published Friday, January 24th, 2014

Baby Buggy

about Clay Bennett...

The son of a career army officer, Bennett led a nomadic life, attending ten different schools before graduating in 1980 from the University of North Alabama with degrees in Art and History. After brief stints as a staff artist at the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette and the Fayetteville (NC) Times, he went on to serve as the editorial cartoonist for the St. Petersburg Times (1981-1994) and The Christian Science Monitor (1997-2007), before joining the staff of the ...

127
Comments do not represent the opinions of the Chattanooga Times Free Press, nor does it review every comment. Profanities, slurs and libelous remarks are prohibited. For more information you can view our Terms & Conditions and/or Ethics policy.
EaTn said...

Wow, that's a little unnerving image just before bedtime. There are many moral reasons to terminate pre-births, but there are no moral reasons to let children be born into poverty, hunger and sickness in this country of unequal distributed wealth.

January 24, 2014 at 12:33 a.m.
nucanuck said...

Seems that the Right believes in Right to Birth, not Right to Life. Millions and millions are all but abandoned shortly after getting their cord cut. Blame whomever you want, but that is the reality.

Unwanted uneducated unneeded unemployable people bring the house down on all the rest.

January 24, 2014 at 12:51 a.m.
TOES02800 said...

Probably half of aborted children are female. War on women? Or war on children?

January 24, 2014 at 1:57 a.m.
TOES02800 said...

"It seems rather bizarre that President Obama, who has voted against requiring medical care for babies born as the result of failed abortions, surrounded himself with children while trying to nullify the Second Amendment to "protect children."

http://www.americanthinker.com/2013/01/the_liberal_war_on_children.html#ixzz2rISnG017

January 24, 2014 at 2 a.m.
TOES02800 said...

Nanny said:

"Unwanted uneducated unneeded unemployable people bring the house down on all the rest."

You advocate killing all the drug addicts and homeless folks as well?

You liberal/democrats are a butt load of hypocrisy. You claim to be party of compassion. The party that looks out for the down trodden, the helpless and the weak. But when it comes to the most weak and helpless of them all, your all in for sticking a stainless steel hook through their heads. Amazing.

I'd bet anything that if you libs could find a way to ensure babies would grow up and vote democrat, You'd all be staunch pro-lifers.

You should all thank your mothers for not being pro-abortion.

January 24, 2014 at 2:18 a.m.
nucanuck said...

Only women should be allowed to decide whether they can become a caring mother. An uncaring mother is practically a life sentence for a new-born.

Toejam, you should give thought a try.

January 24, 2014 at 2:52 a.m.
TOES02800 said...

" An uncaring mother is practically a life sentence for a new-born."

So you ARE in favor of the death penalty after all!

You're all over the place nancy. You need to cover up. Your bitch is showing.

January 24, 2014 at 3:08 a.m.
fairmon said...

Question to those supporting prochoice, would you be willing to require that sterilization be included in the process? Would you be willing to pay for those that could not afford an abortion?

Prolife supporters, would you be willing to liberally fund a well managed facility that took all unwanted children as wards of the state and encouraged adoption? Would you be willing to pay for them to be raised and educated like loving parents would do?

January 24, 2014 at 3:48 a.m.
MickeyRat said...

Fairmon asked:

”Question to those supporting prochoice, would you be willing to REQUIRE THAT STERILIZATION be included in the process?”

”Fund a well-managed facility that took all unwanted children as wards of the state?”

You mean like a –‘camp'?

No Reichsführer Fairmon.

You are an exercise in extremes, in which everything and everyone is only to be defined or described monetarily.

January 24, 2014 at 6:04 a.m.
LibDem said...

If I thought right-to-lifers cared about fetuses I might have a little sympathy for them, but I know they only care about controlling women.

January 24, 2014 at 6:40 a.m.
degage said...

LibDem, BS!

I read about all these couples that go to China ,Russia and Mexico to adopt a child because there is a shortage of adoptable children in this country. If a person is aborting for medical reasons and incest is one thing but to abort for birth control is another. Put that child up for adoption and stop the senseless killing of the unborn.

January 24, 2014 at 7:19 a.m.
wallyworld said...

From Adopt America Network: Despite the fact that we live in one of the most fortunate nations in the world, there are 130,000 adoptable children in the U.S. foster care system waiting to be adopted. People really need to read up on topics before they assume anything.

January 24, 2014 at 7:29 a.m.
jesse said...

It ain't P/C to adopt American kids!

If ya adopt from overseas it makes ya feel all warm and fuzzy about yourself!!

January 24, 2014 at 7:36 a.m.
LibDem said...

degage, Keeping the adoption mills stocked up seems like a really good call. We can just call women "incubators".

Former Gov. Huckabee says Democrats are trying to lure women with free contraception. The gall of reducing unwanted pregnancies and the resulting abortions. Abortions are the life blood of conservative fund raising.

January 24, 2014 at 7:58 a.m.
PlainTruth said...

This toon has sparked some of the dumbest posts ever, thus far. Killing is killing.

January 24, 2014 at 8:11 a.m.
LibDem said...

WHO: "6.6 million children under the age of five died in 2012."

Where's the sympathy for the born?

January 24, 2014 at 8:18 a.m.

That's the face of abortion. 55 million abortions since RvW in 1973.

That's genocide.

The shocking hypocrisy of liberals is what's scary. It's a woman's body and right to choose when it comes to killing a human being inside her, but it's not her body and not her choice when it comes to her health care, and choosing her doctor.

The holy trinity of liberals/Democrats is pot, abortion and sodomy. "gays" and illegal aliens are sacred, but the unborn are evil. The government will fight tooth and nail for those, but not to protect the unborn.

January 24, 2014 at 8:21 a.m.
PlainTruth said...

Nice talking point LD. But hollow.

January 24, 2014 at 8:22 a.m.
PlainTruth said...

I will amend my earlier post. This toon, and the first 2 posts, are downright despicable.

January 24, 2014 at 8:26 a.m.

So 55 million abortions is acceptable because children are abandoned after they're born, and there are lots of children waiting to be adopted. Is that the logic? Carry that logic to it's natural conclusion in all areas of life and see where it take you.

January 24, 2014 at 8:26 a.m.
Maximus said...

