I have been aware of the evidence for some time Big Dog and I do support you. I am totally against abortions of convenience.

Your assumption then would be of course that the fetus enjoyed this?

I watched every clip. This truly is murder. Thanks Bigdog. That gave me a reality check about how serious this really is. If anyone can watch every clip and still say this is ok, he she has no conscience.

I agree. A reminder to all. Yes this is very graphic. If it was illegal to perform these acts I would not post this. But since it is legal I posted it to show how wrong and ignorant we have become. Some of the clips even show fetuses that are fully formed babies aborted and sitting in piles of bodies in buckets. But if we don't talk about it how will people know?

I think it’s a little too easy for men to claim the moral high ground and be anti-abortion. You never have to experience a 9 month pregnancy, the pain associated with childbirth, or the responsibility of either raising the child or giving it up for adoption.

For a man, choosing a position in the abortion debate is relatively simple. Do you like sex followed by killing an unborn child, or do you like sex followed by keeping a child alive? It’s pretty obvious why so many men choose the latter, and consider themselves anti-abortion. If all I had to do in order to make a baby was have sex, I’d probably be anti-abortion as well.

What you have to remember is that it’s completely different from the point of view of the woman. Most women, myself included, plan on having children at a point in their life when they are financially and emotionally capable of giving their child the upbringing he or she deserves. There are so many children that end up uneducated, malnourished or victims of abuse all because they don’t have a mother who can care for them properly.

The world is already overpopulated and I figure that if you plan on bringing another life into it, you need to be ready to take full responsibility for the child. Did you know that legalizing abortion actually lowers crime rates, because children grow up in healthy families instead of being raised by a 14-year-old single mother or in a foster home?

Judging me and you don't even know me. Nice. I believe in birth control. I know some Catholics don't, but many of us have come together. My Church has fellowship with a local Catholic church. We live here as Americans and neighbors together. We vote for simialr issues. So it's just ignorant of you to judge me when you don't even know me. I also adopted my nephew. And I believe that we should use tax dollars to take care of unwanted children. Liberals say they care so much about people, but when it comes to unwanted babies it's seems that they think it's better to kill them. Instead we could do C-section births to take away the pain, and focus federal funding on caring for the babies. And the world is not over populated. If it's to populated where you are, move. After all who's going to take care of us when we get old? Who's going to pay for the social security? Who's going to take us to the doctor when we're old? GOD's social security plan was to have children and when we get old they take care of us. But we've been killing them off and at the same time wonder why we have a financial social security shortage.

“Instead we could do C-section births to take away the pain”

Seriously? You think a c-section is less painful? The mother is often kept awake for the c-section because full anesthesia can be dangerous. Plus you end up with a massive scar and possible muscle damage in the lower abdomen. C-sections are by far the more painful alternative. And I don’t think the main motive for abortions is being scared of the pain.

Actually as a social worker in Canada I can tell you there is a long waiting list for babies and many anti abortionists would gladly take in a child. The stats do not support your argument but we hear the same dead arguments every time this issue comes up.

Interesting Kent. Abortion also has side-effects that pro-abortionists don't want you to know about. My wife had a C-section and she is doing fine. They put her to sleep because she was so scared. My son has been a blessing. I get my nephew in July. I'm excited about it.

Yes. There are risks in a C-section and there are risks in an abortion. So why should we choose to kill. The government should promote adoption and help out with unwanted children, if they really care about people.

I personally believe that contraceptives are O.K. And sex eduacation classes should be taught with parent signature only.
But that is not the subject. The subject is; should we allow the continued killing of babies?

“The government should promote adoption and help out with unwanted children, if they really care about people.”

From the point of view of the mother, adoption is not an alternative to abortion. She would still need to go through the pregnancy, which means nine months of pills, tests and a controlled diet. The sad thing is that many young mothers who get pregnant by mistake don’t bother to take prenatal vitamins or give up cigarettes, alcohol and even drugs. Yeah, abortions are sad. But you know what’s even sadder? Seeing a newborn baby with a cocaine addiction, or with fetal alcohol syndrome. No amount of education will stop this kind of thing from happening. It may dramatically reduce the frequency, but it will never stop it.

