[Vision2020] Compassion for All Life

Sun Jan 28 21:27:12 PST 2007

Ouch!  As someone who lived in the area during the Tate/LaBianca Murders, I 
totally resent your characterization of these two things being similar.  
Tate was KILLED and her child, though it was falsely rumored, was NOT 
removed.  What Atkins said was that she had THOUGHT about removing the 
child.  Again, the mother was KILLED at the time this inner-debate was 
taking place.

The abortionist has the consent of the mother and, NO, I do not agree with 
abortion, but I do agree that each person has the RIGHT to make that 
decision for theyself.  I would HOPE they would choose to go the adoption 
route, but again, it is not MY place to try and influence them in that 
decision.

You, as a MAN, do not have the right to force a women into your way of 
thinking.  How about if all women made the decision for a man that he could 
not be circumsized or "fixed"? You would resent that intrusion into your 
body choices, as I would expect you to.

You gotta let people make up their own minds.  It is ultimately their life 
and they are the ones that have to answer for their life's direction.

Yep, hear it now....murder and abortion are the same.  Not legally, so you 
really have to find another argument that works.

J  :]

>From: "Tony" <tonytime at clearwire.net>
>To: "Tom Hansen" <thansen at moscow.com>
>CC: vision2020 at moscow.com
>Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Compassion for All Life
>Date: Sun, 28 Jan 2007 17:35:46 -0800
>
>Tom, for God's sake, would you call what Charles Manson had his followers 
>do to Sharon Tate, an "operation?"  How then can you characterize the 
>equally barbaric practice of ripping an innocent child from it's mother's 
>womb and then summarily trash canning the bloody remains, as a medical 
>procedure??
>
>Think, you misguided enabler!  A man who intentionally causes the violent 
>death of an innocent child, is NOT a "physician" but simply a more polished 
>Charley Manson.  The result is the same: violent and unnecessary death.
>
>When judgment day comes, if there is such a thing, may God have mercy on 
>your soul, Tom, for countenancing our modern age's most horrific crime.
>
>-T
>   ----- Original Message -----
>   From: Tom Hansen
>   To: 'Scott Dredge' ; vision2020 at moscow.com
>   Sent: Saturday, January 27, 2007 6:05 AM
>   Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Compassion for All Life
>
>
>   Two things that legalizing abortions (prior to the third trimester) 
>accomplishes:
>
>
>
>   1)  Reduces mandated influence of the government over women's personal 
>lives.
>
>
>
>   2)  Provides availability of sterilized environments and 
>trained/qualified physicians for such an operation.
>
>
>
>   To believe that abortions will not occur if they are not legal is 
>absolutely ludicrous.  To believe that the number of abortions has 
>increased since Roe v. Wade is just as ignorant.  Perhaps the number of 
>REPORTED abortions has increased, possibly due to a drastic reduction in 
>abortions being performed in back alleys with coat hangers.
>
>
>
>   Seeya round town, Moscow.
>
>
>
>   Tom "I'm Pro-Choice and I Vote" Hansen
>
>   Moscow, Idaho
>
>
>
>   "Don't pray in my school and I won't think in your church."
>
>
>
>   - Author Unknown
>
>
>
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>   From: vision2020-bounces at moscow.com 
>[mailto:vision2020-bounces at moscow.com] On Behalf Of Scott Dredge
>   Sent: Friday, January 26, 2007 10:03 PM
>   To: vision2020 at moscow.com
>   Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Compassion for All Life
>
>
>
>   Tony,
>
>   You can oppose abortion all you want.  The fact is that whether or not 
>abortion remains legalized or whether it is completely banned will not 
>directily impact you.  You personally gain no rights nor lose any rights as 
>abortion restrictions ebb and flow.
>
>   But would your position on "compassion for all life" change at all if 
>you were affected?  For instance, let's say that I need half of your liver 
>to survive because for [insert any reason] my own liver is failing.  Let's 
>say that an operation to split your liver carries no more risk of death to 
>you than that of a woman in child birth.  Let's also say that the recovery 
>time from this operation is no more burdensome than what women typically go 
>through from late term pregnancies through child birth.  Your liver will 
>regenerate back to full size 6 months after the operation.  The question 
>then I have for you is this: should you be allowed to make the choice of 
>whether or not to donate half of your liver to save my life or should the 
>government be allowed to strap you to a gurney against your will and take 
>half of your liver to save me in the name of "compassion for all life"?
>
>   Looking forward to your bobbing and weaving response - if you have any 
>response at all.
>
>   -Scott
>
>
>
>
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>   =======================================================
>    List services made available by First Step Internet,
>    serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
>                  http://www.fsr.net
>             mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
>   =======================================================

>=======================================================
>  List services made available by First Step Internet,
>  serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
>                http://www.fsr.net
>           mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
>=======================================================

_________________________________________________________________
Get live scores and news about your team: Add the Live.com Football Page  
http://www.live.com/?addtemplate=football