Women on Waves

[Gość: awalk]

www.womenonwaves.org/index_pol.html
Well, what do you think?

[Gość: brookie]

Abortion should be legal in Poland and that's the first thing.The sooner we
get rid of catholic fanatics the better for everyone, especially for that poor
women relaying on that crap sheep and it's crew. Poland is still in diapers if
comes to women's rights of making choices in different things, not mention
abortion. Women should decide about that because they breed. That's their body
and they decide about that.

[Gość: awalk]

Yes brookie, just look at this map www.womenonwaves.org/pol/pol_laws.html We are the red dot in the middle of the white, and then of course Africa and all undeveloped countries. Perhaps we should join African Union instead, we wouldn't be so lonely. At school I learnt that Poland was once the last bastion, the last frontier between civilized, and then Christian, Europe and Asian infidels. We have been very proud of that fact since. We haven't noticed though that the times have changed and Europe is not that Christian anymore. But here in Poland the faith and religion still requires us to sacrifice our women's lives. Amen!

[Gość: brookie]

Oh bhoy! Our mother land, red eagle on the white map of civilization.
And the majority of the nation proud of making Poland more visible.
Polish and African women have lots in common then, that's shocking!
In that case rapists must not forget of providing comdoms, or maybe every
potential victim should have one just in case. Catholic Church don't mind to
welcome some fresh bastards.
Cheers awalk

[glory]

And Brookie, you forgot one thing. To say amen.
In Holland abortion is legal and it doesn't mean increasing of abortion
procedures, because contraseptive products are available like milk or pot.
No one is concerned about the religion wise,that means, less people stressed
out and more people having free choices if comes to procreation.
Can I say amen now? Sorry, I've already said that at the begining.
Brookie and Awalk, this time I agree with you guys.

[Gość: brookie]

I forgot to mention about Australia. It's marked yellow which means abortion
is legal if comes to mental health. Everyone in Australia has mental problems
( English people shouldn't have sent that amount of freaks to Australia ).
But as far as I know, pregnant woman complaining about the depresion has the
chance to do abortion legally. And many women give birth every year just to
recieve the family assistance. They don't have desire to work, but that's
their choice of living. The thing is that they are able to make a choice.
They think it's fine to gain extra 20 kilos, but they don't have to worry
about work in the next 16 years. After that time they apply for a pension.

[glory]

Yes, I agree with you brookie. Comparing to you, those Aussie chicks look like
100 years old elephants. And further more, I think you're right. England
really sent too many idiots to Australia. But than again, who cares!

[glory]

And I forgot to buy Jim Beam on special. And I FORGOT to go to work today!
And what did you people forget today?.
What did I say? I forgot about Jim Beam?
On SPECIAL?.
No way !!!.
No way,yyyyy wait. I must not panic!
Jim Beam, I'm not forgetting about you friend. I'm on my way .

[Gość: awalk]

Gość portalu: brookie napisał(a):

>... And many women give birth every year just to
> recieve the family assistance. They don't have desire to work, but that's
> their choice of living. The thing is that they are able to make a choice.
> They think it's fine to gain extra 20 kilos, but they don't have to worry
> about work in the next 16 years. After that time they apply for a pension.

The only assistance you get in Poland is when they throw you out with your children into the street. It is called eviction but unlike abortion it is absolutely legal.

[Gość: brookie]

Eviction with a young children, that sounds familiar in polish environment.
And where are the catholics right now? Prying for some lost souls?

"As the snow flies,
On the cold and grey CHicago moan

The little baby child is born in the ghetto,
And his momma cries
Couse there's one thing she don't need
Is another hungry mouth to feed in the ghetto"
As The King Elvis said.
And you awalk, come to Australia, we're inviting you!
Let us know! You're always welcome!

[Gość: brookie]

"We can't go on together
When suspicious minds,
And we can't build the bridge
On suspicious minds"

[Gość: Eve]

Clever though you seem to be you forget one undeniable fact (not belief,
opinion or whatever you may call it) : ABORTION IS KILLING OF A HUMAN BEING.
Not an embryo , not a foetus , not a number of cells but A BABY. It is out of
the question. All biologists will tell you so. Now the question arises : Do
you approve of killing people? Then why not two-year olds? Can't you understand
they are babies before you see them. Seeing is believing?

