comes in for an abortion $500.00.
>> She can come in as often as she likes, we keep the dead fetus.
>>
>>
>> --
>
>
>>> Forced abortion under certain circumstances should be required.
>>> For example, a fetus which has a heritable genetic, mental or physical
>>> disease deleterious mutation or disorder. Any fetus which will tend to
>>> degrade the human gene pool. Any fetus as a child which will become a
>>> burden upon society.
>>
>>
>> I'm in favor of paying any woman who comes in for an abortion $500.00.
>> She can come in as often as she likes, we keep the dead fetus.
>>
>>
>> --
>
> To that woman who kills her own child is better that (s)he never would
> birthed...
Well, that makes sense.....
> birthed...
�RLMeasures
May 13, 2013, 8:26:34 AM5/13/13
to
default
May 13, 2013, 8:30:10 AM5/13/13
to
On Mon, 13 May 2013 12:05:23 +0300, "Ksuvo" <aki.ka...@tut.fi>
wrote:
>
>"HVAC" <harlowc...@gmail.com> kirjoitti
>viestiss�:kmotob$91i$1...@dont-email.me...
That is true. Contraception is a far better choice. Make it
available and educate people into responsible social intercourse.
Force is never a good alternative - be it forced abortions or forcing
people to have unwanted children or forcing the marketing of
contraceptives to make them unavailable to people or forcing the
educational system to forego teaching reproduction in schools on
religious grounds.
Force is what governments and religions use to achieve the greedy ends
of their proponents. The more people learn to think for themselves,
the harder they are to force.
wrote:
>
>"HVAC" <harlowc...@gmail.com> kirjoitti
>viestiss�:kmotob$91i$1...@dont-email.me...
available and educate people into responsible social intercourse.
Force is never a good alternative - be it forced abortions or forcing
people to have unwanted children or forcing the marketing of
contraceptives to make them unavailable to people or forcing the
educational system to forego teaching reproduction in schools on
religious grounds.
Force is what governments and religions use to achieve the greedy ends
of their proponents. The more people learn to think for themselves,
the harder they are to force.
H�gar
May 13, 2013, 3:24:37 PM5/13/13
to
"HVAC" <harlowc...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:kmotob$91i$1...@dont-email.me...
> On 5/8/2013 11:06 AM, JWD Wolfe wrote:
>>
>> Forced abortion under certain circumstances should be required.
>> For example, a fetus which has a heritable genetic, mental or physical
>> disease deleterious mutation or disorder. Any fetus which will tend to
>> degrade the human gene pool. Any fetus as a child which will become a
>> burden upon society.
>
>
> I'm in favor of paying any woman who comes in for an abortion $500.00.
> She can come in as often as she likes, we keep the dead fetus.
In GuthBall's case, even the Pope would have sanctioned a forced abortion.
>>
>> Forced abortion under certain circumstances should be required.
>> For example, a fetus which has a heritable genetic, mental or physical
>> disease deleterious mutation or disorder. Any fetus which will tend to
>> degrade the human gene pool. Any fetus as a child which will become a
>> burden upon society.
>
>
> I'm in favor of paying any woman who comes in for an abortion $500.00.
> She can come in as often as she likes, we keep the dead fetus.
elizabeth
May 14, 2013, 3:59:57 PM5/14/13
to
On May 13, 2:05 am, "Ksuvo" <aki.karppi...@tut.fi> wrote:
> "HVAC" <harlowcampb...@gmail.com> kirjoitti
> viestissä:kmotob$91...@dont-email.me...
Too true about that sow who spewed you, trollqueen.
> "HVAC" <harlowcampb...@gmail.com> kirjoitti
> viestissä:kmotob$91...@dont-email.me...
JWD Wolfe
May 14, 2013, 10:32:59 PM5/14/13
to
On 5/9/2013 2:35 AM, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> In article
> <Jason-08051...@66-53-219-125.lsan.mdsg-pacwest.com>,
> Ja...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:
>
>> In article <hlwdjsd2-0329C6...@news.giganews.com>, Jeanne
>> Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> In article <hStit.30116$Tl3....@fx29.fr7>,
>>
>> Miracles do happen. I agree with you. shocking.
>
>
> Why the surprise?
>
> I've only ever said I'm for pro-choice. That means decisions on whether
> to continue a pregnancy can only be made by the woman. Forced abortion
> is just as evil as forced birthing.
>
A genetically diseased, a down syndrome mental fetus, or physical or
mentally impaired fetus that can never be able to provide for itself
has no right to become a burden upon society.
Whoever is responsible for the care and support of such persons should
have the right to have a say so: this should also hold true for socially
dependent elderly people.
I am am an American Indian or a "Native American" as the PC folks
have it. I've heard stories about how my people from the beginning
dealt with such offspring and the elderly. You would not like it,
but a society with individuals who are barely able to feed
or support themselves will eventually reach the point where society
will have to make harsh decisions and such a society will have the right
to do so. The survival of the fittest will come into effect.
I wonder how far the US is from having to make decisions regarding
what to do with such people. Hopefully never, but it would not be a
surprise if the Obamacare people are not concerned with this now or
in the future.
>
> Choice.
>
> In article
> <Jason-08051...@66-53-219-125.lsan.mdsg-pacwest.com>,
> Ja...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:
>
>> In article <hlwdjsd2-0329C6...@news.giganews.com>, Jeanne
>> Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> In article <hStit.30116$Tl3....@fx29.fr7>,
>>> JWD Wolfe <Lo...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Forced abortion under certain circumstances should be required.
>>>> For example, a fetus which has a heritable genetic, mental or physical
>>>> disease deleterious mutation or disorder. Any fetus which will tend to
>>>> degrade the human gene pool. Any fetus as a child which will become a
>>>> burden upon society.
>>>
>>>
>>> No one can make that choice except the pregnant woman.
