Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'

[dhamiltony...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

While beauty and youth are in their full prime,
 And folly and fashion affect our whole time;
 Oh, let not the phantom our wishes engage;
 Let's live so in youth that we blush not in age. 
 

 I sigh not for beauty, nor languish for wealth, 
 But grant me, kind Providence, virtue and health.
 Then, richer than kings, and far happier than they,
 My days shall pass swiftly and sweetly away.
 

 The vain and the young may attend us awhile,
 But let not their flatt'ry our prudence beguile.
 Let's covet those charms that shall never decay;
 Nor listen to all that deceivers can say.
 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <dhamiltony...@yahoo.com> wrote :

 Sublunary?
 

Sublunary sphere - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sublunary_sphere 
 
 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sublunary_sphere
 
 Sublunary sphere - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sublunary_sphere The sublunary sphere is a 
concept in Aristotelian physics derived from Greek astronomy.[1] It is the 
region of the geocentric cosmos below the Moon, c...


 
 View on en.wikipedia.org https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sublunary_sphere
 Preview by Yahoo 
 

  

 "Unthinking man, remember this, 
 Though fond of sublunary bliss, 

 Make hay while the sun shines..
 the Dome doors open for meditation at 6:40am CST  
 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <dhamiltony...@yahoo.com> wrote :

 My days, my weeks, my months, my years,
 Fly rapid as the whirling spheres, 
 Fly rapid as the whirling spheres, 
 Around the steady pole. 
 Time, like the tide, its motion keeps, 
 And I must launch thro' endless deeps,
 And I must launch thro' endless deeps, 
 Where endless ages roll.
 

 The grave is near the cradle seen,
 How swift the moments pass between, 
 How swift the moments pass between, 
 And whisper as they fly. 
 "Unthinking man, remember this, 
 Though fond of sublunary bliss, 
 Though fond of sublunary bliss, 
 That you must groan and die." 
 

 My soul, attend the solemn call, 
 Thine earthly tent must shortly fall, 
 Thine earthly tent must shortly fall, 
 And thou must take thy flight. 
 Beyond the vast expansive blue, 
 To sing above, as angels do, 
 To sing above, as angels do,
 Or sing in endless night. 
 

 Joshua Smith's Divine Hymns, 1794.
 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <steve.sun...@yahoo.com> wrote :

 This is sort of funny.  A couple of weeks ago my wife and I were having dinner 
in a restaurant in a better part of town, where I also went to high school.  It 
was a lot busier than we expected. We were sitting at the outdoor bar, and I 
hear a couple guys talking about the best looking girl in our high school 
during those days.  I mentioned how odd that was to my wife, and then she 
overheard the bartender talking to one of the group about where the their high 
school reunion was going to after this little pre get together. 

 This group was a year behind me, (thank God), but I was surprised at just how 
old everyone looked.
 

 On the other hand, the person I see in the mirror now, for the first time, is 
starting to look pretty old as well.  (-:
 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

 64 next month. Just went to my 45th year high school reunion last night, 
couldn't recognize a soul! We all looked so old! Everybody was going around 
looking at our name tags with our senior pictures on them to see who they 
recognized! It was hilarious.  My dad died when I was nine, I never married 
because I never expected to live long enough to raise a family. Didn't want to 
put my kids through my own personal experience. Big mistake, maybe. Hear I am 
at 64, old enough to be a grandfather. However , raising a family, I wouldn't 
have had the wonderful experiences I have had with Maharishi.

 

 From: "awoelflebater@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Sunday, September 20, 2015 11:34 AM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
 
 
   

 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

 
At this point I would have to ask your age. I would guess you were born well 
after the beginning of the *Great Society*. That is when out of wedlock 
birthrates began do increase, when the government told the masses, we will take 
care of your babies, women began to feel there was no need for a man in the 
house, a bread winner. Children started growing up without a male role model 
and authority figure in the house and crime started ramping up. Out of wedlock 
birth rates in the black community today near 80% and about 40 % in white 
homes, the last I read. This was unheard of before the beginning of the *Great 
Society*.
 

 That's funny because I was going to ask your age as well based on some of your 
comments (BTW, I like discussing things with you because no matter how much we 
might disagree you are alway pleasant and civil.

Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'

[olliesed...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

Superiorism sounds like life as run by the ego. Slavery, born of great fear, is 
all that is. The ego is all about always being right, and enforcing boundaries. 
It very much works in opposition to open-mindedness. Great manager, lousy 
leader. I am glad such influences are no longer predominant here on FFL, as it 
is resulting in long chains of varied thoughts, even tackling the most 
controversial topics. Ah, and I see *Girish's reputation* has been served up 
today...:-)
 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <dhamiltony2k5@...> wrote :

 Thanks for the acknowledgment, Ollie. I noticed this too. The praise should go 
to yahoo-groups. Folks in the 'Debate' thread seemed consciously respectful in 
their writing on such a volatile subject with chosen writing written well 
within the yahoo-groups guidelines of civility. Was really great and 
substantial content well said. At one point someone tried a hook barbed with 
superiorism but nobody took the bait. The whole thread evidently shows a 
thoughtful culture of maturing self-moderation of the group. -JaiGuruYouAll! 
 

 Def: Superiorism (noun) – the state of believing you and/or your ideas are 
better than everyone else’s and attributing negative motives and/or lower 
levels of intelligence to anyone who would disagree
 

 FFL # 420760Superiorism
 -Bhairitu's Link
 18 September 2015
 

 
 420913"olliesedwuz" said: To Doug: Thanks for (re)creating a great environment 
here - it is really taking off. ..
 I don't think we will see eye to eye on this within the context of this 
discussion, though I heartily agree with what you had said earlier about being 
true to oneself, and having the courage of your convictions (paraphrasing). The 
topic of abortion can be such a contentious issue, and yet we've had about 
fifty exchanges on this subject, here on FFL, opening up a host of different 
perspectives.

 420849back_formore writes: (BTW, I like discussing things with you because no 
matter how much we might disagree you are alway pleasant and civil. I think 
this is one of the things I like most about FFL now - everyone can speak their 
mind without the peanut gallery inciting dissension by misrepresenting every 
viewpoint and consequently skewing discussions until hey resemble nothing but 
juvenile pie throwing contests)
 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <olliesedwuz@...> wrote :

 I don't think we will see eye to eye on this within the context of this 
discussion, though I heartily agree with what you had said earlier about being 
true to oneself, and having the courage of your convictions (paraphrasing). The 
topic of abortion can be such a contentious issue, and yet we've had about 
fifty exchanges on this subject, here on FFL, opening up a host of different 
perspectives. 

 To Doug: Thanks for (re)creating a great environment here - it is really 
taking off. 
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

 Geeez dude, don't take my word. Check it out your self. As for the definition 
of murder, check it out . It also usually includes willful and *unjust* 
killing.   A fetus doesn't threaten anyone. It is totally innocent.  In the 
case of wars, killing an enemy that is a threat, has never been considered 
murder. Although by today's standard there are clear limitations. Even the 
killing of civilians is not considered murder, if it was not intended and I 
would assume precautions were taken to avoid it. As far as I can tell, every 
culture and religion has made an exception for killing another human for self 
defense and war or at least a defensive war.  

 

 From: "olliesedwuz@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Monday, September 21, 2015 12:34 PM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
 
 
   Even if I take you at your word here, this still lacks an explanation for 
why this is the bigger issue, vs. the lives lost through US led invasions of 
other countries. To say waging war is self-defense makes such actions morally 
meaningless, allowing us aggression in any quarter, justified as 
'self-defense'. Where are the demonstrations against the murders occurring as a 
result of our actions outside our borders? Why should independent human beings 
get less or no consideration, than fetuses, regarding their murders, if we 
define murder as you have here? It seems you are going after the easy target.
 
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

  Murder is defined as the willful killing of another *human being*, 
*especially* with malice. Notice , one doesn't have to exhibit malice to have 
committed murder. If a fetus is not a human being, what is it? Mind you, there 
was a time in our history when slaves were not considered complete human 
beings.
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Monday, September 21, 2015 6:59 AM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
 
 
   Let's talk 

Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'

[dhamiltony...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

Thanks for the acknowledgment, Ollie. I noticed this too. The praise should go 
to yahoo-groups. Folks in the 'Debate' thread seemed consciously respectful in 
their writing on such a volatile subject with chosen writing written well 
within the yahoo-groups guidelines of civility. Was really great and 
substantial content well said. At one point someone tried a hook barbed with 
superiorism but nobody took the bait. The whole thread evidently shows a 
thoughtful culture of maturing self-moderation of the group. -JaiGuruYouAll! 
 
 
 Def: Superiorism (noun) – the state of believing you and/or your ideas are 
better than everyone else’s and attributing negative motives and/or lower 
levels of intelligence to anyone who would disagree 
 
 
 FFL # 420760Superiorism
 -Bhairitu's Link
 18 September 2015
 

 
 420913"olliesedwuz" said: To Doug: Thanks for (re)creating a great environment 
here - it is really taking off. ..
 I don't think we will see eye to eye on this within the context of this 
discussion, though I heartily agree with what you had said earlier about being 
true to oneself, and having the courage of your convictions (paraphrasing). The 
topic of abortion can be such a contentious issue, and yet we've had about 
fifty exchanges on this subject, here on FFL, opening up a host of different 
perspectives.

 420849back_formore writes: (BTW, I like discussing things with you because no 
matter how much we might disagree you are alway pleasant and civil. I think 
this is one of the things I like most about FFL now - everyone can speak their 
mind without the peanut gallery inciting dissension by misrepresenting every 
viewpoint and consequently skewing discussions until hey resemble nothing but 
juvenile pie throwing contests) 
 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <olliesed...@yahoo.com> wrote :

 I don't think we will see eye to eye on this within the context of this 
discussion, though I heartily agree with what you had said earlier about being 
true to oneself, and having the courage of your convictions (paraphrasing). The 
topic of abortion can be such a contentious issue, and yet we've had about 
fifty exchanges on this subject, here on FFL, opening up a host of different 
perspectives. 

 To Doug: Thanks for (re)creating a great environment here - it is really 
taking off. 
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

 Geeez dude, don't take my word. Check it out your self. As for the definition 
of murder, check it out . It also usually includes willful and *unjust* 
killing.   A fetus doesn't threaten anyone. It is totally innocent.  In the 
case of wars, killing an enemy that is a threat, has never been considered 
murder. Although by today's standard there are clear limitations. Even the 
killing of civilians is not considered murder, if it was not intended and I 
would assume precautions were taken to avoid it. As far as I can tell, every 
culture and religion has made an exception for killing another human for self 
defense and war or at least a defensive war.  

 

 From: "olliesedwuz@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Monday, September 21, 2015 12:34 PM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
 
 
   Even if I take you at your word here, this still lacks an explanation for 
why this is the bigger issue, vs. the lives lost through US led invasions of 
other countries. To say waging war is self-defense makes such actions morally 
meaningless, allowing us aggression in any quarter, justified as 
'self-defense'. Where are the demonstrations against the murders occurring as a 
result of our actions outside our borders? Why should independent human beings 
get less or no consideration, than fetuses, regarding their murders, if we 
define murder as you have here? It seems you are going after the easy target.
 
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

  Murder is defined as the willful killing of another *human being*, 
*especially* with malice. Notice , one doesn't have to exhibit malice to have 
committed murder. If a fetus is not a human being, what is it? Mind you, there 
was a time in our history when slaves were not considered complete human 
beings.
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Monday, September 21, 2015 6:59 AM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
 
 
   Let's talk about this term, "murder", wrt an abortion. I know the radical 
preachers have seized on this term as a graphic and ugly description of 
abortion. But, have any of them known a murder victim? Someone who had a full 
life and a circle of friends and family, those that loved them, who would never 
see them again? Hard core memories of this person remain, their smile, their 
belongings, the many activities shared, their pictures in the high school 
yearbook. I lost two friends that way in high school, both young women, one was 
hitchhikin

Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'

[dhamiltony...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

Sublunary?
 

Sublunary sphere - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sublunary_sphere 
 
 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sublunary_sphere 
 
 Sublunary sphere - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sublunary_sphere The sublunary sphere is a 
concept in Aristotelian physics derived from Greek astronomy.[1] It is the 
region of the geocentric cosmos below the Moon, c...
 
 
 
 View on en.wikipedia.org https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sublunary_sphere 
 Preview by Yahoo 
 
 
  

 "Unthinking man, remember this, 
 Though fond of sublunary bliss, 

 Make hay while the sun shines..
 the Dome doors open for meditation at 6:40am CST  
 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <dhamiltony...@yahoo.com> wrote :

 My days, my weeks, my months, my years,
 Fly rapid as the whirling spheres, 
 Fly rapid as the whirling spheres, 
 Around the steady pole. 
 Time, like the tide, its motion keeps, 
 And I must launch thro' endless deeps,
 And I must launch thro' endless deeps, 
 Where endless ages roll.
 

 The grave is near the cradle seen,
 How swift the moments pass between, 
 How swift the moments pass between, 
 And whisper as they fly. 
 "Unthinking man, remember this, 
 Though fond of sublunary bliss, 
 Though fond of sublunary bliss, 
 That you must groan and die." 
 

 My soul, attend the solemn call, 
 Thine earthly tent must shortly fall, 
 Thine earthly tent must shortly fall, 
 And thou must take thy flight. 
 Beyond the vast expansive blue, 
 To sing above, as angels do, 
 To sing above, as angels do,
 Or sing in endless night. 
 

 Joshua Smith's Divine Hymns, 1794.
 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <steve.sun...@yahoo.com> wrote :

 This is sort of funny.  A couple of weeks ago my wife and I were having dinner 
in a restaurant in a better part of town, where I also went to high school.  It 
was a lot busier than we expected. We were sitting at the outdoor bar, and I 
hear a couple guys talking about the best looking girl in our high school 
during those days.  I mentioned how odd that was to my wife, and then she 
overheard the bartender talking to one of the group about where the their high 
school reunion was going to after this little pre get together. 

 This group was a year behind me, (thank God), but I was surprised at just how 
old everyone looked.
 

 On the other hand, the person I see in the mirror now, for the first time, is 
starting to look pretty old as well.  (-:
 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

 64 next month. Just went to my 45th year high school reunion last night, 
couldn't recognize a soul! We all looked so old! Everybody was going around 
looking at our name tags with our senior pictures on them to see who they 
recognized! It was hilarious.  My dad died when I was nine, I never married 
because I never expected to live long enough to raise a family. Didn't want to 
put my kids through my own personal experience. Big mistake, maybe. Hear I am 
at 64, old enough to be a grandfather. However , raising a family, I wouldn't 
have had the wonderful experiences I have had with Maharishi.

 

 From: "awoelflebater@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Sunday, September 20, 2015 11:34 AM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
 
 
   

 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

 
At this point I would have to ask your age. I would guess you were born well 
after the beginning of the *Great Society*. That is when out of wedlock 
birthrates began do increase, when the government told the masses, we will take 
care of your babies, women began to feel there was no need for a man in the 
house, a bread winner. Children started growing up without a male role model 
and authority figure in the house and crime started ramping up. Out of wedlock 
birth rates in the black community today near 80% and about 40 % in white 
homes, the last I read. This was unheard of before the beginning of the *Great 
Society*.
 

 That's funny because I was going to ask your age as well based on some of your 
comments (BTW, I like discussing things with you because no matter how much we 
might disagree you are alway pleasant and civil. I think this is one of the 
things I like most about FFL now - everyone can speak their mind without the 
peanut gallery inciting dissension by misrepresenting every viewpoint and 
consequently skewing discussions until hey resemble nothing but juvenile pie 
throwing contests). I was born in 1956 so that makes me much older than you 
think. In addition, I have never had an abortion nor do I have any children (by 
definite choice). When my husband and I were married he had already been 
married before and had had a vasectomy (he is 7 years older than I am) and if 
we were going to have children together he was going to have to have the 
vasectomy rev

Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'

[olliesed...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

I don't think we will see eye to eye on this within the context of this 
discussion, though I heartily agree with what you had said earlier about being 
true to oneself, and having the courage of your convictions (paraphrasing). The 
topic of abortion can be such a contentious issue, and yet we've had about 
fifty exchanges on this subject, here on FFL, opening up a host of different 
perspectives. 

 To Doug: Thanks for (re)creating a great environment here - it is really 
taking off. 
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

 Geeez dude, don't take my word. Check it out your self. As for the definition 
of murder, check it out . It also usually includes willful and *unjust* 
killing.   A fetus doesn't threaten anyone. It is totally innocent.  In the 
case of wars, killing an enemy that is a threat, has never been considered 
murder. Although by today's standard there are clear limitations. Even the 
killing of civilians is not considered murder, if it was not intended and I 
would assume precautions were taken to avoid it. As far as I can tell, every 
culture and religion has made an exception for killing another human for self 
defense and war or at least a defensive war.  

 

 From: "olliesedwuz@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Monday, September 21, 2015 12:34 PM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
 
 
   Even if I take you at your word here, this still lacks an explanation for 
why this is the bigger issue, vs. the lives lost through US led invasions of 
other countries. To say waging war is self-defense makes such actions morally 
meaningless, allowing us aggression in any quarter, justified as 
'self-defense'. Where are the demonstrations against the murders occurring as a 
result of our actions outside our borders? Why should independent human beings 
get less or no consideration, than fetuses, regarding their murders, if we 
define murder as you have here? It seems you are going after the easy target.
 
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

  Murder is defined as the willful killing of another *human being*, 
*especially* with malice. Notice , one doesn't have to exhibit malice to have 
committed murder. If a fetus is not a human being, what is it? Mind you, there 
was a time in our history when slaves were not considered complete human 
beings.
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Monday, September 21, 2015 6:59 AM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
 
 
   Let's talk about this term, "murder", wrt an abortion. I know the radical 
preachers have seized on this term as a graphic and ugly description of 
abortion. But, have any of them known a murder victim? Someone who had a full 
life and a circle of friends and family, those that loved them, who would never 
see them again? Hard core memories of this person remain, their smile, their 
belongings, the many activities shared, their pictures in the high school 
yearbook. I lost two friends that way in high school, both young women, one was 
hitchhiking, and the other's car broke down.
 

 And does anyone think about the actual mindset of a murderer? Aside from 
killings done in the heat of the moment, murderers are violent thugs and 
predators who deliberately enjoy inflicting pain on others - As evil as it 
gets. 
 

 

 
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

 About 53 million abortions since Row v Wade.About 300,000 last year. Hitler 
murdered 6 million innocent lives alone in a 5-6 yer period. Stalin murdered 
about 20 million, Mao about fifty million. We've got them beat!

 

 From: "awoelflebater@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Sunday, September 20, 2015 8:50 AM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
 
 
   

 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

 I guess it depends on your definition of *judge*. Do I recognize poor 
choices?Is it  from poor up bringing or low intelligence.-or is it something 
else. Does that person learn from their mistakes or do they keep repeating the 
same mistake over and over. Do they ever figure out that they are making 
mistakes and , poor choices. Do they feel any responsibility for their choices? 
Do they even care? Do they feel entitled to make mistakes without consequences? 
Some people learn things the easy way, others the hard way.  How much empathy, 
compassion and understanding is expected of me? For how long and to what 
degree? Are they taking advantage of my good will? If it's their nature to 
learn things the hard way, is my help actually retarding their learning 
process? Some people are real victims of circumstances through no fault of 
their own. They didn't make poor choices  but shit happened. Maybe their 
husband died or just left them or became totally disabl

Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'

[Mike Dixon mdixon.6...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

That is and has always been the definition of murder. Killing the enemy in war 
is not considered murder.

  From: "awoelfleba...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]" 
<FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Monday, September 21, 2015 3:39 PM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
   
    


---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

Geeez dude, don't take my word. Check it out your self. As for the definition 
of murder, check it out . It also usually includes willful and *unjust* 
killing.   A fetus doesn't threaten anyone. It is totally innocent.  In the 
case of wars, killing an enemy that is a threat, has never been considered 
murder. Although by today's standard there are clear limitations. Even the 
killing of civilians is not considered murder, if it was not intended and I 
would assume precautions were taken to avoid it. As far as I can tell, every 
culture and religion has made an exception for killing another human for self 
defense and war or at least a defensive war.  

So, killing an unformed, unborn human is murder and killing a fully formed 
human being with history and family and loved ones who threatens you or is 
engaged in war with you is not murder. 'Nuff said.

  From: "olliesedwuz@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Monday, September 21, 2015 12:34 PM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
 
 Even if I take you at your word here, this still lacks an explanation for why 
this is the bigger issue, vs. the lives lost through US led invasions of other 
countries. To say waging war is self-defense makes such actions morally 
meaningless, allowing us aggression in any quarter, justified as 
'self-defense'. Where are the demonstrations against the murders occurring as a 
result of our actions outside our borders? Why should independent human beings 
get less or no consideration, than fetuses, regarding their murders, if we 
define murder as you have here? It seems you are going after the easy target.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

 Murder is defined as the willful killing of another *human being*, 
*especially* with malice. Notice , one doesn't have to exhibit malice to have 
committed murder. If a fetus is not a human being, what is it? Mind you, there 
was a time in our history when slaves were not considered complete human 
beings.
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Monday, September 21, 2015 6:59 AM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
 
 Let's talk about this term, "murder", wrt an abortion. I know the radical 
preachers have seized on this term as a graphic and ugly description of 
abortion. But, have any of them known a murder victim? Someone who had a full 
life and a circle of friends and family, those that loved them, who would never 
see them again? Hard core memories of this person remain, their smile, their 
belongings, the many activities shared, their pictures in the high school 
yearbook. I lost two friends that way in high school, both young women, one was 
hitchhiking, and the other's car broke down.
And does anyone think about the actual mindset of a murderer? Aside from 
killings done in the heat of the moment, murderers are violent thugs and 
predators who deliberately enjoy inflicting pain on others - As evil as it 
gets. 


---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

About 53 million abortions since Row v Wade.About 300,000 last year. Hitler 
murdered 6 million innocent lives alone in a 5-6 yer period. Stalin murdered 
about 20 million, Mao about fifty million. We've got them beat!

  From: "awoelflebater@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Sunday, September 20, 2015 8:50 AM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
 
 


---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

I guess it depends on your definition of *judge*. Do I recognize poor 
choices?Is it  from poor up bringing or low intelligence.-or is it something 
else. Does that person learn from their mistakes or do they keep repeating the 
same mistake over and over. Do they ever figure out that they are making 
mistakes and , poor choices. Do they feel any responsibility for their choices? 
Do they even care? Do they feel entitled to make mistakes without consequences? 
Some people learn things the easy way, others the hard way.  How much empathy, 
compassion and understanding is expected of me? For how long and to what 
degree? Are they taking advantage of my good will? If it's their nature to 
learn things the hard way, is my help actually retarding their learning 
process? Some people are real victims of circumstances through no fault of 
their own. They didn't make poor choices  but shit happened. Maybe their 
husband died or just left them or 

Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'

[feste37]

I know a woman who had several abortions. Using Mike's language, she would be a 
triple murderess. Doesn't sound quite right. 
 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <olliesedwuz@...> wrote :

 Let's talk about this term, "murder", wrt an abortion. I know the radical 
preachers have seized on this term as a graphic and ugly description of 
abortion. But, have any of them known a murder victim? Someone who had a full 
life and a circle of friends and family, those that loved them, who would never 
see them again? Hard core memories of this person remain, their smile, their 
belongings, the many activities shared, their pictures in the high school 
yearbook. I lost two friends that way in high school, both young women, one was 
hitchhiking, and the other's car broke down. 

 And does anyone think about the actual mindset of a murderer? Aside from 
killings done in the heat of the moment, murderers are violent thugs and 
predators who deliberately enjoy inflicting pain on others - As evil as it 
gets. 
 

 To call abortion "murder" is over the top hyperbole, and those radical 
preachers spreading such nonsense should, if they can see over their massively 
inflated egos, be ashamed of themselves. Abortion is not murder, and it never 
has been. To equate it this way simply tells me that the ones raising this 
issue are either incredibly naive and thoughtless, or far more interested in 
creating conflict, than resolution. Doesn't sound Christ-like to me - 
Carelessly equating abortion with "murder" is more like creating a political 
wedge issue, to rally the flock. 
 

 Pardon my cynical view of the radical preachers who rally their followers 
around the abortion issue, though it seems far easier for these men to gang up 
on women thinking of terminating their pregnancy, than it does to tackle the 
real problems of the world, their families, and within themselves. 
 
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

 About 53 million abortions since Row v Wade.About 300,000 last year. Hitler 
murdered 6 million innocent lives alone in a 5-6 yer period. Stalin murdered 
about 20 million, Mao about fifty million. We've got them beat!

 

 From: "awoelflebater@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Sunday, September 20, 2015 8:50 AM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
 
 
   

 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

 I guess it depends on your definition of *judge*. Do I recognize poor 
choices?Is it  from poor up bringing or low intelligence.-or is it something 
else. Does that person learn from their mistakes or do they keep repeating the 
same mistake over and over. Do they ever figure out that they are making 
mistakes and , poor choices. Do they feel any responsibility for their choices? 
Do they even care? Do they feel entitled to make mistakes without consequences? 
Some people learn things the easy way, others the hard way.  How much empathy, 
compassion and understanding is expected of me? For how long and to what 
degree? Are they taking advantage of my good will? If it's their nature to 
learn things the hard way, is my help actually retarding their learning 
process? Some people are real victims of circumstances through no fault of 
their own. They didn't make poor choices  but shit happened. Maybe their 
husband died or just left them or became totally disabled. Aren't  they more 
deserving of my empathy and compassion than someone that never grew up? When I 
was younger, out of wedlock births were relatively low. Today, I think it is  
over or at least close to half. Something is dreadfully wrong. When it comes to 
the woman that has the abortion, I am fully aware that she is probably confused 
and frightened of her future  and doesn't know what to do and ends up taking 
the remedy with the quickest results. I feel terribly sorry for her because  I 
don't think she really and fully understands what she has just done. Yes, 
she'll always remember it and the anguish. But she was talked into it and told 
it was the best thing to do. This is what the Beast does. What is the Beast, 
it's the system!

 

 Overview:
 

 Quick Stats • Half of pregnancies among American women are unintended, and 
about four in 10 of these end in abortion.[1]
 • About half of American women will have an unintended pregnancy, [2] and 
nearly 3 in 10 will have an abortion, by age 45.[3]
 • The overall U.S. unintended pregnancy rate increased slightly between 1994 
and 2008, but unintended pregnancy increased 55% among poor women, while 
decreasing 24% among higher-income women.[1,6]
 • Overall, the abortion rate decreased 8% between 2000 and 2008, but abortion 
increased 18% among poor women, while decreasing 28% among higher-income 
women.[3]
 • Some 1.06 million abortions were performed in 2011, down from 1.21 million 
abortions in 2008, a declin

Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'

[olliesed...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

Let's talk about this term, "murder", wrt an abortion. I know the radical 
preachers have seized on this term as a graphic and ugly description of 
abortion. But, have any of them known a murder victim? Someone who had a full 
life and a circle of friends and family, those that loved them, who would never 
see them again? Hard core memories of this person remain, their smile, their 
belongings, the many activities shared, their pictures in the high school 
yearbook. I lost two friends that way in high school, both young women, one was 
hitchhiking, and the other's car broke down. 

 And does anyone think about the actual mindset of a murderer? Aside from 
killings done in the heat of the moment, murderers are violent thugs and 
predators who deliberately enjoy inflicting pain on others - As evil as it 
gets. 
 

 To call abortion "murder" is over the top hyperbole, and those radical 
preachers spreading such nonsense should, if they can see over their massively 
inflated egos, be ashamed of themselves. Abortion is not murder, and it never 
has been. To equate it this way simply tells me that the ones raising this 
issue are either incredibly naive and thoughtless, or far more interested in 
creating conflict, than resolution. Doesn't sound Christ-like to me - 
Carelessly equating abortion with "murder" is more like creating a political 
wedge issue, to rally the flock. 
 

 Pardon my cynical view of the radical preachers who rally their followers 
around the abortion issue, though it seems far easier for these men to gang up 
on women thinking of terminating their pregnancy, than it does to tackle the 
real problems of the world, their families, and within themselves. 
 
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

 About 53 million abortions since Row v Wade.About 300,000 last year. Hitler 
murdered 6 million innocent lives alone in a 5-6 yer period. Stalin murdered 
about 20 million, Mao about fifty million. We've got them beat!

 

 From: "awoelflebater@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Sunday, September 20, 2015 8:50 AM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
 
 
   

 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

 I guess it depends on your definition of *judge*. Do I recognize poor 
choices?Is it  from poor up bringing or low intelligence.-or is it something 
else. Does that person learn from their mistakes or do they keep repeating the 
same mistake over and over. Do they ever figure out that they are making 
mistakes and , poor choices. Do they feel any responsibility for their choices? 
Do they even care? Do they feel entitled to make mistakes without consequences? 
Some people learn things the easy way, others the hard way.  How much empathy, 
compassion and understanding is expected of me? For how long and to what 
degree? Are they taking advantage of my good will? If it's their nature to 
learn things the hard way, is my help actually retarding their learning 
process? Some people are real victims of circumstances through no fault of 
their own. They didn't make poor choices  but shit happened. Maybe their 
husband died or just left them or became totally disabled. Aren't  they more 
deserving of my empathy and compassion than someone that never grew up? When I 
was younger, out of wedlock births were relatively low. Today, I think it is  
over or at least close to half. Something is dreadfully wrong. When it comes to 
the woman that has the abortion, I am fully aware that she is probably confused 
and frightened of her future  and doesn't know what to do and ends up taking 
the remedy with the quickest results. I feel terribly sorry for her because  I 
don't think she really and fully understands what she has just done. Yes, 
she'll always remember it and the anguish. But she was talked into it and told 
it was the best thing to do. This is what the Beast does. What is the Beast, 
it's the system!

 

 Overview:
 

 Quick Stats • Half of pregnancies among American women are unintended, and 
about four in 10 of these end in abortion.[1]
 • About half of American women will have an unintended pregnancy, [2] and 
nearly 3 in 10 will have an abortion, by age 45.[3]
 • The overall U.S. unintended pregnancy rate increased slightly between 1994 
and 2008, but unintended pregnancy increased 55% among poor women, while 
decreasing 24% among higher-income women.[1,6]
 • Overall, the abortion rate decreased 8% between 2000 and 2008, but abortion 
increased 18% among poor women, while decreasing 28% among higher-income 
women.[3]
 • Some 1.06 million abortions were performed in 2011, down from 1.21 million 
abortions in 2008, a decline of 13%.[4]
 • The number of U.S. abortion providers declined 4% between 2008 (1,793) and 
2011 (1,720). The number of clinics providing abortion services declined 1%, 
from 851 to 839. Eighty-nine percent o

Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'

[dhamiltony...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

My days, my weeks, my months, my years,
 Fly rapid as the whirling spheres, 
 Fly rapid as the whirling spheres, 
 Around the steady pole. 
 Time, like the tide, its motion keeps, 
 And I must launch thro' endless deeps,
 And I must launch thro' endless deeps, 
 Where endless ages roll.
 

 The grave is near the cradle seen,
 How swift the moments pass between, 
 How swift the moments pass between, 
 And whisper as they fly. 
 "Unthinking man, remember this, 
 Though fond of sublunary bliss, 
 Though fond of sublunary bliss, 
 That you must groan and die." 
 

 My soul, attend the solemn call, 
 Thine earthly tent must shortly fall, 
 Thine earthly tent must shortly fall, 
 And thou must take thy flight. 
 Beyond the vast expansive blue, 
 To sing above, as angels do, 
 To sing above, as angels do,
 Or sing in endless night. 
 

 Joshua Smith's Divine Hymns, 1794.
 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <steve.sun...@yahoo.com> wrote :

 This is sort of funny.  A couple of weeks ago my wife and I were having dinner 
in a restaurant in a better part of town, where I also went to high school.  It 
was a lot busier than we expected. We were sitting at the outdoor bar, and I 
hear a couple guys talking about the best looking girl in our high school 
during those days.  I mentioned how odd that was to my wife, and then she 
overheard the bartender talking to one of the group about where the their high 
school reunion was going to after this little pre get together. 

 This group was a year behind me, (thank God), but I was surprised at just how 
old everyone looked.
 

 On the other hand, the person I see in the mirror now, for the first time, is 
starting to look pretty old as well.  (-:
 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

 64 next month. Just went to my 45th year high school reunion last night, 
couldn't recognize a soul! We all looked so old! Everybody was going around 
looking at our name tags with our senior pictures on them to see who they 
recognized! It was hilarious.  My dad died when I was nine, I never married 
because I never expected to live long enough to raise a family. Didn't want to 
put my kids through my own personal experience. Big mistake, maybe. Hear I am 
at 64, old enough to be a grandfather. However , raising a family, I wouldn't 
have had the wonderful experiences I have had with Maharishi.

 

 From: "awoelflebater@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Sunday, September 20, 2015 11:34 AM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
 
 
   

 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

 
At this point I would have to ask your age. I would guess you were born well 
after the beginning of the *Great Society*. That is when out of wedlock 
birthrates began do increase, when the government told the masses, we will take 
care of your babies, women began to feel there was no need for a man in the 
house, a bread winner. Children started growing up without a male role model 
and authority figure in the house and crime started ramping up. Out of wedlock 
birth rates in the black community today near 80% and about 40 % in white 
homes, the last I read. This was unheard of before the beginning of the *Great 
Society*.
 

 That's funny because I was going to ask your age as well based on some of your 
comments (BTW, I like discussing things with you because no matter how much we 
might disagree you are alway pleasant and civil. I think this is one of the 
things I like most about FFL now - everyone can speak their mind without the 
peanut gallery inciting dissension by misrepresenting every viewpoint and 
consequently skewing discussions until hey resemble nothing but juvenile pie 
throwing contests). I was born in 1956 so that makes me much older than you 
think. In addition, I have never had an abortion nor do I have any children (by 
definite choice). When my husband and I were married he had already been 
married before and had had a vasectomy (he is 7 years older than I am) and if 
we were going to have children together he was going to have to have the 
vasectomy reversed but much to his relief I told him I had no desire for 
children. But before that I would have had many opportunities to have gotten 
pregnant but I was pretty careful. Would I have had an abortion if I had gotten 
pregnant? I'm not absolutely sure but it seems likely that I would have.
 

 


 


 












 














 













 







































 


 

Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'

[feste37]

Wow! That means I've known a serial killer for over 30 years and I never even 
realized it! And she seems such a nice woman . . . 
 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

 I know! Sounds horrible doesn't it? What's worse, the *label* or the *act* 
that defines the label? You would think that most women would feel remorse or 
regret at having done this and that is why we compassionately don't use that 
label.But three? Maybe a pregnancy would have endangered her life.
 

 From: feste37 <no_re...@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Monday, September 21, 2015 8:25 AM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
 
 
   I know a woman who had several abortions. Using Mike's language, she would 
be a triple murderess. Doesn't sound quite right. 

 


 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <olliesedwuz@...> wrote :

 Let's talk about this term, "murder", wrt an abortion. I know the radical 
preachers have seized on this term as a graphic and ugly description of 
abortion. But, have any of them known a murder victim? Someone who had a full 
life and a circle of friends and family, those that loved them, who would never 
see them again? Hard core memories of this person remain, their smile, their 
belongings, the many activities shared, their pictures in the high school 
yearbook. I lost two friends that way in high school, both young women, one was 
hitchhiking, and the other's car broke down. 

 And does anyone think about the actual mindset of a murderer? Aside from 
killings done in the heat of the moment, murderers are violent thugs and 
predators who deliberately enjoy inflicting pain on others - As evil as it 
gets. 
 

 To call abortion "murder" is over the top hyperbole, and those radical 
preachers spreading such nonsense should, if they can see over their massively 
inflated egos, be ashamed of themselves. Abortion is not murder, and it never 
has been. To equate it this way simply tells me that the ones raising this 
issue are either incredibly naive and thoughtless, or far more interested in 
creating conflict, than resolution. Doesn't sound Christ-like to me - 
Carelessly equating abortion with "murder" is more like creating a political 
wedge issue, to rally the flock. 
 

 Pardon my cynical view of the radical preachers who rally their followers 
around the abortion issue, though it seems far easier for these men to gang up 
on women thinking of terminating their pregnancy, than it does to tackle the 
real problems of the world, their families, and within themselves. 
 
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

 About 53 million abortions since Row v Wade.About 300,000 last year. Hitler 
murdered 6 million innocent lives alone in a 5-6 yer period. Stalin murdered 
about 20 million, Mao about fifty million. We've got them beat!

 

 From: "awoelflebater@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Sunday, September 20, 2015 8:50 AM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
 
 
   

 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

 I guess it depends on your definition of *judge*. Do I recognize poor 
choices?Is it  from poor up bringing or low intelligence.-or is it something 
else. Does that person learn from their mistakes or do they keep repeating the 
same mistake over and over. Do they ever figure out that they are making 
mistakes and , poor choices. Do they feel any responsibility for their choices? 
Do they even care? Do they feel entitled to make mistakes without consequences? 
Some people learn things the easy way, others the hard way.  How much empathy, 
compassion and understanding is expected of me? For how long and to what 
degree? Are they taking advantage of my good will? If it's their nature to 
learn things the hard way, is my help actually retarding their learning 
process? Some people are real victims of circumstances through no fault of 
their own. They didn't make poor choices  but shit happened. Maybe their 
husband died or just left them or became totally disabled. Aren't  they more 
deserving of my empathy and compassion than someone that never grew up? When I 
was younger, out of wedlock births were relatively low. Today, I think it is  
over or at least close to half. Something is dreadfully wrong. When it comes to 
the woman that has the abortion, I am fully aware that she is probably confused 
and frightened of her future  and doesn't know what to do and ends up taking 
the remedy with the quickest results. I feel terribly sorry for her because  I 
don't think she really and fully understands what she has just done. Yes, 
she'll always remember it and the anguish. But she was talked into it and told 
it was the best thing to do. This is what the Beast does. What is the Beast, 
it's the system!

 

 Overview:
 

 Quick Stats • Half of pregnan

Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'

[awoelfleba...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

  Murder is defined as the willful killing of another *human being*, 
*especially* with malice. Notice , one doesn't have to exhibit malice to have 
committed murder. If a fetus is not a human being, what is it? Mind you, there 
was a time in our history when slaves were not considered complete human 
beings.
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Monday, September 21, 2015 6:59 AM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
 
 
   Let's talk about this term, "murder", wrt an abortion. I know the radical 
preachers have seized on this term as a graphic and ugly description of 
abortion. But, have any of them known a murder victim? Someone who had a full 
life and a circle of friends and family, those that loved them, who would never 
see them again? Hard core memories of this person remain, their smile, their 
belongings, the many activities shared, their pictures in the high school 
yearbook. I lost two friends that way in high school, both young women, one was 
hitchhiking, and the other's car broke down.
 

 And does anyone think about the actual mindset of a murderer? Aside from 
killings done in the heat of the moment, murderers are violent thugs and 
predators who deliberately enjoy inflicting pain on others - As evil as it 
gets. 
 