Considering unwanted babies that are mentally retarted and drug addicted; There are still many people that would take care or pay for the care. America is the most generous giving country in the world and the most wealthy. We could federally care for the unwanted and I know many people would donate. But you guys just say kill. They do feel pain when being killed.

Bigdog,

First of all, why are you bringing up abortion? It seems a bit off the beaten path given this is normally where we explain the exidence supporting evolution and you say "nuh-uh". Did something bring this to your mind?

Secondly, why would you think that athiests are necessarily pro abortion? I ask because you list religious groups at the exclusion of others. Just because someone doesn't have a religious objection doesn't mean one cannot have a moral objection. See the difference is we use reason to determine what is right and wrong and not try to extrapolate things which were not listed in a Bronze Age text. According to the Old Testament there is nothing wrong with abortion for instance. I can give you the verse that covers a forced abortion if you would like.

I need to watch the rest so I can see how pain is proven and not just a response to stimuli but I don't know that it is relevent. Legal abortion does not make more abortions. Lack of sex education and lack of contraception are what lead to abortions both legal and illegal.

Those who believe like I do know why I have posted this. It's simply to bring awareness. I'd like to see the verse that you say legalized abortion. I think that I know what you are referring to. But please post it anyway.

To bring awareness to what? I think everyone understands the implications of abortion, and would agree that death should be avoided to the greatest extent possible. It’s not like atheists are somehow missing the point or supporting murder. There’s a reason it’s called pro-choice and not pro-abortion.

But the point is that we don’t have enough resources on this planet to sustain the human population, considering the rate at which it’s increasing. You need to look at the big picture sometimes. Instead of tax dollars funding foster homes where children grow up feeling worthless and expressing their anger through crime (I’m not being stereotypical, the statistics are very real), they could go towards cancer research or the development of new medical technology.

I never actually said legalize. It just didn't criminalize it.

Exodus 21:22-5
And if men struggle and strike a woman with child so that she has a miscarriage, yet there is no further injury, he shall be fined as the woman's husband may demand of him, and he shall pay as the judges decide. But if there is any further injury, then you shall appoint as a penalty life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, bruise for bruise.

Killing a fetus is not a crime to be punished but a civil matter. Only if there is injury to the person is there a crime.

Exodus 21:22-5

The striker in this verse is still fined, just as doctors practicing abortions should be. First offense they should be fined. Second time they should lose their license. I would create a 'No Casting of Stones Act' to protect the women caught in the act since they have been brainwashed to think it's O.K. It's amazing however that California laws are tougher than the old testament. In California if you kill a woman and the baby dies you get double homicide. But abortion is not considered murder in the same state. Doesn't make sense. But that's liberalism.

I've heard the 'not enough resources' line before. We could plant plenty of vegetables to feed people. That's still not a good reason to kill. "There's not enough resources so maybe kill them" doesn't sound convincing. I know a very rich man who I believe is a genious at what he does. He was raised in an orphanage and treats his family very well. So I still believe that we should give them a chance. Let them decide, when they grow up, if they want to live or not.

“We could plant plenty of vegetables to feed people.”

Doesn’t work like that. Industrial scale farms require massive amounts of fertilizer, and fertilizer is made with fossil fuels. Which are not a renewable resource. And yes, I’m sure there are many happy, healthy children who are raised by foster parents. But the statistics show that generally, foster care is more likely to result in children with emotional problems in comparison to children raised by their mother and father.

So you don't believe there's a chance for them so just kill them huh? I thought you liberals believed in spreading the wealth around? We're killing off the future doctors and caretakers of the world.

Abortion against the woman's will results in a fine. Think that through.

