![The Mohican Board! [Bumppo's Redux!]](images/wwwboard.gif "The Mohican Board! [Bumppo's Redux!]") |
|
| Author |
 Topic  |
|
susquesus
Mad Hermit of the North Woods
USA
Bumppo's Patron since [at least]:
September 03 2003
Status: offline
|
 Posted - December 10 2003 : 2:00:57 PM
|
Poll Question:
Will a candidates stance on abortion be the deciding factor in your voting choice next November? If yes, why?
|
|
|
report to moderator
|
|
|
richfed
Sachem
USA
Bumppo's Patron since [at least]:
May 13 2002
Status: offline
Administrator |
 Posted - December 11 2003 : 06:08:09 AM
|
| Because nothing is more precious than life itself. |
report to moderator  |
|
|
SgtMunro
Soldier of the King
USA
Bumppo's Patron since [at least]:
September 23 2002
Status: offline
Donating Member |
Posted - December 11 2003 : 2:50:54 PM
|
I agree with Sachem Rich on this. My opinion used to be that no one should tell anyone what to do with their own body, until I became I father then that changed...
Your Most Humble Servant,
|
Serjeant-Major Duncan Munro
Capt. Thos. Graham's Coy.
42nd Royal Highland Regiment of Foote
(The Black Sheep of the Black Watch)
"Nemo Me Impune Lacessit"
-Or-
"Recruit locally, fight globally." |
| report to moderator |
|
|
susquesus
Mad Hermit of the North Woods
USA
Bumppo's Patron since [at least]:
September 03 2003
Status: offline
|
Posted - December 11 2003 : 8:41:58 PM
|
"My opinion used to be that no one should tell anyone what to do with their own body, until I became a father, then that changed..."
Do you guys think that that is the common reaction? I mean that once you have a child of your own your view shifts? As of right now, being a single guy and all, I feel that abortion in a case where the mother's life/health are at risk or the pregnancy is a result of incest or rape(1st half of pregnancy) is acceptable. Of course I've never looked into my own childs' eyes before.
I imagine that if I were married and my wife was pregnant and the doctor said- "There's a complication, your wife will die without an abortion" - I would be alright with it if my wife decided to go for the abortion(and subsequently live to attempt another possibly successful pregnancy). I can't understand giving women a death sentence based on a single pregnancy. The human body is built for multiple births, we should take advantage. I just don't know, I've never been in that situation before.
Is it black and white or is there a gray area? Is it a choice based on religion, emotion, morality, fear of eternal damnation? Does it need to be legislated? Roe Vs. Wade overturned? Something needs to be decided so our society can move on to other issues. I don't mean to trivialize it, it's just that it has no effect on me personally. I'm opposed to the idea of any single issue deciding a discussion.
I just imagine what could happen if a candidate was the only pro-choice/life candidate in an election and it came down to people voting for them on that one issue even though they also thought it was a good idea to lock up people with freckles, pave the National Forests, and legalize child prostitution. What happens if Adolf Hitler is re-incarnated into another politician and he's elected on his stance on the abortion issue? Sure, these are extreme cases but the thought has merit. It's incredibly divisive, frustrating.
I would definitely appreciate hearing more on this from people. 
Did becoming a parent change your view on abortion? |
| report to moderator |
|
|
Wilderness Woman
Watcher of the Wood
USA
Bumppo's Patron since [at least]:
November 27 2002
Status: offline
Donating Member |
Posted - December 12 2003 : 08:28:55 AM
|
I'm putting on my armor and stepping into the Lion's Den again.
If I may put a woman's thoughts into this debate... Some time ago, I posted my views on abortion in a very vehement manner. Those views have not changed. In response to Susquesus' last question, "Did becoming a parent change your view on abortion?", I would like to say:
It sure did! Back in my much more liberal pseudo-hippie days during the 70s, I was all pro-choice, even with my conservative Christian upbringing. When I was carrying life within me--my first pregnancy at the age of 34--my obstetrician asked me if I wanted to have amniocentesis to determine if my baby had any birth defects, so that I could decide if I wanted an abortion. This was in my 4th month, after I had heard the heartbeat and felt the tiny flutter of life.
I said, "No. If our baby is born with a birth defect, we will love it with all of our hearts and take care of it to the best of our ability." My doctor smiled at me and said, "Good."