>>>
>>>> Forced abortion under certain circumstances should be required.
>>>> For example, a fetus which has a heritable genetic, mental or physical
>>>> disease deleterious mutation or disorder. Any fetus which will tend to
>>>> degrade the human gene pool. Any fetus as a child which will become a
>>>> burden upon society.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Miracles do happen. I agree with you. shocking.
>
>
> Why the surprise?
>
> I've only ever said I'm for pro-choice. That means decisions on whether
> to continue a pregnancy can only be made by the woman. Forced abortion
> is just as evil as forced birthing.
>
A genetically diseased, a down syndrome mental fetus, or physical or
mentally impaired fetus that can never be able to provide for itself
has no right to become a burden upon society.
Whoever is responsible for the care and support of such persons should
have the right to have a say so: this should also hold true for socially
dependent elderly people.
I am am an American Indian or a "Native American" as the PC folks
have it. I've heard stories about how my people from the beginning
dealt with such offspring and the elderly. You would not like it,
but a society with individuals who are barely able to feed
or support themselves will eventually reach the point where society
will have to make harsh decisions and such a society will have the right
to do so. The survival of the fittest will come into effect.
I wonder how far the US is from having to make decisions regarding
what to do with such people. Hopefully never, but it would not be a
surprise if the Obamacare people are not concerned with this now or
in the future.
>
> Choice.
>
JWD Wolfe
May 14, 2013, 10:34:39 PM5/14/13
to
On 5/9/2013 3:18 AM, skye...@yahoo.com wrote:
> *not* abort. Whether to carry a pregnancy to term or not should be
> nobody's decision but the woman's.
>
Only if she can support it. She has no right to burden society with
a socially dependent offspring.
>
> --
> Brenda Nelson, A.A.#34 and A+ atheist
> BAAWA Knight of the Golden Litterbox
> EAC Professor of Feline Thermometrics and Cat-Herding
> skyeyes nine at cox dot net OR
> skyeyes nine at yahoo dot com
> --
>
> On May 8, 8:06 am, JWD Wolfe <L...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>> Forced abortion under certain circumstances should be required.
>> For example, a fetus which has a heritable genetic, mental or physical
>> disease deleterious mutation or disorder. Any fetus which will tend to
>> degrade the human gene pool. Any fetus as a child which will become a
>> burden upon society.
>
> Forcing a woman to abort is just as malicious as forcing a woman to
>> Forced abortion under certain circumstances should be required.
>> For example, a fetus which has a heritable genetic, mental or physical
>> disease deleterious mutation or disorder. Any fetus which will tend to
>> degrade the human gene pool. Any fetus as a child which will become a
>> burden upon society.
>
> *not* abort. Whether to carry a pregnancy to term or not should be
> nobody's decision but the woman's.
>
Only if she can support it. She has no right to burden society with
a socially dependent offspring.
>
> --
> Brenda Nelson, A.A.#34 and A+ atheist
> BAAWA Knight of the Golden Litterbox
> EAC Professor of Feline Thermometrics and Cat-Herding
> skyeyes nine at cox dot net OR
> skyeyes nine at yahoo dot com
> --
>
JWD Wolfe
May 14, 2013, 10:37:56 PM5/14/13
to
On 5/9/2013 4:46 AM, W.T.S. wrote:
> In article <Jason-08051...@66-53-219-125.lsan.mdsg-pacwest.com>,
> Jason-...@ProLiar.biz says...
> In article <Jason-08051...@66-53-219-125.lsan.mdsg-pacwest.com>,
>> In article <hlwdjsd2-0329C6...@news.giganews.com>, Jeanne
>> Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> In article <hStit.30116$Tl3....@fx29.fr7>,
>> Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> In article <hStit.30116$Tl3....@fx29.fr7>,
>>> JWD Wolfe <Lo...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Forced abortion under certain circumstances should be required.
>>>> For example, a fetus which has a heritable genetic, mental or physical
>>>> disease deleterious mutation or disorder. Any fetus which will tend to
>>>> degrade the human gene pool. Any fetus as a child which will become a
>>>> burden upon society.
>>>
>>>
>>>> Forced abortion under certain circumstances should be required.
>>>> For example, a fetus which has a heritable genetic, mental or physical
>>>> disease deleterious mutation or disorder. Any fetus which will tend to
>>>> degrade the human gene pool. Any fetus as a child which will become a
>>>> burden upon society.
>>>
>>> No one can make that choice except the pregnant woman.
>>
>> Miracles do happen. I agree with you. shocking.
> No, miracles are myths, Jason, they don't happen in real life. But, it
>>
>> Miracles do happen. I agree with you. shocking.
> is the woman's choice, no matter what the results are for her and for
> any others. No, not even you or I.
>>
>
>
> We are indeed Carcinoma Sapiens, destroying, by insane fecundity, that
> which we need to survive.
>>
> As always, organized religion opposes progress -
>
And you call forcing society to support offspring that can _never_
support themselves progress?
>>
> See what RELIGION does to peoples' minds?
>>
> Adults no longer believe in the Tooth Fairy - but they still torture and
> kill each other over ancient myths and superstitions.
>>
> "We all remember how many religious wars were fought for a religion of
> love
> and gentleness; how many bodies were burned
> alive with the genuinely kind intention of saving souls from the eternal
> fire of hell." --- Karl Popper
>>
> "When one person suffers from a delusion, it is called insanity. When
> many
> people suffer from a delusion, it is called Religion."
> --- Robert M. Pirsig
>>
> Either God wants to abolish evil and cannot, or he can but does not want
> to.
> If he wants to but cannot he is impotent. If he can
> but does not want to, he is wicked. If he neither can nor wants to, then
> he
> is both powerless and wicked.
> --- Epicurus, Greek philosopher, circa 300 B.C.
>>
> "Act of God" disasters like the Japanese earthquake expose the myth.