 

 
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

 About 53 million abortions since Row v Wade.About 300,000 last year. Hitler 
murdered 6 million innocent lives alone in a 5-6 yer period. Stalin murdered 
about 20 million, Mao about fifty million. We've got them beat!

 

 From: "awoelflebater@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Sunday, September 20, 2015 8:50 AM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
 
 
   

 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

 I guess it depends on your definition of *judge*. Do I recognize poor 
choices?Is it  from poor up bringing or low intelligence.-or is it something 
else. Does that person learn from their mistakes or do they keep repeating the 
same mistake over and over. Do they ever figure out that they are making 
mistakes and , poor choices. Do they feel any responsibility for their choices? 
Do they even care? Do they feel entitled to make mistakes without consequences? 
Some people learn things the easy way, others the hard way.  How much empathy, 
compassion and understanding is expected of me? For how long and to what 
degree? Are they taking advantage of my good will? If it's their nature to 
learn things the hard way, is my help actually retarding their learning 
process? Some people are real victims of circumstances through no fault of 
their own. They didn't make poor choices  but shit happened. Maybe their 
husband died or just left them or became totally disabled. Aren't  they more 
deserving of my empathy and compassion than someone that never grew up? When I 
was younger, out of wedlock births were relatively low. Today, I think it is  
over or at least close to half. Something is dreadfully wrong. When it comes to 
the woman that has the abortion, I am fully aware that she is probably confused 
and frightened of her future  and doesn't know what to do and ends up taking 
the remedy with the quickest results. I feel terribly sorry for her because  I 
don't think she really and fully understands what she has just done. Yes, 
she'll always remember it and the anguish. But she was talked into it and told 
it was the best thing to do. This is what the Beast does. What is the Beast, 
it's the system!

 

 Overview:
 

 Quick Stats • Half of pregnancies among American women are unintended, and 
about four in 10 of these end in abortion.[1]
 • About half of American women will have an unintended pregnancy, [2] and 
nearly 3 in 10 will have an abortion, by age 45.[3]
 • The overall U.S. unintended pregnancy rate increased slightly between 1994 
and 2008, but unintended pregnancy increased 55% among poor women, while 
decreasing 24% among higher-income women.[1,6]
 • Overall, the abortion rate decreased 8% between 2000 and 2008, but abortion 
increased 18% among poor women, while decreasing 28% among higher-income 
women.[3]
 • Some 1.06 million abortions were performed in 2011, down from 1.21 million 
abortions in 2008, a decline of 13%.[4]
 • The number of U.S. abortion providers declined 4% between 2008 (1,793) and 
2011 (1,720). The number of clinics providing abortion services declined 1%, 
from 851 to 839. Eighty-nine percent of all U.S. counties lacked an abortion 
clinic in 2011; 38% of women live in those counties.[4]
 • Nine in 10 abortions occur in the first 12 weeks of pregnancy.[5]
 • A broad cross section of U.S. women have abortions:[3]
 58% are in their 20s; 61% have one or more children; 56% are unmarried and not 
cohabiting; 69% are economically disadvantaged; and 73% report a religious 
affiliation.
 

 
 


 









 













 
  


 













  




 


 












 














 


 

Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'

[Mike Dixon mdixon.6...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

Hmmm , yes, pregnancies do happen, even with precautions but I doubt the 
overwhelming majority do. Kind of reminds me of Jeff Goldbloom's line in 
Jurassic Park, "Nature finds a way". I say" if the mother's life is endangered" 
because that would be self defense. Killing in self defense is not considered 
murder. In cases like rape, incest etc, I know it sounds tough but does 
innocent life have to pay with it's own for the actions of others. The mother 
should bring the baby to term and give it up for adoption if she can't handle 
the circumstances. Somebody will love it if she can't. If she doesn't a 
reminder of her misfortune, does she want two reminders?

  From: "awoelfleba...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]" 
<FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Monday, September 21, 2015 10:15 AM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
   
    


---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

 Murder is defined as the willful killing of another *human being*, 
*especially* with malice. Notice , one doesn't have to exhibit malice to have 
committed murder. If a fetus is not a human being, what is it? Mind you, there 
was a time in our history when slaves were not considered complete human 
beings.
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Monday, September 21, 2015 6:59 AM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
 
 Let's talk about this term, "murder", wrt an abortion. I know the radical 
preachers have seized on this term as a graphic and ugly description of 
abortion. But, have any of them known a murder victim? Someone who had a full 
life and a circle of friends and family, those that loved them, who would never 
see them again? Hard core memories of this person remain, their smile, their 
belongings, the many activities shared, their pictures in the high school 
yearbook. I lost two friends that way in high school, both young women, one was 
hitchhiking, and the other's car broke down.
And does anyone think about the actual mindset of a murderer? Aside from 
killings done in the heat of the moment, murderers are violent thugs and 
predators who deliberately enjoy inflicting pain on others - As evil as it 
gets. 


---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

About 53 million abortions since Row v Wade.About 300,000 last year. Hitler 
murdered 6 million innocent lives alone in a 5-6 yer period. Stalin murdered 
about 20 million, Mao about fifty million. We've got them beat!

  From: "awoelflebater@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Sunday, September 20, 2015 8:50 AM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
 
 


---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

I guess it depends on your definition of *judge*. Do I recognize poor 
choices?Is it  from poor up bringing or low intelligence.-or is it something 
else. Does that person learn from their mistakes or do they keep repeating the 
same mistake over and over. Do they ever figure out that they are making 
mistakes and , poor choices. Do they feel any responsibility for their choices? 
Do they even care? Do they feel entitled to make mistakes without consequences? 
Some people learn things the easy way, others the hard way.  How much empathy, 
compassion and understanding is expected of me? For how long and to what 
degree? Are they taking advantage of my good will? If it's their nature to 
learn things the hard way, is my help actually retarding their learning 
process? Some people are real victims of circumstances through no fault of 
their own. They didn't make poor choices  but shit happened. Maybe their 
husband died or just left them or became totally disabled. Aren't  they more 
deserving of my empathy and compassion than someone that never grew up? When I 
was younger, out of wedlock births were relatively low. Today, I think it is  
over or at least close to half. Something is dreadfully wrong. When it comes to 
the woman that has the abortion, I am fully aware that she is probably confused 
and frightened of her future  and doesn't know what to do and ends up taking 
the remedy with the quickest results. I feel terribly sorry for her because  I 
don't think she really and fully understands what she has just done. Yes, 
she'll always remember it and the anguish. But she was talked into it and told 
it was the best thing to do. This is what the Beast does. What is the Beast, 
it's the system!

Overview:

Quick Stats
• Half of pregnancies among American women are unintended, and about four in 10 
of these end in abortion.[1]• About half of American women will have an 
unintended pregnancy, [2] and nearly 3 in 10 will have an abortion, by age 
45.[3]• The overall U.S. unintended pregnancy rate increased slightly between 
1994 and 2008, but unintended pregnancy increased 55% among poor women, w

Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'

[Mike Dixon mdixon.6...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

What an honor!

  From: feste37 <no_re...@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Monday, September 21, 2015 10:46 AM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
   
    Wow! That means I've known a serial killer for over 30 years and I never 
even realized it! And she seems such a nice woman . . . 




---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

I know! Sounds horrible doesn't it? What's worse, the *label* or the *act* that 
defines the label? You would think that most women would feel remorse or regret 
at having done this and that is why we compassionately don't use that label.But 
three? Maybe a pregnancy would have endangered her life.

  From: feste37 <no_re...@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Monday, September 21, 2015 8:25 AM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
 
 I know a woman who had several abortions. Using Mike's language, she would be 
a triple murderess. Doesn't sound quite right. 




---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <olliesedwuz@...> wrote :

Let's talk about this term, "murder", wrt an abortion. I know the radical 
preachers have seized on this term as a graphic and ugly description of 
abortion. But, have any of them known a murder victim? Someone who had a full 
life and a circle of friends and family, those that loved them, who would never 
see them again? Hard core memories of this person remain, their smile, their 
belongings, the many activities shared, their pictures in the high school 
yearbook. I lost two friends that way in high school, both young women, one was 
hitchhiking, and the other's car broke down.
And does anyone think about the actual mindset of a murderer? Aside from 
killings done in the heat of the moment, murderers are violent thugs and 
predators who deliberately enjoy inflicting pain on others - As evil as it 
gets. 
To call abortion "murder" is over the top hyperbole, and those radical 
preachers spreading such nonsense should, if they can see over their massively 
inflated egos, be ashamed of themselves. Abortion is not murder, and it never 
has been. To equate it this way simply tells me that the ones raising this 
issue are either incredibly naive and thoughtless, or far more interested in 
creating conflict, than resolution. Doesn't sound Christ-like to me - 
Carelessly equating abortion with "murder" is more like creating a political 
wedge issue, to rally the flock. 
Pardon my cynical view of the radical preachers who rally their followers 
around the abortion issue, though it seems far easier for these men to gang up 
on women thinking of terminating their pregnancy, than it does to tackle the 
real problems of the world, their families, and within themselves. 
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

About 53 million abortions since Row v Wade.About 300,000 last year. Hitler 
murdered 6 million innocent lives alone in a 5-6 yer period. Stalin murdered 
about 20 million, Mao about fifty million. We've got them beat!

  From: "awoelflebater@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Sunday, September 20, 2015 8:50 AM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
 
 


---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

I guess it depends on your definition of *judge*. Do I recognize poor 
choices?Is it  from poor up bringing or low intelligence.-or is it something 
else. Does that person learn from their mistakes or do they keep repeating the 
same mistake over and over. Do they ever figure out that they are making 
mistakes and , poor choices. Do they feel any responsibility for their choices? 
Do they even care? Do they feel entitled to make mistakes without consequences? 
Some people learn things the easy way, others the hard way.  How much empathy, 
compassion and understanding is expected of me? For how long and to what 
degree? Are they taking advantage of my good will? If it's their nature to 
learn things the hard way, is my help actually retarding their learning 
process? Some people are real victims of circumstances through no fault of 
their own. They didn't make poor choices  but shit happened. Maybe their 
husband died or just left them or became totally disabled. Aren't  they more 
deserving of my empathy and compassion than someone that never grew up? When I 
was younger, out of wedlock births were relatively low. Today, I think it is  
over or at least close to half. Something is dreadfully wrong. When it comes to 
the woman that has the abortion, I am fully aware that she is probably confused 
and frightened of her future  and doesn't know what to do and ends up taking 
the remedy with the quickest results. I feel terribly sorry for her because  I 
don't think she really and fully understands what she has just done. Yes, 
she'll always remember it and the anguish. But she was

Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'

[olliesed...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

Even if I take you at your word here, this still lacks an explanation for why 
this is the bigger issue, vs. the lives lost through US led invasions of other 
countries. To say waging war is self-defense makes such actions morally 
meaningless, allowing us aggression in any quarter, justified as 
'self-defense'. Where are the demonstrations against the murders occurring as a 
result of our actions outside our borders? Why should independent human beings 
get less or no consideration, than fetuses, regarding their murders, if we 
define murder as you have here? It seems you are going after the easy target. 
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

  Murder is defined as the willful killing of another *human being*, 
*especially* with malice. Notice , one doesn't have to exhibit malice to have 
committed murder. If a fetus is not a human being, what is it? Mind you, there 
was a time in our history when slaves were not considered complete human 
beings.
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Monday, September 21, 2015 6:59 AM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
 
 
   Let's talk about this term, "murder", wrt an abortion. I know the radical 
preachers have seized on this term as a graphic and ugly description of 
abortion. But, have any of them known a murder victim? Someone who had a full 
life and a circle of friends and family, those that loved them, who would never 
see them again? Hard core memories of this person remain, their smile, their 
belongings, the many activities shared, their pictures in the high school 
yearbook. I lost two friends that way in high school, both young women, one was 
hitchhiking, and the other's car broke down.
 

 And does anyone think about the actual mindset of a murderer? Aside from 
killings done in the heat of the moment, murderers are violent thugs and 
predators who deliberately enjoy inflicting pain on others - As evil as it 
gets. 
 

 

 
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

 About 53 million abortions since Row v Wade.About 300,000 last year. Hitler 
murdered 6 million innocent lives alone in a 5-6 yer period. Stalin murdered 
about 20 million, Mao about fifty million. We've got them beat!

 

 From: "awoelflebater@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Sunday, September 20, 2015 8:50 AM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
 
 
   

 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

 I guess it depends on your definition of *judge*. Do I recognize poor 
choices?Is it  from poor up bringing or low intelligence.-or is it something 
else. Does that person learn from their mistakes or do they keep repeating the 
same mistake over and over. Do they ever figure out that they are making 
mistakes and , poor choices. Do they feel any responsibility for their choices? 
Do they even care? Do they feel entitled to make mistakes without consequences? 
Some people learn things the easy way, others the hard way.  How much empathy, 
compassion and understanding is expected of me? For how long and to what 
degree? Are they taking advantage of my good will? If it's their nature to 
learn things the hard way, is my help actually retarding their learning 
process? Some people are real victims of circumstances through no fault of 
their own. They didn't make poor choices  but shit happened. Maybe their 
husband died or just left them or became totally disabled. Aren't  they more 
deserving of my empathy and compassion than someone that never grew up? When I 
was younger, out of wedlock births were relatively low. Today, I think it is  
over or at least close to half. Something is dreadfully wrong. When it comes to 
the woman that has the abortion, I am fully aware that she is probably confused 
and frightened of her future  and doesn't know what to do and ends up taking 
the remedy with the quickest results. I feel terribly sorry for her because  I 
don't think she really and fully understands what she has just done. Yes, 
she'll always remember it and the anguish. But she was talked into it and told 
it was the best thing to do. This is what the Beast does. What is the Beast, 
it's the system!

 

 Overview:
 

 Quick Stats • Half of pregnancies among American women are unintended, and 
about four in 10 of these end in abortion.[1]
 • About half of American women will have an unintended pregnancy, [2] and 
nearly 3 in 10 will have an abortion, by age 45.[3]
 • The overall U.S. unintended pregnancy rate increased slightly between 1994 
and 2008, but unintended pregnancy increased 55% among poor women, while 
decreasing 24% among higher-income women.[1,6]
 • Overall, the abortion rate decreased 8% between 2000 and 2008, but abortion 
increased 18% among poor women, while decreasing 28% among higher-income 
women.[3]
 • Some 1.06 million abortions were performed in 2011, down from 1.21 mil

Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'

[Mike Dixon mdixon.6...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

I know! Sounds horrible doesn't it? What's worse, the *label* or the *act* that 
defines the label? You would think that most women would feel remorse or regret 
at having done this and that is why we compassionately don't use that label.But 
three? Maybe a pregnancy would have endangered her life.

  From: feste37 <no_re...@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Monday, September 21, 2015 8:25 AM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
   
    I know a woman who had several abortions. Using Mike's language, she would 
be a triple murderess. Doesn't sound quite right. 




---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <olliesedwuz@...> wrote :

Let's talk about this term, "murder", wrt an abortion. I know the radical 
preachers have seized on this term as a graphic and ugly description of 
abortion. But, have any of them known a murder victim? Someone who had a full 
life and a circle of friends and family, those that loved them, who would never 
see them again? Hard core memories of this person remain, their smile, their 
belongings, the many activities shared, their pictures in the high school 
yearbook. I lost two friends that way in high school, both young women, one was 
hitchhiking, and the other's car broke down.
And does anyone think about the actual mindset of a murderer? Aside from 
killings done in the heat of the moment, murderers are violent thugs and 
predators who deliberately enjoy inflicting pain on others - As evil as it 
gets. 
To call abortion "murder" is over the top hyperbole, and those radical 
preachers spreading such nonsense should, if they can see over their massively 
inflated egos, be ashamed of themselves. Abortion is not murder, and it never 
has been. To equate it this way simply tells me that the ones raising this 
issue are either incredibly naive and thoughtless, or far more interested in 
creating conflict, than resolution. Doesn't sound Christ-like to me - 
Carelessly equating abortion with "murder" is more like creating a political 
wedge issue, to rally the flock. 
Pardon my cynical view of the radical preachers who rally their followers 
around the abortion issue, though it seems far easier for these men to gang up 
on women thinking of terminating their pregnancy, than it does to tackle the 
real problems of the world, their families, and within themselves. 
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

About 53 million abortions since Row v Wade.About 300,000 last year. Hitler 
murdered 6 million innocent lives alone in a 5-6 yer period. Stalin murdered 
about 20 million, Mao about fifty million. We've got them beat!

  From: "awoelflebater@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Sunday, September 20, 2015 8:50 AM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
 
 


---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

I guess it depends on your definition of *judge*. Do I recognize poor 
choices?Is it  from poor up bringing or low intelligence.-or is it something 
else. Does that person learn from their mistakes or do they keep repeating the 
same mistake over and over. Do they ever figure out that they are making 
mistakes and , poor choices. Do they feel any responsibility for their choices? 
Do they even care? Do they feel entitled to make mistakes without consequences? 
Some people learn things the easy way, others the hard way.  How much empathy, 
compassion and understanding is expected of me? For how long and to what 
degree? Are they taking advantage of my good will? If it's their nature to 
learn things the hard way, is my help actually retarding their learning 
process? Some people are real victims of circumstances through no fault of 
their own. They didn't make poor choices  but shit happened. Maybe their 
husband died or just left them or became totally disabled. Aren't  they more 
deserving of my empathy and compassion than someone that never grew up? When I 
was younger, out of wedlock births were relatively low. Today, I think it is  
over or at least close to half. Something is dreadfully wrong. When it comes to 
the woman that has the abortion, I am fully aware that she is probably confused 
and frightened of her future  and doesn't know what to do and ends up taking 
the remedy with the quickest results. I feel terribly sorry for her because  I 
don't think she really and fully understands what she has just done. Yes, 
she'll always remember it and the anguish. But she was talked into it and told 
it was the best thing to do. This is what the Beast does. What is the Beast, 
it's the system!

Overview:

Quick Stats
• Half of pregnancies among American women are unintended, and about four in 10 
of these end in abortion.[1]• About half of American women will have an 
unintended pregnancy, [2] and nearly 3 in 10 will have an abortion, by age 
45.[3]• The overall U.

Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'

[Mike Dixon mdixon.6...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

 Murder is defined as the willful killing of another *human being*, 
*especially* with malice. Notice , one doesn't have to exhibit malice to have 
committed murder. If a fetus is not a human being, what is it? Mind you, there 
was a time in our history when slaves were not considered complete human 
beings.
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Monday, September 21, 2015 6:59 AM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
   
    Let's talk about this term, "murder", wrt an abortion. I know the radical 
preachers have seized on this term as a graphic and ugly description of 
abortion. But, have any of them known a murder victim? Someone who had a full 
life and a circle of friends and family, those that loved them, who would never 
see them again? Hard core memories of this person remain, their smile, their 
belongings, the many activities shared, their pictures in the high school 
yearbook. I lost two friends that way in high school, both young women, one was 
hitchhiking, and the other's car broke down.
And does anyone think about the actual mindset of a murderer? Aside from 
killings done in the heat of the moment, murderers are violent thugs and 
predators who deliberately enjoy inflicting pain on others - As evil as it 
gets. 


---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

About 53 million abortions since Row v Wade.About 300,000 last year. Hitler 
murdered 6 million innocent lives alone in a 5-6 yer period. Stalin murdered 
about 20 million, Mao about fifty million. We've got them beat!

  From: "awoelflebater@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Sunday, September 20, 2015 8:50 AM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
 
 


---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

I guess it depends on your definition of *judge*. Do I recognize poor 
choices?Is it  from poor up bringing or low intelligence.-or is it something 
else. Does that person learn from their mistakes or do they keep repeating the 
same mistake over and over. Do they ever figure out that they are making 
mistakes and , poor choices. Do they feel any responsibility for their choices? 
Do they even care? Do they feel entitled to make mistakes without consequences? 
Some people learn things the easy way, others the hard way.  How much empathy, 
compassion and understanding is expected of me? For how long and to what 
degree? Are they taking advantage of my good will? If it's their nature to 
learn things the hard way, is my help actually retarding their learning 
process? Some people are real victims of circumstances through no fault of 
their own. They didn't make poor choices  but shit happened. Maybe their 
husband died or just left them or became totally disabled. Aren't  they more 
deserving of my empathy and compassion than someone that never grew up? When I 
was younger, out of wedlock births were relatively low. Today, I think it is  
over or at least close to half. Something is dreadfully wrong. When it comes to 
the woman that has the abortion, I am fully aware that she is probably confused 
and frightened of her future  and doesn't know what to do and ends up taking 
the remedy with the quickest results. I feel terribly sorry for her because  I 
don't think she really and fully understands what she has just done. Yes, 
she'll always remember it and the anguish. But she was talked into it and told 
it was the best thing to do. This is what the Beast does. What is the Beast, 
it's the system!

Overview:

Quick Stats
• Half of pregnancies among American women are unintended, and about four in 10 
of these end in abortion.[1]• About half of American women will have an 
unintended pregnancy, [2] and nearly 3 in 10 will have an abortion, by age 
45.[3]• The overall U.S. unintended pregnancy rate increased slightly between 
1994 and 2008, but unintended pregnancy increased 55% among poor women, while 
decreasing 24% among higher-income women.[1,6]• Overall, the abortion rate 
decreased 8% between 2000 and 2008, but abortion increased 18% among poor 
women, while decreasing 28% among higher-income women.[3]• Some 1.06 million 
abortions were performed in 2011, down from 1.21 million abortions in 2008, a 
decline of 13%.[4]• The number of U.S. abortion providers declined 4% between 
2008 (1,793) and 2011 (1,720). The number of clinics providing abortion 
services declined 1%, from 851 to 839. Eighty-nine percent of all U.S. counties 
lacked an abortion clinic in 2011; 38% of women live in those counties.[4]• 
Nine in 10 abortions occur in the first 12 weeks of pregnancy.[5]• A broad 
cross section of U.S. women have abortions:[3]   
   - 58% are in their 20s;
   - 61% have one or more children;
   - 56% are unmarried and not cohabiting;
   - 69% are economically disadvantaged; and
   - 73% report a religious affiliation.







 

 



  #yiv0327501978 #yiv0327501978 -- #yiv0327501

Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'

[awoelfleba...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

 Geeez dude, don't take my word. Check it out your self. As for the definition 
of murder, check it out . It also usually includes willful and *unjust* 
killing.   A fetus doesn't threaten anyone. It is totally innocent.  In the 
case of wars, killing an enemy that is a threat, has never been considered 
murder. Although by today's standard there are clear limitations. Even the 
killing of civilians is not considered murder, if it was not intended and I 
would assume precautions were taken to avoid it. As far as I can tell, every 
culture and religion has made an exception for killing another human for self 
defense and war or at least a defensive war.  

So, killing an unformed, unborn human is murder and killing a fully formed 
human being with history and family and loved ones who threatens you or is 
engaged in war with you is not murder. 'Nuff said.

 

 From: "olliesedwuz@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Monday, September 21, 2015 12:34 PM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
 
 
   Even if I take you at your word here, this still lacks an explanation for 
why this is the bigger issue, vs. the lives lost through US led invasions of 
other countries. To say waging war is self-defense makes such actions morally 
meaningless, allowing us aggression in any quarter, justified as 
'self-defense'. Where are the demonstrations against the murders occurring as a 
result of our actions outside our borders? Why should independent human beings 
get less or no consideration, than fetuses, regarding their murders, if we 
define murder as you have here? It seems you are going after the easy target.
 
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

  Murder is defined as the willful killing of another *human being*, 
*especially* with malice. Notice , one doesn't have to exhibit malice to have 
committed murder. If a fetus is not a human being, what is it? Mind you, there 
was a time in our history when slaves were not considered complete human 
beings.
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Monday, September 21, 2015 6:59 AM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
 
 
   Let's talk about this term, "murder", wrt an abortion. I know the radical 
preachers have seized on this term as a graphic and ugly description of 
abortion. But, have any of them known a murder victim? Someone who had a full 
life and a circle of friends and family, those that loved them, who would never 
see them again? Hard core memories of this person remain, their smile, their 
belongings, the many activities shared, their pictures in the high school 
yearbook. I lost two friends that way in high school, both young women, one was 
hitchhiking, and the other's car broke down.
 

 And does anyone think about the actual mindset of a murderer? Aside from 
killings done in the heat of the moment, murderers are violent thugs and 
predators who deliberately enjoy inflicting pain on others - As evil as it 
gets. 
 

 

 
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

 About 53 million abortions since Row v Wade.About 300,000 last year. Hitler 
murdered 6 million innocent lives alone in a 5-6 yer period. Stalin murdered 
about 20 million, Mao about fifty million. We've got them beat!

 

 From: "awoelflebater@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Sunday, September 20, 2015 8:50 AM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
 
 
   

 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

 I guess it depends on your definition of *judge*. Do I recognize poor 
choices?Is it  from poor up bringing or low intelligence.-or is it something 
else. Does that person learn from their mistakes or do they keep repeating the 
same mistake over and over. Do they ever figure out that they are making 
mistakes and , poor choices. Do they feel any responsibility for their choices? 
Do they even care? Do they feel entitled to make mistakes without consequences? 
Some people learn things the easy way, others the hard way.  How much empathy, 
compassion and understanding is expected of me? For how long and to what 
degree? Are they taking advantage of my good will? If it's their nature to 
learn things the hard way, is my help actually retarding their learning 
process? Some people are real victims of circumstances through no fault of 
their own. They didn't make poor choices  but shit happened. Maybe their 
husband died or just left them or became totally disabled. Aren't  they more 
deserving of my empathy and compassion than someone that never grew up? When I 
was younger, out of wedlock births were relatively low. Today, I think it is  
over or at least close to half. Something is dreadfully wrong. When it comes to 
the woman tha

Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'

[Mike Dixon mdixon.6...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

Geeez dude, don't take my word. Check it out your self. As for the definition 
of murder, check it out . It also usually includes willful and *unjust* 
killing.   A fetus doesn't threaten anyone. It is totally innocent.  In the 
case of wars, killing an enemy that is a threat, has never been considered 
murder. Although by today's standard there are clear limitations. Even the 
killing of civilians is not considered murder, if it was not intended and I 
would assume precautions were taken to avoid it. As far as I can tell, every 
culture and religion has made an exception for killing another human for self 
defense and war or at least a defensive war.  

  From: "olliesed...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]" 
<FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Monday, September 21, 2015 12:34 PM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
   
    Even if I take you at your word here, this still lacks an explanation for 
why this is the bigger issue, vs. the lives lost through US led invasions of 
other countries. To say waging war is self-defense makes such actions morally 
meaningless, allowing us aggression in any quarter, justified as 
'self-defense'. Where are the demonstrations against the murders occurring as a 
result of our actions outside our borders? Why should independent human beings 
get less or no consideration, than fetuses, regarding their murders, if we 
define murder as you have here? It seems you are going after the easy target.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

 Murder is defined as the willful killing of another *human being*, 
*especially* with malice. Notice , one doesn't have to exhibit malice to have 
committed murder. If a fetus is not a human being, what is it? Mind you, there 
was a time in our history when slaves were not considered complete human 
beings.
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Monday, September 21, 2015 6:59 AM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
 
 Let's talk about this term, "murder", wrt an abortion. I know the radical 
preachers have seized on this term as a graphic and ugly description of 
abortion. But, have any of them known a murder victim? Someone who had a full 
life and a circle of friends and family, those that loved them, who would never 
see them again? Hard core memories of this person remain, their smile, their 
belongings, the many activities shared, their pictures in the high school 
yearbook. I lost two friends that way in high school, both young women, one was 
hitchhiking, and the other's car broke down.
And does anyone think about the actual mindset of a murderer? Aside from 
killings done in the heat of the moment, murderers are violent thugs and 
predators who deliberately enjoy inflicting pain on others - As evil as it 
gets. 


---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

About 53 million abortions since Row v Wade.About 300,000 last year. Hitler 
murdered 6 million innocent lives alone in a 5-6 yer period. Stalin murdered 
about 20 million, Mao about fifty million. We've got them beat!

  From: "awoelflebater@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Sunday, September 20, 2015 8:50 AM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
 
 


---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

I guess it depends on your definition of *judge*. Do I recognize poor 
choices?Is it  from poor up bringing or low intelligence.-or is it something 
else. Does that person learn from their mistakes or do they keep repeating the 
same mistake over and over. Do they ever figure out that they are making 
mistakes and , poor choices. Do they feel any responsibility for their choices? 
Do they even care? Do they feel entitled to make mistakes without consequences? 
Some people learn things the easy way, others the hard way.  How much empathy, 
compassion and understanding is expected of me? For how long and to what 
degree? Are they taking advantage of my good will? If it's their nature to 
learn things the hard way, is my help actually retarding their learning 
process? Some people are real victims of circumstances through no fault of 
their own. They didn't make poor choices  but shit happened. Maybe their 
husband died or just left them or became totally disabled. Aren't  they more 
deserving of my empathy and compassion than someone that never grew up? When I 
was younger, out of wedlock births were relatively low. Today, I think it is  
over or at least close to half. Something is dreadfully wrong. When it comes to 
the woman that has the abortion, I am fully aware that she is probably confused 
and frightened of her future  and doesn't know what to do and ends up taking 
the remedy with the quickest results. I feel terribly sorry for her because  I 
don't think she really and fully understands what she has just done. Yes, 
s

Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'

[Mike Dixon mdixon.6...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

64 next month. Just went to my 45th year high school reunion last night, 
couldn't recognize a soul! We all looked so old! Everybody was going around 
looking at our name tags with our senior pictures on them to see who they 
recognized! It was hilarious.  My dad died when I was nine, I never married 
because I never expected to live long enough to raise a family. Didn't want to 
put my kids through my own personal experience. Big mistake, maybe. Hear I am 
at 64, old enough to be a grandfather. However , raising a family, I wouldn't 
have had the wonderful experiences I have had with Maharishi.

  From: "awoelfleba...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]" 
<FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Sunday, September 20, 2015 11:34 AM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
   
    


---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

At this point I would have to ask your age. I would guess you were born well 
after the beginning of the *Great Society*. That is when out of wedlock 
birthrates began do increase, when the government told the masses, we will take 
care of your babies, women began to feel there was no need for a man in the 
house, a bread winner. Children started growing up without a male role model 
and authority figure in the house and crime started ramping up. Out of wedlock 
birth rates in the black community today near 80% and about 40 % in white 
homes, the last I read. This was unheard of before the beginning of the *Great 
Society*.
That's funny because I was going to ask your age as well based on some of your 
comments (BTW, I like discussing things with you because no matter how much we 
might disagree you are alway pleasant and civil. I think this is one of the 
things I like most about FFL now - everyone can speak their mind without the 
peanut gallery inciting dissension by misrepresenting every viewpoint and 
consequently skewing discussions until hey resemble nothing but juvenile pie 
throwing contests). I was born in 1956 so that makes me much older than you 
think. In addition, I have never had an abortion nor do I have any children (by 
definite choice). When my husband and I were married he had already been 
married before and had had a vasectomy (he is 7 years older than I am) and if 
we were going to have children together he was going to have to have the 
vasectomy reversed but much to his relief I told him I had no desire for 
children. But before that I would have had many opportunities to have gotten 
pregnant but I was pretty careful. Would I have had an abortion if I had gotten 
pregnant? I'm not absolutely sure but it seems likely that I would have.










  #yiv2792190811 #yiv2792190811 -- #yiv2792190811ygrp-mkp {border:1px solid 
#d8d8d8;font-family:Arial;margin:10px 0;padding:0 10px;}#yiv2792190811 
#yiv2792190811ygrp-mkp hr {border:1px solid #d8d8d8;}#yiv2792190811 
#yiv2792190811ygrp-mkp #yiv2792190811hd 
{color:#628c2a;font-size:85%;font-weight:700;line-height:122%;margin:10px 
0;}#yiv2792190811 #yiv2792190811ygrp-mkp #yiv2792190811ads 
{margin-bottom:10px;}#yiv2792190811 #yiv2792190811ygrp-mkp .yiv2792190811ad 
{padding:0 0;}#yiv2792190811 #yiv2792190811ygrp-mkp .yiv2792190811ad p 
{margin:0;}#yiv2792190811 #yiv2792190811ygrp-mkp .yiv2792190811ad a 
{color:#ff;text-decoration:none;}#yiv2792190811 #yiv2792190811ygrp-sponsor 
#yiv2792190811ygrp-lc {font-family:Arial;}#yiv2792190811 
#yiv2792190811ygrp-sponsor #yiv2792190811ygrp-lc #yiv2792190811hd {margin:10px 
0px;font-weight:700;font-size:78%;line-height:122%;}#yiv2792190811 
#yiv2792190811ygrp-sponsor #yiv2792190811ygrp-lc .yiv2792190811ad 
{margin-bottom:10px;padding:0 0;}#yiv2792190811 #yiv2792190811actions 
{font-family:Verdana;font-size:11px;padding:10px 0;}#yiv2792190811 
#yiv2792190811activity 
{background-color:#e0ecee;float:left;font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;padding:10px;}#yiv2792190811
 #yiv2792190811activity span {font-weight:700;}#yiv2792190811 
#yiv2792190811activity span:first-child 
{text-transform:uppercase;}#yiv2792190811 #yiv2792190811activity span a 
{color:#5085b6;text-decoration:none;}#yiv2792190811 #yiv2792190811activity span 
span {color:#ff7900;}#yiv2792190811 #yiv2792190811activity span 
.yiv2792190811underline {text-decoration:underline;}#yiv2792190811 
.yiv2792190811attach 
{clear:both;display:table;font-family:Arial;font-size:12px;padding:10px 
0;width:400px;}#yiv2792190811 .yiv2792190811attach div a 
{text-decoration:none;}#yiv2792190811 .yiv2792190811attach img 
{border:none;padding-right:5px;}#yiv2792190811 .yiv2792190811attach label 
{display:block;margin-bottom:5px;}#yiv2792190811 .yiv2792190811attach label a 
{text-decoration:none;}#yiv2792190811 blockquote {margin:0 0 0 
4px;}#yiv2792190811 .yiv2792190811bold 
{font-family:Arial;font-size:13px;font-weight:700;}#yiv2792190811 
.yiv2792190811bold a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv2792190811 dd.yiv2792190811last 
p a {font-family:Verdana;font-weig

Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'

[authfri...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

Mike, you've gone way off into fantasyland now. Women don't decide to have an 
abortion because the government tells them to. Up until Roe v. Wade, of course, 
government *prohibited* abortion. And these days it's state governments 
(Republican-run) that are doing their damndest to make abortion as difficult as 
possible. 

 Furthermore, most women do not suffer anguish or regret after an abortion; 
what they experience is relief. Nor do they feel they've "killed their child." 
To them, the fetus has not yet become a child. To me, the real evil is trying 
to make women feel guilty about having an abortion.
 

 You may not like any of this, but when you make your antiabortion arguments, 
you need to take the reality into account and not make up conspiracy theories.
 

 

 

 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

 
Men and women today have had a bill of goods sold to them by those in power. 
That is the system that men have created  through governments and their 
programs. Governments convince people that they *only want to help you* and 
they give you things and take care of you,  but you are expected  to follow 
their recommendations, their solutions. In the case of a woman having an 
unwanted pregnancy, they slyly say " It's just a lump of tissue, do yourself a 
favor,we'll send you to a clinic and have it removed, your problems will be 
solved". The woman, in her desperation agrees and suffers the anguish of 
knowing that she killed her child. And if someone tries to say no, don't do it. 
you'll regret it", they are mocked as a religious fanatic. This is PURE EVIL. 
This the beast that man has created. I call it a beast because it devours human 
souls.
 From: "awoelflebater@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Sunday, September 20, 2015 8:47 AM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
 
 
   

 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

 

 But she was talked into it and told it was the best thing to do. This is what 
the Beast does. What is the Beast, it's the system!

 

 Huh?
 
 









 


 

Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'

[Mike Dixon mdixon.6...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

Yeah, but the end result is the same.

  From: "awoelfleba...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]" 
<FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Sunday, September 20, 2015 11:08 AM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
   
    


---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

About 53 million abortions since Row v Wade.About 300,000 last year. Hitler 
murdered 6 million innocent lives alone in a 5-6 yer period. Stalin murdered 
about 20 million, Mao about fifty million. We've got them beat!

I would have to argue that torturing and murdering full grown adults and 
children is different than aborting an undeveloped embryo.
  From: "awoelflebater@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Sunday, September 20, 2015 8:50 AM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
 
 


---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

I guess it depends on your definition of *judge*. Do I recognize poor 
choices?Is it  from poor up bringing or low intelligence.-or is it something 
else. Does that person learn from their mistakes or do they keep repeating the 
same mistake over and over. Do they ever figure out that they are making 
mistakes and , poor choices. Do they feel any responsibility for their choices? 
Do they even care? Do they feel entitled to make mistakes without consequences? 
Some people learn things the easy way, others the hard way.  How much empathy, 
compassion and understanding is expected of me? For how long and to what 
degree? Are they taking advantage of my good will? If it's their nature to 
learn things the hard way, is my help actually retarding their learning 
process? Some people are real victims of circumstances through no fault of 
their own. They didn't make poor choices  but shit happened. Maybe their 
husband died or just left them or became totally disabled. Aren't  they more 
deserving of my empathy and compassion than someone that never grew up? When I 
was younger, out of wedlock births were relatively low. Today, I think it is  
over or at least close to half. Something is dreadfully wrong. When it comes to 
the woman that has the abortion, I am fully aware that she is probably confused 
and frightened of her future  and doesn't know what to do and ends up taking 
the remedy with the quickest results. I feel terribly sorry for her because  I 
don't think she really and fully understands what she has just done. Yes, 
she'll always remember it and the anguish. But she was talked into it and told 
it was the best thing to do. This is what the Beast does. What is the Beast, 
it's the system!

Overview:

Quick Stats
• Half of pregnancies among American women are unintended, and about four in 10 
of these end in abortion.[1]• About half of American women will have an 
unintended pregnancy, [2] and nearly 3 in 10 will have an abortion, by age 
45.[3]• The overall U.S. unintended pregnancy rate increased slightly between 
1994 and 2008, but unintended pregnancy increased 55% among poor women, while 
decreasing 24% among higher-income women.[1,6]• Overall, the abortion rate 
decreased 8% between 2000 and 2008, but abortion increased 18% among poor 
women, while decreasing 28% among higher-income women.[3]• Some 1.06 million 
abortions were performed in 2011, down from 1.21 million abortions in 2008, a 
decline of 13%.[4]• The number of U.S. abortion providers declined 4% between 
2008 (1,793) and 2011 (1,720). The number of clinics providing abortion 
services declined 1%, from 851 to 839. Eighty-nine percent of all U.S. counties 
lacked an abortion clinic in 2011; 38% of women live in those counties.[4]• 
Nine in 10 abortions occur in the first 12 weeks of pregnancy.[5]• A broad 
cross section of U.S. women have abortions:[3]   
   - 58% are in their 20s;
   - 61% have one or more children;
   - 56% are unmarried and not cohabiting;
   - 69% are economically disadvantaged; and
   - 73% report a religious affiliation.