Carrying life within me changed everything. |
| report to moderator |
|
|
SgtMunro
Soldier of the King
USA
Bumppo's Patron since [at least]:
September 23 2002
Status: offline
Donating Member |
Posted - December 12 2003 : 09:14:23 AM
|
quote:
Do you guys think that that is the common reaction?...and the doctor said- "There's a complication, your wife will die without an abortion" - I would be alright with it if my wife decided to go for the abortion(and subsequently live to attempt another possibly successful pregnancy).
I apologize for not giving a longer answer on this. I always answer for my votes on these polls, since I believe that we should be always able to explain our beliefs. My wife and I have discussed our thoughts with our friends, one of which is an OB/GYN Doc with over 25 years experience in her field who gave us some interesting facts concerning the 'tried and true' battle cries from the pro-abortion side. So, in answer to some of your questions, here are my thoughts on the subject:
1) To protect the life of the mother? In the RARE instances where this happens, by all means YES. Keep in mind, however, that most women (my wife included) would rather their unborn child live, if there was a chance of a safe delivery (for the baby, not her). Maternal instinct usually kicks in, right after a woman discovers she is pregnant, and most women become very protective of their baby as well as the 'hearth and home'. This is very normal, and it has insured the survival of our species since we first walked on scene.
2) In the case of rape/incest? Once again, this depends on if the woman would want to. I have investigated a couple of sexual assaults, and the victim is given the opportunity to take a 'morning after pill' (before such a thing was legal for matters of convience) which is nothing more than a very high dose of the same compound used in oral birth control. In cases of incest, which I have never personally investigated but have talked with detectives who have, it usually is for the protection of the mother, since safe delivery cannot be guarenteed for a young girl under the age of say 13.
3) Partial-Birth Abortion? This is another matter altogether. According to my wife's OB/GYN Doc friend, she had never known an instance in over twenty-five years where that would be necessary and she would never perform such an operation since it is murder and therefore against both the law and her professional oath.
Now that my basic beliefs are known, I shall continue on to address some of your questions/statememnts.
quote:
I can't understand giving women a death sentence based on a single pregnancy.
That would NEVER, repeat NEVER happen. Even during the pre Roe-v-Wade era there were provisions to legally perform the operation in cases of threat to the mother's health (and no, it did not have to be immenent). This is a statement of fact, and one that the 'other' side would never want widely published (since a good number of them prefer not to have the facts get in the way of something that sounds or feels good).
quote:
Does it need to be legislated? Roe Vs. Wade overturned?
There are aspects of it that need to be legislated, for instance partial-birth abortion. As to Roe-v-Wade being overturned completely, that will probably never happen, even though the original plaintiff in the case has since changed her stance and has said so publicly (but was not given wide coverage in the 'mainstream' media).
quote:
I just imagine what could happen i |
Serjeant-Major Duncan Munro
Capt. Thos. Graham's Coy.
42nd Royal Highland Regiment of Foote
(The Black Sheep of the Black Watch)
"Nemo Me Impune Lacessit"
-Or-
"Recruit locally, fight globally." |
| report to moderator |
|
|
securemann
Deerslayer
USA
Bumppo's Patron since [at least]:
July 08 2002
Status: offline
|
Posted - December 12 2003 : 4:18:25 PM
|
| Yes Joyce,buy all means we need a woman's thought on this! And may I add that your post was wonderful.Now for my two cents.When we say abortion is wrong,we mean all DIRECT abortion.That means the procedure is done solely to destroy the unborn child.Now a woman has a right to save her life and this comes under what is called the double effect.She can have procedures done to preserve her life with the intent to not deliberately hurt her child but with the unintended effect that it might cause an abortion.People think in this day and age that a doctor rushes in the waiting room and starts yelling at the father saying,"hurry up,we have a problem,make a decision now! Your wife or the child! Even if this did occur,the doctor has to make an attempt to save the both of them.He can't kill one to save the other.If the child dies during the process,it won't be considered an abortion because of the double effect.My grandmother gave birth at 12 and had no problems.So much for the body not to be able to handle a birth.As for rape,that's a tough one.How many people here would call for the execution of the rapist? Send him to jail and make him pay, right? But to execute the guilty party I think nobody here would call for that.Then why execute the innocent party for nothing? That would be the baby who was conceived.Just my thoughts. |
| report to moderator |
|
|
Christina
Deerslayer
USA
Bumppo's Patron since [at least]:
May 27 2002
Status: offline
|
 Posted - December 15 2003 : 5:55:13 PM
|
I'm not going to get into my personal views on abortion because I've got enough problems as it is right now...but I wanted to know if anybody else here had the same thoughts I did on some of the anti-abortion activists who picket clinics, scream at people, hold up graphic signs, etc. I have no problem with protesters -- it's a free country -- but has anybody, like me, ever wondered if all of these people couldn't be doing something a whole lot more productive, like helping to take care of abandoned children, volunteering their time at a crisis pregnancy center, etc? Here in Columbia, S.C., we have this fleet of four or five guys who spend SIX to EIGHT hours a day marching up and down in front of the state capital building wearing necklaces made out of pink plastic fetuses, pushing a plastic baby in a doll carrier, and holding signs that say ABORTION IS MURDER. I realize they want to get their message out...but hmmmm...I wonder what good things could be done with that 40 or so hours a week they spend out in front of the State House. Trust me, I understand the desire to picket, but I somehow think there are other constructive things to be done as well...Just my two cents...