Democrat messaging and dirty tricks campaign in full swing for the Mid Term Elections. With Barry The Welfare Pimp's approval ratings at an all time low, the jobless rate soaring, and Obamascare circling the drain.....IT AIN'T GONNA WORK! The lefty baby killing Marxist pothead Democrats, especially Obama the guy with below average character at best is going down hard. The POTUS basically legalizing and endorsing pot from the Whitehouse.....so trashy and mediocre.

January 24, 2014 at 8:27 a.m.
fairmon said...

MickeyRat said...

You mean like a –‘camp'?

I meant a nice orphanage with well paid employees and houses provided qualified couples for them to live with and be cared for until adopted. Those requiring any pregnant woman to have a child she doesn't want should be willing to assure that child has every opportunity other kids have to succeed.

I assume since you don't think sterilization should be part of any abortion you accept that a woman can have multiple abortions and just keep killing babies any time before they pop out of the womb?

If money is not important why do the local, state and federal governments need so much of mine? Why is welfare needed if money is not important?

January 24, 2014 at 8:29 a.m.
fairmon said...

Nanny said to nucanuck:

Nuca: "Unwanted uneducated unneeded unemployable people bring the house down on all the rest."

Nanny: You advocate killing all the drug addicts and homeless folks as well?

Fairmon: No, but killing the drug dealers without drawn out appeals would be fine with me. We are losing the war on drugs so bad it makes the war on poverty unwinnable. Drugs kill more people directly and indirectly plus destroy more families than any cause where stats are kept.

January 24, 2014 at 8:44 a.m.
degage said...

Lib, do you mean 6.6 million children under 5 in the US died in 2012? Where did you get that number? Must be world wide . I just googled it and you failed to admit that it is half of what it was in 1990. WORLDWIDE is the word you left out.

January 24, 2014 at 8:48 a.m.

Plaintruth, you're correct. That's the twisted way liberals view the unborn. It's a disgusting piece of propaganda. Liberals are the kings and queens of projection, that baby's expression is the face of "abortion rights"/right to kill/genocide. It's butt ugly, like this cartoon.

Liberals have more respect for Michelle Obama's toe jam then they do the unborn.

January 24, 2014 at 8:53 a.m.

Why not nip everything in the bud? The world is full of uncertainty and there's no guarantee one's life will turn out ok, so let's abort all human beings going forward. That way we'll make sure the rest of us can get what we need. Until we solve all of our problems all unborn will be killed. I can just see BO declaring that on the state of the union.

How about this, going forward only homosexual activities will be permitted. That's a sure way to make sure no more babies are born. Only sodomy allowed!

January 24, 2014 at 9:08 a.m.

How about a Ghostbusters-like logo with that babies face in a circle, splashed all over the place to make sure we never forget the evil that is the unborn.

This cartoon is scraping the bottom of the barrel.

January 24, 2014 at 9:12 a.m.
jesse said...

We could just make gittin pregnant a capital crime w/an automatic death sentence!Carried out on the spot since there would be no doubt about it!!

I agree w/bleeder about the toon tho,Clay seems to be losein it somewhat!!

January 24, 2014 at 9:35 a.m.
wallyworld said...

LibDem, now you know it doesn't matter if the 6.6 million were not all amuriken children dying. Don't you get the Family Values platform?

January 24, 2014 at 9:44 a.m.
jesse said...

Need to do somethin about all these geezers we got runnin around too!Maybe at retirement instead of S.S. ya get 20 phenobarbital pills and a quart of whiskey!( or a 357 and 1 bullit!!)

January 24, 2014 at 9:53 a.m.
alprova said...

degage wrote: "I read about all these couples that go to China ,Russia and Mexico to adopt a child because there is a shortage of adoptable children in this country."

There is? I'm sure that there might be a shortage of lily-white INFANTS to adopt, but there are plenty of CHILDREN, of all races, who are in need of a loving home here in THIS country.

Many Americans favor adoption, and many have at some point considered adoption. However, relatively few have taken concrete steps toward adopting a child, and fewer still have actually adopted a child.

"If a person is aborting for medical reasons and incest is one thing but to abort for birth control is another. Put that child up for adoption and stop the senseless killing of the unborn."

That's not your decision to make, unless that embryo is currently being housed in your body.

The day that Republicans fund a program that will not only care for the mother while she is pregnant, but provide a home for every single child born with all expenses guaranteed to provide for every child put up for adoption, until they are 18 years of age, THEN I will come down on the side of pro-choice.

Until that day ever comes, pro-choicers are merely flapping their lips for nothing.

January 24, 2014 at 10:55 a.m.
alprova said...

Z-man, you're probably all about pro-life except when it comes to liberals.

Now be honest; If you could get clean away with it, you'd probably take out a couple or more of them whenever you had an urge to go target shooting.

Even better, you'd probably love to invent a test to determine whether or not an infant will grow up to become a flaming liberal, in which case, you'd probably turn your head when a coat hanger was inserted to end it's life.

Yesiree...you're a devout pro-lifer alright, but I'm betting you would draw the line somewhere in the sand, again, if you were honest.

January 24, 2014 at 11:03 a.m.
conservative said...

It's both astonishing and appalling the lengths the wicked will go to justifying evil.

Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter! Isaiah 5:20

January 24, 2014 at 11:06 a.m.
PlainTruth said...

Alpo proving daily that he is indeed a moron.

January 24, 2014 at 11:12 a.m.
GaussianInteger said...

I have kids and I would never encourage a woman to have an abortion. With that being said, I don't think it is anyone's business what a woman chooses to do with her body except the woman and her doctor. I definitely don't feel that a woman that is impregnated during rape or incest should be forced to have the child.

January 24, 2014 at 11:13 a.m.
PlainTruth said...

Gassy, murder is murder. Agree on the rape & incest.

January 24, 2014 at 11:26 a.m.
nucanuck said...

Any suggestions on how to feed, educate, and employ an over-populated world?

The very definition of cancer is out-of-control, runaway growth. We are there in population, to the point that we are on course to destroy our host…the finite planet earth. So which moral dilemma is greater?

January 24, 2014 at 11:52 a.m.
PlainTruth said...

^^So Nuke, you think abortion is a good option, do you?

January 24, 2014 at 12:15 p.m.
TOES02800 said...

The fact is, abortion procedure in this country is wildly expensive and difficult to go through.(to protect the children) Hence, people go to Russia and China or Africa to adopt children.

Ironic that it's hard to adopt a child, but eerily simplistic to kill one legally.

January 24, 2014 at 12:21 p.m.
TOES02800 said...

