Man Burns Down Abortion Clinic, Says He Did It Because He Doesn't Like Abortions

Yet, she should have a right to abort, because foetii without brain should not have a right to life, such as persons have.

Any rights that a foetus has, stem in reality from the future potential person it can develop to. It is this future person that has right to inheritance, or for example, a mother that does not take drugs during pregnancy so that he will not be unhealthy.

Abortion ends the potential, and as such it is a victimless crime, because it is highly absurd to consider a potential future person that will never exist a victim of anything.

Granting right to life to foetuses also devalues human beings in general, by comparing them to a bunch of totipotent cells as an equal. Thats quite disgusting in itself.

 

A person who has the right to own 4.2 billion Dollars should not have the right to live because it is in your eyes not a human being? Can it be you don't care about paradoxa in your arguments?

 

A person who has the right to own 4.2 billion Dollars should not have the right to live because it is in your eyes not a human being? Can it be you don't care about paradoxa in your arguments?

http://youtu.be/x8h-OyspcOk

 

A person who has the right to own 4.2 billion Dollars should not have the right to live because it is in your eyes not a human being?

http://youtu.be/x8h-OyspcOk

 

What are you talking about?

 

Do you speak with me? My last comment - unfortunatlelly I had some technical problems so its now three times existing - speaks about the paradox that we human beings are defining ourselve to death while we are ignoring what we know, so we will get this results we don't like to have.

No one likes ot live in a world where only one child in the own mother has to die. Death makes people sad and not happy. To defend children is an unwritten law in every living being. I don't have any idea why rational men and women are not able to see how sensefull our predisposed behavior often is. So I don't have any idea why so many people are fighting for death against life. Why not to fight for unborn children children and their mothers? Why to fight against? Why have the most rich nations in the world the worst problems with unborn children? What's wrong with us?

http://youtu.be/pNA0cYPELmY

 

There is no paradox. It is the future person who may some day develop from the foetus if allowed, that has a right to life and to 4.2 billion dollars. Not the foetus. Foetus can be killed, and the money then spent otherwise. Because foetus is not a person, but a thing. Things dont have rights.

 

I don't doubt about that you have the feeling you are right. But it's unfortunatelly always one of the first steps of all mass-murders in every war to deny that the enemies are human beings. Truth is always the first victim. So: No one has to take care if he murders only animals=foetus=things. From my point of view you are captured in a so called "devils circle". To abort a person who has rights makes no sense for the law system in its own logic (independent that laws are often making also no sense watched from outside the laws). To try to create laws for human beings by denying the right to live for human beings makes no sense at all.

http://youtu.be/b5bTYSjYg_0

 

It's impossible to abort a person with rights, because people (persons) don't occupy the body of another person.

People are born human beings.

 

Arguments don't become better only because they are stupid. Betwenn all himan beings are common elements of existance - procreation, gestation and childbearing are completly normal steps in every human life. It is not normal - better to say it's one of the worst perversions - to kill a human being in the situation of the highest protection in nature. Never again in life a human being is so save as in the womb of the own mother - if not cruel intelligent animals called "doctors" would kill them there. We are using the highest and best gifts of god to produce a desperating bad TV-show for hell.

And please: doctors are also human beings - also in case they are doing abortions because we are telling them they have to do so - even if it was now very easy for me to define them as animals (=murderable creatures - and its by the way also wrong to kill an animal on not very good reasons). I could also define you as a thing without a big problem - destroyable without consequences ... . But this all fits not with the reality all around us.

http://youtu.be/MhH5Hd4w_ko

 

What does all that have to do with the fact that to be a person you must be born?

It's no good getting angry about it, that's the way it must be.

 

You should read what's written here. Only a person is able to be a heir for example - but even a cell is able to be a heir.

http://youtu.be/rP0vn9PZ3kU

 

You aren't making any sense.

http://youtu.be/rP0vn9PZ3kU[/QUOTE]

 

Not really. A company or an institution can be a heir, too. Also, in this case it is the future person that may one day develop from the foetus (if allowed), that is the heir. Not the foetus itself.

I agree. But foetus is even lower than an animal. Animals have quite developed brains, which is again the source of their rights, such as right not to be abused. Early human foetuses are comparable to bugs or plants or amoebas. It is not wrong to kill these, there is not even any victim.

 

Yes, I am asking what is this rich person all about and how is it relevant to abortion?

 

That is not true. Leona Helmsley left a fortune to her dog.

 

Who was the heir of the dog? - or with other words: It's very good that Mrs. Leona Hemsley cared for her dog over the point of her own death - but an impossibolity keeps to be an impossibillity. I give my dogs my allowness to eat me if I'm dead - I don't care about my dead body - but this doesn't mean now that my dogs are becoming human beings or public persons. A dog is for example completly helpless if someone steals his/her money becaude a dog is not able to produce any idea abou that money mecessarry to help him to save his life in modern times. If we we would abort every child who is not able to think also in our money-way than we coulf kill every human being. This definition-nonsense helps no one only a little. The questions coud be. "Why to see in a foetus an enemy? What forces us to think in a way so we are convinced we are right if we kill human beings (in their mothers womb). Will the quality of life become better?" This will not happen - only life helps to live and to reach quality.

http://youtu.be/gx2Mc5K9VO0

 

I find it funny that these "rightists" make such a huge deal out of minor vandalizing done by the "OWS" people, yet make NO deal out of such obvious MURDER and violence against abortion clinics, such as this.

 

Bombing an abortion clinic is justified, in their eyes. They are saving 'babies', remember.

 

What they are doing, is emotionally raging against people who support a cause that they hate (abortion); their hate for abortion is in turn motivated by "she's a slut so she deserves to be punished for her mistake" mentality.

 

true.

which is the real underlying reason, not concern for children unborn or otherwise.

 

I find it odd that you respond to this guy here but ignore his attempt to educate folks in another thread by threatening to blow one members brain out, threaten anothers family, flame bait and directly attack myself and others with names. Folks are asking what the he'll is going on with the mods and here your are chatting it up with the very guy.

 

This is off topic, but what I was saying in that thread was that undue violence against people like YOU, you dislike, but undue violence against people you disagree with, you love.

And they all returned fire with similar comments, so whatever.

 

You were making direct threats to members here and their family. Are we now at the point where we can break forum rules as long as we preempt it with "what if"?

 

First: the vandals were not vandals - and second: who murdered whom on what reason? And why not to burn an abortion clinic down? "Violence against a building" sounds more funny than serios. Nevertheless: If someone is concvinced that in an aborton clinic is a place where human beings become mass-murdered - what to do exactly? Shows the global situation not only how peaceful the most Christrians like to solve one of the worst problems of all mankind? Otherwise continously abortion clinics would burn. The only "problem": Christians are not fighting this way.

http://youtu.be/sYnxLSwQSeI