/NB. I'm pretty sure, you protest against cruelty towards animals, advocate
vegetarianism 'cause it's so unhumane. Most pro-abortionists think this way and
they cannot see how riduculous it is to treat animals better than people/

As for women's rights. Our bellies belong to us but only if and until no baby
is there. Then it's my life and freedom versus another PERSON's life.

to eve

[Gość: sleepy]

eve has said, "Not an embryo , not a foetus , not a number of cells but A
BABY. ... All biologists will tell you so."
well, eve, 'baby' is not exactly a biological term. it is a word that is loaded
with a variety of emotions, and you use it for purely persuasive ends, godska
eve!

[Gość: Eve]

Gość portalu: sleepy napisał(a):

> eve has said, "Not an embryo , not a foetus , not a number of cells but A
> BABY. ... All biologists will tell you so."
> well, eve, 'baby' is not exactly a biological term. it is a word that is
loaded
>
> with a variety of emotions, and you use it for purely persuasive ends,
godska
> eve!

O.K. Let's call them Human Beings or People. I used the word "babies" only to
avoid repetitions. What I mean is evident if you read the beginning of my
letter.

[Gość: Eve]

Clever though you seem to be you forget one undeniable fact (not belief,
opinion or whatever you may call it) : ABORTION IS KILLING OF A HUMAN BEING.
Not an embryo , not a foetus , not a number of cells but A BABY. It is out of
the question. All biologists will tell you so. Now the question arises : Do
you approve of killing people? Then why not two-year olds? Can't you understand
they are babies before you see them. Seeing is believing?

/NB. I'm pretty sure, you protest against cruelty towards animals, advocate
vegetarianism 'cause it's so unhumane. Most pro-abortionists think this way and
they cannot see how riduculous it is to treat animals better than people/

As for women's rights. Our bellies belong to us but only if and until no baby
is there. Then it's my life and freedom versus another PERSON's life.

[Gość: chickenShorts]

Gość portalu: Eve napisał(a):

> Clever though you seem to be you forget one undeniable fact (not belief,
> opinion or whatever you may call it) : ABORTION IS KILLING OF A HUMAN BEING.

Well, at the risk of being a pedant, I' d suggest insertion of a
word 'possible' between 'KILLING' and 'HUMAN' and then I'd ask you for a
definition of the latter because it all depends on the timing... in my opinion.

(...)"The developing brain and nervous system

The brain begins as a hollow tube. Neurons are generated along the outer walls
of this tube and then travel to their proper locations in three stages:

Cell production between 10-26 weeks after conception. Cells are generated at a
rate of 250,000per minute in the foetal brain"(...)

psychology.unn.ac.uk/marion/webdevptl%20files%5Cdev%20lec02.htm

> Not an embryo , not a foetus , not a number of cells but A BABY.

Again, being emotional doesn't help. Stop shouting. Are you suggesting that a
lump of living tissue without any nervous system is a human being? Appears to
be just that before, to be absolutely sure, the 10th week...

> It is out of
> the question. All biologists will tell you so.

Can you substantiate this? A meaningful link, perhaps?

>Now the question arises : Do
> you approve of killing people?

No! Never!

>Then why not two-year olds? Can't you understand
>
> they are babies before you see them. Seeing is believing?

Why, having started so nicely, do you have to talk bollocks now?


> /NB. I'm pretty sure, you protest against cruelty towards animals, advocate
> vegetarianism 'cause it's so unhumane. Most pro-abortionists think this way
and
>
> they cannot see how riduculous it is to treat animals better than people/
>
> As for women's rights. Our bellies belong to us but only if and until no baby
> is there. Then it's my life and freedom versus another PERSON's life.

How about a better information & system of care, profesional help instead of
leaving the decision making to idiots with cross as an emblem?