Christina |
See this face? This is the face of a woman on the edge.
Whoopi Goldberg, "Jumping Jack Flash"
|
| report to moderator |
|
|
SgtMunro
Soldier of the King
USA
Bumppo's Patron since [at least]:
September 23 2002
Status: offline
Donating Member |
Posted - December 15 2003 : 8:13:44 PM
|
quote:
...but I wanted to know if anybody else here had the same thoughts I did on some of the anti-abortion activists who picket clinics, scream at people, hold up graphic signs, etc. I have no problem with protesters -- it's a free country -- but has anybody, like me, ever wondered if all of these people couldn't be doing something a whole lot more productive...
Yeah, I feel that way about AIDS Activists, Gay "Rights" Activists, Enviromental Activists, Animal "Rights" Activists, World Worker's Party (Anarchists) and so on. Some of those folks spend more than six or eight hours a day on their pet projects, and some even get public monies to subsidize their dissent.
Picketing clinics, screaming at people; yeah, that is annoying, but at least they do not throw blood (animal or human)/paint on bystanders, destroy private property or block up traffic (stranding the working folks whose taxes subsidize the existince of some of these leeches). I guess it could be worse, the Anti-Abortion (Pro-Life) Activists on the "right" could mimic the illegal/quasi-terrorist tactics of the above mentioned activists on the "left".
Just some things to mull over...
Your Most Humble Servant,
|
Serjeant-Major Duncan Munro
Capt. Thos. Graham's Coy.
42nd Royal Highland Regiment of Foote
(The Black Sheep of the Black Watch)
"Nemo Me Impune Lacessit"
-Or-
"Recruit locally, fight globally." |
| report to moderator |
|
|
susquesus
Mad Hermit of the North Woods
USA
Bumppo's Patron since [at least]:
September 03 2003
Status: offline
|
Posted - December 16 2003 : 01:06:58 AM
|
Okay. I think that the bottom line is that extremists of any sort are annoying. Left or right. The left is not immune- the paint/blood throwing fur folks are definitely lame. Neither is the right- the pro-life pastor who was put to death a few months ago for shooting an abortion doctor.
Extremism in all forms is obnoxious, by nature. If it bothers you, it is working. It's a vital component of our democratic process- like it or lump it.
At any rate, you are both right. A lot of activists suck. From rainbow warrior to pistol-toting pastor. Rational discussion is far more effective than screaming repetitive chants or having a sit-in. Some of the folks that do it are doing so for selfish, cathartic reasons. It makes them feel better about themselves, or burns through angry emotion. If people spent as much time looking for solutions to their problems as they do shooting their mouths off about them we'd all be a lot better off. Focus that energy and passion, cut with it- don't just burn it off.
At any rate we've only had this democracy for 227 years. We're kind of slow learners, it's gonna take awhile longer. I think we're on the right track. |
| report to moderator |
|
|
SgtMunro
Soldier of the King
USA
Bumppo's Patron since [at least]:
September 23 2002
Status: offline
Donating Member |
Posted - December 16 2003 : 08:01:07 AM
|
quote:
Rational discussion is far more effective than screaming repetitive chants or having a sit-in. Some of the folks that do it are doing so for selfish, cathartic reasons. It makes them feel better about themselves, or burns through angry emotion. If people spent as much time looking for solutions to their problems as they do shooting their mouths off about them we'd all be a lot better off.