> Either
> God can do nothing to stop catastrophes like
> this, or he doesn't care to, or he doesn't exist. He is thus either
> impotent, evil, or imaginary.
> --- CNN Belief Blog, 3-20-11
>>
> "With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things
> and
> evil people doing evil things. But for good people
> to do evil things, that takes religion."
> --- Steven Weinberg, quoted in The New York Times, April 20, 1999
>>
> "Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from
> religious conviction." --- Blaise Pascal.
>>
> "Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as
> false,
> and by rulers as useful."
> --- Seneca the Younger (4? BC - 65 AD)
>>
> "Religion once ruled the world. It was called the Dark Ages." --- Ruth
> Green.
>>
> "Science flies you to the moon. Religion flies you into buildings." ---
> Victor Stenger.
>>
> "I don't believe in God because I don't believe in Mother Goose." ---
> Clarence Darrow
>>
> "As my ancestors are free from slavery, I am free from the slavery of
> religion." --- Butterfly McQueen
>>
> "Religion was invented when the first con-man met the first fool." -
> Mark
> Twain
>>
> "Faith is believing what you know ain't so." --- Mark Twain
>>
> "The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character
> in
> all fiction." --- Richard Dawkins
>>
> "Cult today, religion tomorrow."
>>
> The Freedom From Religion Foundation: http://ffrf.org/
> The Secular Coalition for America: www.secular.org
> Secular Student Alliance: www.secularstudents.org
> www.infidels.org
> www.humaniststudies.org
> www.atheistalliance.org
> www.americanhumanist.org
>
JWD Wolfe
May 14, 2013, 10:42:44 PM5/14/13
to
On 5/9/2013 7:39 AM, duke wrote:
>
I'm an American Indian, Actually I do not share your ideas about what is
or not moral. For example mental and physically defective offspring who
can never support themselves have no right to burden others. Those
of us who pay taxes, should have the right to make decisions.
> On Wed, 08 May 2013 11:06:52 -0400, JWD Wolfe <Lo...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>
>>
>> Forced abortion under certain circumstances should be required.
>> For example, a fetus which has a heritable genetic, mental or physical
>> disease deleterious mutation or disorder. Any fetus which will tend to
>> degrade the human gene pool. Any fetus as a child which will become a
>> burden upon society.
>
> If you murder it, you yourself are already a member of the mutated gene pool.
>
>>
>> Forced abortion under certain circumstances should be required.
>> For example, a fetus which has a heritable genetic, mental or physical
>> disease deleterious mutation or disorder. Any fetus which will tend to
>> degrade the human gene pool. Any fetus as a child which will become a
>> burden upon society.
>
>
I'm an American Indian, Actually I do not share your ideas about what is
or not moral. For example mental and physically defective offspring who
can never support themselves have no right to burden others. Those
of us who pay taxes, should have the right to make decisions.
JWD Wolfe
May 14, 2013, 10:59:14 PM5/14/13
to
On 5/9/2013 6:49 PM, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> In article <7p5no89mril0bup5n...@4ax.com>,
> their lives completely, are the same ones who want the government
> monitoring every single one of the millions of pregnancies every year.
>
I don't believe in anarchy, so I don't hate government, but yes, I think
government should monitor pregnancies for fetuses which will become a
burden upon society. In some cases a child who is born with a condition
that can be alleviated within a set amount of monetary expense should
have that chance, but a value should be placed upon the life of such a
person. For example an infant with a heart problem that can be repaired
by medicine should not be the recipient of endless expensive care. I
am aware of such a child. Over $200,000 was spent, but the child died
at six months of age anyway. A huge waste of money.
> In article <7p5no89mril0bup5n...@4ax.com>,
> default <no...@noname.net> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 08 May 2013 11:06:52 -0400, JWD Wolfe <Lo...@bellsouth.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Forced abortion under certain circumstances should be required.
>>> For example, a fetus which has a heritable genetic, mental or physical
>>> disease deleterious mutation or disorder. Any fetus which will tend to
>>> degrade the human gene pool. Any fetus as a child which will become a
>>> burden upon society.
>>
>
>> On Wed, 08 May 2013 11:06:52 -0400, JWD Wolfe <Lo...@bellsouth.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Forced abortion under certain circumstances should be required.
>>> For example, a fetus which has a heritable genetic, mental or physical
>>> disease deleterious mutation or disorder. Any fetus which will tend to
>>> degrade the human gene pool. Any fetus as a child which will become a
>>> burden upon society.
>>
>> And which scum sucking politicians get to decide? - because you know
>> it will be the politicians that want this power.
>
>
> Talk about the irony. The people who hate government, who want it out of
>> it will be the politicians that want this power.
>
>
> their lives completely, are the same ones who want the government
> monitoring every single one of the millions of pregnancies every year.
>
I don't believe in anarchy, so I don't hate government, but yes, I think
government should monitor pregnancies for fetuses which will become a
burden upon society. In some cases a child who is born with a condition
that can be alleviated within a set amount of monetary expense should
have that chance, but a value should be placed upon the life of such a
person. For example an infant with a heart problem that can be repaired
by medicine should not be the recipient of endless expensive care. I
am aware of such a child. Over $200,000 was spent, but the child died
at six months of age anyway. A huge waste of money.
JWD Wolfe
May 14, 2013, 11:01:46 PM5/14/13
to
On 5/12/2013 4:27 PM, HVAC wrote:
> On 5/8/2013 11:06 AM, JWD Wolfe wrote:
>>
>> Forced abortion under certain circumstances should be required.
>> For example, a fetus which has a heritable genetic, mental or physical
>> disease deleterious mutation or disorder. Any fetus which will tend to
>> degrade the human gene pool. Any fetus as a child which will become a
>> burden upon society.
>
>
> I'm in favor of paying any woman who comes in for an abortion $500.00.
> She can come in as often as she likes, we keep the dead fetus.