[Gość: Eve]

Gość portalu: chickenShorts napisał(a):

> Gość portalu: Eve napisał(a):
>
> > Clever though you seem to be you forget one undeniable fact (not belief,
> > opinion or whatever you may call it) : ABORTION IS KILLING OF A HUMAN BEIN
> G.
>
> Well, at the risk of being a pedant, I' d suggest insertion of a
> word 'possible' between 'KILLING' and 'HUMAN' and then I'd ask you for a
> definition of the latter because it all depends on the timing... in my
opinion.

Am I to understand that you prefer those with a red star symbol?
Congratulations! Now everything is clear! You must be aware of the fact that
LENIN ( you do respect HIM, don't you?) who the first to legalise abortion.

>
>
> (...)"The developing brain and nervous system
>
> The brain begins as a hollow tube. Neurons are generated along the outer
walls
> of this tube and then travel to their proper locations in three stages:
>
> Cell production between 10-26 weeks after conception. Cells are generated at
a
> rate of 250,000per minute in the foetal brain"(...)
>
> psychology.unn.ac.uk/marion/webdevptl%20files%5Cdev%20lec02.htm
>
> > Not an embryo , not a foetus , not a number of cells but A BABY.
>
> Again, being emotional doesn't help. Stop shouting. Are you suggesting that a
> lump of living tissue without any nervous system is a human being? Appears to
> be just that before, to be absolutely sure, the 10th week...
>
> > It is out of
> > the question. All biologists will tell you so.
>
> Can you substantiate this? A meaningful link, perhaps?
>
> >Now the question arises : Do
> > you approve of killing people?
>
> No! Never!
>
> >Then why not two-year olds? Can't you understand
> >
> > they are babies before you see them. Seeing is believing?
>
> Why, having started so nicely, do you have to talk bollocks now?
>
>
> > /NB. I'm pretty sure, you protest against cruelty towards animals, advocat
> e
> > vegetarianism 'cause it's so unhumane. Most pro-abortionists think this wa
> y
> and
> >
> > they cannot see how riduculous it is to treat animals better than people/
> >
> > As for women's rights. Our bellies belong to us but only if and until no b
> aby
> > is there. Then it's my life and freedom versus another PERSON's life.
>
> How about a better information & system of care, profesional help instead of
> leaving the decision making to idiots with cross as an emblem?
>

[Gość: chickenShorts]

Gość portalu: Eve napisał(a):

> Am I to understand that you prefer those with a red star symbol?
> Congratulations! Now everything is clear! You must be aware of the fact that
> LENIN ( you do respect HIM, don't you?) who the first to legalise abortion.

Is that the only level you can ascend to with your crushing counter-argument?
I think you are a troll & talking to you is a waste of time...

pro-abortionists, unite!

[Gość: sleepy]

to all you pro-abortionist women and men posting here: you will all go to hell,
so help me zeus, or bacchus... ;)

i can only wish i can meet you there with a keg of a good lager, to celebrate
the victory of free choice and reason....

but hell, what are we going to do with all these hypocritical pralates in black
and purple one or two floors below us?

cheers!

[glory]

Sleepy!
With that keg of lager I'm with you!
I hope you have some hidden dozen of whiskey? If you do, you're my man.

[glory]

Very serious and touching subject!
I've got only one question.
When the heart starts bitting?.

[butter_fly]

glory napisał:

> Very serious and touching subject!
> I've got only one question.
> When the heart starts bitting?.

That's exactly what I'd like to know... Just one little change: When does the
heart start BEATING?

glory come on, this was funny (remeber fish can bite, heart can beat - or can't
it?)

[glory]

Butter_fly, thanks for correcting me. Fish can bite, o yes sir!
Once I was pulling a big motherfucker shark. We managed to do it. The monster
was already on a deck. He looked quite dead. Quite- and that was my mistake.
I was kissing his nose for the photo picture and shark suddenly decided that
he wasn't dead yet and he bit me. But I'm telling you what, my head stucked
inside of his jaw and thanks to my drunken friend I still got my head. He used
a hammer to bit the crap out of that beast. Anyway, to make a long story short
shark was cut into fillets and grilled with egzotic spieces and washed down
with italian Chantii.
From now on, sharks don't fuck around with Glory.