 

 



  #yiv2236302194 #yiv2236302194 -- #yiv2236302194ygrp-mkp {border:1px solid 
#d8d8d8;font-family:Arial;margin:10px 0;padding:0 10px;}#yiv2236302194 
#yiv2236302194ygrp-mkp hr {border:1px solid #d8d8d8;}#yiv2236302194 
#yiv2236302194ygrp-mkp #yiv2236302194hd 
{color:#628c2a;font-size:85%;font-weight:700;line-height:122%;margin:10px 
0;}#yiv2236302194 #yiv2236302194ygrp-mkp #yiv2236302194ads 
{margin-bottom:10px;}#yiv2236302194 #yiv2236302194ygrp-mkp .yiv2236302194ad 
{padding:0 0;}#yiv2236302194 #yiv2236302194ygrp-mkp .yiv2236302194ad p 
{margin:0;}#yiv2236302194 #yiv2236302194ygrp-mkp .yiv2236302194ad a 
{color:#ff;text-decoration:none;}#yiv2236302194 #yiv2236302194ygrp-sponsor 
#yiv2236302194ygrp-lc {font-family:Arial;}#yiv2236302194 
#yiv2236302194ygrp-sponsor #yiv2236302194ygrp-lc #yiv2236302194hd {margin:10px 
0px;font-weight:700;font-size:78%;line-height:122%;}#yiv2236302194 
#yiv

Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'

[dhamiltony...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

Enter hell as 
 if strolling in a
 pleasure garden.
 -Lin-Chi
 Zen Calendar
 19 September 2015
 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <authfri...@yahoo.com> wrote :

 
 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

  No, our government doesn't dare force anyone to have an abortion. That would 
cause a revolt.
 

 I didn't say anything about "forcing." *You* said the government "talks them 
into it," but it doesn't do that either.
 

 But they sure let you know that they *fight* for your *right* to have it.
 

 Oh, they do, do they? That must be why Congress is trying to defund Planned 
Parenthood, I guess, and why so many state governments are putting big 
obstacles in the way of obtaining an abortion.
 

 Come on, Mike. This is just a silly argument, not worthy of your intelligence.
 

 Wouldn't it be a shame to not use the *government approved* solution to fix 
your problems? It has to be OK, the government says so! But, if you choose not 
to, we'll help you raise your child. How can you lose?< Of course the easiest 
thing (and cheapest for the government)is just terminate it. Under these 
circumstances, I can't see why there wouldn't be some immediate but temporary 
relief. This is all social conditioning and engineering, Margaret Sanger's 
dream come true.< If a woman doesn't feel remorse, regret or anguish following 
the termination of her pregnancy by abortion, something is terribly wrong with 
the human species.

 

 Or maybe something is terribly wrong with those who don't understand that 
women think they should have control over their own bodies.
 

 Desensitization to the instinct of motherhood has been completed.
 

 Oh, nonsense. Women have been having abortions for millennia, all over the 
globe, even before there was a way to do it safely and painlessly and legally, 
even when they were risking their lives to have it done. The "instinct of 
motherhood" kicks in just fine when a woman *wants* to have a child.
 

 I think it was Gloria Steinem who observed that if men had the children, 
abortion would be a sacrament.
 

 

 

 

 

  What else can we desensitize humanity to?
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Sunday, September 20, 2015 3:43 PM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
 
 
   Mike, you've gone way off into fantasyland now. Women don't decide to have 
an abortion because the government tells them to. Up until Roe v. Wade, of 
course, government *prohibited* abortion. And these days it's state governments 
(Republican-run) that are doing their damndest to make abortion as difficult as 
possible.
 

 Furthermore, most women do not suffer anguish or regret after an abortion; 
what they experience is relief. Nor do they feel they've "killed their child." 
To them, the fetus has not yet become a child. To me, the real evil is trying 
to make women feel guilty about having an abortion.
 

 You may not like any of this, but when you make your antiabortion arguments, 
you need to take the reality into account and not make up conspiracy theories.
 

 

 

 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

 
Men and women today have had a bill of goods sold to them by those in power. 
That is the system that men have created  through governments and their 
programs. Governments convince people that they *only want to help you* and 
they give you things and take care of you,  but you are expected  to follow 
their recommendations, their solutions. In the case of a woman having an 
unwanted pregnancy, they slyly say " It's just a lump of tissue, do yourself a 
favor,we'll send you to a clinic and have it removed, your problems will be 
solved". The woman, in her desperation agrees and suffers the anguish of 
knowing that she killed her child. And if someone tries to say no, don't do it. 
you'll regret it", they are mocked as a religious fanatic. This is PURE EVIL. 
This the beast that man has created. I call it a beast because it devours human 
souls.
 From: "awoelflebater@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Sunday, September 20, 2015 8:47 AM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
 
 
   

 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

 

 But she was talked into it and told it was the best thing to do. This is what 
the Beast does. What is the Beast, it's the system!

 

 Huh?
 
 









 











 


 

Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'

[awoelfleba...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

 Yeah, but the end result is the same.
 

 If you mean a certain amount of people are dead in either case then, yes, that 
result is the same. If you mean the effect on the world and others is the same 
then, no, it is not. 
 

 From: "awoelflebater@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Sunday, September 20, 2015 11:08 AM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
 
 
   

 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

 About 53 million abortions since Row v Wade.About 300,000 last year. Hitler 
murdered 6 million innocent lives alone in a 5-6 yer period. Stalin murdered 
about 20 million, Mao about fifty million. We've got them beat!

 

 I would have to argue that torturing and murdering full grown adults and 
children is different than aborting an undeveloped embryo.
 

 From: "awoelflebater@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Sunday, September 20, 2015 8:50 AM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
 
 
   

 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

 I guess it depends on your definition of *judge*. Do I recognize poor 
choices?Is it  from poor up bringing or low intelligence.-or is it something 
else. Does that person learn from their mistakes or do they keep repeating the 
same mistake over and over. Do they ever figure out that they are making 
mistakes and , poor choices. Do they feel any responsibility for their choices? 
Do they even care? Do they feel entitled to make mistakes without consequences? 
Some people learn things the easy way, others the hard way.  How much empathy, 
compassion and understanding is expected of me? For how long and to what 
degree? Are they taking advantage of my good will? If it's their nature to 
learn things the hard way, is my help actually retarding their learning 
process? Some people are real victims of circumstances through no fault of 
their own. They didn't make poor choices  but shit happened. Maybe their 
husband died or just left them or became totally disabled. Aren't  they more 
deserving of my empathy and compassion than someone that never grew up? When I 
was younger, out of wedlock births were relatively low. Today, I think it is  
over or at least close to half. Something is dreadfully wrong. When it comes to 
the woman that has the abortion, I am fully aware that she is probably confused 
and frightened of her future  and doesn't know what to do and ends up taking 
the remedy with the quickest results. I feel terribly sorry for her because  I 
don't think she really and fully understands what she has just done. Yes, 
she'll always remember it and the anguish. But she was talked into it and told 
it was the best thing to do. This is what the Beast does. What is the Beast, 
it's the system!

 

 Overview:
 

 Quick Stats • Half of pregnancies among American women are unintended, and 
about four in 10 of these end in abortion.[1]
 • About half of American women will have an unintended pregnancy, [2] and 
nearly 3 in 10 will have an abortion, by age 45.[3]
 • The overall U.S. unintended pregnancy rate increased slightly between 1994 
and 2008, but unintended pregnancy increased 55% among poor women, while 
decreasing 24% among higher-income women.[1,6]
 • Overall, the abortion rate decreased 8% between 2000 and 2008, but abortion 
increased 18% among poor women, while decreasing 28% among higher-income 
women.[3]
 • Some 1.06 million abortions were performed in 2011, down from 1.21 million 
abortions in 2008, a decline of 13%.[4]
 • The number of U.S. abortion providers declined 4% between 2008 (1,793) and 
2011 (1,720). The number of clinics providing abortion services declined 1%, 
from 851 to 839. Eighty-nine percent of all U.S. counties lacked an abortion 
clinic in 2011; 38% of women live in those counties.[4]
 • Nine in 10 abortions occur in the first 12 weeks of pregnancy.[5]
 • A broad cross section of U.S. women have abortions:[3]
 58% are in their 20s; 61% have one or more children; 56% are unmarried and not 
cohabiting; 69% are economically disadvantaged; and 73% report a religious 
affiliation.
 

 
 


 









 













 
  


 













  




 


 












 













 


 

Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'

[awoelfleba...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

 64 next month. Just went to my 45th year high school reunion last night, 
couldn't recognize a soul! We all looked so old! Everybody was going around 
looking at our name tags with our senior pictures on them to see who they 
recognized! It was hilarious.  My dad died when I was nine, I never married 
because I never expected to live long enough to raise a family. Didn't want to 
put my kids through my own personal experience. Big mistake, maybe. Hear I am 
at 64, old enough to be a grandfather. However , raising a family, I wouldn't 
have had the wonderful experiences I have had with Maharishi.

 

 Excellent - not too many regrets then. Well done. You can't have it all. If 
you marry you can never be forever single and know what that's like. If you 
have kids you can never know what it is like to go out of this life childless. 
If you spend lots of time following a spiritual teacher you will have lived a 
very different life than your average Hollywood film star. You can't have it 
all in a single life time. You win some, you lose out in some cases - it's all 
part of the game. I am happy with my choices but this doesn't mean I wouldn't 
love to be able to live about 10 life times simultaneously. I want to milk it 
all for what it's worth.
 

 From: "awoelflebater@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Sunday, September 20, 2015 11:34 AM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
 
 
   

 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

 
At this point I would have to ask your age. I would guess you were born well 
after the beginning of the *Great Society*. That is when out of wedlock 
birthrates began do increase, when the government told the masses, we will take 
care of your babies, women began to feel there was no need for a man in the 
house, a bread winner. Children started growing up without a male role model 
and authority figure in the house and crime started ramping up. Out of wedlock 
birth rates in the black community today near 80% and about 40 % in white 
homes, the last I read. This was unheard of before the beginning of the *Great 
Society*.
 

 That's funny because I was going to ask your age as well based on some of your 
comments (BTW, I like discussing things with you because no matter how much we 
might disagree you are alway pleasant and civil. I think this is one of the 
things I like most about FFL now - everyone can speak their mind without the 
peanut gallery inciting dissension by misrepresenting every viewpoint and 
consequently skewing discussions until hey resemble nothing but juvenile pie 
throwing contests). I was born in 1956 so that makes me much older than you 
think. In addition, I have never had an abortion nor do I have any children (by 
definite choice). When my husband and I were married he had already been 
married before and had had a vasectomy (he is 7 years older than I am) and if 
we were going to have children together he was going to have to have the 
vasectomy reversed but much to his relief I told him I had no desire for 
children. But before that I would have had many opportunities to have gotten 
pregnant but I was pretty careful. Would I have had an abortion if I had gotten 
pregnant? I'm not absolutely sure but it seems likely that I would have.
 

 


 


 












 














 













 







































 


 

Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'

[dhamiltony...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

Yes but in fact by insight of profound [spiritual] experience then conscience 
and faith [experience] different from will of ideologies can lead [join] people 
to do extraordinarily good things like build great Domes to meditate in to 
influence other people in good effect.  -JaiGuruYou!   
 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <olliesed...@yahoo.com> wrote :

 I appreciate your commitment, and warning someone of the consequences of sin 
is OK if they are a close friend I suppose, and/or sharing the same faith. 
Otherwise, there are many choices for living, and there is also karma for 
imposing one's will on another. All the religions are incomplete wrt how they 
interpret God's message, and to assert that one is somehow superior over the 
others, and then insist that others follow such a  doctrine, seems pretty 
ignorant. There is the ability for any of us to follow a faith quietly, and 
with great conviction. Especially in these modern times, all religious 
knowledge is easily available. If a religion is strong enough, there is no 
reason to proselytize its message to the point that it causes conflict in the 
lives of those who don't share the same faith, to say nothing of openly 
imposing its will on others.
  
 Thanks for this discussion, and the challenge, and the ability for me to see 
more clearly your POV, and clarify my own. 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

 I don't know of any Christian church that will accept abortion as OK or 
advisable unless the mother's life is endangered. I'm sure there are some that 
may not talk about it for fear of seeming judgmental or driving away those that 
won't listen. Warning someone of the consequences of sin is not being 
judgmental, it's practical advice. I am willing to say the same goes for any 
other religion. A  devout Hindu or  devout Buddhist may say nothing but I can 
almost guarantee that they shrug their shoulders and think, "it's their karma, 
not mine". Their are people in every faith that don't practice it or only 
mildly. Christ called them luke warm and said he would spew them out in the 
end.  He demands people that are on fire for Him. Maharishi wanted people that 
were *one pointed* , on the program. If you aren't, he didn't waist time with 
you. All or nothing. I guess thats OK as long as you aren't told that Killing 
infidels via Jihad is the best guaranteed method to heaven. 

 From: "olliesedwuz@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Saturday, September 19, 2015 11:37 PM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
 
 
   Yes, every religion can be shown to have its hypocrisy, but this insistence 
that abortions cannot be performed according to the choice of the woman who is 
pregnant, is only prevalent in radical Christianity, and radical Islam. Not all 
Christian sects are against abortion, and not all Muslim countries forbid it. 
But those at the mercy of the radical preachers of both religions, are pawns, 
imo. To them I would say, You simply don't have the right, or the authority, to 
control my life. Go get perfect, first, and then we'll talk, but no butting in 
line.:-) The more moderate sects of both Christianity and Islam understand 
this. It is only the radical elements of both of these religions who insist on 
this complete invasion of personal choice.
 
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

 *Innocent Life,* the unborn don't fly jets into buildings or commit any other 
criminal or hostile act. Killing in Self- defense is justifiable. I believe I 
mentioned earlier that Abortion is acceptable when the mother's life is 
threatened.If you are concerned about hypocrisy, Christians aren't alone. 
Everybody can be labeled Hypocrites one way or another. Can you name one 
religious/spiritual group that doesn't have *qualifications* as to who receives 
salvation or liberation. etc?And each believes theirs is superior to 
others.Look no further than TM! Everyone has their limitations and 
understanding of religion and spirituality. If you have followed Maharishi's 
teachings you will know that we are born into our lives based on our karma, 
which dictates the circumstances of our lives and how and what values we grow 
up with to experience life. If you were born into a  Judeo-Christian culture, 
those are the values you are meant to experience life from. In India, from that 
perspective. A Muslim, that perspective and so on. That is your dharma and how 
you grow. This is why Maharishi used to say, one doesn't need to change 
religions to practice TM successfully. Add TM to whatever you are and you'll be 
better. Everyone has a different understanding based on their ability to 
understand. We all start from somewhere. The question is, where do we finish 
up? Follow your dharma for maximum growth. Gita says, it's better to die within 
your dharma, even if done poorly than to

Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'

[Mike Dixon mdixon.6...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

My comment was in regards with how they live life in general, not about the 
single choice of having an abortion. If you live a promiscuous life and don't 
take the necessary precautions to prevent pregnancy and you get pregnant. I 
would say you made some poor choices. You made your own bed. BTW are you saying 
no woman has ever had more than one abortion?
  From: "awoelfleba...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]" 
<FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Sunday, September 20, 2015 8:47 AM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
   
    


---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

I guess it depends on your definition of *judge*. Do I recognize poor 
choices?Is it  from poor up bringing or low intelligence.-or is it something 
else. Does that person learn from their mistakes or do they keep repeating the 
same mistake over and over. Do they ever figure out that they are making 
mistakes and , poor choices. Do they feel any responsibility for their choices? 
Do they even care? Do they feel entitled to make mistakes without consequences?
You act as if choosing (in this case) to have an abortion is "without 
consequences". I don't think there is a woman on the planet who would choose to 
do it twice. It is no walk in the park. From the physical ramifications and 
discomfort and risk there are many, many psychological and relationship factors 
that can go into making the whole enterprise highly unpleasant. You are making 
it sound like having an abortion is as simple as flushing a turd down a 
toilet.things? 
 

  From: "emily.mae50@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Saturday, September 19, 2015 6:19 PM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
 
 P.S.  Do you first judge the woman for having the abortion and then judge her 
for not raising her child right?  For being poor, uneducated?  For going on 
welfare?  For needing help from a society that marginalizes her?  For not 
getting it?  Do you sponsor a single mother yourself? You aren't coming across 
as demonstrating a shred of understanding on this issue from a realistic 
standpoint.  


---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <emily.mae50@...> wrote :

As I said, I agree with what Karen Armstrong writes.   When the founding 
*fathers* wrote what they did, they were not thinking of this issue
"Indeed I want to argue that America is the only country that has the 
misfortune of being founded on a philosophical mistake--namely, the notion of 
inalienable rights. We Christians do not believe that we have inalienable 
rights. That is the false presumption of Enlightenment individualism, and it 
opposes everything that Christians believe about what it means to be a 
creature. Notice that the issue is inalienable rights. Rights make a certain 
sense as correlative to duties and goods, but they are not inalienable. For 
example, when the lords protested against the king in the Magna Charta, they 
did so in the name of their duties to their underlings. Duties, not rights, 
were primary. The rights were simply ways of remembering what the duties were."
(Taken from this...you sound Christian Mike, so I include this and this link 
for you.  Has some interesting points.)  
ABORTION, THEOLOGICALLY UNDERSTOOD
|  |
|  | |  | ABORTION, THEOLOGICALLY UNDE... ABORTION, THEOLOGICALLY 
UNDERSTOOD 1991 Taskforce of United Methodists on Abortion and Sexuality, Inc. 
Published by and available from: ... |  |
| View on www.lifewatch.org|   Preview by Yahoo  |
|  |

    RE: ".birth control,( I don't want it now. It'll mess up my plans for 
life, I can't afford it, I don't know who the father is, etc)"
This speaks to your assumptions and prejudice regarding an issue that is more 
often than not, deeply personal for a woman.  You demonstrate a closed mind 
when you assume you know what women are thinking.  How many interviews have you 
done?  

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

Your position that to abort is a personal one and should not be legislated. My 
position is that you don't have the right to take another person's life. It is 
a founding principal of our government and has been recognized from *IT's* very 
inception. Life is considered an *unalienable* right. Unalienable means *it can 
not be denied*. In other words, your right to privacy ends with your body and 
you can  not deny another person's greater right of life, unless it threatens 
yours. Life trumps privacy. The overwhelming majority of abortions are done as 
birth control,( I don't want it now. It'll mess up my plans for life, I can't 
afford it, I don't know who the father is, etc) not to protect the mother's 
life from complications that could lead to possible death.

  From: "emily.mae50@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com&g

Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'

[awoelfleba...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,  wrote :

 I guess it depends on your definition of *judge*. Do I recognize poor 
choices?Is it  from poor up bringing or low intelligence.-or is it something 
else. Does that person learn from their mistakes or do they keep repeating the 
same mistake over and over. Do they ever figure out that they are making 
mistakes and , poor choices. Do they feel any responsibility for their choices? 
Do they even care? Do they feel entitled to make mistakes without consequences? 
Some people learn things the easy way, others the hard way.  How much empathy, 
compassion and understanding is expected of me? For how long and to what 
degree? Are they taking advantage of my good will? If it's their nature to 
learn things the hard way, is my help actually retarding their learning 
process? Some people are real victims of circumstances through no fault of 
their own. They didn't make poor choices  but shit happened. Maybe their 
husband died or just left them or became totally disabled. Aren't  they more 
deserving of my empathy and compassion than someone that never grew up? When I 
was younger, out of wedlock births were relatively low. Today, I think it is  
over or at least close to half. Something is dreadfully wrong. When it comes to 
the woman that has the abortion, I am fully aware that she is probably confused 
and frightened of her future  and doesn't know what to do and ends up taking 
the remedy with the quickest results. I feel terribly sorry for her because  I 
don't think she really and fully understands what she has just done. Yes, 
she'll always remember it and the anguish. But she was talked into it and told 
it was the best thing to do. This is what the Beast does. What is the Beast, 
it's the system!

 

 Overview:
 

 Quick Stats • Half of pregnancies among American women are unintended, and 
about four in 10 of these end in abortion.[1]
 • About half of American women will have an unintended pregnancy, [2] and 
nearly 3 in 10 will have an abortion, by age 45.[3]
 • The overall U.S. unintended pregnancy rate increased slightly between 1994 
and 2008, but unintended pregnancy increased 55% among poor women, while 
decreasing 24% among higher-income women.[1,6]
 • Overall, the abortion rate decreased 8% between 2000 and 2008, but abortion 
increased 18% among poor women, while decreasing 28% among higher-income 
women.[3]
 • Some 1.06 million abortions were performed in 2011, down from 1.21 million 
abortions in 2008, a decline of 13%.[4]
 • The number of U.S. abortion providers declined 4% between 2008 (1,793) and 
2011 (1,720). The number of clinics providing abortion services declined 1%, 
from 851 to 839. Eighty-nine percent of all U.S. counties lacked an abortion 
clinic in 2011; 38% of women live in those counties.[4]
 • Nine in 10 abortions occur in the first 12 weeks of pregnancy.[5]
 • A broad cross section of U.S. women have abortions:[3]
 58% are in their 20s; 61% have one or more children; 56% are unmarried and not 
cohabiting; 69% are economically disadvantaged; and 73% report a religious 
affiliation.
 

 
 









 













 
  


 













  




 


 

Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'

[Mike Dixon mdixon.6...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

  From: "awoelfleba...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]" 
<FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Sunday, September 20, 2015 8:47 AM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
   
    


---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

 Again, not about abortion  but poor life style that may lead to an abortion.

 Some people learn things the easy way, others the hard way.  How much empathy, 
compassion and understanding is expected of me? For how long and to what 
degree? Are they taking advantage of my good will?
What do you have to do with it all? It isn't about you, believe it or not.
 

  From: "emily.mae50@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Saturday, September 19, 2015 6:19 PM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
 
 P.S.  Do you first judge the woman for having the abortion and then judge her 
for not raising her child right?  For being poor, uneducated?  For going on 
welfare?  For needing help from a society that marginalizes her?  For not 
getting it?  Do you sponsor a single mother yourself? You aren't coming across 
as demonstrating a shred of understanding on this issue from a realistic 
standpoint.  


---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <emily.mae50@...> wrote :

As I said, I agree with what Karen Armstrong writes.   When the founding 
*fathers* wrote what they did, they were not thinking of this issue
"Indeed I want to argue that America is the only country that has the 
misfortune of being founded on a philosophical mistake--namely, the notion of 
inalienable rights. We Christians do not believe that we have inalienable 
rights. That is the false presumption of Enlightenment individualism, and it 
opposes everything that Christians believe about what it means to be a 
creature. Notice that the issue is inalienable rights. Rights make a certain 
sense as correlative to duties and goods, but they are not inalienable. For 
example, when the lords protested against the king in the Magna Charta, they 
did so in the name of their duties to their underlings. Duties, not rights, 
were primary. The rights were simply ways of remembering what the duties were."
(Taken from this...you sound Christian Mike, so I include this and this link 
for you.  Has some interesting points.)  
ABORTION, THEOLOGICALLY UNDERSTOOD
|  |
|  | |  | ABORTION, THEOLOGICALLY UNDE... ABORTION, THEOLOGICALLY 
UNDERSTOOD 1991 Taskforce of United Methodists on Abortion and Sexuality, Inc. 
Published by and available from: ... |  |
| View on www.lifewatch.org|   Preview by Yahoo  |
|  |

    RE: ".birth control,( I don't want it now. It'll mess up my plans for 
life, I can't afford it, I don't know who the father is, etc)"
This speaks to your assumptions and prejudice regarding an issue that is more 
often than not, deeply personal for a woman.  You demonstrate a closed mind 
when you assume you know what women are thinking.  How many interviews have you 
done?  

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

Your position that to abort is a personal one and should not be legislated. My 
position is that you don't have the right to take another person's life. It is 
a founding principal of our government and has been recognized from *IT's* very 
inception. Life is considered an *unalienable* right. Unalienable means *it can 
not be denied*. In other words, your right to privacy ends with your body and 
you can  not deny another person's greater right of life, unless it threatens 
yours. Life trumps privacy. The overwhelming majority of abortions are done as 
birth control,( I don't want it now. It'll mess up my plans for life, I can't 
afford it, I don't know who the father is, etc) not to protect the mother's 
life from complications that could lead to possible death.

  From: "emily.mae50@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Saturday, September 19, 2015 10:55 AM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
 
 Was this the answer to my question?  I appreciate that you've articulated your 
position here.  I believe that the decision to abort is a personal one and one 
that should not be legislated. It isn't a casual decision and don't assume that 
the law which allows it turns it into one.  You have a position—does your 
position lead to positions on policies and social structure that are consistent 
with this position? How do you define compassion?  I agree with the position 
stated below.  
"Nearly every abortion represents a human tragedy. This is something that the 
shrill rhetoric of the Christian right tends to ignore. Perhaps, when facing 
the possibility of terminating a pregnancy, we should return to the ancient 
insight that while it is an inexorable law of life that our survival often 
depends upon t

Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'

[awoelfleba...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

 About 53 million abortions since Row v Wade.About 300,000 last year. Hitler 
murdered 6 million innocent lives alone in a 5-6 yer period. Stalin murdered 
about 20 million, Mao about fifty million. We've got them beat!

 

 I would have to argue that torturing and murdering full grown adults and 
children is different than aborting an undeveloped embryo.
 

 From: "awoelflebater@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Sunday, September 20, 2015 8:50 AM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
 
 
   

 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

 I guess it depends on your definition of *judge*. Do I recognize poor 
choices?Is it  from poor up bringing or low intelligence.-or is it something 
else. Does that person learn from their mistakes or do they keep repeating the 
same mistake over and over. Do they ever figure out that they are making 
mistakes and , poor choices. Do they feel any responsibility for their choices? 
Do they even care? Do they feel entitled to make mistakes without consequences? 
Some people learn things the easy way, others the hard way.  How much empathy, 
compassion and understanding is expected of me? For how long and to what 
degree? Are they taking advantage of my good will? If it's their nature to 
learn things the hard way, is my help actually retarding their learning 
process? Some people are real victims of circumstances through no fault of 
their own. They didn't make poor choices  but shit happened. Maybe their 
husband died or just left them or became totally disabled. Aren't  they more 
deserving of my empathy and compassion than someone that never grew up? When I 
was younger, out of wedlock births were relatively low. Today, I think it is  
over or at least close to half. Something is dreadfully wrong. When it comes to 
the woman that has the abortion, I am fully aware that she is probably confused 
and frightened of her future  and doesn't know what to do and ends up taking 
the remedy with the quickest results. I feel terribly sorry for her because  I 
don't think she really and fully understands what she has just done. Yes, 
she'll always remember it and the anguish. But she was talked into it and told 
it was the best thing to do. This is what the Beast does. What is the Beast, 
it's the system!

 

 Overview:
 

 Quick Stats • Half of pregnancies among American women are unintended, and 
about four in 10 of these end in abortion.[1]
 • About half of American women will have an unintended pregnancy, [2] and 
nearly 3 in 10 will have an abortion, by age 45.[3]
 • The overall U.S. unintended pregnancy rate increased slightly between 1994 
and 2008, but unintended pregnancy increased 55% among poor women, while 
decreasing 24% among higher-income women.[1,6]
 • Overall, the abortion rate decreased 8% between 2000 and 2008, but abortion 
increased 18% among poor women, while decreasing 28% among higher-income 
women.[3]
 • Some 1.06 million abortions were performed in 2011, down from 1.21 million 
abortions in 2008, a decline of 13%.[4]
 • The number of U.S. abortion providers declined 4% between 2008 (1,793) and 
2011 (1,720). The number of clinics providing abortion services declined 1%, 
from 851 to 839. Eighty-nine percent of all U.S. counties lacked an abortion 
clinic in 2011; 38% of women live in those counties.[4]
 • Nine in 10 abortions occur in the first 12 weeks of pregnancy.[5]
 • A broad cross section of U.S. women have abortions:[3]
 58% are in their 20s; 61% have one or more children; 56% are unmarried and not 
cohabiting; 69% are economically disadvantaged; and 73% report a religious 
affiliation.
 

 
 


 









 













 
  


 













  




 


 












 


 

Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'

[olliesed...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

I appreciate your commitment, and warning someone of the consequences of sin is 
OK if they are a close friend I suppose, and/or sharing the same faith. 
Otherwise, there are many choices for living, and there is also karma for 
imposing one's will on another. All the religions are incomplete wrt how they 
interpret God's message, and to assert that one is somehow superior over the 
others, and then insist that others follow such a  doctrine, seems pretty 
ignorant. There is the ability for any of us to follow a faith quietly, and 
with great conviction. Especially in these modern times, all religious 
knowledge is easily available. If a religion is strong enough, there is no 
reason to proselytize its message to the point that it causes conflict in the 
lives of those who don't share the same faith, to say nothing of openly 
imposing its will on others.
  
 Thanks for this discussion, and the challenge, and the ability for me to see 
more clearly your POV, and clarify my own. 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

 I don't know of any Christian church that will accept abortion as OK or 
advisable unless the mother's life is endangered. I'm sure there are some that 
may not talk about it for fear of seeming judgmental or driving away those that 
won't listen. Warning someone of the consequences of sin is not being 
judgmental, it's practical advice. I am willing to say the same goes for any 
other religion. A  devout Hindu or  devout Buddhist may say nothing but I can 
almost guarantee that they shrug their shoulders and think, "it's their karma, 
not mine". Their are people in every faith that don't practice it or only 
mildly. Christ called them luke warm and said he would spew them out in the 
end.  He demands people that are on fire for Him. Maharishi wanted people that 
were *one pointed* , on the program. If you aren't, he didn't waist time with 
you. All or nothing. I guess thats OK as long as you aren't told that Killing 
infidels via Jihad is the best guaranteed method to heaven. 

 From: "olliesedwuz@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Saturday, September 19, 2015 11:37 PM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
 
 
   Yes, every religion can be shown to have its hypocrisy, but this insistence 
that abortions cannot be performed according to the choice of the woman who is 
pregnant, is only prevalent in radical Christianity, and radical Islam. Not all 
Christian sects are against abortion, and not all Muslim countries forbid it. 
But those at the mercy of the radical preachers of both religions, are pawns, 
imo. To them I would say, You simply don't have the right, or the authority, to 
control my life. Go get perfect, first, and then we'll talk, but no butting in 
line.:-) The more moderate sects of both Christianity and Islam understand 
this. It is only the radical elements of both of these religions who insist on 
this complete invasion of personal choice.
 
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

 *Innocent Life,* the unborn don't fly jets into buildings or commit any other 
criminal or hostile act. Killing in Self- defense is justifiable. I believe I 
mentioned earlier that Abortion is acceptable when the mother's life is 
threatened.If you are concerned about hypocrisy, Christians aren't alone. 
Everybody can be labeled Hypocrites one way or another. Can you name one 
religious/spiritual group that doesn't have *qualifications* as to who receives 
salvation or liberation. etc?And each believes theirs is superior to 
others.Look no further than TM! Everyone has their limitations and 
understanding of religion and spirituality. If you have followed Maharishi's 
teachings you will know that we are born into our lives based on our karma, 
which dictates the circumstances of our lives and how and what values we grow 
up with to experience life. If you were born into a  Judeo-Christian culture, 
those are the values you are meant to experience life from. In India, from that 
perspective. A Muslim, that perspective and so on. That is your dharma and how 
you grow. This is why Maharishi used to say, one doesn't need to change 
religions to practice TM successfully. Add TM to whatever you are and you'll be 
better. Everyone has a different understanding based on their ability to 
understand. We all start from somewhere. The question is, where do we finish 
up? Follow your dharma for maximum growth. Gita says, it's better to die within 
your dharma, even if done poorly than to die in someone else's dharma, even if 
well done. If you were born a Jew , then be one but practice TM. If you were 
born a Christian, then be one but practice TM. If you were born a Muslim, a 
Hindu... etc. but practice TM. BTW, if you think you can convert to be a Hindu, 
you can't. Speak to any Vedic priest,. he'll tell you pretty much what I just 
said. And if y

Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'

[awoelfleba...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

 I guess it depends on your definition of *judge*. Do I recognize poor 
choices?Is it  from poor up bringing or low intelligence.-or is it something 
else. Does that person learn from their mistakes or do they keep repeating the 
same mistake over and over. Do they ever figure out that they are making 
mistakes and , poor choices. Do they feel any responsibility for their choices? 
Do they even care? Do they feel entitled to make mistakes without consequences?
 

 You act as if choosing (in this case) to have an abortion is "without 
consequences". I don't think there is a woman on the planet who would choose to 
do it twice. It is no walk in the park. From the physical ramifications and 
discomfort and risk there are many, many psychological and relationship factors 
that can go into making the whole enterprise highly unpleasant. You are making 
it sound like having an abortion is as simple as flushing a turd down a toilet.
 

  Some people learn things the easy way, others the hard way.  How much 
empathy, compassion and understanding is expected of me? For how long and to 
what degree? Are they taking advantage of my good will?
 

 What do you have to do with it all? It isn't about you, believe it or not.
 

  If it's their nature to learn things the hard way, is my help actually 
retarding their learning process? Some people are real victims of circumstances 
through no fault of their own. They didn't make poor choices  but shit 
happened. Maybe their husband died or just left them or became totally 
disabled. Aren't  they more deserving of my empathy and compassion than someone 
that never grew up? When I was younger, out of wedlock births were relatively 
low.
 

 Maybe because of the high abortion rate, certainly not because of society's 
greater abstinance or birth control's higher effectiveness rate. I think you 
should check the stats here comparing when 'you were younger' as compared to 
today with numbers adjusted for population growth. I highly doubt "out of 
wedlock" births were relatively low. Do you think this is because more people 
were more careful, their morals were stronger or you're imagining things? 
 

  Today, I think it is  over or at least close to half. Something is dreadfully 
wrong. When it comes to the woman that has the abortion, I am fully aware that 
she is probably confused and frightened of her future  and doesn't know what to 
do and ends up taking the remedy with the quickest results. I feel terribly 
sorry for her because  I don't think she really and fully understands what she 
has just done. Yes, she'll always remember it and the anguish. But she was 
talked into it and told it was the best thing to do. This is what the Beast 
does. What is the Beast, it's the system!

 

 Huh?
 

 From: "emily.mae50@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Saturday, September 19, 2015 6:19 PM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
 
 
   P.S.  Do you first judge the woman for having the abortion and then judge 
her for not raising her child right?  For being poor, uneducated?  For going on 
welfare?  For needing help from a society that marginalizes her?  For not 
getting it?  Do you sponsor a single mother yourself? You aren't coming across 
as demonstrating a shred of understanding on this issue from a realistic 
standpoint.  
 


 
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <emily.mae50@...> wrote :

 As I said, I agree with what Karen Armstrong writes.   When the founding 
*fathers* wrote what they did, they were not thinking of this issue 

 "Indeed I want to argue that America is the only country that has the 
misfortune of being founded on a philosophical mistake--namely, the notion of 
inalienable rights. We Christians do not believe that we have inalienable 
rights. That is the false presumption of Enlightenment individualism, and it 
opposes everything that Christians believe about what it means to be a 
creature. Notice that the issue is inalienable rights. Rights make a certain 
sense as correlative to duties and goods, but they are not inalienable. For 
example, when the lords protested against the king in the Magna Charta, they 
did so in the name of their duties to their underlings. Duties, not rights, 
were primary. The rights were simply ways of remembering what the duties were."
 

 (Taken from this...you sound Christian Mike, so I include this and this link 
for you.  Has some interesting points.)  
 

 ABORTION, THEOLOGICALLY UNDERSTOOD http://www.lifewatch.org/abortion.html 
 
 http://www.lifewatch.org/abortion.html
 
 ABORTION, THEOLOGICALLY UNDE... http://www.lifewatch.org/abortion.html 
ABORTION, THEOLOGICALLY UNDERSTOOD 1991 Taskforce of United Methodists on 
Abortion and Sexuality, Inc. Published by and available from: ...


 
 View on www.lifewatch.org http://www

Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'

[Mike Dixon mdixon.6...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

Men and women today have had a bill of goods sold to them by those in power. 
That is the system that men have created  through governments and their 
programs. Governments convince people that they *only want to help you* and 
they give you things and take care of you,  but you are expected  to follow 
their recommendations, their solutions. In the case of a woman having an 
unwanted pregnancy, they slyly say " It's just a lump of tissue, do yourself a 
favor,we'll send you to a clinic and have it removed, your problems will be 
solved". The woman, in her desperation agrees and suffers the anguish of 
knowing that she killed her child. And if someone tries to say no, don't do it. 
you'll regret it", they are mocked as a religious fanatic. This is PURE EVIL. 
This the beast that man has created. I call it a beast because it devours human 
souls.
  From: "awoelfleba...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]" 
<FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Sunday, September 20, 2015 8:47 AM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
   
    


---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :


 But she was talked into it and told it was the best thing to do. This is what 
the Beast does. What is the Beast, it's the system!

Huh?
  From: "emily.mae50@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Saturday, September 19, 2015 6:19 PM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
 
 P.S.  Do you first judge the woman for having the abortion and then judge her 
for not raising her child right?  For being poor, uneducated?  For going on 
welfare?  For needing help from a society that marginalizes her?  For not 
getting it?  Do you sponsor a single mother yourself? You aren't coming across 
as demonstrating a shred of understanding on this issue from a realistic 
standpoint.  


---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <emily.mae50@...> wrote :

As I said, I agree with what Karen Armstrong writes.   When the founding 
*fathers* wrote what they did, they were not thinking of this issue
"Indeed I want to argue that America is the only country that has the 
misfortune of being founded on a philosophical mistake--namely, the notion of 
inalienable rights. We Christians do not believe that we have inalienable 
rights. That is the false presumption of Enlightenment individualism, and it 
opposes everything that Christians believe about what it means to be a 
creature. Notice that the issue is inalienable rights. Rights make a certain 
sense as correlative to duties and goods, but they are not inalienable. For 
example, when the lords protested against the king in the Magna Charta, they 
did so in the name of their duties to their underlings. Duties, not rights, 
were primary. The rights were simply ways of remembering what the duties were."
(Taken from this...you sound Christian Mike, so I include this and this link 
for you.  Has some interesting points.)  
ABORTION, THEOLOGICALLY UNDERSTOOD
|  |
|  | |  | ABORTION, THEOLOGICALLY UNDE... ABORTION, THEOLOGICALLY 
UNDERSTOOD 1991 Taskforce of United Methodists on Abortion and Sexuality, Inc. 
Published by and available from: ... |  |
| View on www.lifewatch.org|   Preview by Yahoo  |
|  |

    RE: ".birth control,( I don't want it now. It'll mess up my plans for 
life, I can't afford it, I don't know who the father is, etc)"
This speaks to your assumptions and prejudice regarding an issue that is more 
often than not, deeply personal for a woman.  You demonstrate a closed mind 
when you assume you know what women are thinking.  How many interviews have you 
done?  

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

Your position that to abort is a personal one and should not be legislated. My 
position is that you don't have the right to take another person's life. It is 
a founding principal of our government and has been recognized from *IT's* very 
inception. Life is considered an *unalienable* right. Unalienable means *it can 
not be denied*. In other words, your right to privacy ends with your body and 
you can  not deny another person's greater right of life, unless it threatens 
yours. Life trumps privacy. The overwhelming majority of abortions are done as 
birth control,( I don't want it now. It'll mess up my plans for life, I can't 
afford it, I don't know who the father is, etc) not to protect the mother's 
life from complications that could lead to possible death.