Nancy sounds like a modern day Josef Mengele.

January 24, 2014 at 12:25 p.m.
LibDem said...

degage, Google WHO. Didn't think I'd have to draw pictures.

If something is growing inside me that I don't want, I'll have it removed. But I'm a man and we get to make these choices.

January 24, 2014 at 12:30 p.m.
PlainTruth said...

^^ good one Lib. Now I totally get it. Thanks for the insight.

January 24, 2014 at 12:34 p.m.
MickeyRat said...

PlainTruth,

So. ”Murder is murder.(Agree on the rape & incest).” Unless it’s not.

Change you screen name to something that befits your idiom to a ‘T’: Salacious B. Crumb

January 24, 2014 at 12:50 p.m.
nucanuck said...

PT,

I do not sit in judgement about abortion. We have all seen the anguish of an unwanted pregnancy and the joy in a wanted pregnancy. I say let each individual woman decide if and when to have children, and whether or not abortion is appropriate.

I do say that we humans are being irresponsible to reproduce in excess of the planet's carrying capacity. Abortion may be a least desirable method of population control, but it does address the birth of unwanted, likely to be unloved or cared for, children. That's a competing morality that is weighing heavily on continued life on earth.

Nine billion people might be possible if we all consumed like jungle tribespeople, but if we wish a modern technological world, we may have to scale back to something closer to two billion. Our planet is finite and we are beginning to touch on our outer limits.

January 24, 2014 at 1:09 p.m.
TOES02800 said...

Why not start thinning out the population right now nancy? Are there any tall buildings where you live? Or maybe you should get a length of rope and find a tall tree.

January 24, 2014 at 1:10 p.m.
TOES02800 said...

Touting death to improve life on earth. Again, Josef Mengele.

You libs are goofy. You promote promiscuity and when there's a consequence of it you just say F#%k it, don't worry, just kill the little sh!t.

Murder to have peace on earth, you're simple.

January 24, 2014 at 1:18 p.m.
LaughingBoy said...

"Abortion isn't hoped for but it's necessary," is what I'm reading, but there are hundreds of millions of children out there right now that can't be cared for properly either. How slippery is the slope to rounding them up?

January 24, 2014 at 1:19 p.m.
TOES02800 said...

Good little liberals are always talking about not putting labels on people. But yet here we have nancy labeling every aborted child as "uneducated Unwanted unneeded unemployable.......

Your mother could have said the same thing about you.

January 24, 2014 at 1:29 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

LibDem said...

Former Gov. Huckabee says Democrats are trying to lure women with free contraception. The gall of reducing unwanted pregnancies and the resulting abortions.

Let’s put it in context ... O.K.? I think he is rightly pointing out the paternalistic nature of Fleabagger policy and he obviously hit the target.

“Our party stands for the recognition of the equality of women and the capacity of women. That’s not a war on them, it’s a war for them. If the Democrats want to insult the women of America by making them believe that they are helpless without Uncle Sugar coming in and providing for them a prescription each month for birth control, because they cannot control their libido or their reproductive system without the help of the government, then so be it. Let us take that discussion all across America, because women are far more than the Democrats have played them to be.”

January 24, 2014 at 1:29 p.m.
PlainTruth said...

Rat. You may be right. Your fits you to a tee, pal.

January 24, 2014 at 1:31 p.m.
GaussianInteger said...

Didn't Huckabee defend Akin's despicable comments a couple of years ago? Huckabee is the last person I would want to listen to when it comes to women and their reproductive system.

January 24, 2014 at 1:36 p.m.
nucanuck said...

Toejam,

Has anyone promoted promiscuity? And how many crack babies have you adopted? None?

There are many different levels of overlapping morality. As in all things, we have to seek a balance. You should try for that.

January 24, 2014 at 1:37 p.m.
TOES02800 said...

Bill Clinton, Marilyn Monroe, John Lennon, Nelson Mandela, Ingrid Bergman, Babe Ruth, Jesse Jackson, Steve Jobs..........

All adopted as children.

But who needs the unemployable unwanted or unneeded anyhow.

January 24, 2014 at 1:40 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

LibDem said...

WHO: "6.6 million children under the age of five died in 2012."

Where's the sympathy for the born?

From The WHO link:

Overall, substantial progress has been made towards achieving Millennium Development Goal (MDG) 4. Since 1990 the global under-five mortality rate has dropped from 90 deaths per 1 000 live births in 1990 to 48 in 2012.

Sure looks like there are programs that have cut the rate in half in little over a decade. Who do you think contributes more than it’s share to these programs”? The U.S. has about 5% of the worlds population and our government contributes about 25% of the costs. That doesn’t count the private contributions (given in a greater level by conservatives) to NGO’s that assist in that endeavor which should bump us up to quite a healthy level of “sympathy” ... don’t you?

January 24, 2014 at 1:48 p.m.
LibDem said...

"...providing for them a prescription each month for birth control...".

Gosh, Mr. Huckabee, that just sounds gross, like, maybe they could be having S-E-X. Far better they just sneak off and have an abortion or an unwanted child. We wouldn't want insurance plans providing contraceptives like they do other pharmaceuticals.

January 24, 2014 at 1:49 p.m.
LibDem said...

Thanks for the info, Jt6gR3hM. It looks like we've earned the right to pump out more unwanted children.

January 24, 2014 at 1:52 p.m.
Rickaroo said...

The indisputable, absolute best way, bar none, to prevent and thereby reduce abortions is to make birth control as accessible as possible. But the Republicans and conservatives in general take a staunch, stubborn stand against it, claiming that it promotes "promiscuity." Also, Obama and the Dems support it so they oppose it in knee-jerk fashion for that reason too.

Well, if you haven't figured it out yet, you hypocritical "pro-lifers," people are going to engage in recreational, promiscuous sex regardless, and no amount of preaching or abstinence programs (already proven to be a failure) are going to make a difference. Like all creatures great and small, humans are naturally wired for sex and by god humans are going to do it, if for no other reason than that it is one of the most pleasurable sensations anyone can experience in life.

So...you really want to get serious about reducing abortions, you hypocrites? Then get real and deal with the realities of life instead of what you think moral, upright people SHOULD do in your idealized world where everyone makes the right decisions all of the time. Make birth control as accessible as possible, i.e. FREE!

January 24, 2014 at 2:20 p.m.
yddem said...

toes, in response to your post at 1:40:

Albert Desalvo, David Berkowitz, Ted Bundy, Richard Speck, Sandra Camille Bridewell, Kenneth Bianchi, Lawrence Bittaker, Joel Rifkin, and others.

