quote:

ORIGINAL: ljmac

quote:

ORIGINAL: adelphi_sky

I tell you. As an African American, reading some of these posts makes me almost as upset as watching the movie Mississippi Burning. And people can't accept that fact that we have a very long way to go as far as understanding each other. I'm sorry, but to say that there are many parallels between slavery and abortion is just plain ignorance. What is obvious is that slavery deals with lives OUTSIDE of the womb. Another obvious observation would tell you you that slavery was economic. Abortion is not about economics. Yes, slaves were murdered. But unlike unborn babies. Often times the choice was not hard to kill a slave. Especially if they got sick on a slave ship. Sometimes they were thrown overboard just because there were too many. The choice to have an abortion takes much thought and grief for the individual. Trust me, I have a friend who went through the ordeal. Slavery was sanctioned by Christians. Abortion was not unless I'm mistaken. The offspring of slaves were highly valued and encouraged because it was a sign of wealth for the slave owner. Abortion doesn't encourage birth at all. I can go on and on about there NOT being many parallels between slavery and abortion.

Also, PW13 states " No matter how someone may feel about their spouse.....the law does not give the right to murder them on demand. (that is what RvW is about murder on demand of a certain group of people) "

While RvW may be an angry and bitter old man, it's a far reach to ascribe him to inciting murder in peoples' hearts. To make a statement like is not only reckless, it is hateful and slanderous as well. Two wrongs don't make a right. Unless you know the man personally and have witnessed a murder based off of his order, then by all means call the police. Because that means he is an accessory to murder. If not, you hold no court to convict him as you have with that statement. Have you no mercy or compassion or even pity for someone who has lost hope? Check your own heart.

Your post exhibits one of the parallels quite nicely. Americans once made a distinction between black people in free states and black people in slave states. You make the same distinction between lives "OUTSIDE" the womb and those still in it. In both cases it is the location of an individual that determined their right to be free.

http://www.blackgenocide.org/home.html

quote:

Um..."RvW" aren't the initals of a person. It's shorthand for "Roe vs. Wade", the landmark 1973 Supreme Court case that legalized the practice of abortion.

Just sayin'. Carry on.

quote:

Your post exhibits one of the parallels quite nicely. Americans once made a distinction between black people in free states and black people in slave states. You make the same distinction between lives "OUTSIDE" the womb and those still in it. In both cases it is the location of an individual that determined their right to be free.

http://www.blackgenocide.org/home.html

quote:


ORIGINAL: P31W

SuspenseWriter,

quote:

Um..."RvW" aren't the initals of a person. It's shorthand for "Roe vs. Wade", the landmark 1973 Supreme Court case that legalized the practice of abortion.

Just sayin'. Carry on.

Shew thanks SuspenseWriter! You have no idea what was going through my mind! I was as lost as a besty bug over the idea that "I" was suppose to "witness" the murder and call the authorities! ROFL

quote:

ljmac,

quote:

Your post exhibits one of the parallels quite nicely. Americans once made a distinction between black people in free states and black people in slave states. You make the same distinction between lives "OUTSIDE" the womb and those still in it. In both cases it is the location of an individual that determined their right to be free.

http://www.blackgenocide.org/home.html

I notice he makes that distinction as well. (I would add to your last sentence the word "right to life or live"

adelphi_sky and Tracydoll,

I am blocking both of you. Maybe this time it will stick.

quote:

ORIGINAL: blessedinnyc

Paul was smart enough to realize that human beings can't control all of the sin in the world. The most we can do is control the sin in our own hearts, control the sin in the church, and then focus on the more important stuff- fulfill the great comission by loving our neighbors as ourselves.

Why don't we work on that part, instead? Instead of campaigning for the angriest anti-abortion advocate, why not work on helping young women get adoptions? Which would you think exemplifies the fruit of the spirit more- and the acts of sinful nature less?

quote:

ORIGINAL: legalnicki

quote:

ORIGINAL: blessedinnyc

Paul was smart enough to realize that human beings can't control all of the sin in the world. The most we can do is control the sin in our own hearts, control the sin in the church, and then focus on the more important stuff- fulfill the great comission by loving our neighbors as ourselves.

Why don't we work on that part, instead? Instead of campaigning for the angriest anti-abortion advocate, why not work on helping young women get adoptions? Which would you think exemplifies the fruit of the spirit more- and the acts of sinful nature less?

This is exactly the reason I decided to re-evaluate my voting logic for the last 19 years. I've always voted Republican b/c 1. my parents did and 2. That's what Christians do. When I grew to like GW and his policies less and less, I realized that really, the only reason I really voted Republican was b/c of the abortion issue.

Now, I don't believe that most Republican politicians are truly anti-abortion, or that they really care about the abortion issue other than to what ends their Pro-life positions will lengthen their political careers (consider: both Laura and Barbara Bush are pro-choice - do you really think their husbands are anti-choice?). I think that Republican candidates are merely using the abortion issue as a means to pander to the Evangelicals (with the exception of Huckabee and Keyes, who are obviously genuine in their beliefs), and there is little evidence to support that any of them are truly serious about outlawing abortion. Every 4 years they say they are in order to garner Evangelical support. Even if they were, do we *really* think that we can put a cork back on that bottle when we live in a society that for the most part does not believe the Bible?

For the fight agains abortion, I think a change in tactics is the only way to make a positive change in the reduction of abortions. Rather than throwing money at attempting to make abortion illegal (and dangerous) for those who do not believe that fetuses are anything more than parasitic tissue, I think that we need to combat abortion in a more realistic way be focusing on preventing pregnancy in the first place. Arguing with Bible verses just isn't going to work when you are arguing with people who don't believe that the Bible is any more than a really old storybook.

As far as the "Babies are punishment", honestly that is something that leaders in the church have preached for ages (although, not in so blunt of terms), teaching that girls who don't want to suffer pregancy and premature motherhood are having abortions to avoid the consequences of their actions (punishment), so they can carry on with their "loose" lifestyles. Obviously a baby is not a punishment to someone who wanted one in the first place, but it is easy to understand how forced motherhood would seem to be punishment to someone who doesn't want one at the time. I really just think this was a matter of semantics. Rather than "punishment", Obama should haves referred to babies as a consequence of his daughter's hypothetical mistake.