www.Usenet.com
www.Usenet.com
| <-- __Chronological__ --> | <-- __Thread__ --> |
David V. wrote:
Don Swayser wrote:
David V. wrote:
Don Swayser wrote:Yes, because American girls are killing their unborn babies, so American's who want to adopt are forced
under_the_bridge wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (golddodgearies) wrote
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (under_the_bridge) wrote
My recomendation is to have abortions within the first three months of pregnancy.
Doesn't prove it's not murder, dum-dum. (The parents prove it is.)
It doesn't prove anything. That was just my recommendation.
Is it a greater sin to abort an unwanted fetus,
or to have an unwanted child which you may not financially and personally be able to care for?
Unwanted by whom. There's a long waiting lists for adoptions.
Where? In California most adoptions are coming from overseas.
into it.
That is not true. You really should study up on the topic before you make inane remarks like that.
Perhaps you'd be good enough to explain just what isn't true.
Trying to explain something like that to someone like you would be a waste of time. You already know your statement was false, yet you persist.
Your post implies first that American girls aren't getting abortions
Do this....Since the question is partially concerned with the will of the fetus, it is close to unanswerable. What does the baby want? A similar question is one of euthanasia. Should we kill poor people if their lives are miserable?
Seems two entirely different situations. If a chile[sic] is unwanted it should be surrendered
for adoption....
How are you going to adopt over a million babies a year?
You didn't answer the question. An internet search is not going to get over a million babies adopted, nor will it point to a solution.
You're the one who stated thatthere are not enough children available in this country to meet the demand for adoption.
Non-repsonsive aren't you?We are free to make choices. Should murder be legal? The death penalty is. The fetus, if it feels itself to be murdered, simply has no recourse. But then, killing a killer is not
much recourse in my opinion. Two wrongs do not
make a right. All you do when you "punish"
someone is destroy not one, but two people.
Falacious[sic] premise and conclusion drawn from it. You (society) don't destroy two people. The killer has destroyed one. Destroying the destroyer prevent him or her from destroying another human life. That's the principal justification for the death penalty.
No, it isn't. Revenge is the main goal of capital punishment.
Then why isn't Susan Smith and Andrea Yates on death row?
Revenge. Duh!
The study this. http://www.jointogether.org/gv/news/summaries/reader/0,2061,546256,00.htmlAnother is deterence[sic]....
It isn't a deterrent.
Oh? How do you know.
By having studied the subject.
The U.S. mrder rate is lower than at any time since the death penalty was banned.
| <-- __Chronological__ --> | <-- __Thread__ --> |