God is the biggest abortionist as most pregnancies end in miscarriage. If you believe that life begins at conception then there are some issues you should have with God. Then again we know you don't try to understand a capritious God that demands worship and threatens you with eternal torment if you fail to bow down.

“So you don't believe there's a chance for them so just kill them huh?”

That’s not what I believe at all. I believe that the mother should have the right to decide the fate of her unborn child. A fetus is not an autonomous being; it is growing using the nutrients from her body, and the oxygen in her blood. If she feels that she is not capable of maintaining a healthy pregnancy and raising or finding people to raise her child, then getting an abortion should be an available option.

The fetus (baby) still feels as much pain as a one day new born.
So what's the difference from killing a new born to a 5 month fetus?

Did you see the videos I put? They show each stage of the fetus.

A fetus does not have a fully developed nervous system until the third trimester of pregnancy, long after an abortion is possible. It may feel some pain, but probably not very much. Definitely not as much as a newborn baby would feel.

And the difference between a newborn baby and a fetus, as I already said, that a fetus is dependant on the mother and not self-sustaining. The fetus is literally a part of the mother’s body, and she should have control over her own body.

Well we can see the baby screaming during the abortion in the 'Silent Scream Video.'

A fetus doesn’t have functioning lungs. The fetus in the video opens its mouth... which tells us absolutely nothing. When a baby cries immediately after being born, it’s the result of a reflex- the purpose of which is to circulate oxygen through its lungs. The reflex to cry does not kick in until after birth, and for a good reason. If it were to happen earlier, the baby would drown.

That video has the sole purpose of appealing to emotion. Referring to the fetus as “the child” and claiming that the fetus is able to scream are great tactics to convince the viewer that abortion is bad. However that doesn’t make the video scientifically valid.

We can see the baby fighting to get away from the knife. In the scream motion the babies mouth is wide open. If you put a knife to a baby in or out of the womb it will hurt.

Thanx for this video. I was searching stuff on the internet and found this site. I'll use that link "the silent scream" for my paper i'm doing in my communications class. I can put it on the powerpoint for everyone to see. I watched it last night.I was sick to my stomach after seeing the babies piled up bodys. But I'm trying to convince my class that abortion is murder. This one girl in my class says they shoudnt kill murderers in prison and should get rid of the death penalty. But says keep abortion legal. Kill innocent babys but keep murders alive? Don't make sense to me. Im with you on this.

Good for you for showing this to your class my Catholic brother. Can you really admit 365 that the piled up holocaust of babies bodies in buckets doesn't bother you?

“Kill innocent babys but keep murders alive?”

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it yet again: The fetus is part of the mother’s body. I believe in personal rights, and I think women should have control over their own bodies. You can’t compare the two scenarios.

And just a random side thought...don’t Catholics believe that contrary to being innocent, babies are born with sin that must be cleansed at baptism? That’s what I recall learning, during my years in Catholic school.

I'm not going to speak for a Catholic, but what you are referring to really means that we are born rebellious. We are born with the capability to sin. Kids are mischeavious naturally. Babies go to Heaven if they die. Jews believe we are not accountable until 12 for girls, because you mature faster and 13 for boys. Then we are accoubtable to GOD.

Catholics baptize babies, and I don't judge that but we believe that the a person should decide when they want to be baptized. But regardless of our differences, thanks to all Catholics for coming together on this issue. We are born in the flesh and naturally rebel against the spirit. That's what it means born in sin. But yes babies are innocent. To call them a fetus is demeaning.

Born in sin meaning the flesh which is antagonistic to the spirit.

When we become accountable for our sins as young adults we began to commit sins, like lust and lying and things like that. Or thoughts that are selfish and so on. GOD says that every sin must be paid for.

Good point. Yes children have a selfish nature. That is what we call the sinful nature. That's why we are taught how to do right, even though we know deep down when we do something wrong. GOD will be the judge. We don't know what the youngest age of a person will be that is judged. To whom much is given, much is required.

