[Charlie Southerland]

It was accidental halal, Annie. Most of us, hunters, cut the throat of a kill as quickly as possible to prevent the blood from affecting the flesh. I think that letting the blood forces the muscles of the animal to purge the blood by muscular massaging, meaning that the muscles massage the arteries and veins promoting the evacuation of the blood.

The beginning of life is a great discussion to have.

[Janice D. Soderling]

Charlie, you are as abject a failure as a stand-up satirist as you are as a soapbox debater.

Your use of lurid sensationalism to deflect unwanted facts is a common gimmick among those whose argument rests on untruths.

Obviously you know nothing about abortion as a surgical method or the regulations that govern its use. The language you use reflects your political and societal wishful thinking, your profound lack of scientific and medical knowledge and your misuse of terminology is wanton. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Definitions_of_abortion

You need to update your sources for sarcasm.

De-funding abortion

Melinda Gates has stated that the foundation "has decided not to fund abortion".[102] In response to questions about this decision, Gates stated in a June 2014 blog post that she "struggle[s] with the issue" and that "the emotional and personal debate about abortion is threatening to get in the way of the lifesaving consensus regarding basic family planning".[102] Up to 2013, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation provided $71 million to Planned Parenthood, the primary U.S. abortion provider, and affiliated organizations.[103]

As regards Buffet see this: http://www.snopes.com/inboxer/outrage/buffett.asp

You may not be aware of it, Charlie, but the world is overpopulated and the immediate effects of overpopulation fall mainly on women and children. In a longer perspective, overpopulation leads to famine, war, starvation, and an explosion in diseases once considered eradicated or made unharmful such as tuberculosis, polio, measles, smallpox, whooping cough, bubonic plague, dengue fever, malaria, etc.

Moreover the new diseases such as aids, ebola, zika will ravage, just like diseases of the past, overcrowded areas around the globe.

Population control, including contraception, abortion, and sex education are necessary for the world at large as well as for the individual women and their already-born children.

You assume a great deal so I am not surprised that you assume that I grew up on a farm. But I encourage you to stick to the topic and speculate less on things you know nothing about.

[Andrew Mandelbaum]

Originally Posted by Charlie Southerland

Glad to see you're reading your Bible, Andrew. Yea! A convert!

It is a Jewish text, Calvin. Jews have been reading it and cross examining it for centuries before for the Evangellomold tailored it into a straitjacket for the mind. From the sayings of the Kotzker Rebbe to Heschel, Origen to Moltmann and all stops between, the brew you and Hobbes make from this vineyard is bitterness and soap scum marketed as joy. Enjoy the last of a miserable vintage. The country will walk on without it. It is already happening. The kids are alright. We will let the dead bury the dead.

[Quincy Lehr]

Not that it would be the first time that I've taken great exception to something Charlie has said, but I imagine I speak for a great many pro-choice parents when I say we love our babies, too. Sure, things that would help new parents concretely include affordable housing and health care, stable work environments, student debt at less-than-crisis levels, well-funded schools with well-paid teachers, paid parental leave, and, hell, government-funded daycare. But nah, that would be... socialist or some such.

[Charlie Southerland]

Quincy, I suppose it's OK to keep the ones you love and kill the ones you don't. Socialism notwithstanding. Pro-Choice, indeed!

Janice, some time ago you said you went to a Methodist Church and in another thread you said you lived on a farm for some time. Were you embellishing your life simply for effect to prove your points at the time. Surely not. Surely.

Says you that contraception, population control, abortion and sex education is the ticket to our survival as a species. According to the memes in 1973, (when I graduated from high school) The world was so overpopulated that it was entirely unlikely that we would survive another ten years if society didn't do exactly what you are spewing, I mean talking about now. You have no facts, just jibber-jabber, Janice. I like all of those J's lined up, don't you? I profoundly lack lots of things, but I know an abortion when I see one. Or talk to someone who's had one. Or talk to someone who's performed one. Lack is in the eye of the beholder.