  From: "emily.mae50@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Saturday, September 19, 2015 10:55 AM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
 
 Was this the answer to my question?  I appreciate that you've articulated your 
position here.  I believe that the decision to abort is a personal one and one 
that shou

Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'

[awoelfleba...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,  wrote :

 Yes, every religion can be shown to have its hypocrisy, but this insistence 
that abortions cannot be performed according to the choice of the woman who is 
pregnant, is only prevalent in radical Christianity, and radical Islam. Not all 
Christian sects are against abortion, and not all Muslim countries forbid it. 
But those at the mercy of the radical preachers of both religions, are pawns, 
imo. To them I would say, You simply don't have the right, or the authority, to 
control my life. Go get perfect, first, and then we'll talk, but no butting in 
line.:-) The more moderate sects of both Christianity and Islam understand 
this. It is only the radical elements of both of these religions who insist on 
this complete invasion of personal choice. 

 I would also say that anyone who takes a hard line on any subject has not been 
in that particular situation (in this case, been faced with the "tragic" and 
difficult decision to have a living 'lump of cells' sucked or cut out of one's 
womb). Just like the many times when pro-gun advocates suddenly change their 
tune when their family member has been shot or killed while standing at line at 
McDonalds or walking down the street. You want to see previously quiet people 
suddenly become vocal about driving while under the influence? Have a good 
friend or family member killed by a drunk driver. Suddenly, miraculously one 
can switch positions/attitudes very quickly.
 
 








 
  





 


 












 














 














 













 


 

Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'

[Mike Dixon mdixon.6...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

About 53 million abortions since Row v Wade.About 300,000 last year. Hitler 
murdered 6 million innocent lives alone in a 5-6 yer period. Stalin murdered 
about 20 million, Mao about fifty million. We've got them beat!

  From: "awoelfleba...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]" 
<FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Sunday, September 20, 2015 8:50 AM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
   
    


---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

I guess it depends on your definition of *judge*. Do I recognize poor 
choices?Is it  from poor up bringing or low intelligence.-or is it something 
else. Does that person learn from their mistakes or do they keep repeating the 
same mistake over and over. Do they ever figure out that they are making 
mistakes and , poor choices. Do they feel any responsibility for their choices? 
Do they even care? Do they feel entitled to make mistakes without consequences? 
Some people learn things the easy way, others the hard way.  How much empathy, 
compassion and understanding is expected of me? For how long and to what 
degree? Are they taking advantage of my good will? If it's their nature to 
learn things the hard way, is my help actually retarding their learning 
process? Some people are real victims of circumstances through no fault of 
their own. They didn't make poor choices  but shit happened. Maybe their 
husband died or just left them or became totally disabled. Aren't  they more 
deserving of my empathy and compassion than someone that never grew up? When I 
was younger, out of wedlock births were relatively low. Today, I think it is  
over or at least close to half. Something is dreadfully wrong. When it comes to 
the woman that has the abortion, I am fully aware that she is probably confused 
and frightened of her future  and doesn't know what to do and ends up taking 
the remedy with the quickest results. I feel terribly sorry for her because  I 
don't think she really and fully understands what she has just done. Yes, 
she'll always remember it and the anguish. But she was talked into it and told 
it was the best thing to do. This is what the Beast does. What is the Beast, 
it's the system!

Overview:

Quick Stats
• Half of pregnancies among American women are unintended, and about four in 10 
of these end in abortion.[1]• About half of American women will have an 
unintended pregnancy, [2] and nearly 3 in 10 will have an abortion, by age 
45.[3]• The overall U.S. unintended pregnancy rate increased slightly between 
1994 and 2008, but unintended pregnancy increased 55% among poor women, while 
decreasing 24% among higher-income women.[1,6]• Overall, the abortion rate 
decreased 8% between 2000 and 2008, but abortion increased 18% among poor 
women, while decreasing 28% among higher-income women.[3]• Some 1.06 million 
abortions were performed in 2011, down from 1.21 million abortions in 2008, a 
decline of 13%.[4]• The number of U.S. abortion providers declined 4% between 
2008 (1,793) and 2011 (1,720). The number of clinics providing abortion 
services declined 1%, from 851 to 839. Eighty-nine percent of all U.S. counties 
lacked an abortion clinic in 2011; 38% of women live in those counties.[4]• 
Nine in 10 abortions occur in the first 12 weeks of pregnancy.[5]• A broad 
cross section of U.S. women have abortions:[3]   
   - 58% are in their 20s;
   - 61% have one or more children;
   - 56% are unmarried and not cohabiting;
   - 69% are economically disadvantaged; and
   - 73% report a religious affiliation.

 





 

 

  #yiv1919087029 #yiv1919087029 -- #yiv1919087029ygrp-mkp {border:1px solid 
#d8d8d8;font-family:Arial;margin:10px 0;padding:0 10px;}#yiv1919087029 
#yiv1919087029ygrp-mkp hr {border:1px solid #d8d8d8;}#yiv1919087029 
#yiv1919087029ygrp-mkp #yiv1919087029hd 
{color:#628c2a;font-size:85%;font-weight:700;line-height:122%;margin:10px 
0;}#yiv1919087029 #yiv1919087029ygrp-mkp #yiv1919087029ads 
{margin-bottom:10px;}#yiv1919087029 #yiv1919087029ygrp-mkp .yiv1919087029ad 
{padding:0 0;}#yiv1919087029 #yiv1919087029ygrp-mkp .yiv1919087029ad p 
{margin:0;}#yiv1919087029 #yiv1919087029ygrp-mkp .yiv1919087029ad a 
{color:#ff;text-decoration:none;}#yiv1919087029 #yiv1919087029ygrp-sponsor 
#yiv1919087029ygrp-lc {font-family:Arial;}#yiv1919087029 
#yiv1919087029ygrp-sponsor #yiv1919087029ygrp-lc #yiv1919087029hd {margin:10px 
0px;font-weight:700;font-size:78%;line-height:122%;}#yiv1919087029 
#yiv1919087029ygrp-sponsor #yiv1919087029ygrp-lc .yiv1919087029ad 
{margin-bottom:10px;padding:0 0;}#yiv1919087029 #yiv1919087029actions 
{font-family:Verdana;font-size:11px;padding:10px 0;}#yiv1919087029 
#yiv1919087029activity 
{background-color:#e0ecee;float:left;font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;padding:10px;}#yiv1919087029
 #yiv1919087029activity span {font-weight:700;}#yiv1919087029 
#yiv1919087029activity span:first-child 
{text-transform:uppercase;}#yiv1919087029 #yiv1

Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'

[Bhairitu noozg...@sbcglobal.net [FairfieldLife]]

On 09/19/2015 03:01 PM, emptyb...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] wrote:


I take the "eastern" view that until the child takes their first 
breathe they are nothing but an growth on the woman.


"Oh yeah ... It ain't nothing but fleshy tissue. It can't breath so it 
ain't human."


That's about as "Eastern" as Washington, New York and Boston.

You obviously have never seen Garbha-Upanishad.
Oh, but I forget ... reading is for "intellectuals with no experience".



The texts take on a different meaning with initiation and experience.







Garbha Upanishad - Translation 




Garbha Upanishad - Translation
The human body is constituted of five things (the five forces of 
earth, sky, air, water and fire) and is of six shelters (like the 
physical, ethereal and so on).



   
View on www.vedarahasya.net 

Preview by Yahoo

Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'

[awoelfleba...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,  wrote :

 
At this point I would have to ask your age. I would guess you were born well 
after the beginning of the *Great Society*. That is when out of wedlock 
birthrates began do increase, when the government told the masses, we will take 
care of your babies, women began to feel there was no need for a man in the 
house, a bread winner. Children started growing up without a male role model 
and authority figure in the house and crime started ramping up. Out of wedlock 
birth rates in the black community today near 80% and about 40 % in white 
homes, the last I read. This was unheard of before the beginning of the *Great 
Society*.
 

 That's funny because I was going to ask your age as well based on some of your 
comments (BTW, I like discussing things with you because no matter how much we 
might disagree you are alway pleasant and civil. I think this is one of the 
things I like most about FFL now - everyone can speak their mind without the 
peanut gallery inciting dissension by misrepresenting every viewpoint and 
consequently skewing discussions until hey resemble nothing but juvenile pie 
throwing contests). I was born in 1956 so that makes me much older than you 
think. In addition, I have never had an abortion nor do I have any children (by 
definite choice). When my husband and I were married he had already been 
married before and had had a vasectomy (he is 7 years older than I am) and if 
we were going to have children together he was going to have to have the 
vasectomy reversed but much to his relief I told him I had no desire for 
children. But before that I would have had many opportunities to have gotten 
pregnant but I was pretty careful. Would I have had an abortion if I had gotten 
pregnant? I'm not absolutely sure but it seems likely that I would have.
 

 


 












 














 













 

Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'

[Mike Dixon mdixon.6...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

I guess my point is, according to Maharishi's teaching, one should follow their 
dharma and practice TM.  TM is the grease under the skid that reduces the 
friction, making  your dharma easier. Dharma is the path of maximum 
evolution.It is dictated by your previous karmas.  Every circumstance you 
inherit , Country, religion, ethnicity, race ,social status, economic status 
etc was pre-ordained and that is what you're perspective of life is viewed 
from. You are meant to face it's challenges and reap it's rewards or be smacked 
down by that and learn from your experiences. Christ said everyone must carry 
their own cross.Your dharma is the burden you have to carry in life. As I said 
, TM is like grease under the skids that bare your load. It makes your life a 
little easier.Do less and accomplish more. Part of Maharishi's teaching *was* 
don't change your family religion, just add TM. Don't guru hop, don't change 
boats in mid stream. You're fucking up your dharma if you do!

  From: "olliesed...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]" 
<FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Sunday, September 20, 2015 8:04 AM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
   
    I appreciate your commitment, and warning someone of the consequences of 
sin is OK if they are a close friend I suppose, and/or sharing the same faith. 
Otherwise, there are many choices for living, and there is also karma for 
imposing one's will on another. All the religions are incomplete wrt how they 
interpret God's message, and to assert that one is somehow superior over the 
others, and then insist that others follow such a  doctrine, seems pretty 
ignorant. There is the ability for any of us to follow a faith quietly, and 
with great conviction. Especially in these modern times, all religious 
knowledge is easily available. If a religion is strong enough, there is no 
reason to proselytize its message to the point that it causes conflict in the 
lives of those who don't share the same faith, to say nothing of openly 
imposing its will on others. Thanks for this discussion, and the challenge, and 
the ability for me to see more clearly your POV, and clarify my own. 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

I don't know of any Christian church that will accept abortion as OK or 
advisable unless the mother's life is endangered. I'm sure there are some that 
may not talk about it for fear of seeming judgmental or driving away those that 
won't listen. Warning someone of the consequences of sin is not being 
judgmental, it's practical advice. I am willing to say the same goes for any 
other religion. A  devout Hindu or  devout Buddhist may say nothing but I can 
almost guarantee that they shrug their shoulders and think, "it's their karma, 
not mine". Their are people in every faith that don't practice it or only 
mildly. Christ called them luke warm and said he would spew them out in the 
end.  He demands people that are on fire for Him. Maharishi wanted people that 
were *one pointed* , on the program. If you aren't, he didn't waist time with 
you. All or nothing. I guess thats OK as long as you aren't told that Killing 
infidels via Jihad is the best guaranteed method to heaven. 
  From: "olliesedwuz@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Saturday, September 19, 2015 11:37 PM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
 
 Yes, every religion can be shown to have its hypocrisy, but this insistence 
that abortions cannot be performed according to the choice of the woman who is 
pregnant, is only prevalent in radical Christianity, and radical Islam. Not all 
Christian sects are against abortion, and not all Muslim countries forbid it. 
But those at the mercy of the radical preachers of both religions, are pawns, 
imo. To them I would say, You simply don't have the right, or the authority, to 
control my life. Go get perfect, first, and then we'll talk, but no butting in 
line.:-) The more moderate sects of both Christianity and Islam understand 
this. It is only the radical elements of both of these religions who insist on 
this complete invasion of personal choice.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

*Innocent Life,* the unborn don't fly jets into buildings or commit any other 
criminal or hostile act. Killing in Self- defense is justifiable. I believe I 
mentioned earlier that Abortion is acceptable when the mother's life is 
threatened.If you are concerned about hypocrisy, Christians aren't alone. 
Everybody can be labeled Hypocrites one way or another. Can you name one 
religious/spiritual group that doesn't have *qualifications* as to who receives 
salvation or liberation. etc?And each believes theirs is superior to 
others.Look no further than TM! Everyone has their limitations and 
understanding of religion and spirituality. If you have

Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'

[Mike Dixon mdixon.6...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

At this point I would have to ask your age. I would guess you were born well 
after the beginning of the *Great Society*. That is when out of wedlock 
birthrates began do increase, when the government told the masses, we will take 
care of your babies, women began to feel there was no need for a man in the 
house, a bread winner. Children started growing up without a male role model 
and authority figure in the house and crime started ramping up. Out of wedlock 
birth rates in the black community today near 80% and about 40 % in white 
homes, the last I read. This was unheard of before the beginning of the *Great 
Society*.
  From: "awoelfleba...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]" 
<FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Sunday, September 20, 2015 8:47 AM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
   
    


---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :


 If it's their nature to learn things the hard way, is my help actually 
retarding their learning process? Some people are real victims of circumstances 
through no fault of their own. They didn't make poor choices  but shit 
happened. Maybe their husband died or just left them or became totally 
disabled. Aren't  they more deserving of my empathy and compassion than someone 
that never grew up? When I was younger, out of wedlock births were relatively 
low.
Maybe because of the high abortion rate, certainly not because of society's 
greater abstinance or birth control's higher effectiveness rate. I think you 
should check the stats here comparing when 'you were younger' as compared to 
today with numbers adjusted for population growth. I highly doubt "out of 
wedlock" births were relatively low. Do you think this is because more people 
were more careful, their morals were stronger or you're imagining things? 
 

  From: "emily.mae50@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Saturday, September 19, 2015 6:19 PM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
 
 P.S.  Do you first judge the woman for having the abortion and then judge her 
for not raising her child right?  For being poor, uneducated?  For going on 
welfare?  For needing help from a society that marginalizes her?  For not 
getting it?  Do you sponsor a single mother yourself? You aren't coming across 
as demonstrating a shred of understanding on this issue from a realistic 
standpoint.  


---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <emily.mae50@...> wrote :

As I said, I agree with what Karen Armstrong writes.   When the founding 
*fathers* wrote what they did, they were not thinking of this issue
"Indeed I want to argue that America is the only country that has the 
misfortune of being founded on a philosophical mistake--namely, the notion of 
inalienable rights. We Christians do not believe that we have inalienable 
rights. That is the false presumption of Enlightenment individualism, and it 
opposes everything that Christians believe about what it means to be a 
creature. Notice that the issue is inalienable rights. Rights make a certain 
sense as correlative to duties and goods, but they are not inalienable. For 
example, when the lords protested against the king in the Magna Charta, they 
did so in the name of their duties to their underlings. Duties, not rights, 
were primary. The rights were simply ways of remembering what the duties were."
(Taken from this...you sound Christian Mike, so I include this and this link 
for you.  Has some interesting points.)  
ABORTION, THEOLOGICALLY UNDERSTOOD
|  |
|  | |  | ABORTION, THEOLOGICALLY UNDE... ABORTION, THEOLOGICALLY 
UNDERSTOOD 1991 Taskforce of United Methodists on Abortion and Sexuality, Inc. 
Published by and available from: ... |  |
| View on www.lifewatch.org|   Preview by Yahoo  |
|  |

    RE: ".birth control,( I don't want it now. It'll mess up my plans for 
life, I can't afford it, I don't know who the father is, etc)"
This speaks to your assumptions and prejudice regarding an issue that is more 
often than not, deeply personal for a woman.  You demonstrate a closed mind 
when you assume you know what women are thinking.  How many interviews have you 
done?  

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

Your position that to abort is a personal one and should not be legislated. My 
position is that you don't have the right to take another person's life. It is 
a founding principal of our government and has been recognized from *IT's* very 
inception. Life is considered an *unalienable* right. Unalienable means *it can 
not be denied*. In other words, your right to privacy ends with your body and 
you can  not deny another person's greater right of life, unless it threatens 
yours. Life trumps privacy. The overwhelming majority of abortions are done as 
birth control,( I don't want it now. It'll me

Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'

[steve.sun...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

This is sort of funny.  A couple of weeks ago my wife and I were having dinner 
in a restaurant in a better part of town, where I also went to high school.  It 
was a lot busier than we expected. We were sitting at the outdoor bar, and I 
hear a couple guys talking about the best looking girl in our high school 
during those days.  I mentioned how odd that was to my wife, and then she 
overheard the bartender talking to one of the group about where the their high 
school reunion was going to after this little pre get together. 

 This group was a year behind me, (thank God), but I was surprised at just how 
old everyone looked.
 

 On the other hand, the person I see in the mirror now, for the first time, is 
starting to look pretty old as well.  (-:
 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

 64 next month. Just went to my 45th year high school reunion last night, 
couldn't recognize a soul! We all looked so old! Everybody was going around 
looking at our name tags with our senior pictures on them to see who they 
recognized! It was hilarious.  My dad died when I was nine, I never married 
because I never expected to live long enough to raise a family. Didn't want to 
put my kids through my own personal experience. Big mistake, maybe. Hear I am 
at 64, old enough to be a grandfather. However , raising a family, I wouldn't 
have had the wonderful experiences I have had with Maharishi.

 

 From: "awoelflebater@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Sunday, September 20, 2015 11:34 AM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
 
 
   

 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

 
At this point I would have to ask your age. I would guess you were born well 
after the beginning of the *Great Society*. That is when out of wedlock 
birthrates began do increase, when the government told the masses, we will take 
care of your babies, women began to feel there was no need for a man in the 
house, a bread winner. Children started growing up without a male role model 
and authority figure in the house and crime started ramping up. Out of wedlock 
birth rates in the black community today near 80% and about 40 % in white 
homes, the last I read. This was unheard of before the beginning of the *Great 
Society*.
 

 That's funny because I was going to ask your age as well based on some of your 
comments (BTW, I like discussing things with you because no matter how much we 
might disagree you are alway pleasant and civil. I think this is one of the 
things I like most about FFL now - everyone can speak their mind without the 
peanut gallery inciting dissension by misrepresenting every viewpoint and 
consequently skewing discussions until hey resemble nothing but juvenile pie 
throwing contests). I was born in 1956 so that makes me much older than you 
think. In addition, I have never had an abortion nor do I have any children (by 
definite choice). When my husband and I were married he had already been 
married before and had had a vasectomy (he is 7 years older than I am) and if 
we were going to have children together he was going to have to have the 
vasectomy reversed but much to his relief I told him I had no desire for 
children. But before that I would have had many opportunities to have gotten 
pregnant but I was pretty careful. Would I have had an abortion if I had gotten 
pregnant? I'm not absolutely sure but it seems likely that I would have.
 

 


 


 












 














 













 







































 


 

Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'

[Mike Dixon mdixon.6...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

My nakshatra is Uttara Phalguni. I've been told that this had a big influence 
on my staying single. I don't know jack Sh*t about jyotish but maybe...

  From: "Bhairitu noozg...@sbcglobal.net [FairfieldLife]" 
<FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Sunday, September 20, 2015 2:27 PM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
   
 You might ask yourself if you would have accomplished more or less with a 
mate.  It didn't try to stay single but it turned out that way and my horoscope 
even says that marriage is inappropriate because I have some kind of sannyasi 
yoga but it sure isn't one I know of.  Believe it or not I've had pious vedic 
astrologers say "have flings instead."  When I was playing music in clubs that 
was quite easy.  :-D 
 
 On 09/20/2015 12:09 PM, Mike Dixon mdixon.6...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] wrote:
  
     64 next month. Just went to my 45th year high school reunion last night, 
couldn't recognize a soul! We all looked so old! Everybody was going around 
looking at our name tags with our senior pictures on them to see who they 
recognized! It was hilarious.  My dad died when I was nine, I never married 
because I never expected to live long enough to raise a family. Didn't want to 
put my kids through my own personal experience. Big mistake, maybe. Hear I am 
at 64, old enough to be a grandfather. However , raising a family, I wouldn't 
have had the wonderful experiences I have had with Maharishi.
   
  From: "awoelfleba...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]" 
<FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Sunday, September 20, 2015 11:34 AM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
   
    
  
 
 ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :
 
At this point I would have to ask your age. I would guess you were born 
well after the beginning of the *Great Society*. That is when out of wedlock 
birthrates began do  increase, when the government told the masses, we will 
take care of your babies, women began to feel there was no need for a man in 
the house, a bread winner. Children  started growing up without a male role 
model and authority figure in the house and crime started ramping up. Out of 
wedlock birth rates in the black community today near 80%  and about 40 % in 
white homes, the last I read. This was unheard of before the beginning of the 
*Great Society*. 
  That's funny because I was going to ask your age as well based on some of  
your comments (BTW, I like discussing things with you because no matter how 
much we might  disagree you are alway! pleasant and civil. I think this is one 
of the things I like most about FFL now - everyone can speak their mind without 
the peanut gallery  inciting dissension by misrepresenting every viewpoint and 
consequently skewing discussions until hey resemble nothing but juvenile pie 
throwing contests). I was born in 1956 so that makes me much older than you 
think. In addition, I have never  had an abortion nor do I have any children 
(by definite choice). When my husband and I were married he had already been 
married before and had had a vasectomy (he is 7  years older than I am) and if 
we were going to have children together he was going to have to have the 
vasectomy reversed but much to his relief I told him I  had no desire for 
children. But before that I would have had many opportunities to have gotten 
pregnant but I was pretty careful. Would I have had an abortion if I  had 
gotten pregnant? I'm not absolutely sure but it seems likely that I would have.
   
   
 
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
   
 
  
 
  #yiv9664144798 #yiv9664144798 -- #yiv9664144798ygrp-mkp {border:1px solid 
#d8d8d8;font-family:Arial;margin:10px 0;padding:0 10px;}#yiv9664144798 
#yiv9664144798ygrp-mkp hr {border:1px solid #d8d8d8;}#yiv9664144798 
#yiv9664144798ygrp-mkp #yiv9664144798hd 
{color:#628c2a;font-size:85%;font-weight:700;line-height:122%;margin:10px 
0;}#yiv9664144798 #yiv9664144798ygrp-mkp #yiv9664144798ads 
{margin-bottom:10px;}#yiv9664144798 #yiv9664144798ygrp-mkp .yiv9664144798ad 
{padding:0 0;}#yiv9664144798 #yiv9664144798ygrp-mkp .yiv9664144798ad p 
{margin:0;}#yiv9664144798 #yiv9664144798ygrp-mkp .yiv9664144798ad a 
{color:#ff;text-decoration:none;}#yiv9664144798 #yiv9664144798ygrp-sponsor 
#yiv9664144798ygrp-lc {font-family:Arial;}#yiv9664144798 
#yiv9664144798ygrp-sponsor #yiv9664144798ygrp-lc #yiv9664144798hd {margin:10px 
0px;font-weight:700;font-size:78%;line-height:122%;}#yiv9664144798 
#yiv9664144798ygrp-sponsor #yiv9664144798ygrp-lc .yiv9664144798ad 
{margin-bottom:10px;padding:0 0;}#yiv9664144798 #yiv9664144798actions 
{font-family:Verdana;font-size:11px;padding:10px 0;}#yiv9664144798 
#yiv9664144798activity 
{background-color:#e0ecee;float:left

Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'

[authfri...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

  No, our government doesn't dare force anyone to have an abortion. That would 
cause a revolt.
 

 I didn't say anything about "forcing." *You* said the government "talks them 
into it," but it doesn't do that either.
 

 But they sure let you know that they *fight* for your *right* to have it.
 

 Oh, they do, do they? That must be why Congress is trying to defund Planned 
Parenthood, I guess, and why so many state governments are putting big 
obstacles in the way of obtaining an abortion.
 

 Come on, Mike. This is just a silly argument, not worthy of your intelligence.
 

 Wouldn't it be a shame to not use the *government approved* solution to fix 
your problems? It has to be OK, the government says so! But, if you choose not 
to, we'll help you raise your child. How can you lose?< Of course the easiest 
thing (and cheapest for the government)is just terminate it. Under these 
circumstances, I can't see why there wouldn't be some immediate but temporary 
relief. This is all social conditioning and engineering, Margaret Sanger's 
dream come true.< If a woman doesn't feel remorse, regret or anguish following 
the termination of her pregnancy by abortion, something is terribly wrong with 
the human species.

 

 Or maybe something is terribly wrong with those who don't understand that 
women think they should have control over their own bodies.
 

 Desensitization to the instinct of motherhood has been completed.
 

 Oh, nonsense. Women have been having abortions for millennia, all over the 
globe, even before there was a way to do it safely and painlessly and legally, 
even when they were risking their lives to have it done. The "instinct of 
motherhood" kicks in just fine when a woman *wants* to have a child.
 

 I think it was Gloria Steinem who observed that if men had the children, 
abortion would be a sacrament.
 

 

 

 

 

  What else can we desensitize humanity to?
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Sunday, September 20, 2015 3:43 PM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
 
 
   Mike, you've gone way off into fantasyland now. Women don't decide to have 
an abortion because the government tells them to. Up until Roe v. Wade, of 
course, government *prohibited* abortion. And these days it's state governments 
(Republican-run) that are doing their damndest to make abortion as difficult as 
possible.
 

 Furthermore, most women do not suffer anguish or regret after an abortion; 
what they experience is relief. Nor do they feel they've "killed their child." 
To them, the fetus has not yet become a child. To me, the real evil is trying 
to make women feel guilty about having an abortion.
 

 You may not like any of this, but when you make your antiabortion arguments, 
you need to take the reality into account and not make up conspiracy theories.
 

 

 

 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

 
Men and women today have had a bill of goods sold to them by those in power. 
That is the system that men have created  through governments and their 
programs. Governments convince people that they *only want to help you* and 
they give you things and take care of you,  but you are expected  to follow 
their recommendations, their solutions. In the case of a woman having an 
unwanted pregnancy, they slyly say " It's just a lump of tissue, do yourself a 
favor,we'll send you to a clinic and have it removed, your problems will be 
solved". The woman, in her desperation agrees and suffers the anguish of 
knowing that she killed her child. And if someone tries to say no, don't do it. 
you'll regret it", they are mocked as a religious fanatic. This is PURE EVIL. 
This the beast that man has created. I call it a beast because it devours human 
souls.
 From: "awoelflebater@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Sunday, September 20, 2015 8:47 AM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
 
 
   

 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

 

 But she was talked into it and told it was the best thing to do. This is what 
the Beast does. What is the Beast, it's the system!

 

 Huh?
 
 









 











 


 

Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'

[Mike Dixon mdixon.6...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

 No, our government doesn't dare force anyone to have an abortion. That would 
cause a revolt. But they sure let you know that they *fight* for your *right* 
to have it. Wouldn't it be a shame to not use the *government approved* 
solution to fix your problems? It has to be OK, the government says so! But, if 
you choose not to, we'll help you raise your child. How can you lose?< Of 
course the easiest thing (and cheapest for the government)is just terminate it. 
Under these circumstances, I can't see why there wouldn't be some immediate but 
temporary relief. This is all social conditioning and engineering, Margaret 
Sanger's dream come true.< If a woman doesn't feel remorse, regret or anguish 
following the termination of her pregnancy by abortion, something is terribly 
wrong with the human species.  Desensitization to the instinct of motherhood 
has been completed. What else can we desensitize humanity to?
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Sunday, September 20, 2015 3:43 PM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
   
    Mike, you've gone way off into fantasyland now. Women don't decide to have 
an abortion because the government tells them to. Up until Roe v. Wade, of 
course, government *prohibited* abortion. And these days it's state governments 
(Republican-run) that are doing their damndest to make abortion as difficult as 
possible.
Furthermore, most women do not suffer anguish or regret after an abortion; what 
they experience is relief. Nor do they feel they've "killed their child." To 
them, the fetus has not yet become a child. To me, the real evil is trying to 
make women feel guilty about having an abortion.
You may not like any of this, but when you make your antiabortion arguments, 
you need to take the reality into account and not make up conspiracy theories.




---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

Men and women today have had a bill of goods sold to them by those in power. 
That is the system that men have created  through governments and their 
programs. Governments convince people that they *only want to help you* and 
they give you things and take care of you,  but you are expected  to follow 
their recommendations, their solutions. In the case of a woman having an 
unwanted pregnancy, they slyly say " It's just a lump of tissue, do yourself a 
favor,we'll send you to a clinic and have it removed, your problems will be 
solved". The woman, in her desperation agrees and suffers the anguish of 
knowing that she killed her child. And if someone tries to say no, don't do it. 
you'll regret it", they are mocked as a religious fanatic. This is PURE EVIL. 
This the beast that man has created. I call it a beast because it devours human 
souls.
  From: "awoelflebater@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Sunday, September 20, 2015 8:47 AM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
 
 


---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :


 But she was talked into it and told it was the best thing to do. This is what 
the Beast does. What is the Beast, it's the system!

Huh?
  #yiv1310640215 #yiv1310640215 -- #yiv1310640215ygrp-mkp {border:1px solid 
#d8d8d8;font-family:Arial;margin:10px 0;padding:0 10px;}#yiv1310640215 
#yiv1310640215ygrp-mkp hr {border:1px solid #d8d8d8;}#yiv1310640215 
#yiv1310640215ygrp-mkp #yiv1310640215hd 
{color:#628c2a;font-size:85%;font-weight:700;line-height:122%;margin:10px 
0;}#yiv1310640215 #yiv1310640215ygrp-mkp #yiv1310640215ads 
{margin-bottom:10px;}#yiv1310640215 #yiv1310640215ygrp-mkp .yiv1310640215ad 
{padding:0 0;}#yiv1310640215 #yiv1310640215ygrp-mkp .yiv1310640215ad p 
{margin:0;}#yiv1310640215 #yiv1310640215ygrp-mkp .yiv1310640215ad a 
{color:#ff;text-decoration:none;}#yiv1310640215 #yiv1310640215ygrp-sponsor 
#yiv1310640215ygrp-lc {font-family:Arial;}#yiv1310640215 
#yiv1310640215ygrp-sponsor #yiv1310640215ygrp-lc #yiv1310640215hd {margin:10px 
0px;font-weight:700;font-size:78%;line-height:122%;}#yiv1310640215 
#yiv1310640215ygrp-sponsor #yiv1310640215ygrp-lc .yiv1310640215ad 
{margin-bottom:10px;padding:0 0;}#yiv1310640215 #yiv1310640215actions 
{font-family:Verdana;font-size:11px;padding:10px 0;}#yiv1310640215 
#yiv1310640215activity 
{background-color:#e0ecee;float:left;font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;padding:10px;}#yiv1310640215
 #yiv1310640215activity span {font-weight:700;}#yiv1310640215 
#yiv1310640215activity span:first-child 
{text-transform:uppercase;}#yiv1310640215 #yiv1310640215activity span a 
{color:#5085b6;text-decoration:none;}#yiv1310640215 #yiv1310640215activity span 
span {color:#ff7900;}#yiv1310640215 #yiv1310640215activity span 
.yiv1310640215underline {text-decoration:underline;}#yiv1310640215 
.yiv1310640215attach 
{clear:both;display:table;font-family:Arial;font-size:12px;padding:10px 
0;width:400px;}#yiv1310640215 .yiv1310640215attach div a 

Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'

[Bhairitu noozg...@sbcglobal.net [FairfieldLife]]

You might ask yourself if you would have accomplished more or less with 
a mate.  It didn't try to stay single but it turned out that way and my 
horoscope even says that marriage is inappropriate because I have some 
kind of sannyasi yoga but it sure isn't one I know of.  Believe it or 
not I've had pious vedic astrologers say "have flings instead."  When I 
was playing music in clubs that was quite easy. :-D


On 09/20/2015 12:09 PM, Mike Dixon mdixon.6...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] 
wrote:
64 next month. Just went to my 45th year high school reunion last 
night, couldn't recognize a soul! We all looked so old! Everybody was 
going around looking at our name tags with our senior pictures on them 
to see who they recognized! It was hilarious.  My dad died when I was 
nine, I never married because I never expected to live long enough to 
raise a family. Didn't want to put my kids through my own personal 
experience. Big mistake, maybe. Hear I am at 64, old enough to be a 
grandfather. However , raising a family, I wouldn't have had the 
wonderful experiences I have had with Maharishi.



*From:* "awoelfleba...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]" 
<FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>

*To:* FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
*Sent:* Sunday, September 20, 2015 11:34 AM
*Subject:* Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'




---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

At this point I would have to ask your age. I would guess you were 
born well after the beginning of the *Great Society*. That is when out 
of wedlock birthrates began do increase, when the government told the 
masses, we will take care of your babies, women began to feel there 
was no need for a man in the house, a bread winner. Children started 
growing up without a male role model and authority figure in the house 
and crime started ramping up. Out of wedlock birth rates in the black 
community today near 80% and about 40 % in white homes, the last I 
read. This was unheard of before the beginning of the *Great Society*.


That's funny because I was going to ask your age as well based on some 
of your comments (BTW, I like discussing things with you because no 
matter how much we might disagree you are alway! pleasant and civil. I 
think this is one of the things I like most about FFL now - everyone 
can speak their mind without the peanut gallery inciting dissension by 
misrepresenting every viewpoint and consequently skewing discussions 
until hey resemble nothing but juvenile pie throwing contests). I was 
born in 1956 so that makes me much older than you think. In addition, 
I have never had an abortion nor do I have any children (by definite 
choice). When my husband and I were married he had already been 
married before and had had a vasectomy (he is 7 years older than I am) 
and if we were going to have children together he was going to have to 
have the vasectomy reversed but much to his relief I told him I had no 
desire for children. But before that I would have had many 
opportunities to have gotten pregnant but I was pretty careful. Would 
I have had an abortion if I had gotten pregnant? I'm not absolutely 
sure but it seems likely that I would have.

Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'

[emily.ma...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

P.S.  Do you first judge the woman for having the abortion and then judge her 
for not raising her child right?  For being poor, uneducated?  For going on 
welfare?  For needing help from a society that marginalizes her?  For not 
getting it?  Do you sponsor a single mother yourself? You aren't coming across 
as demonstrating a shred of understanding on this issue from a realistic 
standpoint.   
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <emily.mae50@...> wrote :

 As I said, I agree with what Karen Armstrong writes.   When the founding 
*fathers* wrote what they did, they were not thinking of this issue 

 "Indeed I want to argue that America is the only country that has the 
misfortune of being founded on a philosophical mistake--namely, the notion of 
inalienable rights. We Christians do not believe that we have inalienable 
rights. That is the false presumption of Enlightenment individualism, and it 
opposes everything that Christians believe about what it means to be a 
creature. Notice that the issue is inalienable rights. Rights make a certain 
sense as correlative to duties and goods, but they are not inalienable. For 
example, when the lords protested against the king in the Magna Charta, they 
did so in the name of their duties to their underlings. Duties, not rights, 
were primary. The rights were simply ways of remembering what the duties were."
 

 (Taken from this...you sound Christian Mike, so I include this and this link 
for you.  Has some interesting points.)  
 

 ABORTION, THEOLOGICALLY UNDERSTOOD http://www.lifewatch.org/abortion.html 
 
 http://www.lifewatch.org/abortion.html
 
 ABORTION, THEOLOGICALLY UNDE... http://www.lifewatch.org/abortion.html 
ABORTION, THEOLOGICALLY UNDERSTOOD 1991 Taskforce of United Methodists on 
Abortion and Sexuality, Inc. Published by and available from: ...


 
 View on www.lifewatch.org http://www.lifewatch.org/abortion.html
 Preview by Yahoo 
 

  
  RE: ".birth control,( I don't want it now. It'll mess up my plans for 
life, I can't afford it, I don't know who the father is, etc)"
 

 This speaks to your assumptions and prejudice regarding an issue that is more 
often than not, deeply personal for a woman.  You demonstrate a closed mind 
when you assume you know what women are thinking.  How many interviews have you 
done?  
 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

 Your position that to abort is a personal one and should not be legislated. My 
position is that you don't have the right to take another person's life. It is 
a founding principal of our government and has been recognized from *IT's* very 
inception. Life is considered an *unalienable* right. Unalienable means *it can 
not be denied*. In other words, your right to privacy ends with your body and 
you can  not deny another person's greater right of life, unless it threatens 
yours. Life trumps privacy. The overwhelming majority of abortions are done as 
birth control,( I don't want it now. It'll mess up my plans for life, I can't 
afford it, I don't know who the father is, etc) not to protect the mother's 
life from complications that could lead to possible death.

 

 From: "emily.mae50@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Saturday, September 19, 2015 10:55 AM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
 
 
   Was this the answer to my question?  I appreciate that you've articulated 
your position here.  I believe that the decision to abort is a personal one and 
one that should not be legislated. It isn't a casual decision and don't assume 
that the law which allows it turns it into one.  You have a position—does your 
position lead to positions on policies and social structure that are consistent 
with this position? How do you define compassion?  I agree with the position 
stated below.  
 