All adopted. All murderers, many serial killers.

But I don't think that's a valid argument for choice, just as I don't think yours is a valid argument against choice.

January 24, 2014 at 2:22 p.m.
Rickaroo said...

"This toon has sparked some of the dumbest posts ever, thus far. Killing is killing." - PT

I must say, it's inspiring to see you taking such a Ghandi-like stance here, PT. So, if killing is killing, you no doubt are an unswerving pacifist, oppose the death penalty, and dare not taint your lips with the likes of any sort of meat products. Your heightened spirituality here is indeed admirable.

January 24, 2014 at 2:30 p.m.
TOES02800 said...

I get your point yd. But life is a gamble. Perfection is a myth. But killing them all to let god sort them out is like scrapping a new car because of a flat tire.

January 24, 2014 at 2:37 p.m.
yddem said...

no, rickaroo, pt says "murder is murder," unless the fetus is aborted because the pregnancy resulted from incest or rape, then it's, well, it must be something else. Justifiable homicide?

January 24, 2014 at 2:37 p.m.
TOES02800 said...

They've raised you to Ghandi-hood PT! Keep up the good work!

January 24, 2014 at 2:39 p.m.
alprova said...

It would be interesting to know exactly what you pro-lifers have done on any personal level, other than to give lip service to the issue, for one child born into poverty or worse, or for one adult to encourage them to deliver an unborn child that they wanted to terminate.

Is you involvement simply to just sit in this forum every day and to pass judgment on people who are truly dealing with such decisions, after having lived your entire lives doing nothing at all for such people?

I'll guarantee you, that unless one of you knocked up some girl in your past, not one of you has ever had to deal with the issue of abortion.

And if the truth were known, a couple of you HAVE indeed dealt with it on a personal level and quietly escorted your gal-pal to a clinic in another state to have the deed performed, or you wrote the girl a check to have it done.

It's not hard to distinguish what level of involvement you may or may not have had. Your words give you away clearly.

I'm sure a couple of you may well even be 70 year old virgins, where you can testify with all honesty that not having sex is indeed possible, for your ugly outide or you ugly disposition has made it entirely impossible for you to procreate.

In short, some of you are highly sex deprived, and spotting those people is not very hard either.

January 24, 2014 at 2:45 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

GaussianInteger said...

Didn't Huckabee defend Akin's despicable comments a couple of years ago?

No! ... He continued to support Akin although he had this to say about his statement:

Since Todd Akin made his infamous remark in what was an unfortunate and awkward attempt to explain his strong pro-life position, I have openly spoken out about what was a disproportionately harsh reaction from party officials and elected officials

Todd Akin admitted his error, publicly apologized for his comment, and asked for forgiveness.I talked to Todd Akin on my daily radio show as he made his first public statements following his comments. He was contrite, he sincerely stated that he was factually incorrect in his statement, and apologized for having said it. He didn’t excuse his comments, justify, or rationalize them.

On his radio show Huckabee call rapes “horrible tragedies” but then added that the resulting offspring of rape are not necessarily without worth.

Huckabee said: - “Ethel Waters, for example, was the result of a forcible rape. I used to work for James Robison back in the 1970s, he leads a large Christian organization. He, himself, was the result of a forcible rape. And so I know it happens, and yet even from those horrible, horrible tragedies of rape, which are inexcusable and indefensible, life has come and sometimes, you know, those people are able to do extraordinary things.”

From this the the Fleabaggers developed the talking point that Huckabee was excusing forcible rape because it sometimes produces admirable people.

Un -F’n - believable !!

Huckabee is the last person I would want to listen to when it comes to women and their reproductive system.

I am not a political supporter of Huckabee although I agree with him on many issues. On abortion I think he goes farther than I agree with.

January 24, 2014 at 2:55 p.m.
TOES02800 said...

Alpo the non-judgemental delivering judgement. Cracker ass cracker.

January 24, 2014 at 2:56 p.m.
Rickaroo said...

You anti-abortionists like to shed your crocodile tears for the 55 million or so fetuses aborted since the inception of Roe v. Wade, as if each one of them would have grown up to be our next President or Einstein or Henry Ford or Steve Jobs. But obviously you haven't given much thought to what sort of people the vast majority of them would have turned out to be. Most of them would have been born to young, emotionally immature, unwed, financially deprived women. In other words, they would have greatly added to the list of "moochers and takers" that you all so much despise and disdain. Certainly some few of them might have overcome the odds and risen to some form of middle class normalcy, if not greatness, but having been born into the lowest common denominator of life, very few would have had a decent chance of rising above it, being born as they were into a society that you are hell-bent on making as austere as possible for those at the bottom.

So cease and desist with your crocodile tears for the unborn, you hypocrites. Our population is already well over what the planet can reasonably sustain, even if all 55 million of them were contributing members of society. In the near future, enforced birth control, if not enforced abortion, will likely become the norm, whether you like it or not.

January 24, 2014 at 3:03 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

LibDem said...

Thanks for the info, Jt6gR3hM. It looks like we've earned the right to pump out more unwanted children.

Come on !! ... That’s all you got? I shoot down your B.S. implication that there is concern for the unborn but not for the children and this is the best you could puke up?

January 24, 2014 at 3:08 p.m.
LibDem said...

You're right, of course, Jt6gR3hM. With the death toll down to a few million, you can concentrate on intimidating vulnerable women at clinics. I guess I didn't know there was a goal.

January 24, 2014 at 3:16 p.m.
limric said...

So the Republican ‘war on women’ and its abortion distortion distraction are rearing its ugly head once again. Listen to the RWNJ’s fizz!

It is an undeniable FACT ; ALL the vociferous cafeteria Christian ‘pro-life’ zealots would rush to the nearest women’s clinic if their lily white oh so virtuous little girls got themselves into a little ‘Girls Gone Wild’ action, or their 14 year old boffed her boyfriend and –whoops daddy, or their wife happened to hook up with the Jose’, the hermano doing the gardening …hide it… and be right back at church on the pew, right next to you TOES02800 Sunday morning loudly protesting how liberals ‘promote promiscuity’ and ‘like murdering babies'.

THERE ARE NO EXCEPTIONS!!

January 24, 2014 at 3:17 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

Rickaroo said...