Verses from the Bible show that babies do go to Heaven. This may help you.
http://www.slideshare.net/fbchenderson/salvation-1-do-babies-go-to-heaven-when-they-die

that is a sick video bigdog. I cant believe people think that is ok. that ripped my heart when I saw thos dead babys. we cant compare abortion to sluaghter houses of animals. people are above animals as long as its to eat. I wil pass this one out man. Yes we can come together on this.

365, I do not believe that you are playing with a full deck of cards. If you know what I mean. Maybe you should see a phsychiatrist?

We are supposed to lust for our wives, but we have to learn self control from looking at others. Would it be right if some guy was staring at your wife? Of course not! It is wrong.

As for rape. The only conditions for abortion are rape and if the life of the mother is in danger. I still don't like it, but that's the only justifiable case in my opinion. Did you see the dead babies bodies piled in buckets? Do you call that O.K.? Here's the video again. http://www.silentscream.org/video1.htm

What if a baby is born and the mother decides afterwards that she wants to dispose of him/her? What is your opinion?

So should the baby have a choice?

What does that have to do with the baby? I'm not talking about the mother.

So should a baby outside the womb have a choice? Should the parents be able to choose death for the baby if circumstances are too tuff?

The question was should the parents legally be allowed? Not, are they capable. Should the parents legally be allowed to put a one day old baby to death simply because they realize they cannot take care of it. What is the Dudes answer also?

"The question was should the parents legally be allowed?'

they already are.
as sci pointed out to your first question. as long as the child is a minor, he has no choice in the matter.
and as long as the fetus isn't self sufficient (eg the during the period you can, and most women have, abortions) the parents are entirely in charge.

"Should the parents legally be allowed to put a one day old baby to death simply because they realize they cannot take care of it."

aah, one day old baby?
nope, they aren't.
But that is entirely unrelated from abortions, something you don't seem to understand.

The problem is that when the baby is in the womb abortion supporters see the baby as fair game even after they know that they are devoloped. In the video Bid Dog put you can see the baby trying to get away from the destructive instruments being used to dismember him/her.

Ben. Thanks for teaching me the socratic method, but you still don't fool me into believeing that you are a "doctor of science." You're a fake and an idiot.

My bad. I just don't take being scolded by a fraud. So two days before the "fetus" is born it's fine to kill him huh?

Hey that's true. How would these evolutionists like to be aborted?

I support the death penalty for molesters that torture and kill. But you support the death penalty for the innocent babies.

"how christian for you....especially since god is supposed to forgive all...."

So I guess according to that logic we should let everybody out of prison and say your forgiven? God forgives. We forgive, but people still need to pay for their crimes on earth as well.

"???how did you figure?

the state doesn''t ABORT the FETUSSES, acting out SCENTENCES."

The state gives doctors the power and we give the state the power. So guilt goes down the line.

It's simple. You believe there's justice to kill the innocent (babies) and I don't. I believe there's justified way to kill child molesting torturing murderers and you don't. These type of people feel less pain during lethal injection than a baby does during abortion. Read this quote from abortionfacts.com.

IS IT REALLY A BABY OR ‘JUST A BLOB OF TISSUE (AT 21 WEEKS)’?"

Years ago scientists did not know. Now, however, with ultrasound and other methods, they can actually "see" the unborn baby inside of the mother’s womb. Doctors can now open the womb, do surgery on an unborn baby, and close up the womb for the pregnancy to continue normally. One now famous photo shows an unborn baby 21 weeks old reaching out of the womb and grabbing the finger of the surgeon. The surgery was completed and the baby was born healthy months later. There is now no question that it is a living, growing, feeling human being long before birth.

Picture: http://www.abortionfacts.com/literature/literature_904ao.asp

You fail sucka!!!!!

GOT EVIDENCE RIGHT HERE. At just 21 weeks they feel pain. Your the biased one.

http://www.abortionfacts.com/literature/literature_904ao.asp

Science has proven it. I'll believe the science. Thanks.

