Vatican attacks US abortion move

page: 32
9
<< 29  30  31    33  34  35 >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 17 2009 @ 09:22 AM
link   
post by Annee
 




I always respect your posts Don. My daughter was working at age 13 doing telemarketing for an insurance company - she has always worked - always supported herself. She never went on public aid - as family helped with the baby. She met her boyfriend when they were 16 at a bible camp (her choice to be involved in church). They were together six years - until she began to out grow him. She always had menstrual problems and was told at an early age it would be impossible to conceive - so she did not use birth control. Miracles happen in those last ditch effort get togethers.



I along with almost everyone I ever met respects and admires anyone who can accomplish what your daughter has. I like to remind though, that the person she has become is due 90% to the parents! Good genes, good examples in front of the child.

I worked in the legal business in KY and I now live in FL. But I departed KY in 1990 so most of what I knew then has probably been changed. Because child support is considered an on-going obligation until the child attains 18, KY has no statute of limitations on claims for child support. After the child turns 18, then a statute would limit the time, I believe because it is a civil matter, the limit in KY is 5 years. Although every state can be different, most states are very similar.

The cost of DNA is much reduced from what it once was. I would not be surprised to learn that a paternity only test for the mother and child could be done for $300 each. Now, that does not get you into court because you still need the father to submit to the DNA test. Or his mother or his sibling. My point is, for less than $1,500 I think you could have the evidence you need to win the case. (You would have to pay the DNA person an expert witness fee to testify on your daughter’s behalf in court).

KY has a statute that if the parent who pays falls behind by $5,000 it is a felony punishable up to 5 years in the pen. I worked on a case where a medical doctor refused to pay and the past due support equaled over $300,000. He got the 5 years, and after a couple days, wanted out. KY has a first time offender release available after 6 months. He applied and was told he must bring $150,000 in cash to the courtroom if he wanted out. He had 2 Brinks guards bring the money and the judge let him out, with the ex-wife’s consent, and warned him, that if he missed ONE more payment, he - the judge - would revoke his probation - for 5 years - and return him to prison to pull the FULL sentence. He paid.




Those are the facts. She still has not received a dime. But - his mother is a wonderful person - - and my daughter made sure he spend summers with his dad's family - AND got to know his dad. Do not punish the child.

DNA testing for Paternity needs to be mandatory - as does child support from the non-custodial parent - no matter what their gender. Those men who are all angry they got screwed by the woman - - need to start supporting mandatory DNA testing. When they begin to understand it is Everyone's problem - - then maybe I'll have some compassion.***** the child should never be allowed to be used as a pawn.



I lay the problem to immaturity. It is almost always the man. It is why 18 is old enough to be a soldier but not old enough to drink. Physical maturity is not emotional maturity, necessarily. I don’t think that will ever change. So we will always have this problem. But I do agree, not only for paternity, but for other diseases or defects that can be detected in DNA testing, I think it is a great thing. Say “Hello” to your daughter, and pat her parents on the back!




posted on Feb, 17 2009 @ 09:45 AM
link   
reply to post by Aermacchi
 




Hey Don it isn't easy being a Christian so why should we give the time of day to someone like you who doesn't even try much less ever asked the lord into your heart. The FACT is their [there] ARE things God cannot do and sinning is one of them he cannot be where sin is.



NOT easy to be a Christian? Hmm? They sit in leather covered soft padded opera seats, 15,000 in an auditorium. Air cooled with humidly added back. They have a 10,000 watts sound system and a drop down tv screen large enough it would make SONY blush! Buses to haul them to the outer reaches of an 8,000 car parking lot? And 20 armed cops to KEEP THE HOMELESS off the property! Sounds pretty E A S Y to be a Christian to me.

Now, do you want to see a REAL MIRACLE? Vicar of Christ Pope Benedict XVI names 100 women to wear the Cardinal's hat! B16 renames the HRCC the NUCC! A NEW UNITED Catholic Church. Now that’s the way to enter the third millennia! With a married clergy, women ordained, and declaring extra good people just that, EXTRA good! And not to fake miracles to become a “saint” as has already happened to Mother Teresa. Get a life! This is 2009 not 1009!


[edit on 2/17/2009 by donwhite]



posted on Feb, 17 2009 @ 10:05 AM
link   
Adding discipline to a person's life never makes it easier. Ask someone in boot camp. Anyway, not sure what 'ease' has to do with abortion...other than it seems to be the case that it is easier to kill a baby than to raise her/him. Being a Christian and/or a parent takes discipline, neither are taking the easy way out.