[Gość: chickenShorts]

sln.fi.edu/biosci/heart.html
www.doc.ic.ac.uk/~gzy/heart/heart/embryo.htm
Nobody here is advocating abortion, OK? We are talking about the rights of
women (& parents) & choice... Pro-choice!!!

[Gość: brookie]

I'm pro-choice too, but what can be done to give a choice?
I can't get it. Let's say for example, abortion is legal but it's not about
killing but about the choice. What choice do I have when abortion is not legal?

Life defending catholics!

[chickenshorts]

"Every year the Pope kills tens, possibly hundreds of thousands of the world's
most vulnerable people by the simple expedient of forbidding Catholics to use
condoms. While his imprecations are dismissed by most churchgoers in the First
World as a load of papal bull, in countries in which there is little access to
alternative sources of information and in which women have few rights, every
papal decree against contraception sentences thousands to a lingering death.

There's no question that the Pope sympathises with the victims of AIDS. In
Italy he has hugged AIDS patients in public. In San Francisco, he kissed an HIV-
positive baby. He has urged sufferers to "feel Jesus at your side, and through
your hope bear witness to the life-giving power of his Cross." Unfortunately,
however, he has exercised the power of the cross only to spread death.

Teaching people about safe sex, the Vatican says, is "a dangerous and immoral
policy based on the deluded theory that the condom can provide adequate
protection against AIDS." Sex education, "above all in relation to the spread
of AIDS" is an "abuse". In 1995, when a French bishop suggested that people
infected with HIV should use condoms, the Pope promptly sacked him. Last month
the Vatican used its seat at the UN General Assembly (where, preposterously, it
has national status) to disrupt, yet again, the UN's family planning and AIDS
prevention programmes.

There are 122 million Catholics in Africa. Whenever the Pope visits them he
explains that the only acceptable form of family planning is strict sexual
abstinence. He told the Nigerians that exploiting the poor and ignorant is "a
crime against God's work." But every year he exploits the poor and ignorant by
preaching against the condom.

Many of Africa's Catholic bishops know that the Pope's position is absurd, and
quietly, privately, they have tried to undermine it. But they are also keenly
aware that, unlike dioceses in prosperous countries, they are almost entirely
dependent on the Vatican for funding. They know that they and their churches
will survive only if, in public, they do precisely as they are told. So in
Zambia, Malawi, Kenya, Tanzania and Uganda, some of the countries with the
biggest AIDS problems on earth, prominent bishops have insisted that condoms
should not be worn. Some, who share the Pope's views, go further, and suggest
that condoms spread AIDS by selectively leaking the virus.

Every time the bishops speak out, they reverse years of awareness raising
(often, paradoxically, by Catholic charities and local churches) about AIDS and
how to prevent it. Men looking for an excuse to practice unsafe sex seize on
the Church's teachings. People who do use condoms deny it, ensuring that the
safe sex message spreads more slowly than the disease."

www.monbiot.com/dsp_article.cfm?article_id=329

[Gość: awalk]

A very good article. The problem is that Polish people are unaware of such views, and our media feed them with carefully prepared, censored and distorted information.

For example our media and most people in Poland don't see anything wrong in showing the cross (with a tortured, bloodied, dying man - nailed to it) to young children; at the same time they are against scenes of violence on television!

[Gość: Jim]

Make war not sex and kill all pro-choice activists!

[Gość: Anna]

W życiu nie słyszałam większych bzdur. Bardzo logiczny ten Twój wywodzik
Chicken shorts ( co to u licha znaczy i czy ma jakąś płeć).
Jeśli ktoś jest tak katolicki, że słucha Papieża w kwestii kondomów, powinien
Go tym bardziej słuchać, gdy mówi o miłości, wierności i odpowiedzialności.
Jeśli ktoś śpi z kim popadnie , trudno go chyba uznać za prawowiernego
katolika. A w takim razie dlaczego miałby nie stosować prezerwatyw czy czego
tam sobie chce?