>
Yes, you would be surprised at how many woman would take you up with that.
> On 5/8/2013 11:06 AM, JWD Wolfe wrote:
>>
>> Forced abortion under certain circumstances should be required.
>> For example, a fetus which has a heritable genetic, mental or physical
>> disease deleterious mutation or disorder. Any fetus which will tend to
>> degrade the human gene pool. Any fetus as a child which will become a
>> burden upon society.
>
>
> I'm in favor of paying any woman who comes in for an abortion $500.00.
> She can come in as often as she likes, we keep the dead fetus.
>
>
Jeanne Douglas
May 15, 2013, 12:56:29 AM5/15/13
to
In article <tUCkt.42627$uG4....@fx11.fr7>,
Yes, it's horrible the depths some people must sink to to in order to
survive.
survive.
duke
May 15, 2013, 7:36:54 AM5/15/13
to
On Tue, 14 May 2013 22:42:44 -0400, JWD Wolfe <lo...@bellsout.net> wrote:
>On 5/9/2013 7:39 AM, duke wrote:
>> On Wed, 08 May 2013 11:06:52 -0400, JWD Wolfe <Lo...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Forced abortion under certain circumstances should be required.
>>> For example, a fetus which has a heritable genetic, mental or physical
>>> disease deleterious mutation or disorder. Any fetus which will tend to
>>> degrade the human gene pool. Any fetus as a child which will become a
>>> burden upon society.
>> If you murder it, you yourself are already a member of the mutated gene pool.
>I'm an American Indian, Actually I do not share your ideas about what is
>or not moral.
Christians do.
>On 5/9/2013 7:39 AM, duke wrote:
>> On Wed, 08 May 2013 11:06:52 -0400, JWD Wolfe <Lo...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Forced abortion under certain circumstances should be required.
>>> For example, a fetus which has a heritable genetic, mental or physical
>>> disease deleterious mutation or disorder. Any fetus which will tend to
>>> degrade the human gene pool. Any fetus as a child which will become a
>>> burden upon society.
>> If you murder it, you yourself are already a member of the mutated gene pool.
>I'm an American Indian, Actually I do not share your ideas about what is
>or not moral.
duke
May 15, 2013, 7:38:11 AM5/15/13
to
HVAC
May 15, 2013, 10:32:27 AM5/15/13
to
each. $500.00 is a bargain for us. The fetus would help in stem cell
research and if we get too many, we run a sale on 'jumbo shrimp'.
http://goo.gl/eBl6U
JWD Wolfe
May 15, 2013, 10:40:17 AM5/15/13
to
then the child could live of not. Further expense would be curtailed.
JWD Wolfe
May 15, 2013, 10:48:49 AM5/15/13
to
On 5/15/2013 10:32 AM, HVAC wrote:
> On 5/14/2013 11:01 PM, JWD Wolfe wrote:
>> On 5/12/2013 4:27 PM, HVAC wrote:
>>> On 5/8/2013 11:06 AM, JWD Wolfe wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Forced abortion under certain circumstances should be required.
>>>> For example, a fetus which has a heritable genetic, mental or physical
>>>> disease deleterious mutation or disorder. Any fetus which will tend to
>>>> degrade the human gene pool. Any fetus as a child which will become a
>>>> burden upon society.
>>>
>>>
>>> I'm in favor of paying any woman who comes in for an abortion $500.00.
>>> She can come in as often as she likes, we keep the dead fetus.
>>>
>> Yes, you would be surprised at how many woman would take you up with
>> that.
>
> Raising these unwanted children to age 18 would cost approx 1/4 million
> each. $500.00 is a bargain for us. The fetus would help in stem cell
> research and if we get too many, we run a sale on 'jumbo shrimp'.
>
Fluoride has been added to drinking water in some locations, why is
> On 5/14/2013 11:01 PM, JWD Wolfe wrote:
>> On 5/12/2013 4:27 PM, HVAC wrote:
>>> On 5/8/2013 11:06 AM, JWD Wolfe wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Forced abortion under certain circumstances should be required.
>>>> For example, a fetus which has a heritable genetic, mental or physical
>>>> disease deleterious mutation or disorder. Any fetus which will tend to
>>>> degrade the human gene pool. Any fetus as a child which will become a
>>>> burden upon society.
>>>
>>>
>>> I'm in favor of paying any woman who comes in for an abortion $500.00.
>>> She can come in as often as she likes, we keep the dead fetus.
>>>
>> Yes, you would be surprised at how many woman would take you up with
>> that.
>
> Raising these unwanted children to age 18 would cost approx 1/4 million
> each. $500.00 is a bargain for us. The fetus would help in stem cell
> research and if we get too many, we run a sale on 'jumbo shrimp'.
>
there not some chemical agent that could cause sterility in people,
which could be added to local water supplies. Maybe there is.
>
> http://goo.gl/eBl6U
>
JWD Wolfe
May 15, 2013, 11:06:38 AM5/15/13
to
discussion.
>
> Force is what governments and religions use to achieve the greedy ends
> of their proponents. The more people learn to think for themselves,
> the harder they are to force.
>
Why not put some chemical agent into drinking water which would cause
> Force is what governments and religions use to achieve the greedy ends
> of their proponents. The more people learn to think for themselves,
> the harder they are to force.
>
infertility?
duke
May 15, 2013, 12:08:04 PM5/15/13
to
HVAC
May 15, 2013, 12:09:39 PM5/15/13
to
On 5/15/2013 10:48 AM, JWD Wolfe wrote:
>
>>>> I'm in favor of paying any woman who comes in for an abortion $500.00.
>>>> She can come in as often as she likes, we keep the dead fetus.
>>>>
>>> Yes, you would be surprised at how many woman would take you up with
>>> that.
