Ask the nuns and priests who ran the orphanages and convents in Ireland where recently over 900 corpses of babies and children were found buried. I'd like to know, too.
Dude, your post is way too reasonable for this thread. You are in danger of throwing it way off balance!
How do you reconcile your support for free speech while at the same time suggesting those who disagree with you should be sent to re-education schools? Just wondering...
I disagree. That's like saying your personally opposed to slavery but it's alright if someone else does it. A person is either for the murder of innocent children or they aren't. - - - Updated - - - I'm glad to see the pro abortion crowd being viewed as what they are. Barbaric.
once consciousness enter the shell known as a body, you become a person, before that time the shell is just a glob of cells that may one day become a person... women are not baby making machines that can be forced to have babies by the government, if they choose to create a baby, I support them in that choice "I'm glad to see the pro abortion crowd being viewed as what they are." the anti-choice crowd turns to lies rather then the truth again I see..... .
Not true by any stretch. It is a human being in the first stage of development. I agree. Who couldn't agree with that. They simply shouldn't be able to murder their child.
I tend to agree with this http://www.slate.com/id/2120872/ "a member of President Bush's Council on Bioethics, describes in his book The Ethical Brain, current neurology suggests that a fetus doesn't possess enough neural structure to harbor consciousness until about 26 weeks, when it first seems to react to pain. Before that, the fetal neural structure is about as sophisticated as that of a sea slug and its EEG as flat and unorganized as that of someone brain-dead."
It doesn't say anything as to whether or not it's a person. At any rate, a person who is brain dead is still a person. The same goes with a baby.
It was a private event as they had to get a permit to be there. You would know this if you actually watched and listened to the video.
Right, they needed a permit to hold their protest. However, their permit didn't give them permission to block the area (it's Capital Hill). But that's beside the fact that the Tea Party people chose to beat up this poor fellow. Is this a common reaction from the Tea Party?
How does having a permit to hold an event for a few hours "block the area"? He tried walking through people to get his shots in. They kicked him out. He was hardly "beat" nor a "poor fellow". He went to a private event and got kicked out nothing more and nothing less.