[Gość: awalk]

Gość portalu: Anna napisał(a):

> W życiu nie słyszałam większych bzdur. Bardzo logiczny ten Twój wywodzik
> Chicken shorts ( co to u licha znaczy i czy ma jakąś płeć).
> Jeśli ktoś jest tak katolicki, że słucha Papieża w kwestii kondomów, powinien
> Go tym bardziej słuchać, gdy mówi o miłości, wierności i odpowiedzialności.
> Jeśli ktoś śpi z kim popadnie , trudno go chyba uznać za prawowiernego
> katolika. A w takim razie dlaczego miałby nie stosować prezerwatyw czy czego
> tam sobie chce?

another troll :)

[Gość: jane]

be pro-life not pro-choice

[Gość: Pio]

glory napisał:

> Very serious and touching subject!
> I've got only one question.
> When the heart starts bitting?.
--------------
May I ask yuo if it is your definition of turning nothing into a human being?
Before it this is only a couple of organic cells or fibres?
Nice, really nice...
Nobel-thing is waiting for you, start celebrating.

Pio

oh My Goodness

[Gość: Agnes]

I've just noticed this plot (I think I can call it just like that) and I've
found it very intersting. My mind is divided into two ways of thinking. First
is against abortion - and I'm about to explain it in a sec, second- accepts it -
FULLY. As for me, women have rights to decide about themselves - isn't that
what our grand, grandmother fought for- so ... When I watch TV and watch those
who are protesting against abortion I can see olny men and older women - who
rather won't have children anymore. Nowadays, when we have a look at people
leavig churches, we can see much more older than younger people. Why is that???
Young pepople have changed attitude towards Church which their parents have
been sharing for years. It also means that we do not (cause I young) share
their opinions anymore. We want to make a headway- a huge one. And to do this
we also have to have full, unrestricted rights to decide about our lifes - be
free. No matter if somebody like it or not - abortion is an indivisible part of
our every day choices. So, LET US, WOMEN, DECIDE ON OURSELVES!!!

Above I mentioned the other part of me- that one which do see some obstacles.
Maybe, someone who will read my opinion will say - how stupid she is, she
cannot decide YES or NO. But, let me explain. I'm one of this women who,
despite many trials, cannot have baby. So you can understand that one part of
myself cannot understand when woman, who was blessed by God, does not want to
give the life to her baby. Of course, I would do anything to be in the position
of woman who is about to do or thinking about abortion- cause this would meant
that I am pregnant - But, unfortunately, it was not given to me!

But still I am a feminist and a free, modern woman who wants to decide , to
have right to decide and feel free

Agnes

[Gość: Andy]

Apart from the reasons allowed under Polish Law, why would a woman actually
want to have an abortion?

[Gość: Agnes]

As I wrote before - I don't know why- but it is the matter of choices and
freedom. If something is not allowed more people want to have it , if something
is allowed it is not so attractive anymore.

[Gość: Andy]

I sincerely hope that that is not the only reason a woman would want an abortion
Andy

Gość portalu: Agnes napisał(a):

> As I wrote before - I don't know why- but it is the matter of choices and
> freedom. If something is not allowed more people want to have it , if
something
>
> is allowed it is not so attractive anymore.

[Gość: awalk]

Gość portalu: Andy napisał(a):

> I sincerely hope that that is not the only reason a woman would want an abortion
> Andy
>

Of course not. There are many reasons but the main one is poverty and all its side effects. Have you ever heard about it Andy?

[brookie]

Awalk is right. There are drunk women getting pregnant while having a party,
smoking pot and sleeping around. The future of the babies they breed and
responsibility for them doesn't bother them. What would you say then?

[Gość: Andy]

I would ask the same question to you Brookie. I still believe that people
should take responsibility for their actions. If that's the way they behave
that's their problem, but so is the pregnancy. They should take responsible,
morally wise steps to deal with the situation in the best way possible, which
in my opinion can never be abortion.