We were also told that the earth was cooling so fast that in a few years, crops wouldn't survive the change and we'd all starve. Look as us now, all warmed up, or are we? No matter, it's babies that are to blame, oh, and Donald Trump.

You are right again, Andrew. Who can argue with that?

[Max Goodman]

Originally Posted by Charlie Southerland

The democrats figured out long ago that it was easier to kill your babies and replace them with illegals ready for the work force.

Congratulations, Charlie! Having decided that those who disagree with you are evil, you now may--nay must!--ignore anything they say. You win all arguments by default!

Originally Posted by Charlie Southerland

I... have been called a lot of names

Thanks for taking a stand against name-calling and for not resorting to it when it became necessary to tell us that we kill babies because it is easy. What tolerance! What skill with words!

G-d bless you, Charlie.

[Charlie Southerland]

Max, I didn't call anyone evil. But since you brought the subject up, I suppose that you must think it so that killing a baby is evil. Yes? No? In reality, Max, isn't it easier (for you) to kill a harmless and helpless baby?

Fighting a grown man is normally a pretty big chore. Trying to kill one might be even harder. Yes? No?

And staying on the subject of the Democrat Convention, which you gratefully started, the Democrat Party platform is the most pro-abortion party it's ever been. Hurray! In the name of progressivism millions of Democrats are for genocide, Janice said so. It has to be true.

Genocide can't be evil, can it? No, only when the Left defines genocide as war. The Left gets to define everything. And everyone.


edited in to say that I apologize for using the terms: Progressive, Left. I promised myself I wouldn't use labels or call anyone names, even if they were apropo. I sentence myself to 10 lashes with a hickory switch. It's really gonna' hurt.

[Ann Drysdale]

And killing a buck comes somewhere in between. I am beginning to get it...

[Janice D. Soderling]

Re post #115.

Janice, some time ago you said you went to a Methodist Church and in another thread you said you lived on a farm for some time. Were you embellishing your life simply for effect to prove your points at the time. Surely not. Surely.

Surely not is right. I have not been a Methodist and I have not said I lived on a farm. Produce those threads if you can.

Nor have I ever said: In the name of progressivism millions of Democrats are for genocide.

Misquoting, inferring and ad hom are amateurish ways to debate. Let me help you with your argumentation skills.

You remember: "We were also told that the earth was cooling so fast that in a few years, crops wouldn't survive the change and we'd all starve". But Charlie, old chump,The existence of one past untrue prediction, whether popular or not, does not prove that all predictions are incorrect.

Global cooling was a conjecture during the 1970s of imminent cooling of the Earth's surface and atmosphere culminating in a period of extensive glaciation. This hypothesis had little support in the scientific community, but gained temporary popular attention due to a combination of a slight downward trend of temperatures from the 1940s to the early 1970s and press reports that did not accurately reflect the full scope of the scientific climate literature, which showed a larger and faster-growing body of literature projecting future warming due to greenhouse gas emissions. The current scientific opinion on climate change is that the Earth has not durably cooled, but underwent global warming throughout the 20th century.

That said:

Current Population is Three Times the Sustainable Level
Global Footprint Network data shows that humanity uses the equivalent of 1.6 planet Earths to provide the renewable resources we use and absorb our waste.1 If all 7+ billion of us were to enjoy a European standard of living - which is about half the consumption of the average American - the Earth could sustainably support only about 2 billion people.

It is crucial to understand that the longer we continue consuming more resources than the Earth can sustainably provide, the less able the Earth can meet our resource needs in the future - and the fewer people the planet can support - long-term.