 "Nearly every abortion represents a human tragedy. This is something that the 
shrill rhetoric of the Christian right tends to ignore. Perhaps, when facing 
the possibility of terminating a pregnancy, we should return to the ancient 
insight that while it is an inexorable law of life that our survival often 
depends upon the death and suffering of others, there is something terrible 
about this, and that we must force ourselves to look clearly at what we are 
doing. 
 Thus, while it may be religiously impossible to sanction abortion undertaken 
for trivial reasons - for mere social or professional convenience - it may be 
tragically necessary to sacrifice a potential life to nurture the life we have 
already. This is also a sacred requirement. The foetus may have to die for the 
sake of its mother's physical or psychological health, for the economic 
survival of the family, or to prevent a marital breakdown that would damage its 
siblings. And that is why the woman has to make this painful choice, as only 
she can evaluate her circumstances. But

Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'

[Mike Dixon mdixon.6...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

I don't know of any Christian church that will accept abortion as OK or 
advisable unless the mother's life is endangered. I'm sure there are some that 
may not talk about it for fear of seeming judgmental or driving away those that 
won't listen. Warning someone of the consequences of sin is not being 
judgmental, it's practical advice. I am willing to say the same goes for any 
other religion. A  devout Hindu or  devout Buddhist may say nothing but I can 
almost guarantee that they shrug their shoulders and think, "it's their karma, 
not mine". Their are people in every faith that don't practice it or only 
mildly. Christ called them luke warm and said he would spew them out in the 
end.  He demands people that are on fire for Him. Maharishi wanted people that 
were *one pointed* , on the program. If you aren't, he didn't waist time with 
you. All or nothing. I guess thats OK as long as you aren't told that Killing 
infidels via Jihad is the best guaranteed method to heaven. 
 From: "olliesed...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]" 
<FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Saturday, September 19, 2015 11:37 PM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
   
    Yes, every religion can be shown to have its hypocrisy, but this insistence 
that abortions cannot be performed according to the choice of the woman who is 
pregnant, is only prevalent in radical Christianity, and radical Islam. Not all 
Christian sects are against abortion, and not all Muslim countries forbid it. 
But those at the mercy of the radical preachers of both religions, are pawns, 
imo. To them I would say, You simply don't have the right, or the authority, to 
control my life. Go get perfect, first, and then we'll talk, but no butting in 
line.:-) The more moderate sects of both Christianity and Islam understand 
this. It is only the radical elements of both of these religions who insist on 
this complete invasion of personal choice.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

*Innocent Life,* the unborn don't fly jets into buildings or commit any other 
criminal or hostile act. Killing in Self- defense is justifiable. I believe I 
mentioned earlier that Abortion is acceptable when the mother's life is 
threatened.If you are concerned about hypocrisy, Christians aren't alone. 
Everybody can be labeled Hypocrites one way or another. Can you name one 
religious/spiritual group that doesn't have *qualifications* as to who receives 
salvation or liberation. etc?And each believes theirs is superior to 
others.Look no further than TM! Everyone has their limitations and 
understanding of religion and spirituality. If you have followed Maharishi's 
teachings you will know that we are born into our lives based on our karma, 
which dictates the circumstances of our lives and how and what values we grow 
up with to experience life. If you were born into a  Judeo-Christian culture, 
those are the values you are meant to experience life from. In India, from that 
perspective. A Muslim, that perspective and so on. That is your dharma and how 
you grow. This is why Maharishi used to say, one doesn't need to change 
religions to practice TM successfully. Add TM to whatever you are and you'll be 
better. Everyone has a different understanding based on their ability to 
understand. We all start from somewhere. The question is, where do we finish 
up? Follow your dharma for maximum growth. Gita says, it's better to die within 
your dharma, even if done poorly than to die in someone else's dharma, even if 
well done. If you were born a Jew , then be one but practice TM. If you were 
born a Christian, then be one but practice TM. If you were born a Muslim, a 
Hindu... etc. but practice TM. BTW, if you think you can convert to be a Hindu, 
you can't. Speak to any Vedic priest,. he'll tell you pretty much what I just 
said. And if you insist, dude, just imagine starting at the bottom of the 
barrel, as an untouchable, so you learn the full scope of what it is to be a 
real Hindu! LOL. No thanks!

  From: "olliesedwuz@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Saturday, September 19, 2015 5:39 PM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
 
 It is cherry-picking, led by the radical Christian pastors. If the sanctity of 
human life is so important, where are the anti-war demonstrations by the 
Christians? Those aren't fetuses we are bombing, and invading, they are fully 
grown human beings, men, women and yes, children, but not a peep from the 
anti-abortion crowd about their maiming and slaughter. 
I think it is because of the hypocrisy of their position - I once heard a 
Christian pastor say that a dog could not get into Heaven, unless it was a 
Christian dog (no kidding). The same justification is used for killing Muslims. 
What I would like to see is all of the Christians taking responsibil

Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'

[Mike Dixon mdixon.6...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

I guess it depends on your definition of *judge*. Do I recognize poor 
choices?Is it  from poor up bringing or low intelligence.-or is it something 
else. Does that person learn from their mistakes or do they keep repeating the 
same mistake over and over. Do they ever figure out that they are making 
mistakes and , poor choices. Do they feel any responsibility for their choices? 
Do they even care? Do they feel entitled to make mistakes without consequences? 
Some people learn things the easy way, others the hard way.  How much empathy, 
compassion and understanding is expected of me? For how long and to what 
degree? Are they taking advantage of my good will? If it's their nature to 
learn things the hard way, is my help actually retarding their learning 
process? Some people are real victims of circumstances through no fault of 
their own. They didn't make poor choices  but shit happened. Maybe their 
husband died or just left them or became totally disabled. Aren't  they more 
deserving of my empathy and compassion than someone that never grew up? When I 
was younger, out of wedlock births were relatively low. Today, I think it is  
over or at least close to half. Something is dreadfully wrong. When it comes to 
the woman that has the abortion, I am fully aware that she is probably confused 
and frightened of her future  and doesn't know what to do and ends up taking 
the remedy with the quickest results. I feel terribly sorry for her because  I 
don't think she really and fully understands what she has just done. Yes, 
she'll always remember it and the anguish. But she was talked into it and told 
it was the best thing to do. This is what the Beast does. What is the Beast, 
it's the system!

  From: "emily.ma...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]" 
<FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Saturday, September 19, 2015 6:19 PM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
   
    P.S.  Do you first judge the woman for having the abortion and then judge 
her for not raising her child right?  For being poor, uneducated?  For going on 
welfare?  For needing help from a society that marginalizes her?  For not 
getting it?  Do you sponsor a single mother yourself? You aren't coming across 
as demonstrating a shred of understanding on this issue from a realistic 
standpoint.  


---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <emily.mae50@...> wrote :

As I said, I agree with what Karen Armstrong writes.   When the founding 
*fathers* wrote what they did, they were not thinking of this issue
"Indeed I want to argue that America is the only country that has the 
misfortune of being founded on a philosophical mistake--namely, the notion of 
inalienable rights. We Christians do not believe that we have inalienable 
rights. That is the false presumption of Enlightenment individualism, and it 
opposes everything that Christians believe about what it means to be a 
creature. Notice that the issue is inalienable rights. Rights make a certain 
sense as correlative to duties and goods, but they are not inalienable. For 
example, when the lords protested against the king in the Magna Charta, they 
did so in the name of their duties to their underlings. Duties, not rights, 
were primary. The rights were simply ways of remembering what the duties were."
(Taken from this...you sound Christian Mike, so I include this and this link 
for you.  Has some interesting points.)  
ABORTION, THEOLOGICALLY UNDERSTOOD
|  |
|  | |  | ABORTION, THEOLOGICALLY UNDE... ABORTION, THEOLOGICALLY 
UNDERSTOOD 1991 Taskforce of United Methodists on Abortion and Sexuality, Inc. 
Published by and available from: ... |  |
| View on www.lifewatch.org|   Preview by Yahoo  |
|  |

    RE: ".birth control,( I don't want it now. It'll mess up my plans for 
life, I can't afford it, I don't know who the father is, etc)"
This speaks to your assumptions and prejudice regarding an issue that is more 
often than not, deeply personal for a woman.  You demonstrate a closed mind 
when you assume you know what women are thinking.  How many interviews have you 
done?  

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

Your position that to abort is a personal one and should not be legislated. My 
position is that you don't have the right to take another person's life. It is 
a founding principal of our government and has been recognized from *IT's* very 
inception. Life is considered an *unalienable* right. Unalienable means *it can 
not be denied*. In other words, your right to privacy ends with your body and 
you can  not deny another person's greater right of life, unless it threatens 
yours. Life trumps privacy. The overwhelming majority of abortions are done as 
birth control,( I don't want it now. It'll mess up my plans for life, I can't 
afford it, I don't know who the father is, etc) not to protect the mother's 
life from complications that cou

Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'

[Bhairitu noozg...@sbcglobal.net [FairfieldLife]]

I take the "eastern" view that until the child takes their first breathe 
they are nothing but an growth on the woman.  There's really no soul 
there because no "shakti" which is the basis of consciousness has not 
entered the vessel. The thing about the religious dummies is they want 
to stop abortion but are unwilling to adopt kids from mothers who can't 
take care of them.  They are a bunch of stupid hypocrites.  And just 
wait until one of their daughters gets raped by a felon to see how fast 
she gets shuffled off to have an abortion


On 09/19/2015 11:33 AM, Mike Dixon mdixon.6...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] 
wrote:
Actually, I believe I was giving a non religious explanation against 
abortion. The very founding documents, our nation are built upon, 
recognizes our  unalienable(can not be denied) rights to *Life* 
liberty and the pursuit of happiness. You can't have liberty or 
happiness without Life. These rights are attributed to an All Mighty 
Creator because if such a thing existed, who is anyone to deny them? 
The very same person that wrote those words also wrote about the 
concept of a separation of Church and state. So, they are separate 
issues. The basic human rights recognized by the government are not 
religion based.



*From:* "olliesed...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]" 
<FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>

*To:* FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
*Sent:* Saturday, September 19, 2015 11:05 AM
*Subject:* Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'

This whole abortion "debate" seems like such a set up. Why proclaim 
that due to religious principles, abortion is murder, or that gay 
marriage is sin, and then live in the USA? I am not suggesting such 
believers should leave, though it seems like an awful lot of heartache 
to go through, to insist on a religious truth so strenuously, that to 
have the opposite practiced by some, becomes a constant thorn in the 
believer's side. Who wants to live like that? It seems like a set up, 
designed to cause the believers additional pain, and have them become 
co-dependent on such ideas, and the organizations that publicize them. 
Life is tough enough, imo.


And the issue is NOT that the Christians cannot live by their beliefs. 
No one is insisting *they* get abortions or participate in gay 
marriage. However, they and the radical pastors that preach to them 
have determined that both of these issues are somehow unholy, and 
their very practice is an abomination against God. This in no way 
begins to validate the freedom of each of us to live our lives as we 
see fit. Religious barriers, no matter how well intentioned, are 
better practiced personally, vs. imposed on anyone else. I also see a 
lot more commonality between the fundamentalists of any religion, be 
they Christians or Muslims, than any side is willing to admit.


I do agree that there is a natural law in back of all of this, which 
we are all personally held to, and responsible for. However, each of 
us has to make that judgment of ourselves independently. No one can do 
this for us, or impose it on us, no matter how convinced of their 
truths they may be.


---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

We hold these truths to be self evident... certain unalienable 
Rights,among these are LIFE! Unalienable is defined as, *can not be 
denied*. Without the most fundamental right of life, no other rights 
matter. When does life begin? Theologically, that is open to 
discussion. Biologically, it begins when Conjoined DNA begins to 
divide. It is the very beginning of life, it's self.That DNA is not 
the mother's, it's not the father's, it is the unique DNA of separate 
human being with all of it's potential from beginning to end. It has a 
right that can not be denied. Socially and theologically speaking, 
that unalienable right to life is considered sacred as long as it is 
innocent. Violate specific laws of society and that sacred value can 
be forfeited by the law breaker, it's his conscious decision. But 
never was it intended to to be denied on a basis of someone else's 
circumstances/ convenience. Do we really want to go down that road? 
Hitler did, as did many other tyrants and they have been traditionally 
labeled as EVIL, even Anti-Christ. I speak in biological terms of life 
because we value our society in secular terms and spiritual values are 
not considered valid anymore because certain people don't want other's 
religions imposed upon them..


*From:* "emily.mae50@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
*To:* FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
*Sent:* Saturday, September 19, 2015 1:44 AM
*Subject:* Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'

To me, black and white thinking takes on the cloak of "casual, 
indifferent, etc.", or "blasé," if

Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'

[Mike Dixon mdixon.6...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

Your position that to abort is a personal one and should not be legislated. My 
position is that you don't have the right to take another person's life. It is 
a founding principal of our government and has been recognized from *IT's* very 
inception. Life is considered an *unalienable* right. Unalienable means *it can 
not be denied*. In other words, your right to privacy ends with your body and 
you can  not deny another person's greater right of life, unless it threatens 
yours. Life trumps privacy. The overwhelming majority of abortions are done as 
birth control,( I don't want it now. It'll mess up my plans for life, I can't 
afford it, I don't know who the father is, etc) not to protect the mother's 
life from complications that could lead to possible death.

  From: "emily.ma...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]" 
<FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Saturday, September 19, 2015 10:55 AM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
   
    Was this the answer to my question?  I appreciate that you've articulated 
your position here.  I believe that the decision to abort is a personal one and 
one that should not be legislated. It isn't a casual decision and don't assume 
that the law which allows it turns it into one.  You have a position—does your 
position lead to positions on policies and social structure that are consistent 
with this position? How do you define compassion?  I agree with the position 
stated below.  
"Nearly every abortion represents a human tragedy. This is something that the 
shrill rhetoric of the Christian right tends to ignore. Perhaps, when facing 
the possibility of terminating a pregnancy, we should return to the ancient 
insight that while it is an inexorable law of life that our survival often 
depends upon the death and suffering of others, there is something terrible 
about this, and that we must force ourselves to look clearly at what we are 
doing. Thus, while it may be religiously impossible to sanction abortion 
undertaken for trivial reasons - for mere social or professional convenience - 
it may be tragically necessary to sacrifice a potential life to nurture the 
life we have already. This is also a sacred requirement. The foetus may have to 
die for the sake of its mother's physical or psychological health, for the 
economic survival of the family, or to prevent a marital breakdown that would 
damage its siblings. And that is why the woman has to make this painful choice, 
as only she can evaluate her circumstances. But we should never lose our sense 
of the awful gravity of the procedure, because - as in ancient religion - 
therein lies our sense of life's sacred value." ~Karen Armstrong

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

We hold these truths to be self evident... certain unalienable Rights,among 
these are LIFE! Unalienable is defined as, *can not be denied*. Without the 
most fundamental right of life, no other rights matter. When does life begin? 
Theologically, that is open to discussion. Biologically, it begins when 
Conjoined DNA begins to divide. It is the very beginning of life, it's 
self.That DNA is not the mother's, it's not the father's, it is the unique DNA 
of separate human being with all of it's potential from beginning to end. It 
has a right that can not be denied. Socially and theologically speaking, that 
unalienable right to life is considered sacred as long as it is innocent. 
Violate specific laws of society and that sacred value can be forfeited by the 
law breaker, it's his conscious decision. But never was it intended to to be 
denied on a basis of someone else's circumstances/ convenience. Do we really 
want to go down that road? Hitler did, as did many other tyrants and they have 
been traditionally labeled as EVIL, even Anti-Christ. I speak in biological 
terms of life because we value our society in secular terms and spiritual 
values are not considered valid anymore because certain people don't want 
other's religions imposed upon them..
  From: "emily.mae50@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Saturday, September 19, 2015 1:44 AM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
 
 To me, black and white thinking takes on the cloak of "casual, indifferent, 
etc.", or "blasé," if you will.  The remark "Oh shit! I missed my period! I'm 
really *f"ed* now!" seemed off the cuff and appeared to indicate a prejudiced 
and surficial understanding of the issue"blasé."
Curiously, Mike, do you believe in the soul?  Do you believe in the eternal 
soul?  Do you believe that the soul dies along with a potential life that was 
aborted by the mother, a potential life that could not survive independently at 
6 weeks and that even nature aborts naturally at times (called miscarriages).  
Do you believe that it could be

Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'

[Mike Dixon mdixon.6...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

As Judy said earlier, don't force your religion on me! No, I appreciate your 
views but the reason I gave below is non religious. The founding fathers 
recognized Life as an Unalienable, fundamental right. Most views on abortion 
were formed before there was much common understanding about DNA. The fetus was 
described to the public as a *lump* of tissue, devoid of individuality, almost 
like a cancer. It was depersonalized to make it easier to *get rid of* even the 
term *fetus* has that affect, so as not to leave any emotional scars for the 
aborting mother. But science has projected the understanding of the life of the 
fetus as a unique human being, complete within it's self with more 
understanding of DNA. Maharishi used to speak of holding a great banyan tree in 
the palm of your hand. Just pick up a tiny seed. All of it's greatness and 
potential lies within. Every person has personal weakness's, that' s why we 
have laws.
 From: "Bhairitu noozg...@sbcglobal.net [FairfieldLife]" 
<FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Saturday, September 19, 2015 2:07 PM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
   
 I take the "eastern" view that until the child takes their first breathe 
they are nothing but an growth on the woman.  There's really no soul there 
because no "shakti" which is the basis of consciousness has not entered the 
vessel.   The thing about the religious dummies is they want to stop abortion 
but are unwilling to adopt kids from mothers who can't take care of them.  They 
are a bunch of stupid hypocrites.  And just wait until one of their daughters 
gets raped by a felon to see how fast she gets shuffled off to have an abortion
 
 On 09/19/2015 11:33 AM, Mike Dixon mdixon.6...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] wrote:
  


     Actually, I believe I was giving a non religious explanation against 
abortion. The very founding documents, our nation are built upon, recognizes 
our  unalienable(can not be denied) rights to *Life* liberty and the pursuit of 
happiness. You can't have liberty or happiness without Life. These rights are 
attributed to an All Mighty Creator because if such a thing existed, who is 
anyone to deny them? The very same person that wrote those words also wrote 
about the concept of a separation of Church and state. So, they are separate 
issues. The basic human rights recognized by the government are not religion 
based.
   
  From: "olliesed...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]" 
<FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Saturday, September 19, 2015 11:05 AM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
   
    This whole abortion "debate" seems like such a set up. Why proclaim 
that due to religious principles, abortion is murder, or that gay marriage is 
sin, and then live in the USA? I am not  suggesting such believers should 
leave, though it seems like an awful lot of heartache to go through, to insist 
on a religious truth so strenuously, that to have the opposite practiced by 
some,  becomes a constant thorn in the believer's side. Who wants to live like 
that? It seems like a set up, designed to cause the believers additional pain, 
and have them become co-dependent on such ideas, and the organizations that 
publicize them. Life is tough enough, imo. 
  And the issue is NOT that the Christians cannot live by their beliefs. No one 
is insisting *they* get abortions or participate in gay marriage. However, they 
and the radical pastors that preach  to them have determined that both of these 
issues are somehow unholy, and their very practice is an abomination against 
God. This in no way begins to validate the freedom of each of us to  live our 
lives as we see fit. Religious barriers, no matter how well intentioned, are 
better practiced personally, vs. imposed on anyone else. I also see a lot more 
commonality between the fundamentalists of any religion, be they Christians or 
Muslims, than any side is willing to admit. 
  I do agree that there is a natural law in back of all of this, which we are 
all personally held to, and responsible for. However, each of us has to make 
that judgment of ourselves independently. No  one can do this for us, or impose 
it on us, no matter how convinced of their truths they may be.
 
 ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :
 
   We hold these truths to be self evident... certain unalienable  Rights,among 
these are LIFE! Unalienable is defined as, *can not be denied*. Without the 
most  fundamental right of life, no other rights matter. When does life begin? 
Theologically, that is open to discussion. Biologically, it begins when  
Conjoined DNA begins to divide. It is the very beginning of life, it's 
self.That DNA is not the mother's, it's not the father's, it is the unique DNA  
of separate human being with all of it's potential from beginning to end. It 
has

Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'

[olliesed...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

It is cherry-picking, led by the radical Christian pastors. If the sanctity of 
human life is so important, where are the anti-war demonstrations by the 
Christians? Those aren't fetuses we are bombing, and invading, they are fully 
grown human beings, men, women and yes, children, but not a peep from the 
anti-abortion crowd about their maiming and slaughter. 
 

 I think it is because of the hypocrisy of their position - I once heard a 
Christian pastor say that a dog could not get into Heaven, unless it was a 
Christian dog (no kidding). The same justification is used for killing Muslims. 
What I would like to see is all of the Christians taking responsibility for the 
tragic loss of life that occurs due to our government's actions, including war. 
 

 This picking on the poor souls that undergo abortions is bullying and 
hypocrisy, imo. It is a radical religious view held by those who wish to 
continue the co-dependent relationship they have with their flocks. These 
preachers are a lot like the politicians, framing the (conveniently 
insurmountable) "problems" and "issues" that their congregations face, ensuring 
their followers will feel both bereft, and beholden to the churches. What a 
scam.
 

 ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

 
 Actually, I believe I was giving a non religious explanation against abortion. 
The very founding documents, our nation are built upon, recognizes our  
unalienable(can not be denied) rights to *Life* liberty and the pursuit of 
happiness. You can't have liberty or happiness without Life. These rights are 
attributed to an All Mighty Creator because if such a thing existed, who is 
anyone to deny them? The very same person that wrote those words also wrote 
about the concept of a separation of Church and state. So, they are separate 
issues. The basic human rights recognized by the government are not religion 
based.

 

 From: "olliesedwuz@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Saturday, September 19, 2015 11:05 AM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
 
 
   This whole abortion "debate" seems like such a set up. Why proclaim that due 
to religious principles, abortion is murder, or that gay marriage is sin, and 
then live in the USA? I am not suggesting such believers should leave, though 
it seems like an awful lot of heartache to go through, to insist on a religious 
truth so strenuously, that to have the opposite practiced by some, becomes a 
constant thorn in the believer's side. Who wants to live like that? It seems 
like a set up, designed to cause the believers additional pain, and have them 
become co-dependent on such ideas, and the organizations that publicize them. 
Life is tough enough, imo.
 

 And the issue is NOT that the Christians cannot live by their beliefs. No one 
is insisting *they* get abortions or participate in gay marriage. However, they 
and the radical pastors that preach to them have determined that both of these 
issues are somehow unholy, and their very practice is an abomination against 
God. This in no way begins to validate the freedom of each of us to live our 
lives as we see fit. Religious barriers, no matter how well intentioned, are 
better practiced personally, vs. imposed on anyone else. I also see a lot more 
commonality between the fundamentalists of any religion, be they Christians or 
Muslims, than any side is willing to admit.
 

 I do agree that there is a natural law in back of all of this, which we are 
all personally held to, and responsible for. However, each of us has to make 
that judgment of ourselves independently. No one can do this for us, or impose 
it on us, no matter how convinced of their truths they may be.
 
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

 We hold these truths to be self evident... certain unalienable Rights,among 
these are LIFE! Unalienable is defined as, *can not be denied*. Without the 
most fundamental right of life, no other rights matter. When does life begin? 
Theologically, that is open to discussion. Biologically, it begins when 
Conjoined DNA begins to divide. It is the very beginning of life, it's 
self.That DNA is not the mother's, it's not the father's, it is the unique DNA 
of separate human being with all of it's potential from beginning to end. It 
has a right that can not be denied. Socially and theologically speaking, that 
unalienable right to life is considered sacred as long as it is innocent. 
Violate specific laws of society and that sacred value can be forfeited by the 
law breaker, it's his conscious decision. But never was it intended to to be 
denied on a basis of someone else's circumstances/ convenience. Do we really 
want to go down that road? Hitler did, as did many other tyrants and they have 
been traditionally labeled as EVIL, even Anti-Christ. I speak in biological 
terms of life b

Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'

[emily.ma...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'

[emily.ma...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

These blank posts are intervals for silence and deep breathing

Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'

[awoelfleba...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <noozguru@...> wrote :

 Being that I am a computer programmer I note how newborns are like robots 
taking things in as a way of self-programming.  So the truth may be stranger 
than fiction or religion. ;-) 
 

 I rather think robots are more like humans than babies are like robots.
 
 On 09/19/2015 12:28 PM, Mike Dixon mdixon.6569@... mailto:mdixon.6569@... 
[FairfieldLife] wrote:

   As Judy said earlier, don't force your religion on me! No, I appreciate your 
views but the reason I gave below is non religious. The founding fathers 
recognized Life as an Unalienable, fundamental right. Most views on abortion 
were formed before there was much common understanding about DNA. The fetus was 
described to the public as a *lump* of tissue, devoid of individuality, almost 
like a cancer. It was depersonalized to make it easier to *get rid of* even the 
term *fetus* has that affect, so as not to leave any emotional scars for the 
aborting mother. But science has projected the understanding of the life of the 
fetus as a unique human being, complete within it's self with more 
understanding of DNA. Maharishi used to speak of holding a great banyan tree in 
the palm of your hand. Just pick up a tiny seed. All of it's greatness and 
potential lies within. Every person has personal weakness's, that' s why we 
have laws.

 From: "Bhairitu noozguru@... mailto:noozguru@... [FairfieldLife]" 
<FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com> mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Saturday, September 19, 2015 2:07 PM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
 
 
   
 I take the "eastern" view that until the child takes their first breathe they 
are nothing but an growth on the woman.  There's really no soul there because 
no "shakti" which is the basis of consciousness has not entered the vessel.   
The thing about the religious dummies is they want to stop abortion but are 
unwilling to adopt kids from mothers who can't take care of them.  They are a 
bunch of stupid hypocrites.  And just wait until one of their daughters gets 
raped by a felon to see how fast she gets shuffled off to have an abortion
 
 On 09/19/2015 11:33 AM, Mike Dixon mailto:mdixon.6569@...mdixon.6569@... 
mailto:mdixon.6569@... [FairfieldLife] wrote:

 
 

   Actually,I believe I was giving a non religious explanation against 
abortion. The very founding documents, our nation are built upon, recognizes 
our  unalienable(can not be denied) rights to *Life* liberty and the pursuit of 
happiness. You can't have liberty or happiness without Life. These rights are 
attributed to an All Mighty Creator because if such a thing existed, who is 
anyone to deny them? The very same person that wrote those words also wrote 
about the concept of a separation of Church and state. So, they are separate 
issues. The basic human rights recognized by the government are not religion 
based.

 
 
 From: "olliesedwuz@... [FairfieldLife]" 
mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com<FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com> 
mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Saturday, September 19, 2015 11:05 AM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
 
 
   Thiswhole abortion "debate" seems like such a set up. Why proclaim that due 
to religious principles, abortion is murder, or that gay marriage is sin, and 
then live in the USA? I am not suggesting such believers should leave, though 
it seems like an awful lot of heartache to go through, to insist on a religious 
truth so strenuously, that to have the opposite practiced by some, becomes a 
constant thorn in the believer's side. Who wants to live like that? It seems 
like a set up, designed to cause the believers additional pain, and have them 
become co-dependent on such ideas, and the organizations that publicize them. 
Life is tough enough, imo.
 

 Andthe issue is NOT that the Christians cannot live by their beliefs. No one 
is insisting *they* get abortions or participate in gay marriage. However, they 
and the radical pastors that preach to them have determined that both of these 
issues are somehow unholy, and their very practice is an abomination against 
God. This in no way begins to validate the freedom of each of us to live our 
lives as we see fit. Religious barriers, no matter how well intentioned, are 
better practiced personally, vs. imposed on anyone else. I also see a lot more 
commonality between the fundamentalists of any religion, be they Christians or 
Muslims, than any side is willing to admit.
 

 I do agree that there is a natural law in back of all of this, which we are 
all personally held to, and responsible for. However, each of us has to make 
that judgment of ourselves independently. No one can do this for us, or impose 
it on us, no matter how 

Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'

[Bhairitu noozg...@sbcglobal.net [FairfieldLife]]

Being that I am a computer programmer I note how newborns are like 
robots taking things in as a way of self-programming.  So the truth may 
be stranger than fiction or religion. ;-)


On 09/19/2015 12:28 PM, Mike Dixon mdixon.6...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] 
wrote:
As Judy said earlier, don't force your religion on me! No, I 
appreciate your views but the reason I gave below is non religious. 
The founding fathers recognized Life as an Unalienable, fundamental 
right. Most views on abortion were formed before there was much common 
understanding about DNA. The fetus was described to the public as a 
*lump* of tissue, devoid of individuality, almost like a cancer. It 
was depersonalized to make it easier to *get rid of* even the term 
*fetus* has that affect, so as not to leave any emotional scars for 
the aborting mother. But science has projected the understanding of 
the life of the fetus as a unique human being, complete within it's 
self with more understanding of DNA. Maharishi used to speak of 
holding a great banyan tree in the palm of your hand. Just pick up a 
tiny seed. All of it's greatness and potential lies within. Every 
person has personal weakness's, that' s why we have laws.


*From:* "Bhairitu noozg...@sbcglobal.net [FairfieldLife]" 
<FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>

*To:* FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
*Sent:* Saturday, September 19, 2015 2:07 PM
*Subject:* Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'

I take the "eastern" view that until the child takes their first 
breathe they are nothing but an growth on the woman. There's really no 
soul there because no "shakti" which is the basis of consciousness has 
not entered the vessel.   The thing about the religious dummies is 
they want to stop abortion but are unwilling to adopt kids from 
mothers who can't take care of them. They are a bunch of stupid 
hypocrites. And just wait until one of their daughters gets raped by a 
felon to see how fast she gets shuffled off to have an abortion


On 09/19/2015 11:33 AM, Mike Dixon mdixon.6...@yahoo.com 
<mailto:mdixon.6...@yahoo.com> [FairfieldLife] wrote:



Actually, I believe I was giving a non religious explanation against 
abortion. The very founding documents, our nation are built upon, 
recognizes our unalienable(can not be denied) rights to *Life* 
liberty and the pursuit of happiness. You can't have liberty or 
happiness without Life. These rights are attributed to an All Mighty 
Creator because if such a thing existed, who is anyone to deny them? 
The very same person that wrote those words also wrote about the 
concept of a separation of Church and state. So, they are separate 
issues. The basic human rights recognized by the government are not 
religion based.



*From:* "olliesed...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]" 
<mailto:olliesed...@yahoo.com[FairfieldLife]> 
<FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com> <mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
*To:* FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
<mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>

*Sent:* Saturday, September 19, 2015 11:05 AM
*Subject:* Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'

This whole abortion "debate" seems like such a set up. Why proclaim 
that due to religious principles, abortion is murder, or that gay 
marriage is sin, and then live in the USA? I am not suggesting such 
believers should leave, though it seems like an awful lot of 
heartache to go through, to insist on a religious truth so 
strenuously, that to have the opposite practiced by some, becomes a 
constant thorn in the believer's side. Who wants to live like that? 
It seems like a set up, designed to cause the believers additional 
pain, and have them become co-dependent on such ideas, and the 
organizations that publicize them. Life is tough enough, imo.


And the issue is NOT that the Christians cannot live by their 
beliefs. No one is insisting *they* get abortions or participate in 
gay marriage. However, they and the radical pastors that preach to 
them have determined that both of these issues are somehow unholy, 
and their very practice is an abomination against God. This in no way 
begins to validate the freedom of each of us to live our lives as we 
see fit. Religious barriers, no matter how well intentioned, are 
better practiced personally, vs. imposed on anyone else. I also see a 
lot more commonality between the fundamentalists of any religion, be 
they Christians or Muslims, than any side is willing to admit.


I do agree that there is a natural law in back of all of this, which 
we are all personally held to, and responsible for. However, each of 
us has to make that judgment of ourselves independently. No one can 
do this for us, or impose it on us, no matter how convinced of their 
truths they may be.


---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
<mailto:Fair

Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'

[emptyb...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

I take the "eastern" view that until the child takes their first breathe they 
are nothing but an growth on the woman.

"Oh yeah ... It ain't nothing but fleshy tissue. It can't breath so it ain't 
human." 

That's about as "Eastern" as Washington, New York and Boston.

You obviously have never seen Garbha-Upanishad.
Oh, but I forget ... reading is for "intellectuals with no experience".





Garbha Upanishad - Translation http://www.vedarahasya.net/garbha.htm 
 
 Garbha Upanishad - Translation http://www.vedarahasya.net/garbha.htm The human 
body is constituted of five things (the five forces of earth, sky, air, water 
and fire) and is of six shelters (like the physical, ethereal and so on). 
 
 
 
 View on www.vedarahasya.net http://www.vedarahasya.net/garbha.htm 
 Preview by Yahoo 
 
 
  

Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'

[emily.ma...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

As I said, I agree with what Karen Armstrong writes.   When the founding 
*fathers* wrote what they did, they were not thinking of this issue 

 "Indeed I want to argue that America is the only country that has the 
misfortune of being founded on a philosophical mistake--namely, the notion of 
inalienable rights. We Christians do not believe that we have inalienable 
rights. That is the false presumption of Enlightenment individualism, and it 
opposes everything that Christians believe about what it means to be a 
creature. Notice that the issue is inalienable rights. Rights make a certain 
sense as correlative to duties and goods, but they are not inalienable. For 
example, when the lords protested against the king in the Magna Charta, they 
did so in the name of their duties to their underlings. Duties, not rights, 
were primary. The rights were simply ways of remembering what the duties were."
 

 (Taken from this...you sound Christian Mike, so I include this and this link 
for you.  Has some interesting points.)  
 

 ABORTION, THEOLOGICALLY UNDERSTOOD http://www.lifewatch.org/abortion.html 
 
 http://www.lifewatch.org/abortion.html 
 
 ABORTION, THEOLOGICALLY UNDE... http://www.lifewatch.org/abortion.html 
ABORTION, THEOLOGICALLY UNDERSTOOD 1991 Taskforce of United Methodists on 
Abortion and Sexuality, Inc. Published by and available from: ...
 
 
 
 View on www.lifewatch.org http://www.lifewatch.org/abortion.html 
 Preview by Yahoo 
 
 
  
  RE: ".birth control,( I don't want it now. It'll mess up my plans for 
life, I can't afford it, I don't know who the father is, etc)"
 

 This speaks to your assumptions and prejudice regarding an issue that is more 
often than not, deeply personal for a woman.  You demonstrate a closed mind 
when you assume you know what women are thinking.  How many interviews have you 
done?  
 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

 Your position that to abort is a personal one and should not be legislated. My 
position is that you don't have the right to take another person's life. It is 
a founding principal of our government and has been recognized from *IT's* very 
inception. Life is considered an *unalienable* right. Unalienable means *it can 
not be denied*. In other words, your right to privacy ends with your body and 
you can  not deny another person's greater right of life, unless it threatens 
yours. Life trumps privacy. The overwhelming majority of abortions are done as 
birth control,( I don't want it now. It'll mess up my plans for life, I can't 
afford it, I don't know who the father is, etc) not to protect the mother's 
life from complications that could lead to possible death.

 

 From: "emily.mae50@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Saturday, September 19, 2015 10:55 AM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
 
 
   Was this the answer to my question?  I appreciate that you've articulated 
your position here.  I believe that the decision to abort is a personal one and 
one that should not be legislated. It isn't a casual decision and don't assume 
that the law which allows it turns it into one.  You have a position—does your 
position lead to positions on policies and social structure that are consistent 
with this position? How do you define compassion?  I agree with the position 
stated below.  
 

 "Nearly every abortion represents a human tragedy. This is something that the 
shrill rhetoric of the Christian right tends to ignore. Perhaps, when facing 
the possibility of terminating a pregnancy, we should return to the ancient 
insight that while it is an inexorable law of life that our survival often 
depends upon the death and suffering of others, there is something terrible 
about this, and that we must force ourselves to look clearly at what we are 
doing. 
 Thus, while it may be religiously impossible to sanction abortion undertaken 
for trivial reasons - for mere social or professional convenience - it may be 
tragically necessary to sacrifice a potential life to nurture the life we have 
already. This is also a sacred requirement. The foetus may have to die for the 
sake of its mother's physical or psychological health, for the economic 
survival of the family, or to prevent a marital breakdown that would damage its 
siblings. And that is why the woman has to make this painful choice, as only 
she can evaluate her circumstances. But we should never lose our sense of the 
awful gravity of the procedure, because - as in ancient religion - therein lies 
our sense of life's sacred value." ~Karen Armstrong
 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

 We hold these truths to be self evident... certain unalienable Rights,among 
these are LIFE! Unalienable is defined as, *can not be denied*. Without the 
most fundamental right of life, no other rights matter. When d

Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'

[awoelfleba...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <noozguru@...> wrote :

 I take the "eastern" view that until the child takes their first breathe they 
are nothing but an growth on the woman.  There's really no soul there because 
no "shakti" which is the basis of consciousness has not entered the vessel.
 

 Wow, interesting theory. I wonder how they figured that one out. Can you see 
Shakti making a dive into the baby's body at some point? Is the intake of 
breath the signal for shakti to leap into the body? It certainly is a 
convenient theory for the pro choicers (which I am) - that lump growing inside 
of a woman is just so much cellular clumping.
 

The thing about the religious dummies is they want to stop abortion but are 
unwilling to adopt kids from mothers who can't take care of them.  They are a 
bunch of stupid hypocrites.  And just wait until one of their daughters gets 
raped by a felon to see how fast she gets shuffled off to have an abortion
 

 I would have to agree with you for the most part here. Many people, until they 
are in a particular situation, will say one thing as it is only so much theory 
but when they are in a "situation" they will often abandon their theoretical 
high horses and leap for the very thing they pay lip service to.
 
 On 09/19/2015 11:33 AM, Mike Dixon mdixon.6569@... mailto:mdixon.6569@... 
[FairfieldLife] wrote:

   Actually, I believe I was giving a non religious explanation against 
abortion. The very founding documents, our nation are built upon, recognizes 
our  unalienable(can not be denied) rights to *Life* liberty and the pursuit of 
happiness. You can't have liberty or happiness without Life. These rights are 
attributed to an All Mighty Creator because if such a thing existed, who is 
anyone to deny them? The very same person that wrote those words also wrote 
about the concept of a separation of Church and state. So, they are separate 
issues. The basic human rights recognized by the government are not religion 
based.

 
 
 From: "olliesedwuz@... [FairfieldLife]" mailto:olliesedwuz@...[FairfieldLife] 
<FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com> mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Saturday, September 19, 2015 11:05 AM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
 
 
   This whole abortion "debate" seems like such a set up. Why proclaim that due 
to religious principles, abortion is murder, or that gay marriage is sin, and 
then live in the USA? I am not suggesting such believers should leave, though 
it seems like an awful lot of heartache to go through, to insist on a religious 
truth so strenuously, that to have the opposite practiced by some, becomes a 
constant thorn in the believer's side. Who wants to live like that? It seems 
like a set up, designed to cause the believers additional pain, and have them 
become co-dependent on such ideas, and the organizations that publicize them. 
Life is tough enough, imo.
 

 And the issue is NOT that the Christians cannot live by their beliefs. No one 
is insisting *they* get abortions or participate in gay marriage. However, they 
and the radical pastors that preach to them have determined that both of these 
issues are somehow unholy, and their very practice is an abomination against 
God. This in no way begins to validate the freedom of each of us to live our 
lives as we see fit. Religious barriers, no matter how well intentioned, are 
better practiced personally, vs. imposed on anyone else. I also see a lot more 
commonality between the fundamentalists of any religion, be they Christians or 
Muslims, than any side is willing to admit.
 

 I do agree that there is a natural law in back of all of this, which we are 
all personally held to, and responsible for. However, each of us has to make 
that judgment of ourselves independently. No one can do this for us, or impose 
it on us, no matter how convinced of their truths they may be.
 
 ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, 
<mdixon.6569@...> mailto:mdixon.6569@... wrote :
 
 We hold these truths to be self evident... certain unalienable Rights,among 
these are LIFE! Unalienable is defined as, *can not be denied*. Without the 
most fundamental right of life, no other rights matter. When does life begin? 
Theologically, that is open to discussion. Biologically, it begins when 
Conjoined DNA begins to divide. It is the very beginning of life, it's 
self.That DNA is not the mother's, it's not the father's, it is the unique DNA 
of separate human being with all of it's potential from beginning to end. It 
has a right that can not be denied. Socially and theologically speaking, that 
unalienable right to life is considered sacred as long as it is innocent. 
Violate specific laws of society and that sacred value can be forfeited by the 
law breaker, it's his conscious decision. But

Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'

[emily.ma...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'

[Mike Dixon mdixon.6...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

*Innocent Life,* the unborn don't fly jets into buildings or commit any other 
criminal or hostile act. Killing in Self- defense is justifiable. I believe I 
mentioned earlier that Abortion is acceptable when the mother's life is 
threatened.If you are concerned about hypocrisy, Christians aren't alone. 
Everybody can be labeled Hypocrites one way or another. Can you name one 
religious/spiritual group that doesn't have *qualifications* as to who receives 
salvation or liberation. etc?And each believes theirs is superior to 
others.Look no further than TM! Everyone has their limitations and 
understanding of religion and spirituality. If you have followed Maharishi's 
teachings you will know that we are born into our lives based on our karma, 
which dictates the circumstances of our lives and how and what values we grow 
up with to experience life. If you were born into a  Judeo-Christian culture, 
those are the values you are meant to experience life from. In India, from that 
perspective. A Muslim, that perspective and so on. That is your dharma and how 
you grow. This is why Maharishi used to say, one doesn't need to change 
religions to practice TM successfully. Add TM to whatever you are and you'll be 
better. Everyone has a different understanding based on their ability to 
understand. We all start from somewhere. The question is, where do we finish 
up? Follow your dharma for maximum growth. Gita says, it's better to die within 
your dharma, even if done poorly than to die in someone else's dharma, even if 
well done. If you were born a Jew , then be one but practice TM. If you were 
born a Christian, then be one but practice TM. If you were born a Muslim, a 
Hindu... etc. but practice TM. BTW, if you think you can convert to be a Hindu, 
you can't. Speak to any Vedic priest,. he'll tell you pretty much what I just 
said. And if you insist, dude, just imagine starting at the bottom of the 
barrel, as an untouchable, so you learn the full scope of what it is to be a 
real Hindu! LOL. No thanks!

  From: "olliesed...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]" 
<FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Saturday, September 19, 2015 5:39 PM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
   
    It is cherry-picking, led by the radical Christian pastors. If the sanctity 
of human life is so important, where are the anti-war demonstrations by the 
Christians? Those aren't fetuses we are bombing, and invading, they are fully 
grown human beings, men, women and yes, children, but not a peep from the 
anti-abortion crowd about their maiming and slaughter. 
I think it is because of the hypocrisy of their position - I once heard a 
Christian pastor say that a dog could not get into Heaven, unless it was a 
Christian dog (no kidding). The same justification is used for killing Muslims. 
What I would like to see is all of the Christians taking responsibility for the 
tragic loss of life that occurs due to our government's actions, including war. 
This picking on the poor souls that undergo abortions is bullying and 
hypocrisy, imo. It is a radical religious view held by those who wish to 
continue the co-dependent relationship they have with their flocks. These 
preachers are a lot like the politicians, framing the (conveniently 
insurmountable) "problems" and "issues" that their congregations face, ensuring 
their followers will feel both bereft, and beholden to the churches. What a 
scam.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

Actually, I believe I was giving a non religious explanation against abortion. 
The very founding documents, our nation are built upon, recognizes our  
unalienable(can not be denied) rights to *Life* liberty and the pursuit of 
happiness. You can't have liberty or happiness without Life. These rights are 
attributed to an All Mighty Creator because if such a thing existed, who is 
anyone to deny them? The very same person that wrote those words also wrote 
about the concept of a separation of Church and state. So, they are separate 
issues. The basic human rights recognized by the government are not religion 
based.

  From: "olliesedwuz@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Saturday, September 19, 2015 11:05 AM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
 
 This whole abortion "debate" seems like such a set up. Why proclaim that due 
to religious principles, abortion is murder, or that gay marriage is sin, and 
then live in the USA? I am not suggesting such believers should leave, though 
it seems like an awful lot of heartache to go through, to insist on a religious 
truth so strenuously, that to have the opposite practiced by some, becomes a 
constant thorn in the believer's side. Who wants to live like that? It seems 
like a set up, designed to cause the believers additional pain, and have them 
bec

Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'

[awoelfleba...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <emily.mae50@...> wrote :

 As I said, I agree with what Karen Armstrong writes.   When the founding 
*fathers* wrote what they did, they were not thinking of this issue 

 "Indeed I want to argue that America is the only country that has the 
misfortune of being founded on a philosophical mistake--namely, the notion of 
inalienable rights. We Christians do not believe that we have inalienable 
rights. That is the false presumption of Enlightenment individualism, and it 
opposes everything that Christians believe about what it means to be a 
creature. Notice that the issue is inalienable rights. Rights make a certain 
sense as correlative to duties and goods, but they are not inalienable. For 
example, when the lords protested against the king in the Magna Charta, they 
did so in the name of their duties to their underlings. Duties, not rights, 
were primary. The rights were simply ways of remembering what the duties were."
 

 (Taken from this...you sound Christian Mike, so I include this and this link 
for you.  Has some interesting points.)  
 

 ABORTION, THEOLOGICALLY UNDERSTOOD http://www.lifewatch.org/abortion.html 
 
 http://www.lifewatch.org/abortion.html
 
 ABORTION, THEOLOGICALLY UNDE... http://www.lifewatch.org/abortion.html 
ABORTION, THEOLOGICALLY UNDERSTOOD 1991 Taskforce of United Methodists on 
Abortion and Sexuality, Inc. Published by and available from: ...


 
 View on www.lifewatch.org http://www.lifewatch.org/abortion.html
 Preview by Yahoo 
 

  
  RE: ".birth control,( I don't want it now. It'll mess up my plans for 
life, I can't afford it, I don't know who the father is, etc)"
 

 This speaks to your assumptions and prejudice regarding an issue that is more 
often than not, deeply personal for a woman.  You demonstrate a closed mind 
when you assume you know what women are thinking.  How many interviews have you 
done?  
 

 That Karen Armstrong quote was phenomenal, I meant to post that to you a few 
hours ago when I read it. Thanks for including it - I think women have a handle 
on this issue that perhaps men will never quite be privy to.
 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

 Your position that to abort is a personal one and should not be legislated. My 
position is that you don't have the right to take another person's life. It is 
a founding principal of our government and has been recognized from *IT's* very 
inception. Life is considered an *unalienable* right. Unalienable means *it can 
not be denied*. In other words, your right to privacy ends with your body and 
you can  not deny another person's greater right of life, unless it threatens 
yours. Life trumps privacy. The overwhelming majority of abortions are done as 
birth control,( I don't want it now. It'll mess up my plans for life, I can't 
afford it, I don't know who the father is, etc) not to protect the mother's 
life from complications that could lead to possible death.

 

 From: "emily.mae50@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Saturday, September 19, 2015 10:55 AM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
 
 
   Was this the answer to my question?  I appreciate that you've articulated 
your position here.  I believe that the decision to abort is a personal one and 
one that should not be legislated. It isn't a casual decision and don't assume 
that the law which allows it turns it into one.  You have a position—does your 
position lead to positions on policies and social structure that are consistent 
with this position? How do you define compassion?  I agree with the position 
stated below.  
 

 "Nearly every abortion represents a human tragedy. This is something that the 
shrill rhetoric of the Christian right tends to ignore. Perhaps, when facing 
the possibility of terminating a pregnancy, we should return to the ancient 
insight that while it is an inexorable law of life that our survival often 
depends upon the death and suffering of others, there is something terrible 
about this, and that we must force ourselves to look clearly at what we are 
doing. 
 Thus, while it may be religiously impossible to sanction abortion undertaken 
for trivial reasons - for mere social or professional convenience - it may be 
tragically necessary to sacrifice a potential life to nurture the life we have 
already. This is also a sacred requirement. The foetus may have to die for the 
sake of its mother's physical or psychological health, for the economic 
survival of the family, or to prevent a marital breakdown that would damage its 
siblings. And that is why the woman has to make this painful choice, as only 
she can evaluate her circumstances. But we should never lose our sense of the 
awful gravity of the procedure, because - as in ancient religion - therein lies 
our sense of life's sacred value." ~Karen Arms

Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'

[olliesed...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

Yes, every religion can be shown to have its hypocrisy, but this insistence 
that abortions cannot be performed according to the choice of the woman who is 
pregnant, is only prevalent in radical Christianity, and radical Islam. Not all 
Christian sects are against abortion, and not all Muslim countries forbid it. 
But those at the mercy of the radical preachers of both religions, are pawns, 
imo. To them I would say, You simply don't have the right, or the authority, to 
control my life. Go get perfect, first, and then we'll talk, but no butting in 
line.:-) The more moderate sects of both Christianity and Islam understand 
this. It is only the radical elements of both of these religions who insist on 
this complete invasion of personal choice. 
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

 *Innocent Life,* the unborn don't fly jets into buildings or commit any other 
criminal or hostile act. Killing in Self- defense is justifiable. I believe I 
mentioned earlier that Abortion is acceptable when the mother's life is 
threatened.If you are concerned about hypocrisy, Christians aren't alone. 
Everybody can be labeled Hypocrites one way or another. Can you name one 
religious/spiritual group that doesn't have *qualifications* as to who receives 
salvation or liberation. etc?And each believes theirs is superior to 
others.Look no further than TM! Everyone has their limitations and 
understanding of religion and spirituality. If you have followed Maharishi's 
teachings you will know that we are born into our lives based on our karma, 
which dictates the circumstances of our lives and how and what values we grow 
up with to experience life. If you were born into a  Judeo-Christian culture, 
those are the values you are meant to experience life from. In India, from that 
perspective. A Muslim, that perspective and so on. That is your dharma and how 
you grow. This is why Maharishi used to say, one doesn't need to change 
religions to practice TM successfully. Add TM to whatever you are and you'll be 
better. Everyone has a different understanding based on their ability to 
understand. We all start from somewhere. The question is, where do we finish 
up? Follow your dharma for maximum growth. Gita says, it's better to die within 
your dharma, even if done poorly than to die in someone else's dharma, even if 
well done. If you were born a Jew , then be one but practice TM. If you were 
born a Christian, then be one but practice TM. If you were born a Muslim, a 
Hindu... etc. but practice TM. BTW, if you think you can convert to be a Hindu, 
you can't. Speak to any Vedic priest,. he'll tell you pretty much what I just 
said. And if you insist, dude, just imagine starting at the bottom of the 
barrel, as an untouchable, so you learn the full scope of what it is to be a 
real Hindu! LOL. No thanks!

 

 From: "olliesedwuz@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Saturday, September 19, 2015 5:39 PM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
 
 
   
 It is cherry-picking, led by the radical Christian pastors. If the sanctity of 
human life is so important, where are the anti-war demonstrations by the 
Christians? Those aren't fetuses we are bombing, and invading, they are fully 
grown human beings, men, women and yes, children, but not a peep from the 
anti-abortion crowd about their maiming and slaughter. 
 

 I think it is because of the hypocrisy of their position - I once heard a 
Christian pastor say that a dog could not get into Heaven, unless it was a 
Christian dog (no kidding). The same justification is used for killing Muslims. 
What I would like to see is all of the Christians taking responsibility for the 
tragic loss of life that occurs due to our government's actions, including war. 
 

 This picking on the poor souls that undergo abortions is bullying and 
hypocrisy, imo. It is a radical religious view held by those who wish to 
continue the co-dependent relationship they have with their flocks. These 
preachers are a lot like the politicians, framing the (conveniently 
insurmountable) "problems" and "issues" that their congregations face, ensuring 
their followers will feel both bereft, and beholden to the churches. What a 
scam.
 

 ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

 
 Actually, I believe I was giving a non religious explanation against abortion. 
The very founding documents, our nation are built upon, recognizes our  
unalienable(can not be denied) rights to *Life* liberty and the pursuit of 
happiness. You can't have liberty or happiness without Life. These rights are 
attributed to an All Mighty Creator because if such a thing existed, who is 
anyone to deny them? The very same person that wrote those words also wrote 
about the concept of a separation of Church and state. So, they are separate 
issues. The basic human rights reco

Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'

[Mike Dixon mdixon.6...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

Actually, I believe I was giving a non religious explanation against abortion. 
The very founding documents, our nation are built upon, recognizes our  
unalienable(can not be denied) rights to *Life* liberty and the pursuit of 
happiness. You can't have liberty or happiness without Life. These rights are 
attributed to an All Mighty Creator because if such a thing existed, who is 
anyone to deny them? The very same person that wrote those words also wrote 
about the concept of a separation of Church and state. So, they are separate 
issues. The basic human rights recognized by the government are not religion 
based.

  From: "olliesed...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]" 
<FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Saturday, September 19, 2015 11:05 AM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
   
    This whole abortion "debate" seems like such a set up. Why proclaim that 
due to religious principles, abortion is murder, or that gay marriage is sin, 
and then live in the USA? I am not suggesting such believers should leave, 
though it seems like an awful lot of heartache to go through, to insist on a 
religious truth so strenuously, that to have the opposite practiced by some, 
becomes a constant thorn in the believer's side. Who wants to live like that? 
It seems like a set up, designed to cause the believers additional pain, and 
have them become co-dependent on such ideas, and the organizations that 
publicize them. Life is tough enough, imo.
And the issue is NOT that the Christians cannot live by their beliefs. No one 
is insisting *they* get abortions or participate in gay marriage. However, they 
and the radical pastors that preach to them have determined that both of these 
issues are somehow unholy, and their very practice is an abomination against 
God. This in no way begins to validate the freedom of each of us to live our 
lives as we see fit. Religious barriers, no matter how well intentioned, are 
better practiced personally, vs. imposed on anyone else. I also see a lot more 
commonality between the fundamentalists of any religion, be they Christians or 
Muslims, than any side is willing to admit.
I do agree that there is a natural law in back of all of this, which we are all 
personally held to, and responsible for. However, each of us has to make that 
judgment of ourselves independently. No one can do this for us, or impose it on 
us, no matter how convinced of their truths they may be.

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

We hold these truths to be self evident... certain unalienable Rights,among 
these are LIFE! Unalienable is defined as, *can not be denied*. Without the 
most fundamental right of life, no other rights matter. When does life begin? 
Theologically, that is open to discussion. Biologically, it begins when 
Conjoined DNA begins to divide. It is the very beginning of life, it's 
self.That DNA is not the mother's, it's not the father's, it is the unique DNA 
of separate human being with all of it's potential from beginning to end. It 
has a right that can not be denied. Socially and theologically speaking, that 
unalienable right to life is considered sacred as long as it is innocent. 
Violate specific laws of society and that sacred value can be forfeited by the 
law breaker, it's his conscious decision. But never was it intended to to be 
denied on a basis of someone else's circumstances/ convenience. Do we really 
want to go down that road? Hitler did, as did many other tyrants and they have 
been traditionally labeled as EVIL, even Anti-Christ. I speak in biological 
terms of life because we value our society in secular terms and spiritual 
values are not considered valid anymore because certain people don't want 
other's religions imposed upon them..
  From: "emily.mae50@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Saturday, September 19, 2015 1:44 AM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
 
 To me, black and white thinking takes on the cloak of "casual, indifferent, 
etc.", or "blasé," if you will.  The remark "Oh shit! I missed my period! I'm 
really *f"ed* now!" seemed off the cuff and appeared to indicate a prejudiced 
and surficial understanding of the issue"blasé."
Curiously, Mike, do you believe in the soul?  Do you believe in the eternal 
soul?  Do you believe that the soul dies along with a potential life that was 
aborted by the mother, a potential life that could not survive independently at 
6 weeks and that even nature aborts naturally at times (called miscarriages).  
Do you believe that it could be possible that if there is a soul, that the soul 
may "live" to incarnate in a different host/mother?  Just food for thought.  



---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

I draw the line wi

Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'

[emily.ma...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'

[emily.ma...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

Here is the transcript of what he said.  It is not out of the realm of 
possibility that he was thinking simultaneously of the two topics in that one 
sentence precedes/follows another.  The word "punishment" could just have 
easily been construed as "consequence"...as in "I don't want them to suffer the 
consequence of a baby or an STD at the age of 16."  

 "When it comes specifically to HIV/AIDS, the most important prevention is 
education, which should include -- which should include abstinence education 
and teaching the children -- teaching children, you know, that sex is not 
something casual. But it should also include -- it should also include other, 
you know, information about contraception because, look, I've got two 
daughters. 9 years old and 6 years old. I am going to teach them first of all 
about values and morals. But if they make a mistake, I don't want them punished 
with a baby. I don't want them punished with an STD at the age of 16. You know, 
so it doesn't make sense to not give them information."
 

 Consider expanding your definition of "health/life" of the mother
 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

 Right, I got the context right. He was talking about  contraception at that 
point. And my point earlier is, that Abortion is used primarily as a means of 
birth control, not to protect the health/life of the mother. The latter is used 
primarily to justify the former. The idea of *punishment* corroborates that. 
Almost no one would deny a woman an abortion if her life were threatened by the 
pregnancy.

 From: "emily.mae50@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Friday, September 18, 2015 9:37 PM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
 
 
   Get it right, Mike.  Context, context, context.  You've isolated one 
sentence from an interview about HIV/AIDS - which is where his mind was when he 
made that statement, if you look at the interview.  

 

 
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

  We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal, that 
they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among 
these are *Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness*- That to secure these 
rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from 
the consent of the governed.
 Your right to *privacy* will not stand against another person's right to 
Life much longer, religion or no religion. You will need to abolish the 
first amendment that grants freedom of political speech and freedom of religion 
first. Everyone knows that the overwhelming majority of abortions in this 
country are simply birth control, "Oh shit! I missed my period! I'm really 
*f"ed* now!" It's rarely about health or life of the mother. Fifty-three 
million abortions can not account for that. "
 "Why would I want my daughter to be *punished* with a child?" Obama's words, 
not mine. This is the mind set of *Me first* and to hell with what's right. It 
is the purest of evil and it will not stand.

 From: "authfriend@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Friday, September 18, 2015 12:21 PM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
 
 
   

 

 

 Whether you like it or not, abortion is legal in this country. To jeopardize 
the health of poor women because of your religious convictions is untenable.
 

 

 

 


 













 
  


 


 











 
  

Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'

[emily.ma...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

To me, black and white thinking takes on the cloak of "casual, indifferent, 
etc.", or "blasé," if you will.  The remark "Oh shit! I missed my period! I'm 
really *f"ed* now!" seemed off the cuff and appeared to indicate a prejudiced 
and surficial understanding of the issue"blasé." 

 Curiously, Mike, do you believe in the soul?  Do you believe in the eternal 
soul?  Do you believe that the soul dies along with a potential life that was 
aborted by the mother, a potential life that could not survive independently at 
6 weeks and that even nature aborts naturally at times (called miscarriages).  
Do you believe that it could be possible that if there is a soul, that the soul 
may "live" to incarnate in a different host/mother?  Just food for thought.  
 

 
 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

 I draw the line with *murder* as one human willfully  killing another innocent 
human. There's manslaughter, accidents etc.Then there is killing for food.I can 
admire one who observes ahimsa as going above and beyond the call of duty as a  
penance. 

 

 From: "awoelflebater@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Saturday, September 19, 2015 12:15 AM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
 
 
   

 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

 "My blase attitudes", did I get that right? How can anything be more blase 
than to sweep away and destroy an innocent human life because you're not ready 
to be responsible for*it* yet? It's freaking murder! A women's right to murder? 
The Supreme Court will wake up one day, just as they did when they ruled one 
human can not own another or that Slaves were not 3/5ths of a human being, 
because "all men are created equal" under the law. That took two hundred years 
to get right , but it happened. Science is moving the understanding of life 
forward very fast. If the science of DNA can put a person in prison for life 
for a crime, it will save a life that is innocent of a crime. It's not her body 
that she kills. FYI, all person's involved in the creation of another, need to 
be equally responsible for that life. Yes, that presents new social problems 
but the first rule is do no harm to innocent life.

 

 I love your passion, Mike. I am of the belief that all lives are created 
equal. When I say that I mean ALL lives. Human or animal. Blasphemous? Perhaps. 
Maybe. Likely. To kill any thing is a kind of murder. Killing a fetus is 
destroying life. Butchering a terrified, bleating cow is destroying a life. 
Euthanizing an old and decrepit dog is destroying a life. Is life sacred? 
Probably. What is sacred? Anything that is created. Is allowing something to 
live sometimes opening the way for suffering? Yes. Is destroying a life 
sometimes decreasing the chances of suffering? Yes. Is it better to overdose a 
dangerous horse with phenyl barbital so it doesn't kill somebody merciful? Is 
aborting an unwanted baby the right thing to do? Is there ever the 
justification for causing death of a living being? It all gets so complicated. 
Is the death penalty ever warranted? Are unwanted, unloved, abused children 
happy to have been given the chance to live despite the fact they may have been 
conceived by rape? I can't answer this but what I do know is that human beings 
are given hundreds of chances to make choices every moment of every day and the 
freedom to make those choices must remain intact.

 From: "emily.mae50@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Friday, September 18, 2015 9:38 PM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
 
 
   

 


 

 There is another issue I'd like to comment on about ignorant men thinking they 
know all about pregnancy and childbirth and raising children on their own with 
no support—particularly the ones that think they should judge, condemn, and 
legislate women's rights.  Yes, Mike, it's the girl "who missed her period" 
that's at fault, right?  Not the boy or man with the raging hormones who 
pressured her and pressured her and pressured her to give in to his desires and 
then left the scene.give me a break.  
 

 I'm not saying you shouldn't stand by your religious convictions, but maybe 
you ought to dig a little deeper into your "blasé" attitudes.  
 
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

  We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal, that 
they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among 
these are *Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness*- That to secure these 
rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from 
the consent of the governed.
 Your right to *privacy* will not stand against another

Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'

[awoelfleba...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

 We hold these truths to be self evident... certain unalienable Rights,among 
these are LIFE! Unalienable is defined as, *can not be denied*. Without the 
most fundamental right of life, no other rights matter. When does life begin? 
Theologically, that is open to discussion. Biologically, it begins when 
Conjoined DNA begins to divide. It is the very beginning of life, it's 
self.That DNA is not the mother's, it's not the father's, it is the unique DNA 
of separate human being with all of it's potential from beginning to end. It 
has a right that can not be denied. Socially and theologically speaking, that 
unalienable right to life is considered sacred as long as it is innocent. 
Violate specific laws of society and that sacred value can be forfeited by the 
law breaker, it's his conscious decision. But never was it intended to to be 
denied on a basis of someone else's circumstances/ convenience. Do we really 
want to go down that road? Hitler did, as did many other tyrants and they have 
been traditionally labeled as EVIL, even Anti-Christ. I speak in biological 
terms of life because we value our society in secular terms and spiritual 
values are not considered valid anymore because certain people don't want 
other's religions imposed upon them..

 

 See, it comes down to what feels right to every individual - in the end. Laws 
can be made and laws can be rescinded. Laws may be followed or they may be 
broken. In the end, everyone has to do what feels right for them, in their 
particular circumstance. There is killing and there is choice and that includes 
having to punish those who the law feels transgressed too many boundaries and 
all the while it is human beings who are deciding these things. The right, the 
freedom to be able to decide is the most fundamental for me. Whenever we decide 
something we effect others. That decision could involve abortion, what to eat 
for dinner (do we have tofu or do we have cow?) or how long our ailing cat 
should remain alive. 
 

 You feel that life has a right to exist the moment an egg and a sperm come 
into contact. Others believe it is at 4 months. Still others believe if a life 
is still encased in their womb they have the right to determine, at any time, 
whether it should be born. Who is right? Does it depend upon individual 
circumstance? (Not according to you.) Right vs wrong. Absolute vs relative. The 
challenge of determining these things will continue as long as humankind has a 
brain to reason with and a heart to feel.
 From: "emily.mae50@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Saturday, September 19, 2015 1:44 AM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
 
 
   To me, black and white thinking takes on the cloak of "casual, indifferent, 
etc.", or "blasé," if you will.  The remark "Oh shit! I missed my period! I'm 
really *f"ed* now!" seemed off the cuff and appeared to indicate a prejudiced 
and surficial understanding of the issue"blasé."
 

 Curiously, Mike, do you believe in the soul?  Do you believe in the eternal 
soul?  Do you believe that the soul dies along with a potential life that was 
aborted by the mother, a potential life that could not survive independently at 
6 weeks and that even nature aborts naturally at times (called miscarriages).  
Do you believe that it could be possible that if there is a soul, that the soul 
may "live" to incarnate in a different host/mother?  Just food for thought.  
 

 
 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

 I draw the line with *murder* as one human willfully  killing another innocent 
human. There's manslaughter, accidents etc.Then there is killing for food.I can 
admire one who observes ahimsa as going above and beyond the call of duty as a  
penance. 

 

 From: "awoelflebater@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Saturday, September 19, 2015 12:15 AM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
 
 
   

 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

 "My blase attitudes", did I get that right? How can anything be more blase 
than to sweep away and destroy an innocent human life because you're not ready 
to be responsible for*it* yet? It's freaking murder! A women's right to murder? 
The Supreme Court will wake up one day, just as they did when they ruled one 
human can not own another or that Slaves were not 3/5ths of a human being, 
because "all men are created equal" under the law. That took two hundred years 
to get right , but it happened. Science is moving the understanding of life 
forward very fast. If the science of DNA can put a person in prison for life 
for a crime, it will save a life that is innocent of a cri

Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'

[Mike Dixon mdixon.6...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

We hold these truths to be self evident... certain unalienable Rights,among 
these are LIFE! Unalienable is defined as, *can not be denied*. Without the 
most fundamental right of life, no other rights matter. When does life begin? 
Theologically, that is open to discussion. Biologically, it begins when 
Conjoined DNA begins to divide. It is the very beginning of life, it's 
self.That DNA is not the mother's, it's not the father's, it is the unique DNA 
of separate human being with all of it's potential from beginning to end. It 
has a right that can not be denied. Socially and theologically speaking, that 
unalienable right to life is considered sacred as long as it is innocent. 
Violate specific laws of society and that sacred value can be forfeited by the 
law breaker, it's his conscious decision. But never was it intended to to be 
denied on a basis of someone else's circumstances/ convenience. Do we really 
want to go down that road? Hitler did, as did many other tyrants and they have 
been traditionally labeled as EVIL, even Anti-Christ. I speak in biological 
terms of life because we value our society in secular terms and spiritual 
values are not considered valid anymore because certain people don't want 
other's religions imposed upon them..
 From: "emily.ma...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]" 
<FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Saturday, September 19, 2015 1:44 AM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
   
    To me, black and white thinking takes on the cloak of "casual, indifferent, 
etc.", or "blasé," if you will.  The remark "Oh shit! I missed my period! I'm 
really *f"ed* now!" seemed off the cuff and appeared to indicate a prejudiced 
and surficial understanding of the issue"blasé."
Curiously, Mike, do you believe in the soul?  Do you believe in the eternal 
soul?  Do you believe that the soul dies along with a potential life that was 
aborted by the mother, a potential life that could not survive independently at 
6 weeks and that even nature aborts naturally at times (called miscarriages).  
Do you believe that it could be possible that if there is a soul, that the soul 
may "live" to incarnate in a different host/mother?  Just food for thought.  



---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

I draw the line with *murder* as one human willfully  killing another innocent 
human. There's manslaughter, accidents etc.Then there is killing for food.I can 
admire one who observes ahimsa as going above and beyond the call of duty as a  
penance. 

  From: "awoelflebater@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Saturday, September 19, 2015 12:15 AM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
 
 


---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

"My blase attitudes", did I get that right? How can anything be more blase than 
to sweep away and destroy an innocent human life because you're not ready to be 
responsible for*it* yet? It's freaking murder! A women's right to murder? The 
Supreme Court will wake up one day, just as they did when they ruled one human 
can not own another or that Slaves were not 3/5ths of a human being, because 
"all men are created equal" under the law. That took two hundred years to get 
right , but it happened. Science is moving the understanding of life forward 
very fast. If the science of DNA can put a person in prison for life for a 
crime, it will save a life that is innocent of a crime. It's not her body that 
she kills. FYI, all person's involved in the creation of another, need to be 
equally responsible for that life. Yes, that presents new social problems but 
the first rule is do no harm to innocent life.

I love your passion, Mike. I am of the belief that all lives are created equal. 
When I say that I mean ALL lives. Human or animal. Blasphemous? Perhaps. Maybe. 
Likely. To kill any thing is a kind of murder. Killing a fetus is destroying 
life. Butchering a terrified, bleating cow is destroying a life. Euthanizing an 
old and decrepit dog is destroying a life. Is life sacred? Probably. What is 
sacred? Anything that is created. Is allowing something to live sometimes 
opening the way for suffering? Yes. Is destroying a life sometimes decreasing 
the chances of suffering? Yes. Is it better to overdose a dangerous horse with 
phenyl barbital so it doesn't kill somebody merciful? Is aborting an unwanted 
baby the right thing to do? Is there ever the justification for causing death 
of a living being? It all gets so complicated. Is the death penalty ever 
warranted? Are unwanted, unloved, abused children happy to have been given the 
chance to live despite the fact they may have been conceived by rape? I can't 
answer this but what I do know is that human beings are given hundreds of 
chances 

Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'

[awoelfleba...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,  wrote :

 It is cherry-picking, led by the radical Christian pastors. If the sanctity of 
human life is so important, where are the anti-war demonstrations by the 
Christians? Those aren't fetuses we are bombing, and invading, they are fully 
grown human beings, men, women and yes, children, but not a peep from the 
anti-abortion crowd about their maiming and slaughter. 
 

 I had virtually the same thought. Let's hear about the fate and treatment of 
the grown up babies (adults and children) who are being maimed and slaughtered 
as we speak.  
 

 On another note: There is not a person among us who has not been protected, 
nurtured and loved at some point in our small lives. We received protection and 
nourishment in the womb (we managed to make it into the birth canal or, at 
least, were delivered by C section) and we continue to need all three now. But 
when a baby is miscarried, has nature somehow become aberrational or unnatural? 
When a fetus is malformed in the womb or is attacked by a virus that causes a 
"natural" abortion is this somehow more justified than a person choosing to do 
the same thing (kill its unborn child)?
 

 I think it is because of the hypocrisy of their position - I once heard a 
Christian pastor say that a dog could not get into Heaven, unless it was a 
Christian dog (no kidding). The same justification is used for killing Muslims. 
What I would like to see is all of the Christians taking responsibility for the 
tragic loss of life that occurs due to our government's actions, including war. 
 

 This picking on the poor souls that undergo abortions is bullying and 
hypocrisy, imo. It is a radical religious view held by those who wish to 
continue the co-dependent relationship they have with their flocks. These 
preachers are a lot like the politicians, framing the (conveniently 
insurmountable) "problems" and "issues" that their congregations face, ensuring 
their followers will feel both bereft, and beholden to the churches. What a 
scam.
 

 

  





 


 












 














 














 


 

Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'

[emily.ma...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

Was this the answer to my question?  I appreciate that you've articulated your 
position here.  I believe that the decision to abort is a personal one and one 
that should not be legislated. It isn't a casual decision and don't assume that 
the law which allows it turns it into one.  You have a position—does your 
position lead to positions on policies and social structure that are consistent 
with this position? How do you define compassion?  I agree with the position 
stated below.   

 "Nearly every abortion represents a human tragedy. This is something that the 
shrill rhetoric of the Christian right tends to ignore. Perhaps, when facing 
the possibility of terminating a pregnancy, we should return to the ancient 
insight that while it is an inexorable law of life that our survival often 
depends upon the death and suffering of others, there is something terrible 
about this, and that we must force ourselves to look clearly at what we are 
doing. 
 Thus, while it may be religiously impossible to sanction abortion undertaken 
for trivial reasons - for mere social or professional convenience - it may be 
tragically necessary to sacrifice a potential life to nurture the life we have 
already. This is also a sacred requirement. The foetus may have to die for the 
sake of its mother's physical or psychological health, for the economic 
survival of the family, or to prevent a marital breakdown that would damage its 
siblings. And that is why the woman has to make this painful choice, as only 
she can evaluate her circumstances. But we should never lose our sense of the 
awful gravity of the procedure, because - as in ancient religion - therein lies 
our sense of life's sacred value." ~Karen Armstrong
 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

 We hold these truths to be self evident... certain unalienable Rights,among 
these are LIFE! Unalienable is defined as, *can not be denied*. Without the 
most fundamental right of life, no other rights matter. When does life begin? 
Theologically, that is open to discussion. Biologically, it begins when 
Conjoined DNA begins to divide. It is the very beginning of life, it's 
self.That DNA is not the mother's, it's not the father's, it is the unique DNA 
of separate human being with all of it's potential from beginning to end. It 
has a right that can not be denied. Socially and theologically speaking, that 
unalienable right to life is considered sacred as long as it is innocent. 
Violate specific laws of society and that sacred value can be forfeited by the 
law breaker, it's his conscious decision. But never was it intended to to be 
denied on a basis of someone else's circumstances/ convenience. Do we really 
want to go down that road? Hitler did, as did many other tyrants and they have 
been traditionally labeled as EVIL, even Anti-Christ. I speak in biological 
terms of life because we value our society in secular terms and spiritual 
values are not considered valid anymore because certain people don't want 
other's religions imposed upon them..

 From: "emily.mae50@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Saturday, September 19, 2015 1:44 AM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
 
 
   To me, black and white thinking takes on the cloak of "casual, indifferent, 
etc.", or "blasé," if you will.  The remark "Oh shit! I missed my period! I'm 
really *f"ed* now!" seemed off the cuff and appeared to indicate a prejudiced 
and surficial understanding of the issue"blasé."
 

 Curiously, Mike, do you believe in the soul?  Do you believe in the eternal 
soul?  Do you believe that the soul dies along with a potential life that was 
aborted by the mother, a potential life that could not survive independently at 
6 weeks and that even nature aborts naturally at times (called miscarriages).  
Do you believe that it could be possible that if there is a soul, that the soul 
may "live" to incarnate in a different host/mother?  Just food for thought.  
 

 
 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

 I draw the line with *murder* as one human willfully  killing another innocent 
human. There's manslaughter, accidents etc.Then there is killing for food.I can 
admire one who observes ahimsa as going above and beyond the call of duty as a  
penance. 

 

 From: "awoelflebater@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Saturday, September 19, 2015 12:15 AM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
 
 
   

 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

 "My blase attitudes", did I get that right? How can anything be more blase 
than to sweep away and destroy an innocent human life because you're not ready 
to be responsible for*it* yet? It's freaking murder! A wome

Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'

[olliesed...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

This whole abortion "debate" seems like such a set up. Why proclaim that due to 
religious principles, abortion is murder, or that gay marriage is sin, and then 
live in the USA? I am not suggesting such believers should leave, though it 
seems like an awful lot of heartache to go through, to insist on a religious 
truth so strenuously, that to have the opposite practiced by some, becomes a 
constant thorn in the believer's side. Who wants to live like that? It seems 
like a set up, designed to cause the believers additional pain, and have them 
become co-dependent on such ideas, and the organizations that publicize them. 
Life is tough enough, imo. 

 And the issue is NOT that the Christians cannot live by their beliefs. No one 
is insisting *they* get abortions or participate in gay marriage. However, they 
and the radical pastors that preach to them have determined that both of these 
issues are somehow unholy, and their very practice is an abomination against 
God. This in no way begins to validate the freedom of each of us to live our 
lives as we see fit. Religious barriers, no matter how well intentioned, are 
better practiced personally, vs. imposed on anyone else. I also see a lot more 
commonality between the fundamentalists of any religion, be they Christians or 
Muslims, than any side is willing to admit.
 

 I do agree that there is a natural law in back of all of this, which we are 
all personally held to, and responsible for. However, each of us has to make 
that judgment of ourselves independently. No one can do this for us, or impose 
it on us, no matter how convinced of their truths they may be.
 
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

 We hold these truths to be self evident... certain unalienable Rights,among 
these are LIFE! Unalienable is defined as, *can not be denied*. Without the 
most fundamental right of life, no other rights matter. When does life begin? 
Theologically, that is open to discussion. Biologically, it begins when 
Conjoined DNA begins to divide. It is the very beginning of life, it's 
self.That DNA is not the mother's, it's not the father's, it is the unique DNA 
of separate human being with all of it's potential from beginning to end. It 
has a right that can not be denied. Socially and theologically speaking, that 
unalienable right to life is considered sacred as long as it is innocent. 
Violate specific laws of society and that sacred value can be forfeited by the 
law breaker, it's his conscious decision. But never was it intended to to be 
denied on a basis of someone else's circumstances/ convenience. Do we really 
want to go down that road? Hitler did, as did many other tyrants and they have 
been traditionally labeled as EVIL, even Anti-Christ. I speak in biological 
terms of life because we value our society in secular terms and spiritual 
values are not considered valid anymore because certain people don't want 
other's religions imposed upon them..

 From: "emily.mae50@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Saturday, September 19, 2015 1:44 AM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
 
 
   To me, black and white thinking takes on the cloak of "casual, indifferent, 
etc.", or "blasé," if you will.  The remark "Oh shit! I missed my period! I'm 
really *f"ed* now!" seemed off the cuff and appeared to indicate a prejudiced 
and surficial understanding of the issue"blasé."
 

 Curiously, Mike, do you believe in the soul?  Do you believe in the eternal 
soul?  Do you believe that the soul dies along with a potential life that was 
aborted by the mother, a potential life that could not survive independently at 
6 weeks and that even nature aborts naturally at times (called miscarriages).  
Do you believe that it could be possible that if there is a soul, that the soul 
may "live" to incarnate in a different host/mother?  Just food for thought.  
 

 
 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

 I draw the line with *murder* as one human willfully  killing another innocent 
human. There's manslaughter, accidents etc.Then there is killing for food.I can 
admire one who observes ahimsa as going above and beyond the call of duty as a  
penance. 

 

 From: "awoelflebater@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Saturday, September 19, 2015 12:15 AM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
 
 
   

 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

 "My blase attitudes", did I get that right? How can anything be more blase 
than to sweep away and destroy an innocent human life because you're not ready 
to be responsible for*it* yet? It's freaking murder! A women's right to murder? 
The Supreme Court will wake up one day, just as they did when t

Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'

[Mike Dixon mdixon.6...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

I'll give you that!
  From: "awoelfleba...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]" 
<FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Saturday, September 19, 2015 10:23 AM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
   
    


---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

We hold these truths to be self evident... certain unalienable Rights,among 
these are LIFE! Unalienable is defined as, *can not be denied*. Without the 
most fundamental right of life, no other rights matter. When does life begin? 
Theologically, that is open to discussion. Biologically, it begins when 
Conjoined DNA begins to divide. It is the very beginning of life, it's 
self.That DNA is not the mother's, it's not the father's, it is the unique DNA 
of separate human being with all of it's potential from beginning to end. It 
has a right that can not be denied. Socially and theologically speaking, that 
unalienable right to life is considered sacred as long as it is innocent. 
Violate specific laws of society and that sacred value can be forfeited by the 
law breaker, it's his conscious decision. But never was it intended to to be 
denied on a basis of someone else's circumstances/ convenience. Do we really 
want to go down that road? Hitler did, as did many other tyrants and they have 
been traditionally labeled as EVIL, even Anti-Christ. I speak in biological 
terms of life because we value our society in secular terms and spiritual 
values are not considered valid anymore because certain people don't want 
other's religions imposed upon them..

