Can you bear the truth?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Pro/con between pro-life and pro-choice

http://www.wcla.org/articles/procon.html


Remember: Nobody judge you over abortion rights. It's up to you and your own decision because it's your OWN body.


Like what Cheri said at her post that she was threaten by her parents to have an abort which it's no right because it's HER OWN body, she should decide herself and need the support from her parents. I feel sad how Cheri had been through like this. :tears: I would not do that when I has a daughter. I would support her if she want to keep her unborn baby.

Cheri,
I really dont understand doctors sometimes because they do what your parents says which the doctors supposing to say NO because of 5 months unborn baby has eyes, heart, hair, hand, feet, etc. What your doctor did is an illegal because your unborn baby is healthy. I feel for you, honestly. :tears:

Accord German law:

Abortion legal up to 12 weeks time only when there're healthy baby due "social grounds", malfornation, sick, rape, etc.

Abortion legal up to 22 weeks time: dead, malfornation




Abortion: rights or technicalities? A comparison of Roe v. Wade with the abortion decision of the German Federal Constitutional Court.

Brown HO.

PIP: A comparison of the difference in approach, philosophy, and percepti on of social implications of abortion in the United States and Germany is examined by contrasting the Roe v. Wade decision of the U.S. Supreme Court with the abortion decision of the German Federal Constitutional Court. Roe v. Wade effectively established abortion on demand prior to "viability" (approximately 6 months) and makes it difficult to prevent it for any reason at any time prior to live birth. When the West German Federal Diet passed the Fifth Law for the Reform of the Penal Code which allowed abortion on request up to 12 weeks of conception and for reasons of maternal health up to 22 weeks, the Constitutional Court declared it null and void 8 months later. The 2 courts reached their decisions for quite different reasons. In the U.S. "Jane Roe" was a real, though anonymous, woman. Other real persons had been trying to overturn abortion statutues in various states. The German court acted on a petition brought by 193 members of the Federal Diet and 4 of the states. It was thus, under the German system, obligated to decide the constitutionality of the revisions in abortion legislation and the decision returned the question to the legislative body. The fundamental difference between the German and the American approach is the "right to life." In America the conflict is between the mother's "right to privacy" and the compelling interest of the state to protect the right to life. At no point does the U.S. Supreme Court consider whether the unborn has rights but only whether they constitute a value the protection of which is a legitimate state interest. In Germany, by contrast, the Federal Constitution explicitly establishes the right to life as a subjective human right; the state not only has no right to take life but acknowledges that this right belongs to the human being himself. The U.S. court reasoned that the unborn have been protected "only" for the last century while the German court stated the right has "already" been recognized for a century. The U.S. Court made no mention of the wider social implications of the decision except for a few brief references; the German court's major consideration was the social implication of the law. An appendix with 6 refs. give a translation of the German court's decision.

PMID: 11662181 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/...ve&db=PubMed&list_uids=11662181&dopt=Abstract
 
Last edited:
THE ABORTION DEBATE: Why Words Matter

By Myra Marx Ferree

November 2, 2003
Newsday, Inc.

Abortion is the issue that just won't go away. Although what is now often called the "partial-birth" abortion ban has passed Congress and is soon to be signed by President George W. Bush, the law certainly will be contested in the courts. Because access to all legal abortion is seen as potentially at stake, confirmation of federal judges is fought over as fiercely as any inch of ground on the Somme.

Journalists seem tired of reporting the never-ending battle. The issues that abortion raises are known to every citizen, and the front lines are hardened positions that rarely seem to shift. It's easy to see that the "partial-birth" law was a victory for opponents of legal abortion. But what else is there to say about the struggle besides who is winning or losing?

Widening the focus to look at how other countries handle abortion shows what is distinctive about this long-running American political war. Intemperate claims and opposing views about whether abortion is morally defensible appear in other countries when the debate is activated, but most of the time the issue is politically invisible.

A good case in point is Germany, which, like the United States, has a strong feminist presence, an energetic Catholic Church that strongly defends fetal life and an activist constitutional court that has struck down legislative reforms. Yet the abortion debate is muted, only occasionally draws politicians and the general public into the fray, and does not focus on the courts as battlegrounds. Why is this?