But obviously you haven't given much thought to what sort of people the vast majority of them would have turned out to be.

You might be right ... Creatures born at the lower rungs of society are so damaged and worthless they’re really not worth the effort ... Right?

In the future, enforced birth control, if not enforced abortion, will likely become the norm, whether you like it or not.

You seem to post that with such relish. The state will do what’s in our best interests ... they always have ... Right?

January 24, 2014 at 3:18 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

LibDem said...

You're right, of course, Jt6gR3hM. With the death toll down to a few million, you can concentrate on intimidating vulnerable women at clinics. I guess I didn't know there was a goal.

You do know that there can not be a goal (score) with you moving the goalposts & line all over the field .... Right?

January 24, 2014 at 3:22 p.m.
alprova said...

Toes02800 wrote: "Alpo the non-judgemental delivering judgement. Cracker ass cracker."

Hey...I hit a nerve. It's like shooting fish out of a barrel.

What about you, big boy? What have you personally done to prevent abortion, or explode it, as the case may be?

January 24, 2014 at 3:30 p.m.
LibDem said...

Jt6gR3hM, Now you've completely lost me.

January 24, 2014 at 3:30 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

GaussianInteger said...

I have kids and I would never encourage a woman to have an abortion. With that being said, I don't think it is anyone's business what a woman chooses to do with her body except the woman and her doctor. I definitely don't feel that a woman that is impregnated during rape or incest should be forced to have the child.

The choice should last only until viability and if a woman can’t take care of it before then she should relinquish her rights and defer to the unborn’s rights. With advances in medical technology this boundary is being move farther and farther back. Also at the point that the fetus can feel and react to pain any abortion procedure should be prohibited from causing such pain. We would do the same for convicted murders wouldn’t we?

January 24, 2014 at 3:31 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

LibDem said...

Jt6gR3hM, Now you've completely lost me.

I’ll accept you excuse.

January 24, 2014 at 3:34 p.m.
Rickaroo said...

"You might be right ... Creatures born at the lower rungs of society are so damaged and worthless they’re really not worth the effort ... Right?" - Jt

You said it, not me. That is obviously the way you RWNJs feel about those people born into the sub-strata of society. It is only when a woman is pregnant that you care about the precious little cherub inside her but as soon as it pops out of the womb and is born into poverty you leave it entirely up to the mother to pull herself up by her own bootstraps in your social-Darwinian dog-eat-dog world and raise the kid up to be the next J.P. Morgan or Sam Walton.

January 24, 2014 at 3:53 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

limric said...

It is an undeniable FACT ; ALL the vociferous cafeteria Christian ‘pro-life’ zealots would rush to the nearest women’s clinic if their lily white oh so virtuous little girls got themselves into a little ‘Girls Gone Wild’ action, or their 14 year old boffed her boyfriend and –whoops daddy, or their wife happened to hook up with the Jose’, the hermano doing the gardening …hide it… and be right back at church on the pew, right next to you TOES02800 Sunday morning loudly protesting how liberals ‘promote promiscuity’ and ‘like murdering babies'. THERE ARE NO EXCEPTIONS!!

I have to agree with you. The life attempted at a high moral plane and yet many times destined to fail is of less worth than the one that does not make the attempt and succeeds ... Right?

January 24, 2014 at 3:56 p.m.
nucanuck said...

I've only know the details of one abortion.

An extremely religious widow raising two daughters and a grandson, one daughter severely disabled, the other became a mother at fifteen. The widow was falling into debt just trying to keep her family together while working hard at her day job. The daughter got pregnant again at seventeen. Out of sheer desperation a family totally opposed to abortion opted for abortion.

Criticize them any way you wish, but that family did what they thought they had to to survive. The daughter later married and had more children.

We may think that there are things we wouldn't do until circumstances confront us. I am reminded of the plane crash survivors who ate the flesh of the dead in order to survive.

Judging others is a slippery slope.

January 24, 2014 at 4:03 p.m.
GaussianInteger said...

Jt, you don't have to try to convince me. But as I mentioned earlier, I don't think it's my business if a woman chooses to have a legal procedure. What if having the child puts the mother's life in jeopardy? Is abortion acceptable then?

January 24, 2014 at 4:04 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

Rickaroo said...

"You might be right ... Creatures born at the lower rungs of society are so damaged and worthless they’re really not worth the effort ... Right?" - Jt

You said it, not me.


Rickaroo said ...

...as if each one of them would have grown up to be our next President or Einstein or Henry Ford or Steve Jobs. But obviously you haven't given much thought to what sort of people the vast majority of them would have turned out to be. Most of them would have been born to young, emotionally immature, unwed, financially deprived women. In other words, they would have greatly added to the list of "moochers and takers..."

January 24, 2014 at 4:05 p.m.
PlainTruth said...

It would seem to me, what with the left so worried about kids being born into poverty, that they view abortion as sort of a preventive maintenance. Yes?

January 24, 2014 at 4:13 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

GaussianInteger said...

Jt, you don't have to try to convince me. But as I mentioned earlier, I don't think it's my business if a woman chooses to have a legal procedure. What if it puts the mother's life in jeopardy? Is abortion acceptable then?

Like all rights the woman does not have an absolute right to abortion and society has every right to set the limits. I have said that there is choice until viability but there are naturally exceptions to that. If a woman’s life is in danger or permanent serious physical injury is certain then yes but the easily manipulated catch-all a “danger to her health” ... No. That gives the woman several months of little or no restriction to take care of the matter or she relinquishes her rights, within limits, in deference to the unborn’s rights.

January 24, 2014 at 4:17 p.m.
alprova said...

PT wrote: "It would seem to me, what with the left so worried about kids being born into poverty, that they view abortion as sort of a preventive maintenance. Yes?"

You're not that naive, Twitter twirp.

You know damn well that there are as many reasons for one to consider an abortion as there are abortions.

Everyone is an individual and they have their own reasons for making the decision.

It makes no difference what you or anyone else thinks. Those who have the decision process to go through couldn't care less what anyone outside of their inner circle of friends and family whom they decide to consult think about abortion.

It's their body, and thus their decision to make.

Everyone else can go straight to Hell.

January 24, 2014 at 4:24 p.m.
Rickaroo said...

"Judging others is a slippery slope." - nucanuck

But that is the basis of the philosophy of today's conservatives, nucanuck. They apply it to literally everything, whether it be political, religious, social, or economic. The only way they can justify their calls for increased austerity is to judge and blame everyone who does not measure up to their standards of monetary wealth or material success. By making it the fault of the individual in EVERY case, it is easy for them to live with themselves and rationalize their calls for a society devoid of government support or regulation.