>>
>> Raising these unwanted children to age 18 would cost approx 1/4 million
>> each. $500.00 is a bargain for us. The fetus would help in stem cell
>> research and if we get too many, we run a sale on 'jumbo shrimp'.
> >
> Fluoride has been added to drinking water in some locations, why is
> there not some chemical agent that could cause sterility in people,
> which could be added to local water supplies. Maybe there is.
I am not in favor of the communist plot to sap and degrade our purity of
>
>>>> I'm in favor of paying any woman who comes in for an abortion $500.00.
>>>> She can come in as often as she likes, we keep the dead fetus.
>>>>
>>> Yes, you would be surprised at how many woman would take you up with
>>> that.
>>
>> Raising these unwanted children to age 18 would cost approx 1/4 million
>> each. $500.00 is a bargain for us. The fetus would help in stem cell
>> research and if we get too many, we run a sale on 'jumbo shrimp'.
> >
> Fluoride has been added to drinking water in some locations, why is
> there not some chemical agent that could cause sterility in people,
> which could be added to local water supplies. Maybe there is.
essence. Nor the contamination of our precious bodily fluids.
POE
elizabeth
May 15, 2013, 2:43:46 PM5/15/13
to
On May 14, 7:32 pm, JWD Wolfe <l...@bellsoutl.net> wrote:
> On 5/9/2013 2:35 AM, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > In article
> > <Jason-0805132308480...@66-53-219-125.lsan.mdsg-pacwest.com>,
> On 5/9/2013 2:35 AM, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > In article
> > Ja...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:
>
> >> In article <hlwdjsd2-0329C6.15571408052...@news.giganews.com>, Jeanne
> >> Douglas <hlwdj...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>
> >>> In article <hStit.30116$Tl3.26...@fx29.fr7>,
harshest mountain terrain. You were allowed to live to age 70 (if
memory serves) then you had to go up to the top of the mountain to
die. Unwanted babies were routinely drowned, and female babies sold
to brokers. Because of the realities of living in such a difficult
place, they simply couldn't afford to let people have as many children
as they wanted at the village's expense.
Now, our welfare program has made overpopulation the only real problem
we have. We pay women to have children they can't afford to raise,
and wonder why we're broke . .. the reason China will soon own us is
Mao's one child policy.
elizabeth
May 15, 2013, 2:44:41 PM5/15/13
to
before breeding.
With a nice cash bonus.
elizabeth
May 15, 2013, 2:53:13 PM5/15/13
to
On May 15, 8:06 am, JWD Wolfe <l...@bellsout.net> wrote:
> On 5/13/2013 8:30 AM, default wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Mon, 13 May 2013 12:05:23 +0300, "Ksuvo" <aki.karppi...@tut.fi>
> On 5/13/2013 8:30 AM, default wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > wrote:
>
> >> "HVAC" <harlowcampb...@gmail.com> kirjoitti
> >> viestissä:kmotob$91...@dont-email.me...
>
> >> "HVAC" <harlowcampb...@gmail.com> kirjoitti
> >> viestissä:kmotob$91...@dont-email.me...
where the vas deferens is injected with a soy product that blocks the
sperm, AND IT WILL DISSOLVE NATURALLY IN SEVEN YEARS. No scalpels.
This would be excellent to use on teen males, and hopefully by the
time they need a "booster" they will be a bit more mature! Perhaps
the best way to get men to comply with vasectomization is to force all
"babydaddies" to do 100% of the actual childcare, with no mothers,
girlfriends, new wives, etc allowed to do any of the work. The
babymomma is put out to work at whatever job will have her.
I guarantee you, when that becomes law, men and boys will rush to the
nearest clinic.
Vasectomies are safer, cheaper, and more effective than any method for
females. There is no morbidity/mortality, unlike all methods for
women. Tubals are far more likely to fail, btw, and are far more
dangerous than even childbirth! If more men would get vasectomies,
the savings to the "health care system" would be in the billions.
However, the pharmcorps couldn't get their billions selling poisons to
women . .. so that's why you won't see vasectomies pushed in the
usa. in the uk, doctors promote them because it saves NHS a large
fortune.
HVAC
May 15, 2013, 3:30:37 PM5/15/13
to
On 5/15/2013 2:53 PM, elizabeth wrote:
>
> Actually, mandatory vasectomies, using current methods, esp the one
> where the vas deferens is injected with a soy product that blocks the
> sperm, AND IT WILL DISSOLVE NATURALLY IN SEVEN YEARS. No scalpels.
> This would be excellent to use on teen males, and hopefully by the
> time they need a "booster" they will be a bit more mature! Perhaps
> the best way to get men to comply with vasectomization is to force all
> "babydaddies" to do 100% of the actual childcare, with no mothers,
> girlfriends, new wives, etc allowed to do any of the work. The
> babymomma is put out to work at whatever job will have her.
>
> I guarantee you, when that becomes law, men and boys will rush to the
> nearest clinic.
>
> Vasectomies are safer, cheaper, and more effective than any method for
> females. There is no morbidity/mortality, unlike all methods for
> women. Tubals are far more likely to fail, btw, and are far more
> dangerous than even childbirth! If more men would get vasectomies,
> the savings to the "health care system" would be in the billions.
> However, the pharmcorps couldn't get their billions selling poisons to
> women . .. so that's why you won't see vasectomies pushed in the
> usa. in the uk, doctors promote them because it saves NHS a large
> fortune.
Too much fucking and not enough sucking.
>
> Actually, mandatory vasectomies, using current methods, esp the one
> where the vas deferens is injected with a soy product that blocks the
> sperm, AND IT WILL DISSOLVE NATURALLY IN SEVEN YEARS. No scalpels.
> This would be excellent to use on teen males, and hopefully by the
> time they need a "booster" they will be a bit more mature! Perhaps
> the best way to get men to comply with vasectomization is to force all
> "babydaddies" to do 100% of the actual childcare, with no mothers,
> girlfriends, new wives, etc allowed to do any of the work. The
> babymomma is put out to work at whatever job will have her.