I couldn't agree with you more, except on one item. The tolerance of legally allowing one to "Shoot their mouth off", is the true sign of a free society. As I have stated many, many times before I may not always agree with you, but I will defend your right to say it to the death. Open discourse, even the 'mean-spirited' kind is a very critical component to our society. Without it, we become no different than Old Iraq under Hussein.
P.S.- We have a Represenative Republic not a Democracy, I know to alot of folks there is no difference, but there is.
Your Most Humble Servant,
|
Serjeant-Major Duncan Munro
Capt. Thos. Graham's Coy.
42nd Royal Highland Regiment of Foote
(The Black Sheep of the Black Watch)
"Nemo Me Impune Lacessit"
-Or-
"Recruit locally, fight globally." |
| report to moderator |
|
|
susquesus
Mad Hermit of the North Woods
USA
Bumppo's Patron since [at least]:
September 03 2003
Status: offline
|
Posted - December 16 2003 : 5:07:15 PM
|
No disagreement there. I hope people "shoot their mouths off" 'til their hearts content, as is their right. I'll just ignore them if I find them obnoxious, as is my right.
"P.S. - we have a Representative Republic not a Democracy, I know to a lot of folks there is no difference, but there is."
Yes there is a difference. Webster's New Universal Dictionary states it like this:
democracy: 1.government by the people; a form of government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised directly by them or by their elected agents under a free electoral system 2. a state having such a form of government: the United States and Canada are democracies 3. a state of society characterized by formal equality of right and privileges. 4.political or social equality; democratic spirit. 5. the common people of a community as distinguished from any privileged class; the common people in respect to their political power
republic: 1. a state in which the supreme power rests in the body of the citizens entitled to vote and is exercised by representatives chosen directly or indirectly by them 2. any body of persons viewed as a commonwealth. 3. a state in which the head of government is not a monarch or other hereditary head of state. 4.any of the five periods of republican government in France. 5.a philosophical dialogue by Plato dealing with the composition and structure of the ideal state.
So though it may be correct to say that we have a representative republic it is also correct to say that we have a democracy. A "Representative Republic" is simply a specific form of "Democracy." |
| report to moderator |
|
|
SgtMunro
Soldier of the King
USA
Bumppo's Patron since [at least]:
September 23 2002
Status: offline
Donating Member |
Posted - December 16 2003 : 6:56:50 PM
|
quote:
democracy: 1.government by the people; a form of government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised directly by them or by their elected agents under a free electoral system
quote:
republic: 1. a state in which the supreme power rests in the body of the citizens entitled to vote and is exercised by representatives chosen directly or indirectly by them
As you can see the obvious difference, one is where power is "vested" and the other where the power "rests". In a nutshell, a republic is where the power comes from, and is not "given to" the citizenry in their consent to be governed, a very important difference. As Ben Franklin was reported to have said after the Constitutional Convention when asked what form of government was created for the new country, he replied "A republic, if you can keep it".
You're my kind of debating partner, Susquesus. A person who can state their side from a logical, instead of an emotional, viewpoint. I may not always agree with you, but I most certainly respect you.
Your Most Humble Servant,
|
Serjeant-Major Duncan Munro
Capt. Thos. Graham's Coy.
42nd Royal Highland Regiment of Foote
(The Black Sheep of the Black Watch)
"Nemo Me Impune Lacessit"
-Or-
"Recruit locally, fight globally." |
| report to moderator |
|
|
richfed
Sachem
USA
Bumppo's Patron since [at least]:
May 13 2002
Status: offline
Administrator |
Posted - December 17 2003 : 05:36:11 AM
|
While I agree that extremism is generally not a good thing ... consider this:
Someone kidnaps a child - yours, mine, doesn't matter - this kidnapper has the child spread out on a table & is getting ready to disembowel the helpless child. Someone breaks in and shoots the would-be killer, thereby saving the child. Most would consider this person a hero!
It all boils down to what do you consider the unborn ... a mass of unidentifiable tissue or a human being created by God with a real soul? The answer to that question determines whether or not one considers an "extremist" - in this case - extreme or a hero.
Of course, I pared away the legalities, etc. It is, admittedly, more complicated than my scenario.