 

You feel that life has a right to exist the moment an egg and a sperm come into 
contact. Others believe it is at 4 months. Still others believe if a life is 
still encased in their womb they have the right to determine, at any time, 
whether it should be born. Who is right? Does it depend upon individual 
circumstance? (Not according to you.) Right vs wrong. Absolute vs relative. The 
challenge of determining these things will continue as long as humankind has a 
brain to reason with and a heart to feel.  From: "emily.mae50@... 
[FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Saturday, September 19, 2015 1:44 AM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
 
 To me, black and white thinking takes on the cloak of "casual, indifferent, 
etc.", or "blasé," if you will.  The remark "Oh shit! I missed my period! I'm 
really *f"ed* now!" seemed off the cuff and appeared to indicate a prejudiced 
and surficial understanding of the issue"blasé."
Curiously, Mike, do you believe in the soul?  Do you believe in the eternal 
soul?  Do you believe that the soul dies along with a potential life that was 
aborted by the mother, a potential life that could not survive independently at 
6 weeks and that even nature aborts naturally at times (called miscarriages).  
Do you believe that it could be possible that if there is a soul, that the soul 
may "live" to incarnate in a different host/mother?  Just food for thought.  



---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

I draw the line with *murder* as one human willfully  killing another innocent 
human. There's manslaughter, accidents etc.Then there is killing for food.I can 
admire one who observes ahimsa as going above and beyond the call of duty as a  
penance. 

  From: "awoelflebater@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Saturday, September 19, 2015 12:15 AM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
 
 


---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

"My blase attitudes", did I get that right? How can anything be more blase than 
to sweep away and destroy an innocent human life because you're not ready to be 
responsible for*it* yet? It's freaking murder! A women's right to murder? The 
Supreme Court will wake up one day, just as they did when they ruled one human 
can not own another or that Slaves were not 3/5ths of a human being, because 
"all men are created equal" under the law. That took two hundred years to get 
right , but it happened. Science is moving the understanding of life forward 
very fast. If the science of DNA can put a person in prison for life for a 
crime, it will save a life that is innocent of a crime. It's not her body that 
she kills. FYI, all person's involved in the creation of another, need to be 
equally responsible for that life. Yes, that presents new social problems but 
the first rule is do no harm to innocent life.

I love your passion, Mike. I am of the belief that all lives are created equal. 
When I say that I mean ALL lives. Human or animal. Blasphemous? Perhaps. Maybe. 
Likely. To kill any thing is a kind of murder. Killing a fetus is destroying 
life. Butchering a terrified, blea

Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'

[geezerfr...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

Republicans Are Legislating Based On Fake Videos. Should Someone Tell Them? The 
House passed a pair of bills related to Planned Parenthood funding and 
"abortion survivors" on Friday. 

 Laura Bassett http://www.huffingtonpost.com/laura-bassettLaura Bassett, Senior 
Politics Reporter, The Huffington Post
 http://twitter.com/lebassett



 Posted: 09/18/2015 02:52 PM EDT | Edited: 13 minutes ago
 WASHINGTON -- In the second GOP presidential debate Wednesday night, candidate 
Carly Fiorina passionately described a graphic scene from an undercover video 
of Planned Parenthood in which a fetus that survived an abortion waits, its 
"heart beating" and "legs kicking," for a technician to harvest its brain. On 
Friday, House Republicans passed a pair of bills inspired by the same videos: 
One measure would defund Planned Parenthood and another would protect "abortion 
survivors." 
 The problem is, the videos are so heavily edited that they bear little 
resemblance to reality, and the scene Fiorina described doesn't exist.
 She was most likely referring to the video in which Holly O'Donnell, a former 
procurement technician for a biomedical company, talks about having seen a 
fully formed aborted fetus, with its heart still beating, in a pathology lab. 
The video doesn't show any footage from the scene, but instead shows a graphic 
image https://youtu.be/FzMAycMMXp8?t=8m57s of someone holding a small fetus in 
their hands. That image is not an aborted fetus, as the video suggests. Rather, 
it was taken from the blog of a woman named Alexis Fretz 
https://f2photographybylexi.wordpress.com/2013/06/26/walter-joshua-fretz/, who 
miscarried at 19 weeks and posted images of her still-born baby online. 
 The image of the miscarried baby is not the only misleading moment in the 
videos, which were produced by the anti-abortion group Center for Medical 
Progress. Separate conversations are cut and spliced together to appear as if 
they are one line of discussion. Subtitles in the videos do not match the words 
being said. Entire chunks of time are missing from the footage -- even from the 
supposedly full, "unedited" videos that the Center released along with the more 
heavily edited ones.
 A forensic analysis of the videos 
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/planned-parenthood-sting-videos-forensic_55df2334e4b029b3f1b1be9f
 found they are so egregiously manipulated that they would never be accepted as 
evidence in a court of law.
 Congress requested the real, unaltered videos 
http://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/253716-oversight-committee-subpoenas-for-unedited-planned-parenthood-footage
 of Planned Parenthood from the Center for Medical Progress earlier this week, 
but the Center has not yet released them to anyone. Meanwhile, multiple state 
investigations and a federal investigation into the accusations against Planned 
Parenthood have failed to produce any evidence to support the claims in the 
videos. 
 But Republicans lawmakers continue to legislate based on the videos. GOP 
members of Congress screened the videos at a legislative hearing Thursday 
afternoon to support their effort to defund Planned Parenthood, as Democrats 
balked in disbelief. Rep. Frank Pallone (D-N.J.) skewered his GOP colleagues 
once the videos ended. 
 "I just think it's so irresponsible to use this type of material -- false 
material, inaccurate, misleading videos -- to make any case at what is supposed 
to be a legislative hearing," Pallone said. "Yet Republicans are openly 
ignoring the mounting evidence that the videos are fake and continuing to 
legislate based on them."  
 The criticism fell on deaf ears. 
 "They're not doctored," Rep. Brian Babin (R-Texas) said of the videos on the 
House floor Friday morning before the votes. "I daresay none of these folks 
we're hearing from on the other side of the aisle have watched them." 
 "Harvesting body parts, how could anyone defend that?" Rep. Sean Duffy 
(R-Wis.) shouted into the microphone during the emotional debate. 
 The videos, even in their heavily edited form, do not show Planned Parenthood 
harvesting and selling body parts. What they do show is Planned Parenthood 
doctors having frank, technical conversations about abortion procedures with 
actors that are posing as fetal tissue procurement technicians. The doctors 
discuss the modest reimbursements Planned Parenthood is legally allowed to 
receive to cover the costs of donating fetal tissue for medical research.
 One doctor makes an inappropriate joke about wanting to buy a Lamborghini with 
the reimbursements, which amount to a maximum $60 per specimen donated. 
Considering that only two Planned Parenthood clinics in the country actually 
donate fetal tissue, and the $60 fee has to cover the costs of preserving and 
transporting each specimen, it's absurd to think the doctor was serious about 
buying a luxury sports car with that money.
 The Republican effort to defund Planned Parenthood is unlikely to succeed 
anyway. The 

Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'

[Mike Dixon mdixon.6...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

 We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal, that 
they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among 
these are *Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness*- That to secure these 
rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from 
the consent of the governed.Your right to *privacy* will not stand against 
another person's right to Life much longer, religion or no religion. You 
will need to abolish the first amendment that grants freedom of political 
speech and freedom of religion first. Everyone knows that the overwhelming 
majority of abortions in this country are simply birth control, "Oh shit! I 
missed my period! I'm really *f"ed* now!" It's rarely about health or life of 
the mother. Fifty-three million abortions can not account for that. ""Why would 
I want my daughter to be *punished* with a child?" Obama's words, not mine. 
This is the mind set of *Me first* and to hell with what's right. It is the 
purest of evil and it will not stand.
 From: "authfri...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]" 
<FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Friday, September 18, 2015 12:21 PM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
   
    


Whether you like it or not, abortion is legal in this country. To jeopardize 
the health of poor women because of your religious convictions is untenable.



  #yiv5054477122 #yiv5054477122 -- #yiv5054477122ygrp-mkp {border:1px solid 
#d8d8d8;font-family:Arial;margin:10px 0;padding:0 10px;}#yiv5054477122 
#yiv5054477122ygrp-mkp hr {border:1px solid #d8d8d8;}#yiv5054477122 
#yiv5054477122ygrp-mkp #yiv5054477122hd 
{color:#628c2a;font-size:85%;font-weight:700;line-height:122%;margin:10px 
0;}#yiv5054477122 #yiv5054477122ygrp-mkp #yiv5054477122ads 
{margin-bottom:10px;}#yiv5054477122 #yiv5054477122ygrp-mkp .yiv5054477122ad 
{padding:0 0;}#yiv5054477122 #yiv5054477122ygrp-mkp .yiv5054477122ad p 
{margin:0;}#yiv5054477122 #yiv5054477122ygrp-mkp .yiv5054477122ad a 
{color:#ff;text-decoration:none;}#yiv5054477122 #yiv5054477122ygrp-sponsor 
#yiv5054477122ygrp-lc {font-family:Arial;}#yiv5054477122 
#yiv5054477122ygrp-sponsor #yiv5054477122ygrp-lc #yiv5054477122hd {margin:10px 
0px;font-weight:700;font-size:78%;line-height:122%;}#yiv5054477122 
#yiv5054477122ygrp-sponsor #yiv5054477122ygrp-lc .yiv5054477122ad 
{margin-bottom:10px;padding:0 0;}#yiv5054477122 #yiv5054477122actions 
{font-family:Verdana;font-size:11px;padding:10px 0;}#yiv5054477122 
#yiv5054477122activity 
{background-color:#e0ecee;float:left;font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;padding:10px;}#yiv5054477122
 #yiv5054477122activity span {font-weight:700;}#yiv5054477122 
#yiv5054477122activity span:first-child 
{text-transform:uppercase;}#yiv5054477122 #yiv5054477122activity span a 
{color:#5085b6;text-decoration:none;}#yiv5054477122 #yiv5054477122activity span 
span {color:#ff7900;}#yiv5054477122 #yiv5054477122activity span 
.yiv5054477122underline {text-decoration:underline;}#yiv5054477122 
.yiv5054477122attach 
{clear:both;display:table;font-family:Arial;font-size:12px;padding:10px 
0;width:400px;}#yiv5054477122 .yiv5054477122attach div a 
{text-decoration:none;}#yiv5054477122 .yiv5054477122attach img 
{border:none;padding-right:5px;}#yiv5054477122 .yiv5054477122attach label 
{display:block;margin-bottom:5px;}#yiv5054477122 .yiv5054477122attach label a 
{text-decoration:none;}#yiv5054477122 blockquote {margin:0 0 0 
4px;}#yiv5054477122 .yiv5054477122bold 
{font-family:Arial;font-size:13px;font-weight:700;}#yiv5054477122 
.yiv5054477122bold a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv5054477122 dd.yiv5054477122last 
p a {font-family:Verdana;font-weight:700;}#yiv5054477122 dd.yiv5054477122last p 
span {margin-right:10px;font-family:Verdana;font-weight:700;}#yiv5054477122 
dd.yiv5054477122last p span.yiv5054477122yshortcuts 
{margin-right:0;}#yiv5054477122 div.yiv5054477122attach-table div div a 
{text-decoration:none;}#yiv5054477122 div.yiv5054477122attach-table 
{width:400px;}#yiv5054477122 div.yiv5054477122file-title a, #yiv5054477122 
div.yiv5054477122file-title a:active, #yiv5054477122 
div.yiv5054477122file-title a:hover, #yiv5054477122 div.yiv5054477122file-title 
a:visited {text-decoration:none;}#yiv5054477122 div.yiv5054477122photo-title a, 
#yiv5054477122 div.yiv5054477122photo-title a:active, #yiv5054477122 
div.yiv5054477122photo-title a:hover, #yiv5054477122 
div.yiv5054477122photo-title a:visited {text-decoration:none;}#yiv5054477122 
div#yiv5054477122ygrp-mlmsg #yiv5054477122ygrp-msg p a 
span.yiv5054477122yshortcuts 
{font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;font-weight:normal;}#yiv5054477122 
.yiv5054477122green {color:#628c2a;}#yiv5054477122 .yiv5054477122MsoNormal 
{margin:0 0 0 0;}#yiv5054477122 o {font-size:0;}#yiv5054477122 
#yiv5054477122photos div {float:left;width:72px;}#yiv5054477122 
#yiv5054477122photos div div {border:1px solid 
#66;height:6

Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'

[Mike Dixon mdixon.6...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

Congress fully expects Obama to veto any bills restricting abortion or 
defunding PP. Nor do they expect to over- ride a veto. A line is being drawn in 
the sand.  A number of polls show that support for abortion is waning.
  From: "geezerfr...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]" 
<FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Friday, September 18, 2015 2:14 PM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
   
    
Republicans Are Legislating Based On Fake Videos. Should Someone Tell Them?

The House passed a pair of bills related to Planned Parenthood funding and 
"abortion survivors" on Friday.
Laura BassettLaura Bassett, Senior Politics Reporter, The Huffington Post   
   - 
Posted: 09/18/2015 02:52 PM EDT | Edited: 13 minutes agoWASHINGTON -- In the 
second GOP presidential debate Wednesday night, candidate Carly Fiorina 
passionately described a graphic scene from an undercover video of Planned 
Parenthood in which a fetus that survived an abortion waits, its "heart 
beating" and "legs kicking," for a technician to harvest its brain. On Friday, 
House Republicans passed a pair of bills inspired by the same videos: One 
measure would defund Planned Parenthood and another would protect "abortion 
survivors." The problem is, the videos are so heavily edited that they bear 
little resemblance to reality, and the scene Fiorina described doesn't 
exist.She was most likely referring to the video in which Holly O'Donnell, a 
former procurement technician for a biomedical company, talks about having seen 
a fully formed aborted fetus, with its heart still beating, in a pathology lab. 
The video doesn't show any footage from the scene, but instead shows a graphic 
image of someone holding a small fetus in their hands. That image is not an 
aborted fetus, as the video suggests. Rather, it was taken from the blog of a 
woman named Alexis Fretz, who miscarried at 19 weeks and posted images of her 
still-born baby online. The image of the miscarried baby is not the only 
misleading moment in the videos, which were produced by the anti-abortion group 
Center for Medical Progress. Separate conversations are cut and spliced 
together to appear as if they are one line of discussion. Subtitles in the 
videos do not match the words being said. Entire chunks of time are missing 
from the footage -- even from the supposedly full, "unedited" videos that the 
Center released along with the more heavily edited ones.A forensic analysis of 
the videos found they are so egregiously manipulated that they would never be 
accepted as evidence in a court of law.Congress requested the real, unaltered 
videos of Planned Parenthood from the Center for Medical Progress earlier this 
week, but the Center has not yet released them to anyone. Meanwhile, multiple 
state investigations and a federal investigation into the accusations against 
Planned Parenthood have failed to produce any evidence to support the claims in 
the videos. But Republicans lawmakers continue to legislate based on the 
videos. GOP members of Congress screened the videos at a legislative hearing 
Thursday afternoon to support their effort to defund Planned Parenthood, as 
Democrats balked in disbelief. Rep. Frank Pallone (D-N.J.) skewered his GOP 
colleagues once the videos ended. "I just think it's so irresponsible to use 
this type of material -- false material, inaccurate, misleading videos -- to 
make any case at what is supposed to be a legislative hearing," Pallone said. 
"Yet Republicans are openly ignoring the mounting evidence that the videos are 
fake and continuing to legislate based on them."  The criticism fell on deaf 
ears. "They're not doctored," Rep. Brian Babin (R-Texas) said of the videos on 
the House floor Friday morning before the votes. "I daresay none of these folks 
we're hearing from on the other side of the aisle have watched them." 
"Harvesting body parts, how could anyone defend that?" Rep. Sean Duffy (R-Wis.) 
shouted into the microphone during the emotional debate. The videos, even in 
their heavily edited form, do not show Planned Parenthood harvesting and 
selling body parts. What they do show is Planned Parenthood doctors having 
frank, technical conversations about abortion procedures with actors that are 
posing as fetal tissue procurement technicians. The doctors discuss the modest 
reimbursements Planned Parenthood is legally allowed to receive to cover the 
costs of donating fetal tissue for medical research.One doctor makes an 
inappropriate joke about wanting to buy a Lamborghini with the reimbursements, 
which amount to a maximum $60 per specimen donated. Considering that only two 
Planned Parenthood clinics in the country actually donate fetal tissue, and the 
$60 fee has to cover the costs of preserving and transporting each specimen, 
it's absurd to think the doctor was seri

Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'

[Mike Dixon mdixon.6...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

Right, I got the context right. He was talking about  contraception at that 
point. And my point earlier is, that Abortion is used primarily as a means of 
birth control, not to protect the health/life of the mother. The latter is used 
primarily to justify the former. The idea of *punishment* corroborates that. 
Almost no one would deny a woman an abortion if her life were threatened by the 
pregnancy.
  From: "emily.ma...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]" 
<FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Friday, September 18, 2015 9:37 PM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
   
    Get it right, Mike.  Context, context, context.  You've isolated one 
sentence from an interview about HIV/AIDS - which is where his mind was when he 
made that statement, if you look at the interview.  
 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

 We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal, that 
they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among 
these are *Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness*- That to secure these 
rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from 
the consent of the governed.Your right to *privacy* will not stand against 
another person's right to Life much longer, religion or no religion. You 
will need to abolish the first amendment that grants freedom of political 
speech and freedom of religion first. Everyone knows that the overwhelming 
majority of abortions in this country are simply birth control, "Oh shit! I 
missed my period! I'm really *f"ed* now!" It's rarely about health or life of 
the mother. Fifty-three million abortions can not account for that. ""Why would 
I want my daughter to be *punished* with a child?" Obama's words, not mine. 
This is the mind set of *Me first* and to hell with what's right. It is the 
purest of evil and it will not stand.
  From: "authfriend@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Friday, September 18, 2015 12:21 PM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
 
 


Whether you like it or not, abortion is legal in this country. To jeopardize 
the health of poor women because of your religious convictions is untenable.






   #yiv3315691416 #yiv3315691416 -- #yiv3315691416ygrp-mkp {border:1px solid 
#d8d8d8;font-family:Arial;margin:10px 0;padding:0 10px;}#yiv3315691416 
#yiv3315691416ygrp-mkp hr {border:1px solid #d8d8d8;}#yiv3315691416 
#yiv3315691416ygrp-mkp #yiv3315691416hd 
{color:#628c2a;font-size:85%;font-weight:700;line-height:122%;margin:10px 
0;}#yiv3315691416 #yiv3315691416ygrp-mkp #yiv3315691416ads 
{margin-bottom:10px;}#yiv3315691416 #yiv3315691416ygrp-mkp .yiv3315691416ad 
{padding:0 0;}#yiv3315691416 #yiv3315691416ygrp-mkp .yiv3315691416ad p 
{margin:0;}#yiv3315691416 #yiv3315691416ygrp-mkp .yiv3315691416ad a 
{color:#ff;text-decoration:none;}#yiv3315691416 #yiv3315691416ygrp-sponsor 
#yiv3315691416ygrp-lc {font-family:Arial;}#yiv3315691416 
#yiv3315691416ygrp-sponsor #yiv3315691416ygrp-lc #yiv3315691416hd {margin:10px 
0px;font-weight:700;font-size:78%;line-height:122%;}#yiv3315691416 
#yiv3315691416ygrp-sponsor #yiv3315691416ygrp-lc .yiv3315691416ad 
{margin-bottom:10px;padding:0 0;}#yiv3315691416 #yiv3315691416actions 
{font-family:Verdana;font-size:11px;padding:10px 0;}#yiv3315691416 
#yiv3315691416activity 
{background-color:#e0ecee;float:left;font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;padding:10px;}#yiv3315691416
 #yiv3315691416activity span {font-weight:700;}#yiv3315691416 
#yiv3315691416activity span:first-child 
{text-transform:uppercase;}#yiv3315691416 #yiv3315691416activity span a 
{color:#5085b6;text-decoration:none;}#yiv3315691416 #yiv3315691416activity span 
span {color:#ff7900;}#yiv3315691416 #yiv3315691416activity span 
.yiv3315691416underline {text-decoration:underline;}#yiv3315691416 
.yiv3315691416attach 
{clear:both;display:table;font-family:Arial;font-size:12px;padding:10px 
0;width:400px;}#yiv3315691416 .yiv3315691416attach div a 
{text-decoration:none;}#yiv3315691416 .yiv3315691416attach img 
{border:none;padding-right:5px;}#yiv3315691416 .yiv3315691416attach label 
{display:block;margin-bottom:5px;}#yiv3315691416 .yiv3315691416attach label a 
{text-decoration:none;}#yiv3315691416 blockquote {margin:0 0 0 
4px;}#yiv3315691416 .yiv3315691416bold 
{font-family:Arial;font-size:13px;font-weight:700;}#yiv3315691416 
.yiv3315691416bold a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv3315691416 dd.yiv3315691416last 
p a {font-family:Verdana;font-weight:700;}#yiv3315691416 dd.yiv3315691416last p 
span {margin-right:10px;font-family:Verdana;font-weight:700;}#yiv3315691416 
dd.yiv3315691416last p span.yiv3315691416yshortcuts 
{margin-right:0;}#yiv3315691416 div.yiv3315691416attach-table div div a 
{text-decoration:none;}#yiv3315691416 div.yiv3315691416attach-table 
{width

Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'

[Mike Dixon mdixon.6...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

"My blase attitudes", did I get that right? How can anything be more blase than 
to sweep away and destroy an innocent human life because you're not ready to be 
responsible for*it* yet? It's freaking murder! A women's right to murder? The 
Supreme Court will wake up one day, just as they did when they ruled one human 
can not own another or that Slaves were not 3/5ths of a human being, because 
"all men are created equal" under the law. That took two hundred years to get 
right , but it happened. Science is moving the understanding of life forward 
very fast. If the science of DNA can put a person in prison for life for a 
crime, it will save a life that is innocent of a crime. It's not her body that 
she kills. FYI, all person's involved in the creation of another, need to be 
equally responsible for that life. Yes, that presents new social problems but 
the first rule is do no harm to innocent life.
 
From: "emily.ma...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Friday, September 18, 2015 9:38 PM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
   
    



There is another issue I'd like to comment on about ignorant men thinking they 
know all about pregnancy and childbirth and raising children on their own with 
no support—particularly the ones that think they should judge, condemn, and 
legislate women's rights.  Yes, Mike, it's the girl "who missed her period" 
that's at fault, right?  Not the boy or man with the raging hormones who 
pressured her and pressured her and pressured her to give in to his desires and 
then left the scene.give me a break.  
I'm not saying you shouldn't stand by your religious convictions, but maybe you 
ought to dig a little deeper into your "blasé" attitudes.  
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

 We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal, that 
they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among 
these are *Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness*- That to secure these 
rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from 
the consent of the governed.Your right to *privacy* will not stand against 
another person's right to Life much longer, religion or no religion. You 
will need to abolish the first amendment that grants freedom of political 
speech and freedom of religion first. Everyone knows that the overwhelming 
majority of abortions in this country are simply birth control, "Oh shit! I 
missed my period! I'm really *f"ed* now!" It's rarely about health or life of 
the mother. Fifty-three million abortions can not account for that. ""Why would 
I want my daughter to be *punished* with a child?" Obama's words, not mine. 
This is the mind set of *Me first* and to hell with what's right. It is the 
purest of evil and it will not stand.
  From: "authfriend@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Friday, September 18, 2015 12:21 PM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
 
 


Whether you like it or not, abortion is legal in this country. To jeopardize 
the health of poor women because of your religious convictions is untenable.






   #yiv6139642126 #yiv6139642126 -- #yiv6139642126ygrp-mkp {border:1px solid 
#d8d8d8;font-family:Arial;margin:10px 0;padding:0 10px;}#yiv6139642126 
#yiv6139642126ygrp-mkp hr {border:1px solid #d8d8d8;}#yiv6139642126 
#yiv6139642126ygrp-mkp #yiv6139642126hd 
{color:#628c2a;font-size:85%;font-weight:700;line-height:122%;margin:10px 
0;}#yiv6139642126 #yiv6139642126ygrp-mkp #yiv6139642126ads 
{margin-bottom:10px;}#yiv6139642126 #yiv6139642126ygrp-mkp .yiv6139642126ad 
{padding:0 0;}#yiv6139642126 #yiv6139642126ygrp-mkp .yiv6139642126ad p 
{margin:0;}#yiv6139642126 #yiv6139642126ygrp-mkp .yiv6139642126ad a 
{color:#ff;text-decoration:none;}#yiv6139642126 #yiv6139642126ygrp-sponsor 
#yiv6139642126ygrp-lc {font-family:Arial;}#yiv6139642126 
#yiv6139642126ygrp-sponsor #yiv6139642126ygrp-lc #yiv6139642126hd {margin:10px 
0px;font-weight:700;font-size:78%;line-height:122%;}#yiv6139642126 
#yiv6139642126ygrp-sponsor #yiv6139642126ygrp-lc .yiv6139642126ad 
{margin-bottom:10px;padding:0 0;}#yiv6139642126 #yiv6139642126actions 
{font-family:Verdana;font-size:11px;padding:10px 0;}#yiv6139642126 
#yiv6139642126activity 
{background-color:#e0ecee;float:left;font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;padding:10px;}#yiv6139642126
 #yiv6139642126activity span {font-weight:700;}#yiv6139642126 
#yiv6139642126activity span:first-child 
{text-transform:uppercase;}#yiv6139642126 #yiv6139642126activity span a 
{color:#5085b6;text-decoration:none;}#yiv6139642126 #yiv6139642126activity span 
span {color:#ff7900;}#yiv6139642126 #yiv6139642126activity span 
.yiv6139642126underline {text-decoration:underline;}#yiv613964

Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'

[Mike Dixon mdixon.6...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

I draw the line with *murder* as one human willfully  killing another innocent 
human. There's manslaughter, accidents etc.Then there is killing for food.I can 
admire one who observes ahimsa as going above and beyond the call of duty as a  
penance. 

  From: "awoelfleba...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]" 
<FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Saturday, September 19, 2015 12:15 AM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
   
    


---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

"My blase attitudes", did I get that right? How can anything be more blase than 
to sweep away and destroy an innocent human life because you're not ready to be 
responsible for*it* yet? It's freaking murder! A women's right to murder? The 
Supreme Court will wake up one day, just as they did when they ruled one human 
can not own another or that Slaves were not 3/5ths of a human being, because 
"all men are created equal" under the law. That took two hundred years to get 
right , but it happened. Science is moving the understanding of life forward 
very fast. If the science of DNA can put a person in prison for life for a 
crime, it will save a life that is innocent of a crime. It's not her body that 
she kills. FYI, all person's involved in the creation of another, need to be 
equally responsible for that life. Yes, that presents new social problems but 
the first rule is do no harm to innocent life.

I love your passion, Mike. I am of the belief that all lives are created equal. 
When I say that I mean ALL lives. Human or animal. Blasphemous? Perhaps. Maybe. 
Likely. To kill any thing is a kind of murder. Killing a fetus is destroying 
life. Butchering a terrified, bleating cow is destroying a life. Euthanizing an 
old and decrepit dog is destroying a life. Is life sacred? Probably. What is 
sacred? Anything that is created. Is allowing something to live sometimes 
opening the way for suffering? Yes. Is destroying a life sometimes decreasing 
the chances of suffering? Yes. Is it better to overdose a dangerous horse with 
phenyl barbital so it doesn't kill somebody merciful? Is aborting an unwanted 
baby the right thing to do? Is there ever the justification for causing death 
of a living being? It all gets so complicated. Is the death penalty ever 
warranted? Are unwanted, unloved, abused children happy to have been given the 
chance to live despite the fact they may have been conceived by rape? I can't 
answer this but what I do know is that human beings are given hundreds of 
chances to make choices every moment of every day and the freedom to make those 
choices must remain intact.
From: "emily.mae50@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Friday, September 18, 2015 9:38 PM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
 
 



There is another issue I'd like to comment on about ignorant men thinking they 
know all about pregnancy and childbirth and raising children on their own with 
no support—particularly the ones that think they should judge, condemn, and 
legislate women's rights.  Yes, Mike, it's the girl "who missed her period" 
that's at fault, right?  Not the boy or man with the raging hormones who 
pressured her and pressured her and pressured her to give in to his desires and 
then left the scene.give me a break.  
I'm not saying you shouldn't stand by your religious convictions, but maybe you 
ought to dig a little deeper into your "blasé" attitudes.  
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

 We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal, that 
they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among 
these are *Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness*- That to secure these 
rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from 
the consent of the governed.Your right to *privacy* will not stand against 
another person's right to Life much longer, religion or no religion. You 
will need to abolish the first amendment that grants freedom of political 
speech and freedom of religion first. Everyone knows that the overwhelming 
majority of abortions in this country are simply birth control, "Oh shit! I 
missed my period! I'm really *f"ed* now!" It's rarely about health or life of 
the mother. Fifty-three million abortions can not account for that. ""Why would 
I want my daughter to be *punished* with a child?" Obama's words, not mine. 
This is the mind set of *Me first* and to hell with what's right. It is the 
purest of evil and it will not stand.
  From: "authfriend@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Friday, September 18, 2015 12:21 PM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
 
 


Whether yo

Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'

[emily.ma...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

"in part about HIV/AIDS" (I said that to acknowledge the larger conversation 
that was being had)
 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <emily.mae50@...> wrote :

 Get it right, Mike.  Context, context, context.  You've isolated one sentence 
from an interview about HIV/AIDS - which is where his mind was when he made 
that statement, if you look at the interview.  He also states his children are 
a "miracle" in that same interview; perhaps he didn't get every word right.  
Not like you do, right?  Here's the larger context for you, yes, stated by a 
national spokesperson.   

 "What Senator Obama said and what he believes is clear -- children are 
"miracles," but we have a problem when so many children are having children. As 
Senator Obama said on Saturday -- and on many other occasions -- parents have a 
responsibility to teach their children about values and morals to help make 
sure they are not treating sex casually. And while he understands the passions 
on both sides of this difficult issue, Senator Obama believes we can all agree 
that we should be taking steps to reduce the number of teen pregnancies and 
abortions in this country."
 

 There is another issue I'd like to comment on about ignorant men thinking they 
know all about pregnancy and childbirth and raising children on their own with 
no support—particularly the ones that think they should judge, condemn, and 
legislate women's rights.  Yes, Mike, it's the girl "who missed her period" 
that's at fault, right?  Not the boy or man with the raging hormones who 
pressured her and pressured her and pressured her to give in to his desires and 
then left the scene.give me a break.  
 

 I'm not saying you shouldn't stand by your religious convictions, but maybe 
you ought to dig a little deeper into your "blasé" attitudes.  
 
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

  We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal, that 
they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among 
these are *Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness*- That to secure these 
rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from 
the consent of the governed.
 Your right to *privacy* will not stand against another person's right to 
Life much longer, religion or no religion. You will need to abolish the 
first amendment that grants freedom of political speech and freedom of religion 
first. Everyone knows that the overwhelming majority of abortions in this 
country are simply birth control, "Oh shit! I missed my period! I'm really 
*f"ed* now!" It's rarely about health or life of the mother. Fifty-three 
million abortions can not account for that. "
 "Why would I want my daughter to be *punished* with a child?" Obama's words, 
not mine. This is the mind set of *Me first* and to hell with what's right. It 
is the purest of evil and it will not stand.

 From: "authfriend@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Friday, September 18, 2015 12:21 PM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
 
 
   

 

 

 Whether you like it or not, abortion is legal in this country. To jeopardize 
the health of poor women because of your religious convictions is untenable.
 

 

 

 


 


 










 
  

Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'

[emily.ma...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

Get it right, Mike.  Context, context, context.  You've isolated one sentence 
from an interview about HIV/AIDS - which is where his mind was when he made 
that statement, if you look at the interview.  He also states his children are 
a "miracle" in that same interview; perhaps he didn't get every word right.  
Not like you do, right?  Here's the larger context for you, yes, stated by a 
national spokesperson.   

 "What Senator Obama said and what he believes is clear -- children are 
"miracles," but we have a problem when so many children are having children. As 
Senator Obama said on Saturday -- and on many other occasions -- parents have a 
responsibility to teach their children about values and morals to help make 
sure they are not treating sex casually. And while he understands the passions 
on both sides of this difficult issue, Senator Obama believes we can all agree 
that we should be taking steps to reduce the number of teen pregnancies and 
abortions in this country."
 

 There is another issue I'd like to comment on about ignorant men thinking they 
know all about pregnancy and childbirth and raising children on their own with 
no support—particularly the ones that think they should judge, condemn, and 
legislate women's rights.  Yes, Mike, it's the girl "who missed her period" 
that's at fault, right?  Not the boy or man with the raging hormones who 
pressured her and pressured her and pressured her to give in to his desires and 
then left the scene.give me a break.  
 

 I'm not saying you shouldn't stand by your religious convictions, but maybe 
you ought to dig a little deeper into your "blasé" attitudes.  
 
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

  We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal, that 
they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among 
these are *Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness*- That to secure these 
rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from 
the consent of the governed.
 Your right to *privacy* will not stand against another person's right to 
Life much longer, religion or no religion. You will need to abolish the 
first amendment that grants freedom of political speech and freedom of religion 
first. Everyone knows that the overwhelming majority of abortions in this 
country are simply birth control, "Oh shit! I missed my period! I'm really 
*f"ed* now!" It's rarely about health or life of the mother. Fifty-three 
million abortions can not account for that. "
 "Why would I want my daughter to be *punished* with a child?" Obama's words, 
not mine. This is the mind set of *Me first* and to hell with what's right. It 
is the purest of evil and it will not stand.

 From: "authfriend@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Friday, September 18, 2015 12:21 PM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
 
 
   

 

 

 Whether you like it or not, abortion is legal in this country. To jeopardize 
the health of poor women because of your religious convictions is untenable.
 

 

 

 


 


 










 
  

Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'

[awoelfleba...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

 "My blase attitudes", did I get that right? How can anything be more blase 
than to sweep away and destroy an innocent human life because you're not ready 
to be responsible for*it* yet? It's freaking murder! A women's right to murder? 
The Supreme Court will wake up one day, just as they did when they ruled one 
human can not own another or that Slaves were not 3/5ths of a human being, 
because "all men are created equal" under the law. That took two hundred years 
to get right , but it happened. Science is moving the understanding of life 
forward very fast. If the science of DNA can put a person in prison for life 
for a crime, it will save a life that is innocent of a crime. It's not her body 
that she kills. FYI, all person's involved in the creation of another, need to 
be equally responsible for that life. Yes, that presents new social problems 
but the first rule is do no harm to innocent life.

 

 I love your passion, Mike. I am of the belief that all lives are created 
equal. When I say that I mean ALL lives. Human or animal. Blasphemous? Perhaps. 
Maybe. Likely. To kill any thing is a kind of murder. Killing a fetus is 
destroying life. Butchering a terrified, bleating cow is destroying a life. 
Euthanizing an old and decrepit dog is destroying a life. Is life sacred? 
Probably. What is sacred? Anything that is created. Is allowing something to 
live sometimes opening the way for suffering? Yes. Is destroying a life 
sometimes decreasing the chances of suffering? Yes. Is it better to overdose a 
dangerous horse with phenyl barbital so it doesn't kill somebody merciful? Is 
aborting an unwanted baby the right thing to do? Is there ever the 
justification for causing death of a living being? It all gets so complicated. 
Is the death penalty ever warranted? Are unwanted, unloved, abused children 
happy to have been given the chance to live despite the fact they may have been 
conceived by rape? I can't answer this but what I do know is that human beings 
are given hundreds of chances to make choices every moment of every day and the 
freedom to make those choices must remain intact.

 From: "emily.mae50@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Friday, September 18, 2015 9:38 PM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
 
 
   

 


 

 There is another issue I'd like to comment on about ignorant men thinking they 
know all about pregnancy and childbirth and raising children on their own with 
no support—particularly the ones that think they should judge, condemn, and 
legislate women's rights.  Yes, Mike, it's the girl "who missed her period" 
that's at fault, right?  Not the boy or man with the raging hormones who 
pressured her and pressured her and pressured her to give in to his desires and 
then left the scene.give me a break.  
 

 I'm not saying you shouldn't stand by your religious convictions, but maybe 
you ought to dig a little deeper into your "blasé" attitudes.  
 
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

  We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal, that 
they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among 
these are *Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness*- That to secure these 
rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from 
the consent of the governed.
 Your right to *privacy* will not stand against another person's right to 
Life much longer, religion or no religion. You will need to abolish the 
first amendment that grants freedom of political speech and freedom of religion 
first. Everyone knows that the overwhelming majority of abortions in this 
country are simply birth control, "Oh shit! I missed my period! I'm really 
*f"ed* now!" It's rarely about health or life of the mother. Fifty-three 
million abortions can not account for that. "
 "Why would I want my daughter to be *punished* with a child?" Obama's words, 
not mine. This is the mind set of *Me first* and to hell with what's right. It 
is the purest of evil and it will not stand.

 From: "authfriend@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Friday, September 18, 2015 12:21 PM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
 
 
   

 

 

 Whether you like it or not, abortion is legal in this country. To jeopardize 
the health of poor women because of your religious convictions is untenable.
 

 

 

 


 













 
  





 


 

Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'

[Mike Dixon mdixon.6...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

You're right, no such video exists. What she described were parts of multiple 
videos and eye witness accounts testified to in the prosecution of Philadelphia 
doctor, Kermit Gosnell, that performed abortions and was  found guilty of three 
counts of murder. Also the words of a woman that testified before congress that 
she is the survivor of a failed abortion, badly burned from the saline solution 
and left to die in pain and agony on a cold, stainless steel table. < There 
probably aren't enough such *free* women's clinics, even *with* Planned 
Parenthood. But the resources provided PP could be redistributed to clinics 
that don't murder one person for another's 
convenience.http://eaglerising.com/23715/woman-who-surv...

   

   From: "authfri...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Friday, September 18, 2015 8:57 AM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
   
    
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

It was too long for me.I changed the channel shortly after Carly made her 
comment about Planned Parenthood. I was sold on her by that point.

What you were sold was a bill of goods, unfortunately. She said:
“Anyone who has watched this videotape — I dare Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, 
to watch these tapes — watch a fully formed fetus on the table, its heart 
beating, its legs kicking, while someone says, ‘We have to keep it alive to 
harvest its brain.’ This is about the character of our nation, and if we do not 
stand up and force President Obama to veto this [appropriations] bill, shame on 
us.”