>
> I guarantee you, when that becomes law, men and boys will rush to the
> nearest clinic.
>
> Vasectomies are safer, cheaper, and more effective than any method for
> females. There is no morbidity/mortality, unlike all methods for
> women. Tubals are far more likely to fail, btw, and are far more
> dangerous than even childbirth! If more men would get vasectomies,
> the savings to the "health care system" would be in the billions.
> However, the pharmcorps couldn't get their billions selling poisons to
> women . .. so that's why you won't see vasectomies pushed in the
> usa. in the uk, doctors promote them because it saves NHS a large
> fortune.
HVAC
May 15, 2013, 3:31:19 PM5/15/13
to
JWD Wolfe
May 15, 2013, 4:07:21 PM5/15/13
to
On 5/15/2013 2:53 PM, elizabeth wrote:
> On May 15, 8:06 am, JWD Wolfe <l...@bellsout.net> wrote:
>> On 5/13/2013 8:30 AM, default wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Mon, 13 May 2013 12:05:23 +0300, "Ksuvo" <aki.karppi...@tut.fi>
>>> wrote:
>>
>>>> "HVAC" <harlowcampb...@gmail.com> kirjoitti
>>>> viestiss�:kmotob$91...@dont-email.me...
>> On 5/13/2013 8:30 AM, default wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Mon, 13 May 2013 12:05:23 +0300, "Ksuvo" <aki.karppi...@tut.fi>
>>> wrote:
>>
>>>> "HVAC" <harlowcampb...@gmail.com> kirjoitti
Syd M.
May 15, 2013, 6:32:08 PM5/15/13
to
On May 15, 12:08 pm, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
> >>>> default <n...@noname.net> wrote:
>
> >>>>> On Wed, 08 May 2013 11:06:52 -0400, JWD Wolfe <L...@bellsouth.net>
you protest otherwise.
PDW
> On Wed, 15 May 2013 10:40:17 -0400, JWD Wolfe <l...@bellsout.net> wrote:
> >On 5/15/2013 7:38 AM, duke wrote:
> >On 5/15/2013 7:38 AM, duke wrote:
> >> On Tue, 14 May 2013 22:59:14 -0400, JWD Wolfe <l...@bellsout.net> wrote:
>
> >>> On 5/9/2013 6:49 PM, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> >>>> In article <7p5no89mril0bup5namkrnign87kko2...@4ax.com>,
>
> >>> On 5/9/2013 6:49 PM, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> >>>> default <n...@noname.net> wrote:
>
> >>>>> On Wed, 08 May 2013 11:06:52 -0400, JWD Wolfe <L...@bellsouth.net>
> >>>>> wrote:
>
> >>>>>> Forced abortion under certain circumstances should be required.
> >>>>>> For example, a fetus which has a heritable genetic, mental or physical
> >>>>>> disease deleterious mutation or disorder. Any fetus which will tend to
> >>>>>> degrade the human gene pool. Any fetus as a child which will become a
> >>>>>> burden upon society.
>
> >>>>> And which scum sucking politicians get to decide? - because you know
> >>>>> it will be the politicians that want this power.
>
> >>>> Talk about the irony. The people who hate government, who want it out of
> >>>> their lives completely, are the same ones who want the government
> >>>> monitoring every single one of the millions of pregnancies every year.
>
> >>> I don't believe in anarchy, so I don't hate government, but yes, I think
> >>> government should monitor pregnancies for fetuses which will become a
> >>> burden upon society. In some cases a child who is born with a condition
> >>> that can be alleviated within a set amount of monetary expense should
> >>> have that chance, but a value should be placed upon the life of such a
> >>> person. For example an infant with a heart problem that can be repaired
> >>> by medicine should not be the recipient of endless expensive care. I
> >>> am aware of such a child. Over $200,000 was spent, but the child died
> >>> at six months of age anyway. A huge waste of money.
> >> God almighty knew the child would die at 6 months of age. Did you?
> >If a value were to be placed on a newborn's life once that limit was met
> >then the child could live of not. Further expense would be curtailed.
>
> A murdered infant cannot live to a ripe old age.
>
>
But no infant is killed in an abortion, Dork, no matter how many times
>
> >>>>>> Forced abortion under certain circumstances should be required.
> >>>>>> For example, a fetus which has a heritable genetic, mental or physical
> >>>>>> disease deleterious mutation or disorder. Any fetus which will tend to
> >>>>>> degrade the human gene pool. Any fetus as a child which will become a
> >>>>>> burden upon society.
>
> >>>>> And which scum sucking politicians get to decide? - because you know
> >>>>> it will be the politicians that want this power.
>
> >>>> Talk about the irony. The people who hate government, who want it out of
> >>>> their lives completely, are the same ones who want the government
> >>>> monitoring every single one of the millions of pregnancies every year.
>
> >>> I don't believe in anarchy, so I don't hate government, but yes, I think
> >>> government should monitor pregnancies for fetuses which will become a
> >>> burden upon society. In some cases a child who is born with a condition
> >>> that can be alleviated within a set amount of monetary expense should
> >>> have that chance, but a value should be placed upon the life of such a
> >>> person. For example an infant with a heart problem that can be repaired
> >>> by medicine should not be the recipient of endless expensive care. I
> >>> am aware of such a child. Over $200,000 was spent, but the child died
> >>> at six months of age anyway. A huge waste of money.
> >> God almighty knew the child would die at 6 months of age. Did you?
> >If a value were to be placed on a newborn's life once that limit was met
> >then the child could live of not. Further expense would be curtailed.
>
> A murdered infant cannot live to a ripe old age.
>
>
you protest otherwise.
PDW
Jeanne Douglas
May 15, 2013, 8:08:35 PM5/15/13
to
In article <2wNkt.62486$zR1....@fx03.fr7>,
Are you kidding? We've been doing that for decades.