They look at life and the way they think that it should be in their moral, upright world, and instead of dealing with the issues at hand and trying to give people a hand up who obviously need it, they think that those at the bottom should actually be punished instead and forced to survive in a sink-or-swim world that the complacent "haves" are perpetuating with their calls for more and more austerity for the "have-nots."

January 24, 2014 at 4:26 p.m.
PlainTruth said...

Alpy, you're such a name caller. So unchristian like, fatboy.

January 24, 2014 at 4:38 p.m.
rick1 said...

Another lie from Obama. “Under our plan, no federal dollars will be used to fund abortions, and federal conscience laws will remain in place,” Obama said in his Sept. 9, 2009 speech to Congress.

Now Obama has changed it to where the federal subsidy members of Congress and their staff can now use to buy health-insurance plans that cover elective abortions.

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/terence-p-jeffrey/taxpayers-will-pay-11378-buy-congressmen-obamacare-plans-cover

January 24, 2014 at 4:53 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

alprova said...

degage wrote: "I read about all these couples that go to China ,Russia and Mexico to adopt a child because there is a shortage of adoptable children in this country."

There is? I'm sure that there might be a shortage of lily-white INFANTS to adopt, but there are plenty of CHILDREN, of all races, who are in need of a loving home here in THIS country.

If they were looking for “lily-white” infants why would they go to China and Mexico? I think you may have something amiss there ... don’t you?

"If a person is aborting for medical reasons and incest is one thing but to abort for birth control is another. Put that child up for adoption and stop the senseless killing of the unborn."

That's not your decision to make, unless that embryo is currently being housed in your body.

Of course we as citizens in this country have a say in that decision.

The day that Republicans fund a program that will not only care for the mother while she is pregnant, but provide a home for every single child born with all expenses guaranteed to provide for every child put up for adoption, until they are 18 years of age, THEN I will come down on the side of pro-choice.

We have a moral obligation to assist those that are physically or mentally unable to care for themselves or their offspring. However I see your post as a proposal for public ownership and I believe that has been shown historically unworkable.

Until that day ever comes, pro-choicers are merely flapping their lips for nothing.

Really?

January 24, 2014 at 4:53 p.m.
Rickaroo said...

"That gives the woman several months of little or no restriction to take care of the matter or she relinquishes her rights, within limits, in deference to the unborn’s rights" - Jt

"Little or no restriction?" Yeah, right! Through Republican support of strict anti-abortionist calls for more and more restrictions on a woman's right to choose, they have reduced the number of abortion clinics throughout the country to only a fraction of what they used to be, and those that are still functional have been made to comply with far stricter standards and procedures that force the woman considering abortion to take longer to actually go through with the procedure. Just the fact that many women have to travel so far to get to an abortion clinic in the first place means that they have to come up with more money to cover their travel expenses. And with the extra procedures, such as invasive intra-uterine probing, abortions have become even more expensive. In many cases it can take months for a woman to come up with the money needed and by then she could be well into her second trimester.

"Little or no restriction?" You have got to be kidding. For the past decade, even though a woman's right to choose is still legal and constitutional, the anti-abortion nuts have implemented restriction after restriction to make it increasingly harder for a woman to get an abortion.

January 24, 2014 at 4:54 p.m.
alprova said...

PT wrote: "Alpy, you're such a name caller. So unchristian like, fatboy."

You're nothing if not ironic anytime you call someone down for anything. You're a projecting fool.

January 24, 2014 at 4:56 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

Rickaroo said...

"Judging others is a slippery slope." - nucanuck

But that is the basis of the philosophy of today's conservatives, nucanuck.

I appreciate your non-judgemental post about Conservatives ... I really do ... honest ... LMFAO!!

January 24, 2014 at 4:58 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

Rickaroo said...

"That gives the woman several months of little or no restriction to take care of the matter or she relinquishes her rights, within limits, in deference to the unborn’s rights" - Jt

"Little or no restriction?" Yeah, right!

"Little or no restriction?" You have got to be kidding.

Really? ... If you’re going to attack my personal opinion on this subject don’t you think you should keep your response to the details of my opinion and not project other’s onto it and a little context wouldn’t hurt .... It’ll make you appear less the fool if you do so.

January 24, 2014 at 5:05 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

alprova said...

It makes no difference what you or anyone else thinks.

Of course it does.

Those who have the decision process to go through couldn't care less what anyone outside of their inner circle of friends and family whom they decide to consult think about abortion.

They probably don’t but on the other hand others that have a citizen’s right to decide any limitations maybe couldn’t care less and will decide based on their own conscious.

It's their body, and thus their decision to make.

Not unlimited.

Everyone else can go straight to Hell.

I’ll probably meet you there but bring your own sunscreen.

January 24, 2014 at 5:16 p.m.
PlainTruth said...

Alpy, you called it. PT, ironic, projecting, Ghandi- like. But you're still The Lyin King.

January 24, 2014 at 5:16 p.m.
conservative said...

The pro abortion site guttmacher.org surveyed 1,200 abortion "patients" about the reasons they decided to kill their unborn:

74% said that "having a child would interfere with a woman’s education, work or ability to care for dependents "

74% killed their unborn for their own convenience!

http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/journals/3711005.pdf

January 24, 2014 at 5:17 p.m.
yddem said...

conman, you left out that 73% said they could not afford to have a baby. Maybe you missed it, but more likely you intentionally left that out - it was the next clause in the same sentence. So of the 74% you mention, 73% also could not afford a child. An inconvenient truth for you, conman.

"The reasons women give for having an abortion underscore their understanding of the responsibilities of parenthood and family life. Three-fourths of women cite concern for or responsibility to other individuals; three-fourths say they cannot afford a child; three-fourths say that having a baby would interfere with work, school or the ability to care for dependents; and half say they do not want to be a single parent or are having problems with their husband or partner."

http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/fb_induced_abortion.html

January 24, 2014 at 5:30 p.m.
Rickaroo said...

Jt, you are the fool and you show it with every utterance you make. I DID deal with the details of your opinion - I spoke of how abortion has become so much more restrictive over the years. Everything I said related to your comment. How stupid can you possibly be not to see that?