[Gość: Andy]

Why can't people write on this forum without making condescending, borderering
on insulting comments - there's no need quote: "Have you ever heard about it
Andy?". I hoped for intelligent debate.
Now, I asked a simple question and the answer you gave Awalk was poverty. So
are you trying to say that a pregnant woman thinks in this way:
'I am pregnant, I cannot carry this child for 9 months, give birth and bring
it up because I can't afford it so I'll just get rid of it - it's better that
way.'
I would guess it's a bit more complicated than just poverty. Adoption is an
alternative, especially in Poland where there is a relatively high proportion
of couples who cannot have babies of their own.
Maybe someone could give a fuller answer?

Gość portalu: awalk napisał(a):

> Gość portalu: Andy napisał(a):
>
> > I sincerely hope that that is not the only reason a woman would want an ab
> ortion
> > Andy
> >
>
> Of course not. There are many reasons but the main one is poverty and all
its s
> ide effects. Have you ever heard about it Andy?

[Gość: chickenShorts]

OK, Andy, can I then ask you to state clearly your position on
legality/illegality of abortion and briefly say why it is so? Then, we can
perhaps discuss things... I, for one, detect 'high moral branch' but no tree
for that branch in your way of arguing.

[butter_fly]

Gość portalu: Andy napisał(a):

> I would guess it's a bit more complicated than just poverty. Adoption is an
> alternative, especially in Poland where there is a relatively high proportion
> of couples who cannot have babies of their own.
> Maybe someone could give a fuller answer?
>

I can't agree more Andy - indeed if Polish law was better it would be easier to
adopt children and there would be fewer unwanted ones. On the other hand it's
not as easy and obvious as it seems. A pregnant woman might have an idea about
her future life and might be ready to agree to 'give the baby away' but once
it's born things might change. I know a young girl who's been a mother for a
few days now, and she unlike many of her girlfriends didn't go for abortion
only because she heard the baby's heart during one of her prenatal examinations.
Her life is extremely difficult now but I don't think she'd decide to give her
daughter away.

Another, more important thing is the level of education in Poland, I mean
sexual education.

And yet another thing is contraception - that should be free.

[Gość: awalk]

Gość portalu: Andy napisał(a):

> Why can't people write on this forum without making condescending, borderering
> on insulting comments - there's no need quote: "Have you ever heard about it
> Andy?".

Andy you deserved it, so be a man and don't complain now.

>I hoped for intelligent debate.
> Now, I asked a simple question and the answer you gave Awalk was poverty. So
> are you trying to say that a pregnant woman thinks in this way:
> 'I am pregnant, I cannot carry this child for 9 months, give birth and bring
> it up because I can't afford it so I'll just get rid of it - it's better that
> way.'

Well I refer you tu butterfly's post. It seems you have grossly oversimplified women's thinking and feelings.

> I would guess it's a bit more complicated than just poverty. Adoption is an
> alternative, especially in Poland where there is a relatively high proportion
> of couples who cannot have babies of their own.

I agree adoption is an alternative but it is legally difficult and time consuming. Here things can also go wrong; not all people are responsible. I refer you to bf again, women are mostly very reluctant to give away their babies, and for a very good reason.

[Gość: Andy]

Are you suggesting Awalk that it's easier for a woman to kill her child than
give it away?
Chickenshorts - I am against abortion for the reason that it is the killing of
human beings.
As for education and free contraception: I doubt whether Poland could afford
free contraception, although it's a good idea. Education is the main problem in
my opinion. The Catholic church must learn that its anti-contraceptive teaching
is causing a large proportion of the problem. They can't have their cake and
eat it.
Polish kids must have a moral and complete sex education and the pill should be
more easily available. Maybe then people would stop using abortion as a
contraceptive which it most clearly is not.

[i.p.freely]

Gość portalu: Andy napisał(a):

> Are you suggesting Awalk that it's easier for a woman to kill her child than
> give it away?
************
Since when clump of cells incapable of sustaining life on its own is a CHILD
my friend? Only in some future day it may become a child, if everything goes
right, that is.