--
JD
--
JD
Jeanne Douglas
May 15, 2013, 8:11:08 PM5/15/13
to
In article <qfNkt.78764$1g2....@fx08.fr7>,
Chemical manufacturers have been doing so for decades.
But any government who proposed any such thing would be out on its ass
in days and would be lucky not to be torn to shreds by the people.
But any government who proposed any such thing would be out on its ass
in days and would be lucky not to be torn to shreds by the people.
JWD Wolfe
May 15, 2013, 8:41:59 PM5/15/13
to
up to 2 years of age, if she cannot support it. If she cannot provide
for it, she has NO right to foist it upon society to support. So,
society should have a say-so about it.
>
> PDW
>
JWD Wolfe
May 15, 2013, 8:46:06 PM5/15/13
to
born in the US? Perhaps a couple should be limited to two offspring.
The third should be forced to abort.
Dakota
May 15, 2013, 9:01:07 PM5/15/13
to
disgusting religious notion. It is as vile as calling them bastards.
<astronomy snipped>
Dakota
May 15, 2013, 9:02:24 PM5/15/13
to
On 5/15/2013 7:11 PM, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> In article <qfNkt.78764$1g2....@fx08.fr7>,
> JWD Wolfe <lo...@bellsout.net> wrote:
>
>> On 5/15/2013 10:32 AM, HVAC wrote:
>>> On 5/14/2013 11:01 PM, JWD Wolfe wrote:
>>>> On 5/12/2013 4:27 PM, HVAC wrote:
>>>>> On 5/8/2013 11:06 AM, JWD Wolfe wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Forced abortion under certain circumstances should be required.
>>>>>> For example, a fetus which has a heritable genetic, mental or physical
>>>>>> disease deleterious mutation or disorder. Any fetus which will tend to
>>>>>> degrade the human gene pool. Any fetus as a child which will become a
>>>>>> burden upon society.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm in favor of paying any woman who comes in for an abortion $500.00.
>>>>> She can come in as often as she likes, we keep the dead fetus.
>>>>>
>>>> Yes, you would be surprised at how many woman would take you up with
>>>> that.
>>>
>>> Raising these unwanted children to age 18 would cost approx 1/4 million
>>> each. $500.00 is a bargain for us. The fetus would help in stem cell
>>> research and if we get too many, we run a sale on 'jumbo shrimp'.
>> >
>> Fluoride has been added to drinking water in some locations, why is
>> there not some chemical agent that could cause sterility in people,
>> which could be added to local water supplies. Maybe there is.
>
> Chemical manufacturers have been doing so for decades.
>
Got a cite for that claim?
> In article <qfNkt.78764$1g2....@fx08.fr7>,
> JWD Wolfe <lo...@bellsout.net> wrote:
>
>> On 5/15/2013 10:32 AM, HVAC wrote:
>>> On 5/14/2013 11:01 PM, JWD Wolfe wrote:
>>>> On 5/12/2013 4:27 PM, HVAC wrote:
>>>>> On 5/8/2013 11:06 AM, JWD Wolfe wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Forced abortion under certain circumstances should be required.
>>>>>> For example, a fetus which has a heritable genetic, mental or physical
>>>>>> disease deleterious mutation or disorder. Any fetus which will tend to
>>>>>> degrade the human gene pool. Any fetus as a child which will become a
>>>>>> burden upon society.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm in favor of paying any woman who comes in for an abortion $500.00.
>>>>> She can come in as often as she likes, we keep the dead fetus.
>>>>>
>>>> Yes, you would be surprised at how many woman would take you up with
>>>> that.
>>>
>>> Raising these unwanted children to age 18 would cost approx 1/4 million
>>> each. $500.00 is a bargain for us. The fetus would help in stem cell
>>> research and if we get too many, we run a sale on 'jumbo shrimp'.
>> >
>> Fluoride has been added to drinking water in some locations, why is
>> there not some chemical agent that could cause sterility in people,
>> which could be added to local water supplies. Maybe there is.
>
> Chemical manufacturers have been doing so for decades.
>
>
> But any government who proposed any such thing would be out on its ass
> in days and would be lucky not to be torn to shreds by the people.
>
<astronomy snipped>
> But any government who proposed any such thing would be out on its ass
> in days and would be lucky not to be torn to shreds by the people.
>
Dakota
May 15, 2013, 9:06:52 PM5/15/13
to
upon society to support" the day it turns three? Keep in mind that
'slippery slope' arguments are not necessarily invalid. Each must be
weighed on its merits.
JWD Wolfe
May 15, 2013, 11:06:53 PM5/15/13
to
single mothers. I have no hang up with calling them bastards. Single
women too often cannot support them, so they are foisted off on society.
We as members of society should have some say-so where single women have
babies. There is more than 50% of all births in the US that's
illegitimate. Most of these babies are foisted upon society for support.
Illegitimate babies should be all be euthanized. This is better
than my tax dollars going to support them.
>
> <astronomy snipped>
>
Jeanne Douglas
May 15, 2013, 11:30:44 PM5/15/13
to
In article <kn1avk$nlb$2...@dont-email.me>, Dakota <ma...@NOSPAMmail.com>
wrote:
> On 5/15/2013 7:11 PM, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> > In article <qfNkt.78764$1g2....@fx08.fr7>,
> > JWD Wolfe <lo...@bellsout.net> wrote:
> >
> >> On 5/15/2013 10:32 AM, HVAC wrote:
> >>> On 5/14/2013 11:01 PM, JWD Wolfe wrote:
> >>>> On 5/12/2013 4:27 PM, HVAC wrote:
> >>>>> On 5/8/2013 11:06 AM, JWD Wolfe wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Forced abortion under certain circumstances should be required.