I've wasted enough time with you. I have spent more time on this site today than I usually do and it gets really depressing being exposed to the idiocy of people like you. And when you throw in the lunacy of PT and con-man, it's gets to be downright disgusting. I will leave you and the other RWNJs (oh, pardon me, PT, I keep forgetting you're a "moderate independent." Ha!) to spout your usual mindless drivel here. Now, I need some fresh air. Signing out.

January 24, 2014 at 5:33 p.m.
wallyworld said...

State legislatures enacted 205 abortion restrictions from 2011 through last year, outpacing the 189 provisions enacted during the entire previous decade, a report from the abortion rights-supporting Guttmacher Institute showed Thursday.

January 24, 2014 at 5:33 p.m.
LibDem said...

A strange statistic, conservative. I would have guessed that virtually 100% of abortions are at the choice of the woman. I think that's what we're discussing here - a woman's right to choose.

January 24, 2014 at 6:11 p.m.
alprova said...

Arguing with idiots who have no intention of changing their minds, truly is a complete waste of time.

Arguing with people who dedicate no time whatsoever to addressing issues that they feel strongly about, with the possible exception of typing their objections in an online forum, is a waste of their time.

None of these clowns would spend a minute of their day holding as protest sign, donate a dime to fund those who would, nor would they part with a penny to fund pro-life efforts, that would prevent so much as one abortion.

So why bother with discussing anything factual with them or try having a sane and sensible discussion surrounding the issue?

None of them is going to put a stop to so much as one local abortion, much less one across the nation, but they WILL probably vote for any political candidate who claims to embrace "family values," and casting votes for such politicians gives them cause to believe that they are doing their part to prevent and prohibit abortion.

Abortion should be a last resort option, but make no mistake, it will always be a woman's choice, over and above the objections of disaffected people with nothing to add or subtract from the decision.

As I posted earlier, nothing will change the minds of anyone until conservatives set up and fund heartily, the means by which any child born into unfortunate circumstances, the costs of raising each and every one born from birth to adulthood.

So wail, cry, moan and groan, for all the good it will ever do.

Abortion and the war on women is all for moot.

January 24, 2014 at 6:53 p.m.
alprova said...

JT wrote:

Me: "It makes no difference what you or anyone else thinks."

JT: "Of course it does."

I'm sure you believe that, but what evidence can you point to that your opinion has changed the abortion issue from where it has been standing since the 1970's?

C'mon sister....TESTIFY!!!

Me: "Those who have the decision process to go through couldn't care less what anyone outside of their inner circle of friends and family whom they decide to consult think about abortion."

JT: "They probably don’t but on the other hand others that have a citizen’s right to decide any limitations maybe couldn’t care less and will decide based on their own conscious."

And what evidence can you point to that any such limitations have stood the test of time, again since the 1970's? No limitation since Roe V Wade has not been overturned.

Me: "It's their body, and thus their decision to make."

"Not unlimited."

I have no idea where you get that idea. Abortions are extremely easy to get, and the few limitations that have been put in place have been shot down shortly after their implementation.

Does anyone really expect that Texas will get away with what they did this year? Every single time a conservative crosses that line, they are thrown out of office their next election.

Texas may well turn blue very soon. In fact, it has been predicted.

Me: "Everyone else can go straight to Hell."

JT: "I’ll probably meet you there but bring your own sunscreen."

My Dear, that is one trip that you will be flying solo on.

January 24, 2014 at 7:04 p.m.
stanleyyelnats said...

republicans think life begins at conception and ends at birth.... republicans want to protect the fetus but the flesh and bone human? not so much....

January 24, 2014 at 7:06 p.m.
alprova said...

Plain truther wrote: "Alpy, you called it. PT, ironic, projecting, Ghandi- like. But you're still The Lyin King."

I'm pleased to see you admitting to a very big problem you suffer from.

I'm sure you will step up to the plate and post the proof to so much as one lie I have ever typewritten into this forum, you tricycle tiptoeing tubby tweeter.

I hope you don't expect me to hold my breath that you will or can do anything but project your own lackings onto others.

January 24, 2014 at 7:11 p.m.
alprova said...

Conservative wrote: "74% killed their unborn for their own convenience!"

That's at least equal to the number of self-professing Christians who cherry pick Biblical quotes for their own convenience.

January 24, 2014 at 7:14 p.m.
fairmon said...

alprova said...

Arguing with idiots who have no intention of changing their minds, truly is a complete waste of time.

Why are you discouraging others to challenge you? You should be glad they haven't given up on changing your mind.

January 24, 2014 at 7:25 p.m.
conservative said...

self professing Christian Mr. Anthony Provancher wrote:

"Jesus sinned"

"Jesus cannot be God"

"If you believe the Bible to be 100% accurate in all regards, then you by default believe God to be a mass-murderer."

"Face the truth for once in your life. God is a murderer and a mass-murderer at that...IF THE BIBLE IS ACCURATE."

January 24, 2014 at 7:25 p.m.
alprova said...

Right on cue...con man.

The only thing missing is the Biblical proof that my statements are not 100% correct.

January 24, 2014 at 7:39 p.m.
conservative said...

self professing Christian Mr. Anthony Provancher wrote:

"The idea that we are to accept a mass-murderer as an object of worship doesn't reflect well upon Christians at all. If he murdered nearly every human on the planet, God is far more heinous than Hitler. Yet Christians are to willfully worship him without question. Why?"

January 24, 2014 at 7:44 p.m.

Stanley, you're an ass, just and ass. "war on women" the often repeated mantra by the drones. What a bunch of crap. What about Obama's "war on women". Abortion is off limits, but he feels he can stick his boney fingers in ever other aspect of their medical lives. Hypocrites.

Anyone is who is sickened by that ghastly total, 55 million abortions since 1973, has something missing. Just like anyone who thinks it's just fine and dandy for a man to stick his penis in another man's anus has something missing.

Alprova, you'd rather have us weep over your amputated foot than all those innocent lives. Heartless.

January 24, 2014 at 7:49 p.m.
alprova said...

Z-man wrote: "Anyone is who is sickened by that ghastly total, 55 million abortions since 1973, has something missing."

Uh...I think you left a word out of that sentence.

I'm sure the thought of the unborn dominates your thought process during your every waking moment.

Or could it just be that you think of it only whenever the subject is raised?

I challenge you, as someone who claims to be obsessed by it, to post what you have personally done to prevent the unborn from being aborted.

"Just like anyone who thinks it's just fine and dandy for a man to stick his penis in another man's anus has something missing."