For one thing, public issues are framed for discussion by the words that are chosen by competing sides, as well the language that is accepted as legitimate by the courts.

In the United States, abortion rights are framed as a privacy issue in the Supreme Court's Roe v. Wade decision. Both sides accommodate their arguments accordingly. The anti-abortion side tries to protect the fetus as an individual with wholly comparable rights, and the pro-abortion-rights side defends a zone of privacy for the woman in which the fetus belongs only to her.

The conflict then becomes about government intervention. The anti-abortion side defends the vulnerable fetus with only the state as its protector, while the pro-abortion-rights side stresses state interference with the private decisions of the woman.

Both sides steer away from talking about social issues, such as health and poverty, and what moral role the state might have in creating conditions in which children could be wanted, born and cared for. The anti-abortion movement champions the fetus, without acknowledging the pregnant woman or her needs, and the abortion-rights side is "pro-choice" without paying much attention to the political and social context in which a woman's choices get made.

In Germany, by contrast, when the constitution was interpreted in 1974 as guaranteeing state protection of the right to life of a fetus, making abortion inherently a criminal act, the court also held that it was the state's responsibility to protect the woman and not pose a burden on her that would be more than she could bear.

This initially was understood as allowing abortion only under specified conditions (rape, fetal deformity, threats to the mother's life or health and general socioeconomic necessity), as determined by a doctor and ratified by a court. In the most recent reform of this law in 1992, the woman herself was allowed to make the determination in the first trimester, after state-mandated "pro-life oriented" but non-coercive counseling had informed her of the legal status of her "unborn child" and the financial support the state offers to enable her to "say yes to the child."

Because the constitution offers no privacy rights but affirms the human rights of both the fetus and the woman, those who favor abortion rights have framed the issue in terms of women's self-determination as women. As one feminist legislator put it, "Any politics that is against a woman, to whom the life of the fetus is entrusted, is also a politics against developing life."

This, in contrast with the American principle of privacy, implies that social context matters. Seeing the woman as the one who knows and cares most about her own life and child-bearing, German law places the ultimate decision-making power in her hands, even while acknowledging the fetus as a potential child in a way that most Americans would find morally appropriate.

In the United States, much of the struggle over "partial birth" abortion has been framed by the term itself. Although the abortion-rights side has tried to talk about medical issues, these are not easily reduced to a catch phrase. The medical label, DXC, or dilation and curettage, is not very compelling. By defining the fetus as already being partially "born," the phrase "partial birth abortion" carries a suggestion of murder that is difficult for anyone to support, even in order to protect women's physical health.

This makes legislators reluctant to vote against restricting the procedure, even when they are leery of second-guessing doctors' decisions and know how rare late-term abortions are. When courts review this ban in light of the facts of a particular case, rather than through the prism of the public framing of the issue, they could well overturn it.

Of course, all of this is covered in the media, which brings us to the other big difference between the United States and Germany. What makes a "good story" from journalists' point of view explains why court decisions become the heart of public debate here but rarely in Germany.

In both countries, journalists respond to professional norms of what constitutes appropriate coverage as well as to formal structures of how political debates are managed. Germany has a parliamentary system in which political parties are explicitly recognized in the constitution as responsible for organizing and directing public decision-making. They are supported with tax funds and held accountable for providing political education to citizens at large.

Americans, on the other hand, are suspicious of partisanship. The electoral system gives greater weight to individual donors and groups outside the party system that can organize public passion over particular issues.

Reflecting these formal differences, the German media put political parties and parliament in the center of debate and leave ordinary people, as well as organized social movements on the sidelines. When we analyzed 25 years of newspaper coverage of abortion, from 1970 to 1994, social movement spokespeople provided 25 percent of the quotes in the American stories, but only 2 percent in the German stories.

When abortion was on the parliamentary agenda in Germany, coverage rose substantially. When it was not, the issue all but disappeared. Social movements could get demonstrations reported, but not enough coverage to change how the issue was framed.

Once a law is out of parliament, German newspapers tend to treat its enforcement as unnewsworthy. U.S. media consider the personal and political implications of laws as they are enforced, focusing attention on social movements and courts.