I agree with Bigdog complely on this. We must stop killing God's innocent creatures. We need to stop women who don't want their children from having abortions. What this world needs is more unwanted, unloved children whose parents don't want them or can't take care of them.
We need to use God as our role model in this. God would NEVER kill a child and we should not either.

Science has proven it.

Sci borg: "BZZZT, wrong. Nothing is ever considered proven in science."

But you believe animals to man is proven true and even old earthism when carbon dating and geologic columns have all of these problems in being proven true.

Ronnie, people like you actually make me ill. When you flip your lights on do you say "man..i hope God turns the lights on" When you are sick...do you not go to the doctor...just pray.? You depend on the things that science has proven on an hourly basis. The computer you use to post your drivel is due to the advancements made in science and technology. The food you eat is due to science advancements that feed the world.
I swear, people like you should be precluded from using any of the advantages science and technology has provided.
Your statement that science has proven nothing is a joke. I find it hallarious that you have 2 definitions of the word "proof". 1) the scientific definition of proof and 2) the biblical definition of truth which appears to be.."God said it....it is true...despite all evidence to the contrary."
Honestly, if you REALLY believe what you say..why do you even bother going to the doctor when you are sick? Why not just pray?

First question: Is this Ellman?

Luke 4:23 And he said unto them, Ye will surely say unto me this proverb, physician, heal thyself.

This verse is kind of a riddle to people who don't know the bible. see if you can figure it out. If you can it will answer your question.

Ronnie, do you even think about what you are writing. Your bronze age book tells you to go to the physician and THAT is why you go? You go to a physician because THEY are the ones that can cure you. You go to a doctor because deep down you KNOW that it is their knowledge of science and the drugs they can prescribe to you that were created by science will be what cures you.
Honestly, you downplay science constantly but yet you depend on it in 100 times in your daily life. You should spend your life thanking scientists for what they have given you. Instead you say that science is a lie.

Of course I go to a doctor. The bible says it's appointed unto man once to die. Everybody dies and gets sick. People get healed miraculously sometimes, but later we will die of old age or some disease still.

You ask how does the bible oppose germ theory? Have you read the bible. Bible cliams that God is the one that created the Plagues, etc. It is God that made those people sick..not germs, virus' etc.
Additionally, I think the claim that Jesus, not antibiotics, cures leprocy.
Additionally, wasn't the Garden of Eden free of sickness, shame and suffering before Eve ate that damn apple.
Now, you will probably say that this is too literal an interpretation of the bible. That is intellectually dishonest. You people claim that you hold this holy book up to the highest standards. But you pick and choose what is literal and what is not. Is there a secret decoder ring to determine what is metaphor and what is literal. YOU PEOPLE BELIEVE THE EARTH IS 6000 YEARS OLD, GOD CREATED ADAM FROM DIRT AND EVE FROM A RIB. Why can't you just say these claims are just metaphors and stop attacking science.
Why not just pray for healing. No..you depend on science.
There are no Theists in Emergency Rooms.

Where in the bible do you see that god created pathogenic organisms? Oh.. again.. you are interpeting aren't you. Okay...well then why not interpret it to say that evolution is the means god uses to create diversity AND STOP TRYING TO DEBUNK SCIENTIFIC THEORIES.
I do not think you understand science at all. For example: Germ theory does not say that illness is caused by micro-organisms...unless god causes it.
Meteoralogy does not say that rain is caused by when precipitation forms in clouds.....except when god causes it.
Science is a NATURAL EXPLANATION......

No body knows exactly how it all works. The Bible is just the basic message for what we need to know. We are supposed to figure out the details.

I saved this quote from BIGDOG. Who you athiests hate.

"I want to know how God created the world. I am not interested in this or that phenomenon, in the spectrum of this or that element. I want to know his thoughts. The rest are just details." Albert Einstein (cite- the expanded quotable Einstein, Princeton University Press, pg. 202)

If this quote was unamed you would call him a creationist.

