Pro-Life and Conservatism: A question to be answered...

[Eupher]

No problem, I H5'd her.

Go **** yourself.  I had a child out of wedlock, gave her up for adoption, and am blessed to know her and the parents that adopted her and my granddaughter almost 30 years later.  

When we're all as perfect as you, we'll come to you for endorsement.  Unless you're Jesus, again, go **** yourself.

Werd.

And h5

[SSG Snuggle Bunny]

I guess I have to go against the grain and not h^5 MrsSmiths post. Primarily because of the rash of out of wedlock pregnancy's and single mother households in her family. Not exactly a conservative Ideal. Actually more like something one could expect of the liberal ideology. Nothing personal against MrsSmith just pointing out the disparity.

No one should be congratulated for not killing a pregnancy but on the same token pregnancies don't just happen. They may be unplanned for but this day & age an accidental pregnancy doesn't exist or in the least are infinitely rare.

You're not a conservative.

You're an asshole.

Principles are for when everything travels along swimmingly, they're what you rely on when things don't go as well as they should.

If you can't see that then we'll just add "really ****ing stupid" to the list as well.

[Zeus]

I can just fee the love. The endorsement of out of wedlock single motherhood pregnancies is truly astounding,or is just bad when a liberal does it. When someone else does it and it's bad but when you do it it's OK is called being hypocritical.

No one is perfect but if one recognizes their own imperfections they should by rights be willing to give that same considerations to others.

Same can be said about opinions, are opinions allowed or only allowed when they jive with hive mindset,something like say Democrat underground.

[obumazombie]

I can just fee the love. The endorsement of out of wedlock single motherhood pregnancies is truly astounding,or is just bad when a liberal does it. When someone else does it and it's bad but when you do it it's OK is called being hypocritical.

No one is perfect but if one recognizes their own imperfections they should by rights be willing to give that same considerations to others.

Same can be said about opinions, are opinions allowed or only allowed when they jive with hive mindset,something like say Democrat underground.

Being sympathetic to someone's plight is not the same as endorsement. Sometimes all you can do is make the best of the situation at hand. In all cases we should look for the best route that will lift up, and not tear down.

[Eupher]

I can just fee the love. The endorsement of out of wedlock single motherhood pregnancies is truly astounding,or is just bad when a liberal does it. When someone else does it and it's bad but when you do it it's OK is called being hypocritical.

I don't recall seeing the word "endorsement" or any of its derivatives ANYWHERE in this discussion until now. Project much?

No one is perfect but if one recognizes their own imperfections they should by rights be willing to give that same considerations to others.

In other words, it's okay to be judgmental especially when seeing the same sin in others. Is that about right?

Same can be said about opinions, are opinions allowed or only allowed when they jive with hive mindset,something like say Democrat underground.

You can be an asshole all day long and walk in lockstep with everybody else. The inverse is also true - you can be an asshole and NOT walk in lockstep with everyone.

Bottom line is - it's okay to be an asshole and not walk in lockstep with everybody else. Might want to grow a thicker skin.

[SSG Snuggle Bunny]

I can just fee the love. The endorsement of out of wedlock single motherhood pregnancies is truly astounding...

If you want to feel loved go jerk-off in front of a mirror.

Who has endorsed out of wedlock pregnancies, Scarecrow?

You stated your opinion. Your opinion was received as an unfounded, baseless insult mixed with arrogance. If you're so goddam hung-up on respect for opinions then accept the fact that people's freely-formed opinion of you is pretty low because of how you choose to present yourself (kinda like how I expect you to not like me very much).

Now you're just adding whiny little bitch to the list.

[obumazombie]

If you want to feel loved go jerk-off in front of a mirror.

Who has endorsed out of wedlock pregnancies, Scarecrow?

You stated your opinion. Your opinion was received as an unfounded, baseless insult mixed with arrogance. If you're so goddam hung-up on respect for opinions then accept the fact that people's freely-formed opinion of you is pretty low because of how you choose to present yourself (kinda like how I expect you to not like me very much).

Now you're just adding whiny little bitch to the list.

With a little care and gentle handling we could prevent this from ever getting close to being personal.