Evidence of unsustainable resource use is all around us. Global aquifers are being pumped 3.5 times faster than rainfall can naturally recharge them.2 Eventually they will run dry and hundreds of millions will suffer. Topsoil is being lost 10-40 times faster than it is formed.3 Feeding all 7+ billion of us will become increasingly difficult. Oceans are being overfished, and a primary protein source for over 2 billion people is in jeopardy.4 Worldwide, we have lost half the vertebrate species in the air, water, and land since 1970.5 How many more species can we lose and how many more ecosystems can we destroy before humanity’s own existence is threatened?

It is important to note that the depletion of non-renewable resources such as fossil fuels, metals, and minerals that make a European standard of living possible are not included in Global Footprint Network data. This includes all the tons of oil, coal, iron ore, copper, and hundreds of other minerals and metals that make modern life possible. Taking these non-renewable resources into account suggests 2 billion people living at a European standard of living may be the upper limit of a sustainable global population.

Climate change will only add to the strain on the planet’s ability to support all 7+ billion of us. Climate scientists are warning us to expect lower crop yields of major grains such as wheat, rice, and maize.6 Rising sea levels could create hundreds of millions of climate refugees. And climate disruption is likely to create increasing levels of resource conflict and civil unrest.

Adaptation to climate disruption will be much easier with a much smaller global population. We can achieve a smaller global population tomorrow by beginning a dramatic reduction in births today.
All of us want a viable, sustainable global home. If we allow overpopulation and overconsumption to continue, the evidence is mounting that billions will suffer and that we will leave future generations a much harder, bleaker life.

Reducing birth rates now can save us from the likely increase in death rates that awaits us if we do nothing. Solving overpopulation is essential in building a sustainable future.

http://www.worldpopulationbalance.or...es_sustainable

And no, Charlie, it isn't babies who are to blame. It is ignorant and misinformed adults.

Before you put your other foot in your mouth too, let me make it clear that I have not said that abortion is the only, or even the most important, path to combat overpopulation. But for the INDIVIDUAL WOMAN it is an inalienable right and far more important than a so-called right to tote a firearm in a public place.

[Charlie Southerland]

OK, Janice. In the first case, it wasn't a thread, it was a PM. You said you attended a Methodist church with, I believe, your grandparents. I never accused you of being a Methodist. In the second, most recent case, You took me to task over a poem I wrote where I used the term "wood" in the third stanza of a poem posted here called "Hill Clan". You took issue with the colloquialism of the way I used the word and said that you grew up or spent some time on a farm or near the woods or some such, leading me to recollect that you intended to let me know that you were a farm girl. Hopefully, you may have some recollection of that. In any event, you disagreed with my use of "wood".

You said in a thread this morning that abortion is one of the mechanisms to control the population. (I am paraphrasing) Go back to your quote and I think you will find that I am factually correct in my interpretation of your comment. Like I said, You and millions of Democrats support abortion on demand, which looks and smells and works just like genocide. Progessives, Democrats, all the same to Hillary. I heard her say that more than once. Are you with her?

Whether the science of cooling or warming, cooling was taught as fact in my backwards high school when I attended. I know this kind of thing drives you and Cantor and others wild, but according to scientists, the earth hasn't warmed in 17 years. Many scientists are coming around to the conclusion that it is the Sun that is responsible for "global" warming and cooling. Most of the world's Leading "progressives" falsely push their meme on the public purely for the treasure trove of money instead of legit taxes they'll never get approved by the populace. Let me be clear, I believe in global cooling and global warming. I do not believe it is caused by mankind.

When it comes to sustainability of the population, talk to the Chinese or Indians or Pakistani's or some of the states in Africa. For far different reasons their populations are exploding. Conversely, look at Greece and Japan whose populations have declined so much that there are incentives by the Gov't in Japan for their young to have more kids. And Greece, unable to satisfy the EU with enough euros to get it out of hock, are welcoming foreign immigrants so that they can remain in the Union. (to their detriment on all counts)

And Janice, if babies aren't to blame, then why kill them?

I only have one foot, my dear, and it's a big one, but there's still room to say what need be said.