On Sun, 02 Sep 2007 21:34:14 -0700, Quadibloc <jsavard@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
wrote:
>BOB wrote:
>> DaveInLakeVilla@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Dave in Lake Villa) wrote in news:24714-
>> 46D9C9CA-794@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
>> > Their babies got to have a life and a home . What do aborted babies
>> > get to have because 'mom' thought ***ual 'freedom' / immorality was
>> > more im****tant ?
>> >
>> Non-existance, which is what they had to start with, DavIL.
>>
>> Btw you fool, are you trying to equate freedom with immorality?
>
>If a pregnant woman stands on a bathroom scale, she finds she is
>heavier. So when abortions are performed, they are not performed on
>anything non-existent, or abortion would not be necessary.
>
>Yes, before the woman got pregnant, the unborn child was non-existent.
>So there was a time when the child didn't exist.
>
>So? A year before anyone was born, that person was non-existent. So,
>since we all had non-existence to start with, murdering anyone should
>be legal?
>
>"Freedom" to kill innocent people who are not trying to hurt others,
>how can you equate that, being allowed to violate the rights of
>others, with freedom, where everyone's rights are respected, because
>everyone is equal?
>
>John Savard
Women, what the hell do they need with rights, all they are good for
is having sons to fight for God and country.
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
|