[edit on 17-2-2009 by saint4God]



posted on Feb, 17 2009 @ 10:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by DuneKnight
if I ate from McDonalds and got really fat, then I'm the one whos responsible not McDonalds.


Mc Donalds is male.

Obviously an IVF - kind of thing.



posted on Feb, 17 2009 @ 11:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by donwhite
The cost of DNA is much reduced from what it once was. I would not be surprised to learn that a paternity only test for the mother and child could be done for $300 each. Now, that does not get you into court because you still need the father to submit to the DNA test. Or his mother or his sibling. My point is, for less than $1,500 I think you could have the evidence you need to win the case. (You would have to pay the DNA person an expert witness fee to testify on your daughter’s behalf in court).


A single young mother has $1,500? But - not the point.

Any way you look at it - - responsibility is being dumped solely on the Woman. She's doing everything she can to take care and provide for her child - sometimes working 2 jobs. While the man is just off doing. Not only does she not have the money - she probably suffers from lack of sleep - energy - and time.

By nature we know who the mother is - - so she can not escape it. Paternity is Paternity - - and now that we have DNA testing - by law it should be mandatory. There is no way "personal freedom" from DNA testing should be allowed to protect anyone from the responsibility of a child. Testing should be mandatory & federally funded - even if the man has to repay the costs to the government. Man is the one not taking responsibility for creating a child.

If Man knew there was no escaping his responsibility of getting a woman pregnant - - he might think twice - - and use extra protection. We wouldn't be hearing "it doesn't feel natural using a condom".

Male immaturity? Sorry but that is being sexist. In the majority of cases the man is still older then the woman.

As my husband says: "hoo hoo in woo woo without a raincoat - owns it"

-------------------------------

So Yes! Woman is in charge of womb - - and whether to keep or not.

This is one law that we got right.



posted on Feb, 17 2009 @ 11:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by saint4God
Adding discipline to a person's life never makes it easier. Ask someone in boot camp. Anyway, not sure what 'ease' has to do with abortion...other than it seems to be the case that it is easier to kill a baby than to raise her/him. Being a Christian and/or a parent takes discipline, neither are taking the easy way out.

[edit on 17-2-2009 by saint4God]


I've been a Christian - am a mother/grandmother - and had an abortion.

The only easy thing was stepping away from religion - - because it puts a padlock on the brain.


[edit on 17-2-2009 by Annee]



posted on Feb, 17 2009 @ 11:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by Annee
Paternity is Paternity - - and now that we have DNA testing - by law it should be mandatory.


Amendment: If no man is willing to assume responsibility of being the father.

I agree otherwise. Rare though it may be, there are men who will say, "I'll be the dad whether genetically it's me or not".


Originally posted by Annee
There is no way "personal freedom" from DNA testing should be allowed to protect anyone from the responsibility of a child.


We agree here.


Originally posted by Annee
If Man knew there was no escaping his responsibility of getting a woman pregnant - - he might think twice - - and use extra protection.


You think? Maybe there are men out there that think this far ahead, though I'd guess that the majority does not. It's the 'squirrelly' ones we're trying to catch, not the ones who know how to plan for the future. I hope your right though.


Originally posted by Annee
Male immaturity? Sorry but that is being sexist. In the majority of cases the man is still older then the woman.


Older does not mean more mature.


Originally posted by Annee
So Yes! Woman is in charge of womb - - and whether to keep or not.


My boss is in charge of me, does he have the right to execute me? Is a woman no longer in charge of the baby once it is born?



posted on Feb, 17 2009 @ 11:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by saint4God

Amendment: If no man is willing to assume responsibility of being the father.

I agree otherwise. Rare though it may be, there are men who will say, "I'll be the dad whether genetically it's me or not".



I am obviously not talking about those kind of dads. I'm blanketing one kind - the kind that abandons the woman/child.

My best friend in high school who was Sicilian had a blond sister. The sister was from an affair her mother had. Her father divorced the wife - but kept ALL the kids as his own.

I do live in the real world - - not an idealistic cave.

RIGHT OF CHOICE - - belongs to the woman - - and is one of the fairest laws we've ever enacted.



posted on Feb, 17 2009 @ 12:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by saint4God


Originally posted by Annee
So Yes! Woman is in charge of womb - - and whether to keep or not.