[SSG Snuggle Bunny]

With a little care and gentle handling we could prevent this from ever getting close to being personal.

An admirable quality and I genuinely applaud you for it...

...BUT...

...Zeus wore out his welcome well-before your arrival to our shores. He's here because we don't ban as readily as DU. He is not here for any virtue he possesses and he remains at the grace of others as well as his own obstinance.

For a thing to be wanted it must first be valued.

[Zeus]

I don't recall seeing the word "endorsement" or any of its derivatives ANYWHERE in this discussion until now. Project much?

In other words, it's okay to be judgmental especially when seeing the same sin in others. Is that about right?

You can be an asshole all day long and walk in lockstep with everybody else. The inverse is also true - you can be an asshole and NOT walk in lockstep with everyone.

Bottom line is - it's okay to be an asshole and not walk in lockstep with everybody else. Might want to grow a thicker skin.

So all the invective directed toward an opinion that out of wedlock single motherhood is a bad thing isn't an endorsement of same.

If it wasn't for being judgmental all sin & lawlessness would go unanswered.

More invective.

Ok I'm not a conservative , I'm an asshole, I can go **** myself etc because I don't believe out of wedlock single motherhood is good for the mother , the Child or society in general then so be it. I respect the right for all the posters who disagree with my opinion on the matter I just venture most conservatives would agree with my stance.

[obumazombie]

Quite often what we want is irrelevant. What we have is what is at hand.

[SSG Snuggle Bunny]

So all the invective directed toward an opinion that out of wedlock single motherhood is a bad thing isn't an endorsement of same.

If it wasn't for being judgmental all sin & lawlessness would go unanswered.

And how would you answer the out-of-wedlock pregnancy of a young woman?

Stoning?

Public shaming?

A demand the parents settle down and provide a life for their child?

Ok I'm not a conservative , I'm an asshole, I can go **** myself etc

Finally we agree.

because I don't believe out of wedlock single motherhood is good for the mother , the Child or society in general then so be it.

No, it's because you're an asshole because you made an asshole-ish point in an asshole-ish manner. Now you can add liar to your resume because not one person here endorses out of wedlock pregnancy or refuses to acknowledge the harm it imposes on all parties.

Having children that fell short of the mark does not invalidate Mrs S's post anymore than a person's history of alcoholism invalidates their warnings against strong drink.

For ****'s sake, the point of the thread is about NOT aborting children in the name of personal convenience. What greater example of this than people who acknowledge their mistake and DO NOT impose the penalty on the child but see it brought to life to be raised, loved and valued over their own self?

If life is so ****ing perfect on your planet please feel free to return and not trouble yourself with our lowly kind.

[obumazombie]

The ideal would be the nuclear family, and it would have been formed by proper courtship, a long engagement, with sweetness and innocence. But then we don't hardly ever get to deal with the ideal. You have to meet every situation on it's level.

[SSG Snuggle Bunny]

The ideal would be the nuclear family, and it would have been formed by proper courtship, a long engagement, with sweetness and innocence. But then we don't hardly ever get to deal with the ideal. You have to meet every situation on it's level.

And you made your point excellently without being an asshole.

Some day when I grow-up I wanna be just like you.   

[Zeus]

And how would you answer the out-of-wedlock pregnancy of a young woman?

Stoning?

Public shaming?

A demand the parents settle down and provide a life for their child?
 

Finally we agree.
 

No, it's because you're an asshole because you made an asshole-ish point in an asshole-ish manner. Now you can add liar to your resume because not one person here endorses out of wedlock pregnancy or refuses to acknowledge the harm it imposes on all parties.

Having children that fell short of the mark does not invalidate Mrs S's post anymore than a person's history of alcoholism invalidates their warnings against strong drink.

For ****'s sake, the point of the thread is about NOT aborting children in the name of personal convenience. What greater example of this than people who acknowledge their mistake and DO NOT impose the penalty on the child but see it brought to life to be raised, loved and valued over their own self?

If life is so ****ing perfect on your planet please feel free to return and not trouble yourself with our lowly kind.

a little tough love, be it a stern rebuke, conditional support or perhaps even shunning dependent upon the situation would perhaps prevent the situation from reoccurring.

