Abortion is not a contraceptive device but that is how it has been sold.
Making abortion `illegal’ is problematic, there are those who will do it. That is one consideration, and there might well be justification in some cases for abortions. On the other hand, it has been promoted by leftoids as a `contraceptive; some femmo nazis venturing, it’s a regular, common experience of wimmin. The difficulty is, while abortions can occur as in ,due to physiology, that does not make it a common experience, femmo-nazis using the fallacious universal,deliberate abortion is not regular, per force and many women do not have abortions unless coerced under the fraudulent `U.N. aid’ schemes in some countries like Kenya. Abortion is not a contraceptive, whether it be deliberate or accidental. Yet, in the main, that is what abortion is used for, contraception. That is a false reason and evil because of it. It is not, therefore, a matter of `pro-life’ or `pro-choice’, it is an act of individuals and in concert which is grave matter and the4 rub there-in is palpable as the following example related by Andrew Bolt is an instance of:
I ASKED coroner Greg Cavanagh which of all the deaths he’d investigated, from murders to suicides, had been the hardest to handle.
It was, he replied instantly, the death six years ago of unwanted Jessica Jane, who was born alive in an abortion, plopped into a kidney dish, and left alone in a room to cry for help that never came, until she died, 80 minutes later.
“It called upon all that I was and that I am. It called upon all I’ve experienced in my life,” Cavanagh, a 52-year-old father of two, told me this week.It was a death of the kind he says is almost always kept hidden by doctors - of aborted children born alive.
A death of lives Cavanagh says we must now acknowledge and honour, as he tried to honour little Jessica Jane, refusing to let her die without his notice.
Legal ,schmeegal. The crime is the selling of abortion by leftoids, aided and abetted by govts. to the burden of good old taxpayers, as a contraceptive device when, it is not at all a contraceptive device. To amplify, because a govt. makes a `law’ does not make that regulation `lawful’: Theft, `taxation’ is legal and observed only because govts. promise to weild violence against citizens for non-compliance, compounding the act of theft, `tax’, with the crimes of extortion and violence. Some cases of abortion might warrant court cases on common law grounds, others might not but what cannot be done is promotion of it as a contraceptive device when it is not nor the funding of it by govts and outfits of totiltarian gangsters like the U.N: then, it does become murder and fraud. The instance Bolt cites nderscores each of those points.
Sherry wrote:
don’t forget the Immans and mullahs
COMMENT:
Appreciate the reminder, Sherry, outrage overshadowed some additional bastards long overdue for the drop long.
Posted on 27-Aug-04 at 1:08 pm | Permalink
Some_Guy wrote:
I doubt Mr Joe Cinque mentioned anything outrageous concerning the conduct of the trial, since he had been dead for eighteen months or so at the time.
Since Singh’s defense was one of diminished responsibility due to a psychiatric condition,part of the evidence for which were the two attempts by her parents to have her forcibly committed, their testimony was of obvious relevance in establishing her state of mind.
I don’t know what evidence you think Mr and Mrs Cinque could have provided, or what point of law or fact their testimony could have supported - granted, having Singh’s father on the witness stand may conceivably have helped generate sympathy for her, but this is of very limited relevance where a case is tried only by a judge (without a jury); in any case, the Cinques were clearly visible throughout the trial, and the fact that Justice Crispin had himself lost a child would seem to indicate that he was not unappreciative of their position.
As for your grouping together of “pyschology” (sic), sociology and polygraph tests with “pyschics” (sic) and oracles as “drivel”, I should probably refrain from commenting. But really - do you have any beef with neuropsychology, I wonder? And why include polygraph tests specifically? Proof in science is always a matter of degree, and I would suggest that there is a great deal more experimental support for psychology, sociology and polygraph tests than for psychics and oracles.
Posted on 24-Sep-04 at 3:09 am | Permalink
d wrote:
I had just tapped out a reply on pysch is quackery but, lost it on attempt to post, forgot to enter code.
On the other hand, now, I’ll reserve for a fully worked up itme than an off the cuff response. But yes, Guy pysch and sociology are rot, hocus pocus.They complement only the fictions of sociliasm : crude primitive triblaism but based on false notions of the savage `noble’ and man collectivesed. The rot pumped govt. schools, `teachers universities’ is in large part due to the baleful influnece of the twin psuedo-science: bunk begets stupidity and stupidty worse things.
Posted on 24-Sep-04 at 7:09 am | Permalink