My boss is in charge of me, does he have the right to execute me? Is a woman no longer in charge of the baby once it is born?


He can fire you.

I'd suggest a woman who chose to birth the baby - - choose adoption.



posted on Feb, 17 2009 @ 12:17 PM
link   
I love how you generalize and associate everything to justify your point of view on this subject, but my dear I must truly thank you since you have demonstrated in all your posts everything I been discussing about the erosion of our societies morals.

I believe that you are sincere in your writings and I also believe your beliefs are not uncommon in society today. When you say…



How about we make a law saying that men can't masturbate anymore because when they do the sperm that dies is killing millions of potential people?

Same difference.


I understand that you believe abortions are a form of birth control that is much like using rubbers or the Pill to prevent births. This is something many of us posting here against abortions have been saying over and over, and this view has been caused by 30 years or propaganda from extreme orgs.

The reason why there are so many abortions in America is because of this attitude. 90% plus of abortions are decided on based on this attitude that it is a form of birth control, and in most states a free form, so the government supports this view.

Have any of you pro choice ever thought that just maybe those that want you to have abortions are making big bucks off of tax payers?

So something that should be a very rare event after exhausting all other avenues has become a big money making machine encouraging women to use it as a first choice birth control. The illogic that a growing baby in a womb is a “thing” and then magically becomes a loved child at birth shows just how far our society has fallen due to greed.

Money and connivance is now greater than life itself!!

Societies throughout history have justified every form of horrent behavior and thought. Even as Plato, one of our greatest minds in history, pondered and created the foundations of ethics he had slave boys to take care of all his needs. We have also in America reach the point where we have justified the taking of an innocent life, and give it little thought to the ethical side of it, much like Plato did in not seeing slavery of innocent children as wrong.



Besides, how can we use logic to discuss the issue when you're supporting female oppression? Women have every right to control what happens to the things growing in/on her.


This shows exactly what I’m talking about…”female oppression”…”things” growing in her”…We have justified the taking of a life by turning that life into a "thing"and putting the connivance of the mother or father over another's right to live. If you told Plato that having slave children was wrong and oppresses them he would look at your as if you were crazy, and say, “they were born into this world as a slave and so they are not equal to freemen, so I do not understand your point….”

Well a fetus is not equal to a person so I do not understand why we can’t kill it at a whim or thought. As I said, societies throughout history have justified everything….



[edit on 17-2-2009 by Xtrozero]



posted on Feb, 17 2009 @ 12:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Annee
I am obviously not talking about those kind of dads. I'm blanketing one kind - the kind that abandons the woman/child.


Okay, fair enough



Originally posted by Annee
He can fire you.

I'd suggest a woman who chose to birth the baby - - choose adoption


I guess in this world of hard-heartedness, this would be a better approach rather than execution. At least in this case the child has a chance and a hope of having a mother who has an ounce of compassion.



posted on Feb, 17 2009 @ 12:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Annee


I am obviously not talking about those kind of dads. I'm blanketing one kind - the kind that abandons the woman/child.



When a woman has an abortion is she not abandoning her child in the most heinous way possible? I find your posts rather hypocritical. I as others hold the mother and father both responsible for child, and if you don’t, then you can’t put responsibility on the dad when you condone the mother to remove her responsibilities with an abortion.



posted on Feb, 17 2009 @ 12:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by saint4God

I guess in this world of hard-heartedness, this would be a better approach rather than execution. At least in this case the child has a chance and a hope of having a mother who has an ounce of compassion.


In my belief - physical is only a creation. Soul energy is my natural state. If a soul energy chooses to have a physical experience with me - - and I determine I am not ready to provide that soul energy with the experience it is looking for - - uncreating physical is the right and positive thing to do for that soul energy. Giving it opportunity to choose a different host.

Yes - of course you are going to bring up murder. That would be uncreating a soul energy already in its created physical experience - - thus terminating its experience before completion.

Your personally chosen graphic verbiage meant to alarm - - comes from your belief system - - having no meaning to me.



posted on Feb, 17 2009 @ 12:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by Annee
Your personally chosen graphic verbiage ... having no meaning to me.


Case in point. Thank you.


Originally posted by saint4God
...in this world of hard-heartedness...the child has a chance and a hope of having a mother who has an ounce of compassion.