Abortion is killing but that's hardly an excuse to excuse out of wedlock single motherhood. yes it happens but being an enabler doesn't prevent  the situation nor does it curtail additional occurrences. Neither will cussing and swearing and name calling at those who speak out against it.

Does the invective make you feel bigger,badder, more relevant.

I never said MrSmith point was invalid I just made a rationale observation that was met with cussing & swearing and attacks. before you say I need to grow a pair perhaps you should direct that comment to the posters that apparently came unglued at my observation.

My life is far from perfect even if it was it doesn't invalidate my position.

[SSG Snuggle Bunny]

For someone crying about invective why do you keep using terms like "enabler" in reference to Mrs S? How did she enable anything?

And to recall, you said, "... because of the rash of out of wedlock pregnancy's and single mother households in her family. Not exactly a conservative Ideal. Actually more like something one could expect of the liberal ideology."

Sure, sure, you said, "nothing personal" after that but personal is all you've got (unless you're just too ****ing stupid to understand what it is you're writing).

Please, oh great keeper of all conservative piety, explain to us how independent actions by free-willed individuals invalidate what Mrs S has said. What has she done to enable them? Assuming her messaging is as consistent in her home as it is on this board: what hallmarks of liberal ideology are ascribed to her by means of her family members actions?

Have you ever told a child to not touch the hot stove? The little ****ers are all but guaranteed to reach up and touch it. Does the burn make the parent negligient or an enabler?

BTW -- lest you think this is personal for me in some other regard please understand that more times than not I find Mrs S a less than delightful conversant. It's not her, it's you.

[CactusCarlos]

You're not a conservative.

You're an asshole.

Principles are for when everything travels along swimmingly, they're what you rely on when things don't go as well as they should.

If you can't see that then we'll just add "really ****ing stupid" to the list as well.

H5 for this.

[Zeus]

For someone crying about invective why do you keep using terms like "enabler" in reference to Mrs S? How did she enable anything?

And to recall, you said, "... because of the rash of out of wedlock pregnancy's and single mother households in her family. Not exactly a conservative Ideal. Actually more like something one could expect of the liberal ideology."

Sure, sure, you said, "nothing personal" after that but personal is all you've got (unless you're just too ****ing stupid to understand what it is you're writing).

Please, oh great keeper of all conservative piety, explain to us how independent actions by free-willed individuals invalidate what Mrs S has said. What has she done to enable them? Assuming her messaging is as consistent in her home as it is on this board: what hallmarks of liberal ideology are ascribed to her by means of her family members actions?

Have you ever told a child to not touch the hot stove? The little ****ers are all but guaranteed to reach up and touch it. Does the burn make the parent negligient or an enabler?

BTW -- lest you think this is personal for me in some other regard please understand that more times than not I find Mrs S a less than delightful conversant. It's not her, it's you.

I hven't directed any of my posts toward MrsSmith since my original post everything since has been general. I also never said or implied anything she said or done invalidates her situation.

It really bugs you that I won't stoop to name calling and cussing doesn't it.

I will stand behind my observation that the prevention of out of wedlock pregnancies is more a conservative hallmark than a liberal one.

The child/stove question is irrelevant to the current discussion.

I'll try not to loose any sleep because you won't be my best buddy.

[SSG Snuggle Bunny]

I hven't directed any of my posts toward MrsSmith since my original post everything since has been general. I also never said or implied anything she said or done invalidates her situation.

Are you playing us for stupid?

I guess I have to go against the grain and not h^5 MrsSmiths post. Primarily because of the rash of out of wedlock pregnancy's and single mother households in her family. Not exactly a conservative Ideal. Actually more like something one could expect of the liberal ideology...

No implication from you that her family life invalidated her message? Let's repeat that:

I guess I have to go against the grain and not h^5 MrsSmiths post. Primarily because of the rash of out of wedlock pregnancy's and single mother households in her family. Not exactly a conservative Ideal. Actually more like something one could expect of the liberal ideology...

It really bugs you that I won't stoop to name calling and cussing doesn't it.

No. it bothers me that you're a whiny, obnoxious, two-faced, self-martyring, self-righteous, arrogant asshole.

I will stand behind my observation that the prevention of out of wedlock pregnancies is more a conservative hallmark than a liberal one.