> Chickenshorts - I am against abortion for the reason that it is the killing
of human beings.
***********
You being against abortrion does not bother me. It bothers me when YOU tell ME
that I can not have an aborttion. It bothers me when you impose your misguided
believs on me. If you do not want your wife to have one that's fine with me.
Remember, I am not your wife and I do not share your misguided believes, and I
would like to have a CHOICE my friend.
As far as 'killing of human beings' is concerned let me elighten you, we do it
a lot. Just look around. And here I do not mean sucking out a clump of cells
that some day could have been a human being.


> As for education and free contraception: I doubt whether Poland could afford
> free contraception, although it's a good idea. Education is the main problem
in my opinion. The Catholic church must learn that its anti-contraceptive
teaching is causing a large proportion of the problem. They can't have their
cake and eat it.
> Polish kids must have a moral and complete sex education and the pill should
be more easily available. Maybe then people would stop using abortion as a
> contraceptive which it most clearly is not.
************
You have no argument from me.
Cathlic church and 'intelectual powers' in the corrupt government shoud stay
out of my reproductive life especially that neither is doing a god damned
thing to make it easier to sustain decent life for those already born.

[butter_fly]

I've just heard it on Polish Radio III - modern cotraception is used by just
over 6% of Polish women. Most 16/17 year-old mothers have no idea how the hell
they became mothers!!!! One 16-year-old mother decided she wouldn't go for any
sort of contraception cos that would lead her to losing memory (that's what is
happening to her friend)!!!!!!!

[Gość: Andy]

i.p.freely napisał:

> Gość portalu: Andy napisał(a):
>
> > Are you suggesting Awalk that it's easier for a woman to kill her child th
> an
> > give it away?
> ************
> Since when clump of cells incapable of sustaining life on its own is a CHILD
> my friend? Only in some future day it may become a child, if everything goes
> right, that is.
>
> > Chickenshorts - I am against abortion for the reason that it is the killin
> g
> of human beings.
> ***********
> You being against abortrion does not bother me. It bothers me when YOU tell
ME
> that I can not have an aborttion. It bothers me when you impose your
misguided
> believs on me. If you do not want your wife to have one that's fine with me.
> Remember, I am not your wife and I do not share your misguided believes, and
I
> would like to have a CHOICE my friend.

A lot of people would like to have the choice to kill, fortunately it's against
the law.

> As far as 'killing of human beings' is concerned let me elighten you, we do
it
> a lot. Just look around. And here I do not mean sucking out a clump of cells
> that some day could have been a human being.
>
The fact that we kill a lot of human beings and your use of that in your
argument simply proves my point - abortion is the killing of human beings. Life
begins at conception, there is no argument to that. Scientific fact. Whether
you feel that it is a human being is beside the point. Conception is the start
of a life.


> > As for education and free contraception: I doubt whether Poland could affo
> rd
> > free contraception, although it's a good idea. Education is the main probl
> em
> in my opinion. The Catholic church must learn that its anti-contraceptive
> teaching is causing a large proportion of the problem. They can't have their
> cake and eat it.
> > Polish kids must have a moral and complete sex education and the pill shou
> ld
> be more easily available. Maybe then people would stop using abortion as a
> > contraceptive which it most clearly is not.
> ************
> You have no argument from me.
> Cathlic church and 'intelectual powers' in the corrupt government shoud stay
> out of my reproductive life especially that neither is doing a god damned
> thing to make it easier to sustain decent life for those already born.
>
Give those who are not already born a chance to do something about it. Who
knows you could be killing a future leader.

[i.p.freely]

You write:
<A lot of people would like to have the choice to kill, fortunately it's
against the law.>

And what GREATER GOOD this restrictive, ill concived law serves?
So now I am FORCED to carry unwanted pregnency to term to the DETRIMENT of
existing family. This law is KILLING ME and my family and you worry about
clump of cells within my womb?!

You write:
<The fact that we kill a lot of human beings and your use of that in your
argument simply proves my point - abortion is the killing of human beings.
Life begins at conception, there is no argument to that. Scientific fact.
Whether you feel that it is a human being is beside the point. Conception is
the start of a life.>
*************
Is it against the law to pass hatched egg, that did not 'take', with my
monthly menses? It happens all the time. Is it killing too? When carried to
term it could have been A HUMAN BEING.....

