*giggles* oh god no! I need to go into hiding before I'm charged... I've aided someone in killing millions of innocent sperm on several occasions. I'm a serial killer *gasp*
Me too, and in the vilest of ways. LOL! Of course, I had help, suggestions on how to do it, even..........:X Let's see....27 years times......billions baby, billions, trillions......
I think HuckFinn's point was not to compare abortion to naziism but to point out that protecting the lives of zygotes and fetuses because they are 'potential' human beings rests on the same shaky logic as executing Jews and Irishmen because they are 'potential' criminals.
In response to the original query, I could point out that in primeival times the Earth's atmosphere and oceans were likely rich in organic compounds - like the aqtmospheres of Venus and Jupiter - probably a lot of methane and ammonia. It is in this primeival organic soup that the increasingly complex and integrated moleculer structures that we now know as life first evolved. Even simple organic gasses thus contain the potential for life - life from which we have ourselves descended, and we murderously release them to dissapate into the caustic oxygen atmosphere every time we fart.
Huck Finn is a one note poster who has an agenda here and doesn't really wish to be part of the community He does, commonly, compare abortion to the holocaust.
ummm i might believe that if he had like only 10 posts on his profile or if all his posts were against abortion, but he has like over 1000. i took it more as yall werent accepting him into the community because his view of abortion is different. i found this suprising since i thought this type of community would accept all ideas and ways of thinking
No. If you track his posting, you'd see that normally he only responds to thread in which he can copy and paste his prolife propaganda. But he does stray from the abortion/birthcontrol/birthing threads on occassion to bash gay people and sperm donors and people who use invitro fertilization. Sometimes you see him Politics and America Attacks to defend Bush and tell Commies that they are going to hell. If Hipforums was truly an intolerant place for differing beliefs myself and a handful of others would have run out years ago with pitchforks and torches.
If masturbation is killing, it's not cold blooded murder as Libertine stated in the opening post but more a crime of passion
yep yep yep .... and people who think so badly of birth control and abortions should think before they masturbate... or else, drop their ridiculous self-righteous views...
Here's a thought maybe most of you have not pondered: Abortions are likely to be most common in the liberal West, where nations are wealthy, attitudes are relatively in support of choice on abortion, and access to doctors to perform abortions is available with ease for most young women. If we look at global birthrates, the West is at below-replacement -- barring immigration from the Third World (according to the UN, from what I recall). Western countries are only growing with an influx of foreigners -- something historically unprecedented given the ease of transportation due to technological advances. The world is also more interconnected due to the internet and satellite television. What if groups with liberal attitudes on abortion are outreproduced by fanatical, more fundamentalist groups over the long term (over many, many generations)? This is not touching on whether abortion is morally wrong (I am pretty liberal on that). I ask this question because fanatical religious groups breed at a much higher rate, from what I have read. This is particularly relevant, in my view, considering that immigration is much more widespread than ever, and thus assimilation may not occur with the ease that it once used to. Does anyone have any thoughts on this? Addendum: my thought on this is that extreme liberalism can lead to fascism. Liberals tend to be individualistic in personality, and thus my "group" question is anathema to them. Statistically, highly educated women all over the West have less children, from an article I skimmed recently -- and I would assume they'd be among the most liberal. If these women are not having children, this leaves groups that are less liberal producing children -- children likely to be indoctrinated with the beliefs of their parents. I also realized that this question need not be ethnic in nature: White Christians seem to reproduce more than liberal academics, a backbone of this country in terms of intellectual trends (Utah with its Mormonism supposedly has the highest or one of the highest birthrates in the nation -- something I have not checked out, but in any case the reasoning should be considered). Some Americans are likely to shrug their shoulders and think my post as irrelevant, thus showing their true American colors. Many parts of Western Europe are being inundated with rapidly growing Muslim populations: Spain, France, the UK, the Netherlands, etc. Over many, many generations -- since the birthrates of the indigenous peoples are well below-replacement -- the demographics will be significantly altered (it's not a question if current trends do not change). Even in America, though, different groups have different levels of fundamentalism, and immigrant groups are, statistically, more likely to interpret the Bible literally -- they, incidentally, are outreproducing educated liberals.