The child/stove question is irrelevant to the current discussion.

It's an analogy, you twit. Though I suspect you know this and are just refusing to acknowledge it.

But just so there are no doubts: other people will do what they want regardless of what you tell them.

You have no reason to impugn Mrs S or her message because free-willed individuals did what they wanted to do.

I'll try not to loose any sleep because you won't be my best buddy.

If I've already stated I'm pursuing my side of the argument out of my principles rather than for any personal desire for Mrs S's friendship what the **** makes you think I give a rat's ass about how you see me? Damned if that doesn't bolster the entire contention you're an arrogant prick.

[obumazombie]

With one or the other on the defensive, there will be only monologue. Turning loose of win or lose might be the hot ticket.

[Ptarmigan]

First point, not all teen and/or out-of-wedlock pregnancies are unwanted.  Your basic premise is flawed. 

Second point, the majority of people in rural, conservative areas are smart enough to know that a pregnant woman is carrying a child, not a "blob."  It doesn't matter what stage of pregnancy; the embryo is human, the fetus is human, there is no stage of pregnancy in which the mother is carrying a dog or a monkey or a tumor, so far more women prefer to carry their child, not murder him or her.  In fact, a lot of us have trouble understanding why "compassionate, tolerant, loving" Democrats tend to murder so many children.     Maybe they just aren't smart enough to understand what a child is until they can actually see with their own eyes?

Third point, many people are smart enough to understand that an unwanted pregnancy does not equal an unwanted child.  Conversely, a wanted pregnancy does not always equal a wanted child, as we see from the continuing increase in child abuse statistics.  There is no amount of abortion that will cause every child to be wanted.

Fourth point, Planned Parenthood does one thing well... killing children.  Well, actually, they do other things well, like absorbing government money and using political clout to keep increasing their revenue, but as far as HEALTH is concerned, their one "claim to fame" is the murder of children.  Conversely, Crisis Pregnancy Centers can help pregnant women with free pregnancy tests that are official and can be used for government assistance programs.  Many can provide ultrasounds.  Almost all can provide many other basic necessities like maternity clothing, baby clothes and blankets, diapers, formula, and will request donations for specific needs like cribs, car seats, preemie clothes, etc.  Why would we want a useless child-murdering money-dump instead of a pregnancy center?

Final point, it looks to me as though you are a "typical liberal."  You have so absorbed the leftist excuse for logic that you have trouble understanding any other viewpoint.  Your attitude seems to be that no one could possibly want a child if they happen to be under 20, or if they became pregnant unexpectedly, or if they don't happen to have enough money to "afford" a child right now.  This is simply a false premise entirely.


From a personal perspective, I had my first child at 19.  I was unmarried when he was conceived.  I never wished I had murdered him, and am immensely proud of that child.  He served in the military, is currently a civilian employee of the Navy, and has a beautiful daughter.

Two of my daughters have had children at 19, also.  Neither are married.  None of their children are unwanted.  One has 2 sons, now 10 and 8, and is raising them as a single mom...and doing a good job of it.  The other has a 3 year old daughter and is currently pregnant with her second.  She can't afford to live on her own anymore, so recently moved back home (an option we prefer over having her on welfare.) We'll help with her expenses until she gets on her feet; or until her boyfriend mans-up, marries her, and starts supporting his family.

My niece recently had to deal with an unwanted pregnancy.  Her mother demanded that she abort for many reasons, including the fact that the mother "didn't want to be a grandmother already."  (Need we say that the mother is a liberal??  )  My brother was willing to help her if she kept the baby, so she finally came to visit with me and my daughters.  She was close to believing that her mom was right, she was just too young and irresponsible to have a child, but she changed her mind after spending some time with my younger daughter and her baby.  She chose to keep her child, Thank God, and is a wonderful, loving mother to that little girl now.  Having her baby had "the normal effect" on her, she became far more responsible and was able to get a decent job managing a motel. She is currently pregnant with her second, and planning her wedding to the father of her kids. 