Well golly gee whiz, given your propensity to moan and groan about abortions, I'd think you'd be right on board with sodomy, since there is a zero chance that anyone will wind up pregnant as as result of such an act.

Your obsessions aren't limited to claims of your deep concern for the unborn, are they? You are posting that objection about three times a week, here lately.

"Alprova, you'd rather have us weep over your amputated foot than all those innocent lives. Heartless."

Sir, my amputation has nothing to do with this or any other issue, and I certainly have not called for an ounce of sympathy from a soul.

It is nothing more than a life challenge that I am meeting head-on, and it is all under control. Every day, I am adapting to the loss of my leg just fine.

Don't think that I believe for one second that you have shred so much as one tear for the aborted unborn.

You have to have a heart to weep and nothing from you gives me any hope that yours is not as hard as a rock.

January 24, 2014 at 8:04 p.m.
conservative said...

self professing Christian Mr. Anthony Provancher wrote:

"God gave us all a brain to think with and to question that which deserves an answer. I've wondered for years why the Biblical story of the great flood is so easily accepted, in that God once murdered all life on Earth, save for a few."

"Jesus cannot be God"

"Jesus sinned"

January 24, 2014 at 8:07 p.m.
alprova said...

C'mon connie, refute my words with the word of God.

You do claim to know him, don't you? You claim to walk with his Son, don't you?

Let them guide you to post the Biblical proof that my words are in error.

I'm wide open to being incorrect.

Surely a man of your faith can find the proof that will allow you to disprove my words.

Get busy cutting and pasting.

Posting my words does nothing for your cause. It just reinforces my undeniable truths.

January 24, 2014 at 8:11 p.m.
jesse said...

If ya didn't want sympathy Al we wouldn't even know ya lost a leg!

BTW: exactly where did they take it off at? Calf,knee thigh or hip?

January 24, 2014 at 8:15 p.m.
alprova said...

Fairmon wrote: "Why are you discouraging others to challenge you? You should be glad they haven't given up on changing your mind."

What an excellent point!!

I AM open to changing my mind.

All it takes to do it is the right words.

January 24, 2014 at 8:15 p.m.
conservative said...

self professing Christian Mr. Anthony Provancher wrote:

"Nowhere in the Bible in either the Old or the New Testament, does any quotation by God or Jesus appear, that condemns or even references homosexuality, applicable to anyone but the Israelites."

"Jesus cannot be God"

"Jesus sinned"

January 24, 2014 at 8:15 p.m.
alprova said...

jesse wrote: "If ya didn't want sympathy Al we wouldn't even know ya lost a leg!"

The only reason I mentioned it was to explain my prolonged absence.

I am so not wanting any sympathy. I am a strong, determined soul, who spent only about 48 hours while laying in the hospital experiencing any depression about it.

Since that day, I have been determined to overcome any and all obstacles and I have done it.

"BTW: exactly where did they take it off at? Calf,knee thigh or hip?"

They originally took it off just above the ankle. Three days later, they took it off at the lower end of the calf, because the gangrene had advanced a little farther than they thought it had.

Again, I reiterate, what happened to me could happen to anyone out there. Gaseous gangrene is cause when a soil borne bacterium enters your bloodstream. It can enter one's body through any open wound. It is a very fast moving and deadly form of the disease.

Be sure to treat any wound with an anti-bacterial compound and COVER it until a scab has formed.

January 24, 2014 at 8:24 p.m.
PlainTruth said...

Alpo loves to spout about his physical ailments. If not for attention, what? Alpo learned the term " projection" from his BFF, Easy. And can't shake it. A professional whiner. And a chronic liar.

January 24, 2014 at 8:31 p.m.
caddy said...

when men portray helpless unborn children as evil, vile, ugly, that man is truly an evil, vile, wicked soul.

January 24, 2014 at 8:39 p.m.
dude_abides said...

Jt6gR3hM said... "Like all rights the woman does not have an absolute right to abortion and society has every right to set the limits."

Yes, because society has always made the right decisions regarding the rights of individuals, right?

"If a woman’s life is in danger or permanent serious physical injury is certain..."

Certain?? Can't we, in our societal omniscience, consider a 99% chance to be enough?

January 24, 2014 at 8:42 p.m.
conservative said...

self professing Christian Mr. Anthony Provancher wrote:

"Nowhere in the Bible in either the Old or the New Testament, does any quotation by God or Jesus appear, that condemns or even references homosexuality, applicable to anyone but the Israelites."

"Jesus cannot be God"

"Jesus sinned"

January 24, 2014 at 8:47 p.m.
dude_abides said...

The Lord just told me to ask conservative to take care of himself, as 'Dickhead Heaven' is still under construction.

January 24, 2014 at 8:56 p.m.
conservative said...

self professing Christian Mr. Anthony Provancher wrote:

"My beliefs in God are not dependent on what is written in any copy of a Bible."

January 24, 2014 at 9:04 p.m.
GaussianInteger said...

Self-professing Christian Mr. Conservative: slandering others to publicly display the favor he believes he is receiving from God.

January 24, 2014 at 9:28 p.m.
conservative said...

That's another lie by you.

I have only quoted Mr. Anthony Provancher.

January 24, 2014 at 9:34 p.m.
GaussianInteger said...

If he says he is a Christian, who are you to say he is not?

January 24, 2014 at 10:15 p.m.
yddem said...

Hey, conman, read your gd bible to yourself and maybe, just maybe, you will inherit "the kingdom of heaven," whatever TF that is. Enjoy. And leave us TF alone.

January 24, 2014 at 10:30 p.m.
limric said...

"My beliefs in God are not dependent on what is written in any copy of a Bible."

Sorry(no not really) ‘Conservative’, but the above statement by Alprova is the mark of an authentic Christian. Your explicit contempt for him notwithstanding, you have much to learn from ‘Mr. Anthony Provancher.’ He on the other hand has nothing to learn from you.

January 25, 2014 at 8:36 a.m.
please login to post a comment

videos »         

photos »         

e-edition »

advertisement
advertisement

Find a Business

400 East 11th St., Chattanooga, TN 37403
General Information (423) 756-6900
Copyright, Permissions, Terms & Conditions, Privacy Policy, Ethics policy - Copyright ©2014, Chattanooga Publishing Company, Inc. All rights reserved.
This document may not be reprinted without the express written permission of Chattanooga Publishing Company, Inc.