In many, if not all, cultures, refusing a gift is considered bad manners. Life is God's greatest gift. What's that say?
|
| report to moderator |
|
|
SgtMunro
Soldier of the King
USA
Bumppo's Patron since [at least]:
September 23 2002
Status: offline
Donating Member |
Posted - December 18 2003 : 2:24:00 PM
|
You do raise some interesting philisophical points, Sachem. Like you, I know all to well the realities of both statutory and case law on the subject. The only area I absolutely refuse to give ground on is partial birth abortion, that is murder, plain and simple. If you ever get a chance to look into the "procedure" (since I wouldn't dare post it here, it is too graphic), you would agree with me. The "doctor" who performs such a procedure, should be punished as a murderer. What makes it so henious, is that there is no medical reason to perform the procedure, except to harvest research material.
Your Most Humble Servant,
|
Serjeant-Major Duncan Munro
Capt. Thos. Graham's Coy.
42nd Royal Highland Regiment of Foote
(The Black Sheep of the Black Watch)
"Nemo Me Impune Lacessit"
-Or-
"Recruit locally, fight globally." |
| report to moderator |
|
|
Highlander
Colonial Militia
USA
Bumppo's Patron since [at least]:
February 04 2003
Status: offline
|
Posted - December 18 2003 : 5:03:02 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by richfed
Because nothing is more precious than life itself.
My sentiments exactly!I believe that life begins at conception. We're talking two bodies,not one.For what its worth,my ex-wife had an abortion at age 18.It causes her emotional problems to this day.It is also one of the reasons that we're not together anymore.We did have a daughter together however,and she was worth it more than anything else. |
Highlander |
| report to moderator |
|
|
securemann
Deerslayer
USA
Bumppo's Patron since [at least]:
July 08 2002
Status: offline
|
Posted - December 20 2003 : 11:19:11 PM
|
| Which is more valuable? An unborn eagle's egg or an unborn child.If you chose the unborn child,sorry,you're wrong...at least according to the laws in this country.You see,the penalty for taking or destroying an eagle's egg is $5,000 and a year in jail,but the penalty for taking an unborn child's life is nothing.Matter of fact,people get paid a lot of money for doing it.Does something sound wrong here? |
| report to moderator |
|
|
daire
Colonial Settler
USA
Bumppo's Patron since [at least]:
November 17 2002
Status: offline
|
Posted - December 23 2003 : 5:25:23 PM
|
I can't say yes or no to the poll, it depends on what else the candidate is for. I am completely anti-GWBush (not just because of his views of abortion). However, I'll throw my two cents in on the issue of abortion.
I am single and childless but am pro-choice (and liberal in most respects) and do agree the entire issue has a gray area. Now, if I were to become pregnant, the choice for me may change, but IMO on the whole no one should tell a person what to do or what their decision should be. They are the one(s) that has to live with the decision.
As for it being murder...I'm still undecided on that, but feel it's not a life (I didn't say not a human being) if the fetus would not be viable outside the womb because it wouldn't be able to live.
|
daire
_____________________________________
"I do not call myself subject to much at all."
|
| report to moderator |
|
|
Wilderness Woman
Watcher of the Wood
USA
Bumppo's Patron since [at least]:
November 27 2002
Status: offline
Donating Member |
Posted - December 23 2003 : 6:14:44 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by daire
As for it being murder...I'm still undecided on that, but feel it's not a life (I didn't say not a human being) if the fetus would not be viable outside the womb because it wouldn't be able to live.
Daire, I understand what you are saying... really I do! I used to feel the same way.
But now I believe that where there is a beating heart... there is life. The human heart begins to beat and pump blood through the embryo around day 22 of gestation. Three weeks after conception! This is amazing to me! I would venture to say that by far the most abortions take place well after the baby's heart has begun to beat.
To knowingly and purposely cause the beating heart of a human being to stop... is murder. It doesn't matter whether it is an unborn child or a person with an incurable disease. It is murder. |
| report to moderator |
|
|
richfed
Sachem
USA
Bumppo's Patron since [at least]:
May 13 2002
Status: offline
Administrator |
Posted - December 23 2003 : 7:05:00 PM
|
I, too, used to echo the sentiments expressed by Daire ... Over the years, my feelings on the issue have changed dramatically as it became more & more apparent to me that the fetus is life. And to end it is murder. My old viewpoints became more and more shallow in the process.
Yet, it wasn't until our "Sophia ordeal" that the issue took prime importance for me as to who I would cast my vote. At 26 months, many babies are aborted. At 26 months, Sophia was considered - by pro-abortionists - as "un-viable." Probably over a million dollars was spent keeping her alive. Not to mention her will to live. No one can spend a minute in her presence & say it wasn't worth every penny. Sophia could have been aborted. What a sin that would have been. I will never cast another vote for anyone who favors abortion.