Maybe it's because liberals so often just don't grow up and become responsible adults...but they often seem to be completely self absorbed.  Just as the woman mentioned above, she wanted her granddaughter killed mostly because she thought she was too young to be a grandmother, (vain, vain, vain), but also because she just can't understand that most people, when faced with the reality of life, do manage to grow up!   It's a good thing that most people grow into conservatives!  The world would be a truly sorry place if liberals were anywhere near a majority.

More power to you.

[Eupher]

So all the invective directed toward an opinion that out of wedlock single motherhood is a bad thing isn't an endorsement of same.

If it wasn't for being judgmental all sin & lawlessness would go unanswered.

More invective.

Ok I'm not a conservative , I'm an asshole, I can go **** myself etc because I don't believe out of wedlock single motherhood is good for the mother , the Child or society in general then so be it. I respect the right for all the posters who disagree with my opinion on the matter I just venture most conservatives would agree with my stance.

Well, I see that Snugs has pulled out the K-bar and gotten up close and personal in eviscerating you, so I won't belabor the point.

For one, I don't have a problem with assholes -- except when they make a continual habit of going down that particular road.

You've worn ruts in it.

Especially wearisome is this kind of statement from you:

I respect the right for all the posters who disagree with my opinion on the matter I just venture most conservatives would agree with my stance.

This smacks of elitism, arrogance, and pomposity. This is the kind of thing that Snugs is talking about.

Own it. Embrace the suck.

[Zeus]

Well, I see that Snugs has pulled out the K-bar and gotten up close and personal in eviscerating you, so I won't belabor the point.

For one, I don't have a problem with assholes -- except when they make a continual habit of going down that particular road.

You've worn ruts in it.

Especially wearisome is this kind of statement from you:

This smacks of elitism, arrogance, and pomposity. This is the kind of thing that Snugs is talking about.

Own it. Embrace the suck.

Ah I see calling my conservative credentials into question and my defense of smacks of elitism, arrogance, and pomposity. So how do you propose one answers to the charge ? obviously you disagree that most conservatives disagree with out of wedlock single motherhood. what in your mind is the conservative stance,overall,on the issue?

I proudly own the stance.

[Eupher]

Ah I see calling my conservative credentials into question and my defense of smacks of elitism, arrogance, and pomposity. So how do you propose one answers to the charge ? obviously you disagree that most conservatives disagree with out of wedlock single motherhood. what in your mind is the conservative stance,overall,on the issue?

I proudly own the stance.

Yep, you own it. The suck, that is.

Nobody called your "conservative credentials" -- whatever the hell THOSE are -- into question. Whether you are a conservative or a liberal or something in between is something between you and your principles -- whatever the hell THOSE are.

When you get right down to it, nobody gives a shit whether you're a "conservative" or not.

So why do you and many other faux conservatives who come wading into this site (I say "faux" because, as we all know, only those who are truly uncertain about their own principles find it necessary to bray left and right that they're "conservative) find it necessary to do that, apart from my own observation?

Let's not stray too far from the point -- nobody "endorsed" having children out of wedlock. Mrs Smith has children who have done so for reasons that are their own. My own children, ditto. I shall not burden you with their rationale because it's unimportant.

As has been said already quite eloquently, what is, is. Nothing you say is going to change any of that and pompously braying about your own opinions merely isolates you from those who embrace those children irrespective of the facts that brought them into this life.

Bitchslapped for continuing to be an asshole. Stubbornly continuing to be an asshole. Steadfastly continuing to be an asshole.

[Zeus]

Yep, you own it. The suck, that is.

Nobody called your "conservative credentials" -- whatever the hell THOSE are -- into question. Whether you are a conservative or a liberal or something in between is something between you and your principles -- whatever the hell THOSE are.

You're not a conservative.

You're an asshole.

Principles are for when everything travels along swimmingly, they're what you rely on when things don't go as well as they should.

If you can't see that then we'll just add "really ****ing stupid" to the list as well.

I don't have to lie and ridicule to defend my position.

Obviously we disagree on what conservative positions are and that's fine.

[Eupher]

I don't have to lie and ridicule to defend my position.

Obviously we disagree on what conservative positions are and that's fine.

Let me get this straight, Zeus.

You're basing your entire argument as to what constitutes a conservative on whether or not he/she condemns or supports the practice of having children out of wedlock?

Seriously?