Just awful, huh? Except what she describes doesn't exist on any of the videos. 
She made it up.
She also claimed that if Congress defunded Planned Parenthood, other women's 
health clinics could take up the slack for poor women. That isn't true either. 
There aren't enough such clinics, and they don't have the resources.
http://www.vox.com/2015/9/16/9342165/carly-fiorina-planned-parenthood
http://fusion.net/story/168087/that-sting-video-isnt-the-reason-republicans-are-trying-to-defund-planned-parenthood/?utm_source=rss_medium=feed_campaign=/stories/feed/
http://fusion.net/story/198690/gop-debate-carly-fiorina-planned-parenthood/
https://www.yahoo.com/health/fact-checking-carly-fiorinas-debate-statements-on-183132587.html

  #yiv4912898762 -- #yiv4912898762ygrp-mkp {border:1px solid 
#d8d8d8;font-family:Arial;margin:10px 0;padding:0 10px;}#yiv4912898762 
#yiv4912898762ygrp-mkp hr {border:1px solid #d8d8d8;}#yiv4912898762 
#yiv4912898762ygrp-mkp #yiv4912898762hd 
{color:#628c2a;font-size:85%;font-weight:700;line-height:122%;margin:10px 
0;}#yiv4912898762 #yiv4912898762ygrp-mkp #yiv4912898762ads 
{margin-bottom:10px;}#yiv4912898762 #yiv4912898762ygrp-mkp .yiv4912898762ad 
{padding:0 0;}#yiv4912898762 #yiv4912898762ygrp-mkp .yiv4912898762ad p 
{margin:0;}#yiv4912898762 #yiv4912898762ygrp-mkp .yiv4912898762ad a 
{color:#ff;text-decoration:none;}#yiv4912898762 #yiv4912898762ygrp-sponsor 
#yiv4912898762ygrp-lc {font-family:Arial;}#yiv4912898762 
#yiv4912898762ygrp-sponsor #yiv4912898762ygrp-lc #yiv4912898762hd {margin:10px 
0px;font-weight:700;font-size:78%;line-height:122%;}#yiv4912898762 
#yiv4912898762ygrp-sponsor #yiv4912898762ygrp-lc .yiv4912898762ad 
{margin-bottom:10px;padding:0 0;}#yiv4912898762 #yiv4912898762actions 
{font-family:Verdana;font-size:11px;padding:10px 0;}#yiv4912898762 
#yiv4912898762activity 
{background-color:#e0ecee;float:left;font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;padding:10px;}#yiv4912898762
 #yiv4912898762activity span {font-weight:700;}#yiv4912898762 
#yiv4912898762activity span:first-child 
{text-transform:uppercase;}#yiv4912898762 #yiv4912898762activity span a 
{color:#5085b6;text-decoration:none;}#yiv4912898762 #yiv4912898762activity span 
span {color:#ff7900;}#yiv4912898762 #yiv4912898762activity span 
.yiv4912898762underline {text-decoration:underline;}#yiv4912898762 
.yiv4912898762attach 
{clear:both;display:table;font-family:Arial;font-size:12px;padding:10px 
0;width:400px;}#yiv4912898762 .yiv4912898762attach div a 
{text-decoration:none;}#yiv4912898762 .yiv4912898762attach img 
{border:none;padding-right:5px;}#yiv4912898762 .yiv4912898762attach label 
{display:block;margin-bottom:5px;}#yiv4912898762 .yiv4912898762attach label a 
{text-decoration:none;}#yiv4912898762 blockquote {margin:0 0 0 
4px;}#yiv4912898762 .yiv4912898762bold 
{font-family:Arial;font-size:13px;font-weight:700;}#yiv4912898762 
.yiv4912898762bold a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv4912898762 dd.yiv4912898762last 
p a {font-family:Verdana;font-weight:700;}#yiv4912898762 dd.yiv4912898762last p 
span {margin-right:10px;font-family:Verdana;font-weight:700;}#yiv4912898762 
dd.yiv4912898762last p span.yiv4912898762yshortcuts 
{margin-right:0;}#yiv4912898762 div.yiv4912898762attach-table div div a 
{text-decoration:none;}#yiv4912898762 div.yiv4912898762attach-table 
{width:400px;}#yiv4912898762 di

Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'

[awoelfleba...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,  wrote :

 
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,  wrote :

 It was too long for me.I changed the channel shortly after Carly made her 
comment about Planned Parenthood. I was sold on her by that point.

 

 Like I had mentioned earlier, I started listening to the debate on the radio 
on the way home from work and then Dennis and I listened for another 45 minutes 
or so when I got home but the voices were disembodied and, not being familiar 
with the candidates, it was an interesting experience just being as objective 
as possible with only unknown voices to go by. The frustrating part was when 
someone said something I liked I didn't know who it was! Of course, I can get 
the debate off of youtube which I did but only watched the intro lineup to try 
and figure some of the voices I had been hearing and pair them to a face. But 
watching all three hours would have been beyond me.
 

 I had to laugh; I missed the Canadian debate last night where there were only 
three candidates debating (they didn't allow our Green Party Elizabeth May to 
participate so she tweeted rebuttals as she was watching the three men go at 
it) and listening to the CBC radio news this morning they made some comment 
about how much longer the it was until the voting day - 1 WHOLE MONTH! Ha, ha, 
I think this year's campaign for Prime Minister is one of the longest on record 
- 76 days or thereabouts. I can't even believe how long the process is in the 
US. Astounding.
 
 

 What you were sold was a bill of goods, unfortunately. She said:
 

 “Anyone who has watched this videotape — I dare Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, 
to watch these tapes — watch a fully formed fetus on the table, its heart 
beating, its legs kicking, while someone says, ‘We have to keep it alive to 
harvest its brain.’ This is about the character of our nation, and if we do not 
stand up and force President Obama to veto this [appropriations] bill, shame on 
us.”

 

 Just awful, huh? Except what she describes doesn't exist on any of the videos. 
She made it up.
 

 Thank God for that. The image is horrendous.
 

 She also claimed that if Congress defunded Planned Parenthood, other women's 
health clinics could take up the slack for poor women. That isn't true either. 
There aren't enough such clinics, and they don't have the resources.
 

 http://www.vox.com/2015/9/16/9342165/carly-fiorina-planned-parenthood
 

 
http://fusion.net/story/168087/that-sting-video-isnt-the-reason-republicans-are-trying-to-defund-planned-parenthood/?utm_source=rss_medium=feed_campaign=/stories/feed/
 

 http://fusion.net/story/198690/gop-debate-carly-fiorina-planned-parenthood/
 

 
https://www.yahoo.com/health/fact-checking-carly-fiorinas-debate-statements-on-183132587.html
 
https://www.yahoo.com/health/fact-checking-carly-fiorinas-debate-statements-on-183132587.html

 


 






 

Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'

[authfri...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,  wrote :

 It was too long for me.I changed the channel shortly after Carly made her 
comment about Planned Parenthood. I was sold on her by that point.

 
 

 What you were sold was a bill of goods, unfortunately. She said:
 

 “Anyone who has watched this videotape — I dare Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, 
to watch these tapes — watch a fully formed fetus on the table, its heart 
beating, its legs kicking, while someone says, ‘We have to keep it alive to 
harvest its brain.’ This is about the character of our nation, and if we do not 
stand up and force President Obama to veto this [appropriations] bill, shame on 
us.”

 

 Just awful, huh? Except what she describes doesn't exist on any of the videos. 
She made it up.
 

 She also claimed that if Congress defunded Planned Parenthood, other women's 
health clinics could take up the slack for poor women. That isn't true either. 
There aren't enough such clinics, and they don't have the resources.
 

 http://www.vox.com/2015/9/16/9342165/carly-fiorina-planned-parenthood
 

 
http://fusion.net/story/168087/that-sting-video-isnt-the-reason-republicans-are-trying-to-defund-planned-parenthood/?utm_source=rss_medium=feed_campaign=/stories/feed/
 

 http://fusion.net/story/198690/gop-debate-carly-fiorina-planned-parenthood/
 

 
https://www.yahoo.com/health/fact-checking-carly-fiorinas-debate-statements-on-183132587.html
 
https://www.yahoo.com/health/fact-checking-carly-fiorinas-debate-statements-on-183132587.html

 


 

Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'

[Mike Dixon mdixon.6...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

That is what the remote control is for! I've noticed that the party out of 
control of the WH , seeking control, can be all over the place and seem totally 
chaotic stabbing each other in the back.Thus Reagan's eleventh commandment, 
thou shalt not speak unkindly of another republican.  This happens with 
Democrats as well, when they are the ones outside trying to get in. Sooner or 
later, the weeding- out gets done and parties unified. But hey, it's football 
season!


  From: "Bhairitu noozg...@sbcglobal.net [FairfieldLife]" 
<FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Friday, September 18, 2015 11:21 AM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
   
 About time people start talking about "Silly Season" as this whole 
election process is ridiculous.  But don't expect it to get much traction as 
the media will suppress any discussion of limiting the election season as they 
make too much money from it.
 
 On 09/17/2015 11:45 AM, Mike Dixon mdixon.6...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] wrote:
  


     It was too long for me.I changed the channel shortly after Carly made her 
comment about Planned Parenthood. I was sold on her by that point.
   
  From: "jr_...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Thursday, September 17, 2015 12:32 PM
 Subject: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
   
    Many analysts did not the debate stating that it was too long which 
made the contestants look  tired and haggard for prime time TV.  What do you 
think? 
  CNN Blasted for 3 Hour ‘Debate From Hell’
   
|  
  |
|  
  ||  
  |   CNN Blasted for 3 Hour ‘Debate From Hell’  CNN is hoping for big 
numbers from Wednesday’s second GOP presidential debate, but so far, reaction 
among the media hasn’t been  stellar. Politico‘s H...|  
  |
|  View on www.yahoo.com   |Preview by Yahoo|
|  
  |

  
  
  
  
  
  
  
 
   
 
  #yiv7932911976 #yiv7932911976 -- #yiv7932911976ygrp-mkp {border:1px solid 
#d8d8d8;font-family:Arial;margin:10px 0;padding:0 10px;}#yiv7932911976 
#yiv7932911976ygrp-mkp hr {border:1px solid #d8d8d8;}#yiv7932911976 
#yiv7932911976ygrp-mkp #yiv7932911976hd 
{color:#628c2a;font-size:85%;font-weight:700;line-height:122%;margin:10px 
0;}#yiv7932911976 #yiv7932911976ygrp-mkp #yiv7932911976ads 
{margin-bottom:10px;}#yiv7932911976 #yiv7932911976ygrp-mkp .yiv7932911976ad 
{padding:0 0;}#yiv7932911976 #yiv7932911976ygrp-mkp .yiv7932911976ad p 
{margin:0;}#yiv7932911976 #yiv7932911976ygrp-mkp .yiv7932911976ad a 
{color:#ff;text-decoration:none;}#yiv7932911976 #yiv7932911976ygrp-sponsor 
#yiv7932911976ygrp-lc {font-family:Arial;}#yiv7932911976 
#yiv7932911976ygrp-sponsor #yiv7932911976ygrp-lc #yiv7932911976hd {margin:10px 
0px;font-weight:700;font-size:78%;line-height:122%;}#yiv7932911976 
#yiv7932911976ygrp-sponsor #yiv7932911976ygrp-lc .yiv7932911976ad 
{margin-bottom:10px;padding:0 0;}#yiv7932911976 #yiv7932911976actions 
{font-family:Verdana;font-size:11px;padding:10px 0;}#yiv7932911976 
#yiv7932911976activity 
{background-color:#e0ecee;float:left;font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;padding:10px;}#yiv7932911976
 #yiv7932911976activity span {font-weight:700;}#yiv7932911976 
#yiv7932911976activity span:first-child 
{text-transform:uppercase;}#yiv7932911976 #yiv7932911976activity span a 
{color:#5085b6;text-decoration:none;}#yiv7932911976 #yiv7932911976activity span 
span {color:#ff7900;}#yiv7932911976 #yiv7932911976activity span 
.yiv7932911976underline {text-decoration:underline;}#yiv7932911976 
.yiv7932911976attach 
{clear:both;display:table;font-family:Arial;font-size:12px;padding:10px 
0;width:400px;}#yiv7932911976 .yiv7932911976attach div a 
{text-decoration:none;}#yiv7932911976 .yiv7932911976attach img 
{border:none;padding-right:5px;}#yiv7932911976 .yiv7932911976attach label 
{display:block;margin-bottom:5px;}#yiv7932911976 .yiv7932911976attach label a 
{text-decoration:none;}#yiv7932911976 blockquote {margin:0 0 0 
4px;}#yiv7932911976 .yiv7932911976bold 
{font-family:Arial;font-size:13px;font-weight:700;}#yiv7932911976 
.yiv7932911976bold a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv7932911976 dd.yiv7932911976last 
p a {font-family:Verdana;font-weight:700;}#yiv7932911976 dd.yiv7932911976last p 
span {margin-right:10px;font-family:Verdana;font-weight:700;}#yiv7932911976 
dd.yiv7932911976last p span.yiv7932911976yshortcuts 
{margin-right:0;}#yiv7932911976 div.yiv7932911976attach-table div div a 
{text-decoration:none;}#yiv7932911976 div.yiv7932911976attach-table 
{width:400px;}#yiv7932911976 div.yiv7932911976file-title a, #yiv7932911976 
div.yiv7932911976file-title a:active, #yiv7932911976 
div.yiv7932911976file-title a:hover, #yiv7932911976 div.yiv7932911976file-title 
a:visited {text-decoration:none;}#yiv7932911976 div.yiv7932911976photo-title a, 
#yiv7932911976 div.yiv7932911976photo-title a:active, #yiv7932911976 
div.yiv793

Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'

[Mike Dixon mdixon.6...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

Planned Parenthood is primarily an abortion operation. Many of their patients 
are refereed elsewhere for many other procedures such as mammograms. There is 
no product sold(including birth control) or procedure that PP does that some 
other low cost clinic can't do at the same price.
  From: "authfri...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]" 
<FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Friday, September 18, 2015 12:36 PM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
   
    P.S.: The Gosnell videos and the testimony of the woman who survived an 
abortion are not the imaginary scene Fiorina described.



---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <authfriend@...> wrote :

These are non sequiturs, Mike. Gosnell was a butcher and a criminal and had 
nothing to do with Planned Parenthood. As to the woman who survived an 
abortion, obviously something got screwed up with the clinic's procedures. That 
isn't what normally happens.
The funding issue actually has to do with a multitude of women's health issues, 
not the small percentage of Planned Parenthood's activities that have to do 
with abortion (which aren't federally funded in any case). Millions of 
low-income women will lose access to the other Planned Parenthood health 
services--including contraception--if it's defunded by Congress.


  #yiv2727356730 #yiv2727356730 -- #yiv2727356730ygrp-mkp {border:1px solid 
#d8d8d8;font-family:Arial;margin:10px 0;padding:0 10px;}#yiv2727356730 
#yiv2727356730ygrp-mkp hr {border:1px solid #d8d8d8;}#yiv2727356730 
#yiv2727356730ygrp-mkp #yiv2727356730hd 
{color:#628c2a;font-size:85%;font-weight:700;line-height:122%;margin:10px 
0;}#yiv2727356730 #yiv2727356730ygrp-mkp #yiv2727356730ads 
{margin-bottom:10px;}#yiv2727356730 #yiv2727356730ygrp-mkp .yiv2727356730ad 
{padding:0 0;}#yiv2727356730 #yiv2727356730ygrp-mkp .yiv2727356730ad p 
{margin:0;}#yiv2727356730 #yiv2727356730ygrp-mkp .yiv2727356730ad a 
{color:#ff;text-decoration:none;}#yiv2727356730 #yiv2727356730ygrp-sponsor 
#yiv2727356730ygrp-lc {font-family:Arial;}#yiv2727356730 
#yiv2727356730ygrp-sponsor #yiv2727356730ygrp-lc #yiv2727356730hd {margin:10px 
0px;font-weight:700;font-size:78%;line-height:122%;}#yiv2727356730 
#yiv2727356730ygrp-sponsor #yiv2727356730ygrp-lc .yiv2727356730ad 
{margin-bottom:10px;padding:0 0;}#yiv2727356730 #yiv2727356730actions 
{font-family:Verdana;font-size:11px;padding:10px 0;}#yiv2727356730 
#yiv2727356730activity 
{background-color:#e0ecee;float:left;font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;padding:10px;}#yiv2727356730
 #yiv2727356730activity span {font-weight:700;}#yiv2727356730 
#yiv2727356730activity span:first-child 
{text-transform:uppercase;}#yiv2727356730 #yiv2727356730activity span a 
{color:#5085b6;text-decoration:none;}#yiv2727356730 #yiv2727356730activity span 
span {color:#ff7900;}#yiv2727356730 #yiv2727356730activity span 
.yiv2727356730underline {text-decoration:underline;}#yiv2727356730 
.yiv2727356730attach 
{clear:both;display:table;font-family:Arial;font-size:12px;padding:10px 
0;width:400px;}#yiv2727356730 .yiv2727356730attach div a 
{text-decoration:none;}#yiv2727356730 .yiv2727356730attach img 
{border:none;padding-right:5px;}#yiv2727356730 .yiv2727356730attach label 
{display:block;margin-bottom:5px;}#yiv2727356730 .yiv2727356730attach label a 
{text-decoration:none;}#yiv2727356730 blockquote {margin:0 0 0 
4px;}#yiv2727356730 .yiv2727356730bold 
{font-family:Arial;font-size:13px;font-weight:700;}#yiv2727356730 
.yiv2727356730bold a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv2727356730 dd.yiv2727356730last 
p a {font-family:Verdana;font-weight:700;}#yiv2727356730 dd.yiv2727356730last p 
span {margin-right:10px;font-family:Verdana;font-weight:700;}#yiv2727356730 
dd.yiv2727356730last p span.yiv2727356730yshortcuts 
{margin-right:0;}#yiv2727356730 div.yiv2727356730attach-table div div a 
{text-decoration:none;}#yiv2727356730 div.yiv2727356730attach-table 
{width:400px;}#yiv2727356730 div.yiv2727356730file-title a, #yiv2727356730 
div.yiv2727356730file-title a:active, #yiv2727356730 
div.yiv2727356730file-title a:hover, #yiv2727356730 div.yiv2727356730file-title 
a:visited {text-decoration:none;}#yiv2727356730 div.yiv2727356730photo-title a, 
#yiv2727356730 div.yiv2727356730photo-title a:active, #yiv2727356730 
div.yiv2727356730photo-title a:hover, #yiv2727356730 
div.yiv2727356730photo-title a:visited {text-decoration:none;}#yiv2727356730 
div#yiv2727356730ygrp-mlmsg #yiv2727356730ygrp-msg p a 
span.yiv2727356730yshortcuts 
{font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;font-weight:normal;}#yiv2727356730 
.yiv2727356730green {color:#628c2a;}#yiv2727356730 .yiv2727356730MsoNormal 
{margin:0 0 0 0;}#yiv2727356730 o {font-size:0;}#yiv2727356730 
#yiv2727356730photos div {float:left;width:72px;}#yiv2727356730 
#yiv2727356730photos div div {border:1px solid 
#66;height:62px;overflow:hidden;width:62px;}#yiv2727356730 
#yiv2727356730photos div label 
{color:#66;font-size:10px;overflow:hidden;t

Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'

[Bhairitu noozg...@sbcglobal.net [FairfieldLife]]

About time people start talking about "Silly Season" as this whole 
election process is ridiculous.  But don't expect it to get much 
traction as the media will suppress any discussion of limiting the 
election season as they make too much money from it.


On 09/17/2015 11:45 AM, Mike Dixon mdixon.6...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] 
wrote:
It was too long for me.I changed the channel shortly after Carly made 
her comment about Planned Parenthood. I was sold on her by that point.



*From:* "jr_...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]" 
*To:* FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
*Sent:* Thursday, September 17, 2015 12:32 PM
*Subject:* [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'

Many analysts did not the debate stating that it was too long which 
made the contestants look  tired and haggard for prime time TV.  What 
do you think?


CNN Blasted for 3 Hour ‘Debate From Hell’ 





image 
 




CNN Blasted for 3 Hour ‘Debate From Hell’ 
 

CNN is hoping for big numbers from Wednesday’s second GOP presidential 
debate, but so far, reaction among the media hasn’t been stellar. 
Politico‘s H...


View on www.yahoo.com 
 



Preview by Yahoo

Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'

[Mike Dixon mdixon.6...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

Correction: Jianna Gessa was not left to die on a cold, stainless steel table. 
The abortion doctor was not present at her birth and the attending nurse called 
for an ambulance that rushed her to a hospital where she survived. However, 
strangulation, suffocation or just being left to die in a closet are common 
ways survivors of abortion are *dispatched* as testified to in Kermit Gosnell's 
murder trial. 

  From: Mike Dixon <mdixon.6...@yahoo.com>
 To: "FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com> 
 Sent: Friday, September 18, 2015 9:49 AM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
   
You're right, no such video exists. What she described were parts of multiple 
videos and eye witness accounts testified to in the prosecution of Philadelphia 
doctor, Kermit Gosnell, that performed abortions and was  found guilty of three 
counts of murder. Also the words of a woman that testified before congress that 
she is the survivor of a failed abortion, badly burned from the saline solution 
and left to die in pain and agony on a cold, stainless steel table. < There 
probably aren't enough such *free* women's clinics, even *with* Planned 
Parenthood. But the resources provided PP could be redistributed to clinics 
that don't murder one person for another's 
convenience.http://eaglerising.com/23715/woman-who-surv...

   

   From: "authfri...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Friday, September 18, 2015 8:57 AM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
   
    
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

It was too long for me.I changed the channel shortly after Carly made her 
comment about Planned Parenthood. I was sold on her by that point.

What you were sold was a bill of goods, unfortunately. She said:
“Anyone who has watched this videotape — I dare Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, 
to watch these tapes — watch a fully formed fetus on the table, its heart 
beating, its legs kicking, while someone says, ‘We have to keep it alive to 
harvest its brain.’ This is about the character of our nation, and if we do not 
stand up and force President Obama to veto this [appropriations] bill, shame on 
us.”

Just awful, huh? Except what she describes doesn't exist on any of the videos. 
She made it up.
She also claimed that if Congress defunded Planned Parenthood, other women's 
health clinics could take up the slack for poor women. That isn't true either. 
There aren't enough such clinics, and they don't have the resources.
http://www.vox.com/2015/9/16/9342165/carly-fiorina-planned-parenthood
http://fusion.net/story/168087/that-sting-video-isnt-the-reason-republicans-are-trying-to-defund-planned-parenthood/?utm_source=rss_medium=feed_campaign=/stories/feed/
http://fusion.net/story/198690/gop-debate-carly-fiorina-planned-parenthood/
https://www.yahoo.com/health/fact-checking-carly-fiorinas-debate-statements-on-183132587.html

  #yiv9394390917 -- #yiv9394390917ygrp-mkp {border:1px solid 
#d8d8d8;font-family:Arial;margin:10px 0;padding:0 10px;}#yiv9394390917 
#yiv9394390917ygrp-mkp hr {border:1px solid #d8d8d8;}#yiv9394390917 
#yiv9394390917ygrp-mkp #yiv9394390917hd 
{color:#628c2a;font-size:85%;font-weight:700;line-height:122%;margin:10px 
0;}#yiv9394390917 #yiv9394390917ygrp-mkp #yiv9394390917ads 
{margin-bottom:10px;}#yiv9394390917 #yiv9394390917ygrp-mkp .yiv9394390917ad 
{padding:0 0;}#yiv9394390917 #yiv9394390917ygrp-mkp .yiv9394390917ad p 
{margin:0;}#yiv9394390917 #yiv9394390917ygrp-mkp .yiv9394390917ad a 
{color:#ff;text-decoration:none;}#yiv9394390917 #yiv9394390917ygrp-sponsor 
#yiv9394390917ygrp-lc {font-family:Arial;}#yiv9394390917 
#yiv9394390917ygrp-sponsor #yiv9394390917ygrp-lc #yiv9394390917hd {margin:10px 
0px;font-weight:700;font-size:78%;line-height:122%;}#yiv9394390917 
#yiv9394390917ygrp-sponsor #yiv9394390917ygrp-lc .yiv9394390917ad 
{margin-bottom:10px;padding:0 0;}#yiv9394390917 #yiv9394390917actions 
{font-family:Verdana;font-size:11px;padding:10px 0;}#yiv9394390917 
#yiv9394390917activity 
{background-color:#e0ecee;float:left;font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;padding:10px;}#yiv9394390917
 #yiv9394390917activity span {font-weight:700;}#yiv9394390917 
#yiv9394390917activity span:first-child 
{text-transform:uppercase;}#yiv9394390917 #yiv9394390917activity span a 
{color:#5085b6;text-decoration:none;}#yiv9394390917 #yiv9394390917activity span 
span {color:#ff7900;}#yiv9394390917 #yiv9394390917activity span 
.yiv9394390917underline {text-decoration:underline;}#yiv9394390917 
.yiv9394390917attach 
{clear:both;display:table;font-family:Arial;font-size:12px;padding:10px 
0;width:400px;}#yiv9394390917 .yiv9394390917attach div a 
{text-decoration:none;}#yiv9394390917 .yiv9394390917attach img 
{border:none;padding-right:5px;}#yiv9394390917 .yiv9394390917attach label 
{display:block;margin-bottom:5px;}#yiv9394390917 .yiv9394390917attach

Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'

[authfri...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

These are non sequiturs, Mike. Gosnell was a butcher and a criminal and had 
nothing to do with Planned Parenthood. As to the woman who survived an 
abortion, obviously something got screwed up with the clinic's procedures. That 
isn't what normally happens. 

 The funding issue actually has to do with a multitude of women's health 
issues, not the small percentage of Planned Parenthood's activities that have 
to do with abortion (which aren't federally funded in any case). Millions of 
low-income women will lose access to the other Planned Parenthood health 
services--including contraception--if it's defunded by Congress.
 

 Whether you like it or not, abortion is legal in this country. To jeopardize 
the health of poor women because of your religious convictions is untenable.
 

 Toward the end of the debate, asked about what woman she'd like to see on the 
$10 bill, the hypocrite Fiorina said, "Every woman should be able to live the 
life she chooses."
 

 

Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'

[authfri...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

P.S.: The Gosnell videos and the testimony of the woman who survived an 
abortion are not the imaginary scene Fiorina described. 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,  wrote :

 These are non sequiturs, Mike. Gosnell was a butcher and a criminal and had 
nothing to do with Planned Parenthood. As to the woman who survived an 
abortion, obviously something got screwed up with the clinic's procedures. That 
isn't what normally happens. 

 The funding issue actually has to do with a multitude of women's health 
issues, not the small percentage of Planned Parenthood's activities that have 
to do with abortion (which aren't federally funded in any case). Millions of 
low-income women will lose access to the other Planned Parenthood health 
services--including contraception--if it's defunded by Congress.
 

 Whether you like it or not, abortion is legal in this country. To jeopardize 
the health of poor women because of your religious convictions is untenable.
 

 Toward the end of the debate, asked about what woman she'd like to see on the 
$10 bill, the hypocrite Fiorina said, "Every woman should be able to live the 
life she chooses."
 

 

Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'

[Mike Dixon mdixon.6...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

It was too long for me.I changed the channel shortly after Carly made her 
comment about Planned Parenthood. I was sold on her by that point.

  From: "jr_...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]" 
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Thursday, September 17, 2015 12:32 PM
 Subject: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
   
    Many analysts did not the debate stating that it was too long which made 
the contestants look  tired and haggard for prime time TV.  What do you think?
CNN Blasted for 3 Hour ‘Debate From Hell’
 
||
||||   CNN Blasted for 3 Hour ‘Debate From Hell’  CNN is 
hoping for big numbers from Wednesday’s second GOP presidential debate, but so 
far, reaction among the media hasn’t been stellar. Politico‘s H...||
|  View on www.yahoo.com  |Preview by Yahoo|
||

 





  #yiv3912313261 #yiv3912313261 -- #yiv3912313261ygrp-mkp {border:1px solid 
#d8d8d8;font-family:Arial;margin:10px 0;padding:0 10px;}#yiv3912313261 
#yiv3912313261ygrp-mkp hr {border:1px solid #d8d8d8;}#yiv3912313261 
#yiv3912313261ygrp-mkp #yiv3912313261hd 
{color:#628c2a;font-size:85%;font-weight:700;line-height:122%;margin:10px 
0;}#yiv3912313261 #yiv3912313261ygrp-mkp #yiv3912313261ads 
{margin-bottom:10px;}#yiv3912313261 #yiv3912313261ygrp-mkp .yiv3912313261ad 
{padding:0 0;}#yiv3912313261 #yiv3912313261ygrp-mkp .yiv3912313261ad p 
{margin:0;}#yiv3912313261 #yiv3912313261ygrp-mkp .yiv3912313261ad a 
{color:#ff;text-decoration:none;}#yiv3912313261 #yiv3912313261ygrp-sponsor 
#yiv3912313261ygrp-lc {font-family:Arial;}#yiv3912313261 
#yiv3912313261ygrp-sponsor #yiv3912313261ygrp-lc #yiv3912313261hd {margin:10px 
0px;font-weight:700;font-size:78%;line-height:122%;}#yiv3912313261 
#yiv3912313261ygrp-sponsor #yiv3912313261ygrp-lc .yiv3912313261ad 
{margin-bottom:10px;padding:0 0;}#yiv3912313261 #yiv3912313261actions 
{font-family:Verdana;font-size:11px;padding:10px 0;}#yiv3912313261 
#yiv3912313261activity 
{background-color:#e0ecee;float:left;font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;padding:10px;}#yiv3912313261
 #yiv3912313261activity span {font-weight:700;}#yiv3912313261 
#yiv3912313261activity span:first-child 
{text-transform:uppercase;}#yiv3912313261 #yiv3912313261activity span a 
{color:#5085b6;text-decoration:none;}#yiv3912313261 #yiv3912313261activity span 
span {color:#ff7900;}#yiv3912313261 #yiv3912313261activity span 
.yiv3912313261underline {text-decoration:underline;}#yiv3912313261 
.yiv3912313261attach 
{clear:both;display:table;font-family:Arial;font-size:12px;padding:10px 
0;width:400px;}#yiv3912313261 .yiv3912313261attach div a 
{text-decoration:none;}#yiv3912313261 .yiv3912313261attach img 
{border:none;padding-right:5px;}#yiv3912313261 .yiv3912313261attach label 
{display:block;margin-bottom:5px;}#yiv3912313261 .yiv3912313261attach label a 
{text-decoration:none;}#yiv3912313261 blockquote {margin:0 0 0 
4px;}#yiv3912313261 .yiv3912313261bold 
{font-family:Arial;font-size:13px;font-weight:700;}#yiv3912313261 
.yiv3912313261bold a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv3912313261 dd.yiv3912313261last 
p a {font-family:Verdana;font-weight:700;}#yiv3912313261 dd.yiv3912313261last p 
span {margin-right:10px;font-family:Verdana;font-weight:700;}#yiv3912313261 
dd.yiv3912313261last p span.yiv3912313261yshortcuts 
{margin-right:0;}#yiv3912313261 div.yiv3912313261attach-table div div a 
{text-decoration:none;}#yiv3912313261 div.yiv3912313261attach-table 
{width:400px;}#yiv3912313261 div.yiv3912313261file-title a, #yiv3912313261 
div.yiv3912313261file-title a:active, #yiv3912313261 
div.yiv3912313261file-title a:hover, #yiv3912313261 div.yiv3912313261file-title 
a:visited {text-decoration:none;}#yiv3912313261 div.yiv3912313261photo-title a, 
#yiv3912313261 div.yiv3912313261photo-title a:active, #yiv3912313261 
div.yiv3912313261photo-title a:hover, #yiv3912313261 
div.yiv3912313261photo-title a:visited {text-decoration:none;}#yiv3912313261 
div#yiv3912313261ygrp-mlmsg #yiv3912313261ygrp-msg p a 
span.yiv3912313261yshortcuts 
{font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;font-weight:normal;}#yiv3912313261 
.yiv3912313261green {color:#628c2a;}#yiv3912313261 .yiv3912313261MsoNormal 
{margin:0 0 0 0;}#yiv3912313261 o {font-size:0;}#yiv3912313261 
#yiv3912313261photos div {float:left;width:72px;}#yiv3912313261 
#yiv3912313261photos div div {border:1px solid 
#66;height:62px;overflow:hidden;width:62px;}#yiv3912313261 
#yiv3912313261photos div label 
{color:#66;font-size:10px;overflow:hidden;text-align:center;white-space:nowrap;width:64px;}#yiv3912313261
 #yiv3912313261reco-category {font-size:77%;}#yiv3912313261 
#yiv3912313261reco-desc {font-size:77%;}#yiv3912313261 .yiv3912313261replbq 
{margin:4px;}#yiv3912313261 #yiv3912313261ygrp-actbar div a:first-child 
{margin-right:2px;padding-right:5px;}#yiv3912313261 #yiv3912313261ygrp-mlmsg 
{font-size:13px;font-family:Arial, helvetica, clean, sans-serif;}#yiv3912313261 
#yiv3912313261ygrp-mlmsg table 

Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'

[jr_...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

We take a look at ancient cultures, like the Mayas and Aztecs, and  abhor their 
practice of sacrificing human beings for their gods.  But today's practice of 
abortion is killing millions of babies to an unknown god.  So, what's the 
difference?  IMO, the law of karma would eventually take effect now or the near 
future in equal measure.  Is this the reason why the world is having problem 
with terrorists and natural calamities?
 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,  wrote :

 It was too long for me.I changed the channel shortly after Carly made her 
comment about Planned Parenthood. I was sold on her by that point.

 

 From: "jr_esq@... [FairfieldLife]" 
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Thursday, September 17, 2015 12:32 PM
 Subject: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
 
 
   
 Many analysts did not the debate stating that it was too long which made the 
contestants look  tired and haggard for prime time TV.  What do you think?
 

 CNN Blasted for 3 Hour ‘Debate From Hell’ 
https://www.yahoo.com/tv/s/cnn-blasted-3-hour-debate-hell-125027326.html?soc_src=mail_trk=ma

 
 
 
https://www.yahoo.com/tv/s/cnn-blasted-3-hour-debate-hell-125027326.html?soc_src=mail_trk=ma
 
 CNN Blasted for 3 Hour ‘Debate From Hell’ 
https://www.yahoo.com/tv/s/cnn-blasted-3-hour-debate-hell-125027326.html?soc_src=mail_trk=ma
 CNN is hoping for big numbers from Wednesday’s second GOP presidential debate, 
but so far, reaction among the media hasn’t been stellar. Politico‘s H...


 
 View on www.yahoo.com 
https://www.yahoo.com/tv/s/cnn-blasted-3-hour-debate-hell-125027326.html?soc_src=mail_trk=ma
 Preview by Yahoo 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 


 

Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'

[Mike Dixon mdixon.6...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

It's said that Israel lost their land the first time, exiled to Babylon, 
because they offered their children in sacrifice to false gods, in the 
thousands, We have offered our children in the tens of millions to the false 
god of *convenience*.< Maharishi used to speak about a covatch(not sure of the 
spelling), a protective shield around the righteous, those living in dharma. No 
harm would penetrate that shield. Israel had that and the United States had 
that. Violate the natural order and that shield breaks down. Johnathan Cahn 
spoke about this in his books the Harbinger and the Mystery of the Shemita. God 
is not punishing, He just withdraws his protection and chaos sets in.

  From: "jr_...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Thursday, September 17, 2015 2:59 PM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
   
    We take a look at ancient cultures, like the Mayas and Aztecs, and  abhor 
their practice of sacrificing human beings for their gods.  But today's 
practice of abortion is killing millions of babies to an unknown god.  So, 
what's the difference?  IMO, the law of karma would eventually take effect now 
or the near future in equal measure.  Is this the reason why the world is 
having problem with terrorists and natural calamities?


---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

It was too long for me.I changed the channel shortly after Carly made her 
comment about Planned Parenthood. I was sold on her by that point.

  From: "jr_esq@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Thursday, September 17, 2015 12:32 PM
 Subject: [FairfieldLife] 'Debate from Hell'
 
 Many analysts did not the debate stating that it was too long which made the 
contestants look  tired and haggard for prime time TV.  What do you think?
CNN Blasted for 3 Hour ‘Debate From Hell’

|  |
|  | |  | CNN Blasted for 3 Hour ‘Debate From Hell’ CNN is hoping for 
big numbers from Wednesday’s second GOP presidential debate, but so far, 
reaction among the media hasn’t been stellar. Politico‘s H... |  |
| View on www.yahoo.com|   Preview by Yahoo  |
|  |









  #yiv5221020683 #yiv5221020683 -- #yiv5221020683ygrp-mkp {border:1px solid 
#d8d8d8;font-family:Arial;margin:10px 0;padding:0 10px;}#yiv5221020683 
#yiv5221020683ygrp-mkp hr {border:1px solid #d8d8d8;}#yiv5221020683 
#yiv5221020683ygrp-mkp #yiv5221020683hd 
{color:#628c2a;font-size:85%;font-weight:700;line-height:122%;margin:10px 
0;}#yiv5221020683 #yiv5221020683ygrp-mkp #yiv5221020683ads 
{margin-bottom:10px;}#yiv5221020683 #yiv5221020683ygrp-mkp .yiv5221020683ad 
{padding:0 0;}#yiv5221020683 #yiv5221020683ygrp-mkp .yiv5221020683ad p 
{margin:0;}#yiv5221020683 #yiv5221020683ygrp-mkp .yiv5221020683ad a 
{color:#ff;text-decoration:none;}#yiv5221020683 #yiv5221020683ygrp-sponsor 
#yiv5221020683ygrp-lc {font-family:Arial;}#yiv5221020683 
#yiv5221020683ygrp-sponsor #yiv5221020683ygrp-lc #yiv5221020683hd {margin:10px 
0px;font-weight:700;font-size:78%;line-height:122%;}#yiv5221020683 
#yiv5221020683ygrp-sponsor #yiv5221020683ygrp-lc .yiv5221020683ad 
{margin-bottom:10px;padding:0 0;}#yiv5221020683 #yiv5221020683actions 
{font-family:Verdana;font-size:11px;padding:10px 0;}#yiv5221020683 
#yiv5221020683activity 
{background-color:#e0ecee;float:left;font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;padding:10px;}#yiv5221020683
 #yiv5221020683activity span {font-weight:700;}#yiv5221020683 
#yiv5221020683activity span:first-child 
{text-transform:uppercase;}#yiv5221020683 #yiv5221020683activity span a 
{color:#5085b6;text-decoration:none;}#yiv5221020683 #yiv5221020683activity span 
span {color:#ff7900;}#yiv5221020683 #yiv5221020683activity span 
.yiv5221020683underline {text-decoration:underline;}#yiv5221020683 
.yiv5221020683attach 
{clear:both;display:table;font-family:Arial;font-size:12px;padding:10px 
0;width:400px;}#yiv5221020683 .yiv5221020683attach div a 
{text-decoration:none;}#yiv5221020683 .yiv5221020683attach img 
{border:none;padding-right:5px;}#yiv5221020683 .yiv5221020683attach label 
{display:block;margin-bottom:5px;}#yiv5221020683 .yiv5221020683attach label a 
{text-decoration:none;}#yiv5221020683 blockquote {margin:0 0 0 
4px;}#yiv5221020683 .yiv5221020683bold 
{font-family:Arial;font-size:13px;font-weight:700;}#yiv5221020683 
.yiv5221020683bold a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv5221020683 dd.yiv5221020683last 
p a {font-family:Verdana;font-weight:700;}#yiv5221020683 dd.yiv5221020683last p 
span {margin-right:10px;font-family:Verdana;font-weight:700;}#yiv5221020683 
dd.yiv5221020683last p span.yiv5221020683yshortcuts 
{margin-right:0;}#yiv5221020683 div.yiv5221020683attach-table div div a 
{text-decoration:none;}#yiv5221020683 div.yiv5221020683attach-table 
{width:400px;}#yiv5221020683 div.yiv5221020683file-title a, #yiv5221020683 
div.yiv5221020683file-title a:active, #y