[edit on 17-2-2009 by saint4God]



posted on Feb, 17 2009 @ 12:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by Annee

In my belief - physical is only a creation. Soul energy is my natural state. If a soul energy chooses to have a physical experience with me - - and I determine I am not ready to provide that soul energy with the experience it is looking for - - uncreating physical is the right and positive thing to do for that soul energy. Giving it opportunity to choose a different host.


Hmm rather vague...

So since it is your decision in joining physically with another soul energy why does the father need to have any responsibility at all? Should his responsibility be a choice too?

You also suggest that the physical being growing in your belly has its soul energy already, and so is it not already in the physical world at the beginning of its life cycle? If this is the case then can I decide that any physical soul energy walking around to not interact with them by ending their physical existence?



posted on Feb, 17 2009 @ 12:46 PM
link   
reply to post by Annee
 




By nature we know who the mother is - - so she can not escape it. Paternity is Paternity - - and now that we have DNA testing - by law it should be mandatory. There is no way "personal freedom" from DNA testing should be allowed to protect anyone from the responsibility of a child. Testing should be mandatory & federally funded - even if the man has to repay the costs to the government. Man is the one not taking responsibility for creating a child.

If Man knew there was no escaping his responsibility of getting a woman pregnant - - he might think twice - - and use extra protection. We wouldn't be hearing "it doesn't feel natural using a condom".



As a proposition I have no quarrel with taking the mother's and baby's DNA as soon as practical. And of course if the father is present, his too. Don't forget those instances where the man learned he was NOT the father only at a divorce. I think it is asking too much of a man who had been cuckolded to ignore that and continue to love "his" children. So prompt DNA nay not be all UP side. But as a LAW, I'd support it. And at public expense, too.



posted on Feb, 17 2009 @ 01:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by donwhite

As a proposition I have no quarrel with taking the mother's and baby's DNA as soon as practical. And of course if the father is present, his too. Don't forget those instances where the man learned he was NOT the father only at a divorce. I think it is asking too much of a man who had been cuckolded to ignore that and continue to love "his" children. So prompt DNA nay not be all UP side. But as a LAW, I'd support it. And at public expense, too.


Yes Don - - I absolutely support the reverse in absolving responsibility too.

I also know there have been cases where the judge made decisions to the welfare of the child. Where the man proven not to be the biological father - was deemed the only father the child had known. But - - I'm trying not to go too far off topic.

If law was changed to determine absolute paternity and immediate responsibility - - - there might be less unplanned pregnancies - - and less need for abortion.

Until then - - Right of Choice is 100% right of woman.



posted on Feb, 17 2009 @ 01:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by saint4God

Originally posted by Annee
Your personally chosen graphic verbiage ... having no meaning to me.



Oh No you don't. No partial - out of context quotes.

Original full quote: "Your personally chosen graphic verbiage meant to alarm - - comes from your belief system - - having no meaning to me."



posted on Feb, 17 2009 @ 01:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Annee
Oh No you don't. No partial - out of context quotes.

Original full quote: "Your personally chosen graphic verbiage meant to alarm - - comes from your belief system - - having no meaning to me."


Saying that it comes from my belief system is a gross and incorrect assumption. My assessment comes from the 5th grade science class definition of when life begins (I can quote it again if you like and had before on this thread for those following along). Even quoting your statement in full, my statement stands. It is not out of context whatsoever.

[edit on 17-2-2009 by saint4God]



posted on Feb, 17 2009 @ 01:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by saint4God

Originally posted by Annee
Oh No you don't. No partial - out of context quotes.

Original full quote: "Your personally chosen graphic verbiage meant to alarm - - comes from your belief system - - having no meaning to me."


Saying that it comes from my belief system is a gross and incorrect assumption. My assessment comes from the 5th grade science class definition of when life begins (I can quote it again if you like and had before on this thread for those following along). Even quoting your statement in full, my statement stands. It is not out of context whatsoever.

[edit on 17-2-2009 by saint4God]


Again - - it comes from your belief system.

As my belief comes from my belief system.

How does your science fit my belief that physical is a creation. Thought creates - nothing exists but thought. Physical is for an experience.

Life? What is life? Your belief is life is a physical gob of tissue - nerves - etc.

Life to me is the soul energy intelligence. Like putting batteries into a toy to make it go.

A physical gob without the batteries is not life.



top topics
 
9
<< 29  30  31    33  34  35 >>

log in

join