I can't ... it is murder; it is a sin; it deprives precious little babies - like Sophia - of their right to life. There is no choice. |
| report to moderator |
|
|
Kurt
Mohicanite
USA
Bumppo's Patron since [at least]:
September 27 2003
Status: offline
|
Posted - December 23 2003 : 8:41:35 PM
|
| It was nice having health insurance. |
Yr. obt. svt.
Kurt |
| report to moderator |
|
|
daire
Colonial Settler
USA
Bumppo's Patron since [at least]:
November 17 2002
Status: offline
|
Posted - December 24 2003 : 12:35:21 PM
|
I think I failed to make a clarification, which was my fault. I am not necessarily "pro-abortion", just pro-choice, I think there is a big enough difference. I may not necessarily agree with a person's choice to abort (depending on the circumstances, such as rape, incest, etc), but feel it should be their choice, regardless.
I also feel that if it is made illegal, it increases the chances of a woman going for an abortion by someone who is not a health professional or not 100% knowledgable in what they are doing. We've all heard the stories regarding botched abortions using coat-hangers and the like.
Anyway, this issue will never be settled as long as children are being born; we all just need to respect everyone's views, which I think and hope I do.
|
daire
_____________________________________
"I do not call myself subject to much at all."
|
| report to moderator |
|
|
securemann
Deerslayer
USA
Bumppo's Patron since [at least]:
July 08 2002
Status: offline
|
Posted - December 26 2003 : 8:48:46 PM
|
| I was just thinking- We invade a country because one of the reasons was that a brutal dictator is responsible for the murder of countless innocent citizens.Since 1973,under the laws of the U.S.,40+ million of our innocent citizens have been butchered right here under the title,"FREEDOM OF CHOICE." Would there be a difference in the eye's of God on who is doing the butchering? |
| report to moderator |
|
|
SgtMunro
Soldier of the King
USA
Bumppo's Patron since [at least]:
September 23 2002
Status: offline
Donating Member |
Posted - December 27 2003 : 09:42:00 AM
|
Good point, but if you dissagree with the Femi-nazi "Church" and their "Sacrement" of abortion, you are refered to as "one of those right-wing-nazi(incorrect, since nazis were on the ideological 'left', but it sounds and "feels" good to the left)-extremist-talk radio listening-milita(not really an insult)-conservatives from "fly over country".
Your Most Humble Servant,
|
Serjeant-Major Duncan Munro
Capt. Thos. Graham's Coy.
42nd Royal Highland Regiment of Foote
(The Black Sheep of the Black Watch)
"Nemo Me Impune Lacessit"
-Or-
"Recruit locally, fight globally." |
| report to moderator |
|
|
Kaylynn44
Mohicanite
USA
Bumppo's Patron since [at least]:
July 13 2002
Status: offline
Donating Member |
Posted - December 27 2003 : 5:06:08 PM
|
I may not believe in abortion, but I also would hate to see abortion made illegal. Before everybody gets all hot under the collar, let me explain. Women will always have abortions. That's just a fact. It doesn't matter if it is legal or illegal. The only difference is that if abortion is made illegal, the woman will end up going to a shady doctor or try to abort the child herself. The child will still be dead, and most likely the mother will be too. Think about it, drugs are illegal. Does that stop people from using them? No, and it won't stop women from having abortions, but I do agree with everyone that the birth of a child is the most beautiful and wonderful gift a woman will ever receive. Too bad some women don't know it!!!
Kay |
~ An Infinite Zephyr~
Some things never end
As long as goodness exists
Winds shall always soothe
www.cloudsbooks.com
|
| report to moderator |
|
|
richfed
Sachem
USA
Bumppo's Patron since [at least]:
May 13 2002
Status: offline
Administrator |
Posted - December 28 2003 : 06:54:53 AM
|
Not hot under the collar ... but ... 
You have to legislate against immorality. It simply has to be illegal - or - we as a society - are condoning the action.
Murder is illegal. Child molestation is illegal. Robbery ... rape ... the list goes on. All illegal. Yet, people still do it. Should we have no law? |
| report to moderator |
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
| The Mohican Board! [Bumppo's Redux!] |
© 1997-2025 - Mohican Press |
|
|
| Current Mohicanland page raised in 0.41 seconds |
 |
|
Abortion Debate in the Presidential Race