I think it is wonderful when creationists quote Einstein (or should i say misquote)
They really have no clue regarding Einstein's view of God. Einstein may have believed in a God, however, he did not believe in a personal god, ie..one that cures, performs miracles for man, punishes man, heals man.
It is like if ANY scientist uses the word "God" they automatically think that that scientist is a young earth creationist who believed in the biblical story of creation.
I have said over and over on this site, why can't creationists just take the bible as a metaphor for how/why god did things instead of insisting on a literal interpretation that has been proven wrong over and over again.
I truly believe that if theists took this approach, they would be taken more seriously. If someone actually believes in the concept of a talking snake, or a 6000 year old earth...they have serious mental problems. The gullibility of some people amazes me.
As a random thought, I would like someone to do a study of any connection between a person's belief in a young earth and conspiracy theories. I would hypothosize that there is a direct coorilation between someone believing in the literal words of the bible and thier belief in thy myriad of conspiracy theories.

When Einstein says he would like to know how God created the world I think he means what he says. He wasn't religious but he obviously since he was a genious, knw that the world was created.

Talking about Einstein: Here's a pretty good article from Time Magazine that I found about him. I just read the whole thing. No quotemining please.

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1607298,00.html

Wihan,
Look up Pascal's Wager.
I could go on and on bout this age old question. However, let's have some fun..shall we?
What if the Zeus is the real god? Shouldn't you worship him also? Or what about Horas, Thor, Mithra or the Flying Spagetti Monster:???
This isn't even the logical argument against Pascal's wager...But I thought I would have fun anyway.

The problem is that their is no scientific evidence for the Greek gods. Their is scientific evidence for the Bible.

I didn't ask what you believe in, I asked what if?

Ronnie,
We have requested this evidence for YOUR god time and time again. We get ignored. There is not any scientific proof of god. Again, produce such evidence and win yourself a Nobel Prize.

Einstein discovered evidence for God. Altough he wasn't a Christian he believed in an intelligent designer. Here he is being questioned:

Interviewer to Einstein: To what extent are you influenced by Christianity? (Einstein): "As a child I received instruction both in the Bible and in the Talmud. I am a Jew, but I am enthralled by the luminous figure of the Nazarene (Jesus)."

You accept the historical existence of Jesus? "Unquestionably! No one can read the Gospels without feeling the actual presence of Jesus. His personality pulsates in every word. No myth is filled with such life."

Do you believe in God? "I'm not an atheist. I don't think I can call myself a pantheist. The problem involved is too vast for our limited minds. We are in the position of a little child entering a huge library filled with books in many languages. The child knows someone must have written those books. It does not know how. It does not understand the languages in which they are written. The child dimly suspects a mysterious order in the arrangement of the books but doesn't know what it is. That, it seems to me, is the attitude of even the most intelligent human being toward God. We see the universe marvelously arranged and obeying certain laws but only dimly understand these laws."

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1607298,00.html

Ronnie,
Again, please present evidence. Einstein did NOT submit scientific evidence. He did not test it, observe it. Einstein knew that God is not observable or testable..thus not scientific. He was a pantheist. Pantheists do NOT believe in a personal god. They do not believe that god cures people, they do not believe that god is involved your day to day life. So i am assuming that this is what you believe??????
Ronnie, you really need to pick one battle. Are you a creationists who believes in the bible tale of god creating the universe 6000 years ago or are you a believer in intellegent design which has no position on HOW we were created and HOW we evolved. I.D. says we were intellegently designed but does not go into specifics. We could have been designed by elfs, santa, Thor...etc. Please choose one position and stick with it.

Ronnie.

I can't believe that you're still debating these guys. Don't you see the kind of trash that they spew out? Thanks for bringing up my old post of "Catholics and Protestants: For Life" however. I'm in sunny Florida right now, just trying to get out of the stinking Canadian cold weather.

if you didn't notice...he posted that comment a long time ago. like months ago. he just posted a video above now. in the heading.