> >>>>>> For example, a fetus which has a heritable genetic, mental or physical
> >>>>>> disease deleterious mutation or disorder. Any fetus which will tend to
> >>>>>> degrade the human gene pool. Any fetus as a child which will become a
> >>>>>> burden upon society.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I'm in favor of paying any woman who comes in for an abortion $500.00.
> >>>>> She can come in as often as she likes, we keep the dead fetus.
> >>>>>
> >>>> Yes, you would be surprised at how many woman would take you up with
> >>>> that.
> >>>
> >>> Raising these unwanted children to age 18 would cost approx 1/4 million
> >>> each. $500.00 is a bargain for us. The fetus would help in stem cell
> >>> research and if we get too many, we run a sale on 'jumbo shrimp'.
> >> >
> >> Fluoride has been added to drinking water in some locations, why is
> >> there not some chemical agent that could cause sterility in people,
> >> which could be added to local water supplies. Maybe there is.
> >
> > Chemical manufacturers have been doing so for decades.
> >
> Got a cite for that claim?
Probably got thousands, at the very least.
<http://www.livescience.com/10957-pesticide-turns-male-frogs-females.html
>
<http://water.epa.gov/type/wetlands/outreach/upload/herp-conservation-pr.
pdf>
wrote:
> On 5/15/2013 7:11 PM, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> > In article <qfNkt.78764$1g2....@fx08.fr7>,
> > JWD Wolfe <lo...@bellsout.net> wrote:
> >
> >> On 5/15/2013 10:32 AM, HVAC wrote:
> >>> On 5/14/2013 11:01 PM, JWD Wolfe wrote:
> >>>> On 5/12/2013 4:27 PM, HVAC wrote:
> >>>>> On 5/8/2013 11:06 AM, JWD Wolfe wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Forced abortion under certain circumstances should be required.
> >>>>>> For example, a fetus which has a heritable genetic, mental or physical
> >>>>>> disease deleterious mutation or disorder. Any fetus which will tend to
> >>>>>> degrade the human gene pool. Any fetus as a child which will become a
> >>>>>> burden upon society.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I'm in favor of paying any woman who comes in for an abortion $500.00.
> >>>>> She can come in as often as she likes, we keep the dead fetus.
> >>>>>
> >>>> Yes, you would be surprised at how many woman would take you up with
> >>>> that.
> >>>
> >>> Raising these unwanted children to age 18 would cost approx 1/4 million
> >>> each. $500.00 is a bargain for us. The fetus would help in stem cell
> >>> research and if we get too many, we run a sale on 'jumbo shrimp'.
> >> >
> >> Fluoride has been added to drinking water in some locations, why is
> >> there not some chemical agent that could cause sterility in people,
> >> which could be added to local water supplies. Maybe there is.
> >
> > Chemical manufacturers have been doing so for decades.
> >
> Got a cite for that claim?
<http://www.livescience.com/10957-pesticide-turns-male-frogs-females.html
>
<http://water.epa.gov/type/wetlands/outreach/upload/herp-conservation-pr.
pdf>
Dakota
May 16, 2013, 12:29:54 AM5/16/13
to
a devastating effect on the environment, claiming that chemical agents
intended to sterilize humans have been introduced into local water
supplies for decades is a wholly different matter.
Jeanne Douglas
May 16, 2013, 2:04:34 AM5/16/13
to
In article <h3Ykt.99230$a77....@fx18.fr7>,
Wow. Actually saying that money is more important than lives.
JWD Wolfe <lo...@bellsout.net> wrote:
> On 5/15/2013 9:01 PM, Dakota wrote:
> > On 5/15/2013 7:46 PM, JWD Wolfe wrote:
> >> On 5/15/2013 8:08 PM, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> >>> In article <2wNkt.62486$zR1....@fx03.fr7>,
> >>> JWD Wolfe <lo...@bellsout.net> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> On 5/13/2013 8:30 AM, default wrote:
> >>>>> On Mon, 13 May 2013 12:05:23 +0300, "Ksuvo" <aki.ka...@tut.fi>
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> "HVAC" <harlowc...@gmail.com> kirjoitti
> >>>>>> viestissä:kmotob$91i$1...@dont-email.me...
> On 5/15/2013 9:01 PM, Dakota wrote:
> > On 5/15/2013 7:46 PM, JWD Wolfe wrote:
> >> On 5/15/2013 8:08 PM, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> >>> In article <2wNkt.62486$zR1....@fx03.fr7>,
> >>> JWD Wolfe <lo...@bellsout.net> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> On 5/13/2013 8:30 AM, default wrote:
> >>>>> On Mon, 13 May 2013 12:05:23 +0300, "Ksuvo" <aki.ka...@tut.fi>
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> "HVAC" <harlowc...@gmail.com> kirjoitti
duke
May 16, 2013, 6:59:36 AM5/16/13
to
On Wed, 15 May 2013 11:53:13 -0700 (PDT), elizabeth <elizabet...@gmail.com>
wrote:
>Vasectomies are safer, cheaper, and more effective than any method for
>females.
Even safer is for yon baby support system to keep her knees together.
wrote:
>Vasectomies are safer, cheaper, and more effective than any method for
>females.
duke
May 16, 2013, 7:13:23 AM5/16/13
to
murder to take the life of another person (not yourself) for one's own comfort
and convenience.
>If she cannot provide
>for it, she has NO right to foist it upon society to support. So,
>society should have a say-so about it.
baby.
duke
May 16, 2013, 7:18:58 AM5/16/13
to
On Wed, 15 May 2013 17:11:08 -0700, Jeanne Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com>
wrote:
Yep, the moral code continues to show up.
I wonder if he enjoyed that baby wing. Very disgusting. Very "fires of hell"
to boot.
wrote:
I wonder if he enjoyed that baby wing. Very disgusting. Very "fires of hell"
to boot.
It is loading more messages.
0 new messages