You write:
<Give those who are not already born a chance to do something about it. Who
knows you could be killing a future leader.>
************
or poster child for abortion. Just look around.
When it comes to the unborn take your chances with YOUR wife. But please,
please stay out of MY WOMB and don't second-guess my motives. I might be
hungry, undereducated, unemployed, having 6 hungry children already and...
pregnant again. I have this restrictive law against me and my family, and
absolutely nothing in exchange to help me along!
So, may your life be blessed with many happy, well adjusted, never hungry
children. And of course, I wish your wife bore you a future leader.

[Gość: Andy]

i.p.freely napisał:

> You write:
> <A lot of people would like to have the choice to kill, fortunately it's
> against the law.>
>
> And what GREATER GOOD this restrictive, ill concived law serves?
> So now I am FORCED to carry unwanted pregnency to term to the DETRIMENT of
> existing family. This law is KILLING ME and my family and you worry about
> clump of cells within my womb?!
>
I don't deny that this is a very emotional and difficult issue and I sincerely
wish you all the best, but I could never be convinced that abortion is the best
way out.

> You write:
> <The fact that we kill a lot of human beings and your use of that in your
> argument simply proves my point - abortion is the killing of human beings.
> Life begins at conception, there is no argument to that. Scientific fact.
> Whether you feel that it is a human being is beside the point. Conception is
> the start of a life.>
> *************
> Is it against the law to pass hatched egg, that did not 'take', with my
> monthly menses? It happens all the time. Is it killing too? When carried to
> term it could have been A HUMAN BEING.....
>
Of course not
> You write:
> <Give those who are not already born a chance to do something about it. Who
> knows you could be killing a future leader.>
> ************
> or poster child for abortion. Just look around.
> When it comes to the unborn take your chances with YOUR wife. But please,
> please stay out of MY WOMB and don't second-guess my motives. I might be
> hungry, undereducated, unemployed, having 6 hungry children already and...
> pregnant again. I have this restrictive law against me and my family, and
> absolutely nothing in exchange to help me along!
> So, may your life be blessed with many happy, well adjusted, never hungry
> children. And of course, I wish your wife bore you a future leader.

Thank you for your kind wishes. I wouldn't dare to second guess your motives.
My opinion is simply that abortion is wrong (except in certain specific
circumstances) whether it becomes legal or not as it is the killing of a human
being. I remember seeing the ultrasound scan of my child at about 3 months and
it is easily recognisable as a human being.

[Gość: awalk]

Gość portalu: Andy napisał(a):

> i.p.freely napisał:
>
> > Gość portalu: Andy napisał(a):
> >
> > > Are you suggesting Awalk that it's easier for a woman to kill her child >>than give it away?
> > ************

Yes, it seems it is, except that it is not a murder just a killing of a few cells.
Read this, it is a good example.

Sprogs For Sale
Polish tabloids raised a storm last weekend
after police in the southern city of
Opole detained a 30-year-old Romany pair
with a newly born child they said they had
bought for $200 from a local woman. The
gypsy couple ? who live and work in
Sweden ? reports later confirmed, paid the
girl?s mother to allow them to informally
?adopt? the child.
?There was no bad intent towards the
baby, when we took her back she was wellfed
and washed. They just very much wanted
to have a baby and went for adoption in
the most foolish way possible,? said prosecution
spokesman Roman Wawrzynek.
27 year-old Anna O. gave birth to the
child in mid-June but left the infant in the
hospital when she checked out, telling
authorities she was not going to raise her.
According to hospital sources Anna O.
had done likewise with her last child ? her
fifth ? before returning to reclaim the baby
a week later. This time, a week after selling
the child, Anna O. showed up at the local
police station saying she felt bad about selling
her offspring. Police detained the
Romany pair on their way back to Sweden.
Officials are investigating whether the
affair also involved bribery of hospital staff.

So it seems that even such bad mother as Anna has problems in giving away her child. I can understand it. There is a difference between a child and a clump of cells even if it is a potential child.