Here journalists cover political issues by interviewing people directly affected by laws already passed. Court cases highlight individuals with stories to tell, and social movements help make such sources available. Once a law is framed as hurting or helping people we see or read about, the stakes become more apparent, and judicial decision-making becomes highly charged.

As success of the term "partial birth" testifies, American framing of abortion places respect for the fetus directly in conflict with respect for medical judgment and for women's well-being. Sooner or later, the Supreme Court will have to deal with this. Even if political parties would like to make the issue disappear, they won't be able to. For better or worse, in America whenever either side loses, it turns to the courts, and the debate finds its way back into the news.

Copyright Newsday, Inc. (newsday.com)

http://www.ssc.wisc.edu/soc/news/Newsday2003Nov02.html
 
Teenage abortion in Germany: with reference to the legal system in the United States.

Belling DW, Eberl C.

University of Potsdam, Germany.

PIP: This document compares the legal aspects of induced abortion in the US and Germany with a focus on how each country treats minors who wish to undergo abortion. After a short introduction, the second section describes the legal approach to abortion in the US where women (including minors) have an implicitly recognized constitutional right to abortion until compelling state interest intervenes at a point where the unborn child would be viable outside of the womb. States, however, may permit parents to participate in their daughter's abortion decisions as long as a "judicial bypass procedure" exists to protect the minor's rights. Section 3 describes the situation in Germany, where no constitutional right to abortion exists and where the fetus is protected by the constitution. A minor's right to abortion is determined by the provisions governing whether or not an abortion can be performed, by age limitations, and by the custody rights of the parents. Relevant decisions of the Federal Constitutional Court in 1975 and 1993 are reviewed to show that women have a duty to carry a pregnancy to term unless the woman requests the abortion within 12 weeks of conception and submits to counseling which seeks to protect the fetus (such an abortion would be illegal but immune from prosecution). German court rulings on the competency of minors to render consent are then noted to show that even minors have ultimate responsibility with regard to abortion. Analysis of the legal situation in Germany continues with a look at the personal custody rights of parents and the limitations on those rights imposed by the constitutional rights of the child, by the child's age, and by the child's self-reliance and capacity to assume responsibility. The conclusion contrasts the US and German legal sources of limitation of parental rights over the decisions of minors and the ways each system determines the competency of a minor to make such a decision.

Publication Types:
Review

PMID: 8666732 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=8666732&dopt=Abstract
 
Leibling said:

"Abortion legal up to 22 weeks time: dead, malfornation"

I know "malfornation" is misspelled and really means malnutrition but what does, "22 weeks time: dead" mean????
 
German law before and after 1996.

ABORTION
Except under specific circumstances, the performance of an abortion is an illegal act.65 Germany's current abortion laws will remain in effect until January 1996. On that date, a new abortion statute becomes effective.

Current Law
The current abortion law in Germany is based upon a 1993 Federal Constitutional Court decision and the Penal Code.66

In May 1993, the Federal Constitutional Court held that because the Basic Law protects the right to life of the unborn,67 even in opposition to its mother, abortion was to be regarded as generally unlawful.68 Recognition of women's constitutional rights, however, requires that abortions be permitted in exceptional circumstances. Legislatures are empowered to stipulate the circumstances under which abortions may be regarded as reasonable.

Although the Federal Constitutional Court struck down a provision permitting abortions during the first 12 weeks of pregnancy, it decided that an abortion is not punishable if performed by a physician within the first 12 weeks after conception and if the pregnant woman asked for the procedure and certified that she had been counseled at least three days prior to the performance of an abortion. The court also determined that abortions for medical and eugenic reasons could be financed by health insurance.

The Penal Code permits an abortion on two primary grounds. First, if a physician determines that the continued pregnancy would endanger the life of the woman or pose injury to her physical and mental health, the physician may perform an abortion with the consent of the woman.69 Second, if a physician determines that the fetus suffers from such irremedial damage that the continuation of the pregnancy cannot be demanded of the pregnant woman, the physician may perform an abortion so long as less than 22 weeks have elapsed since conception.70 In the latter case, the woman must first receive counseling at least three days prior to an abortion and then obtain permission from her doctor or a public health officer.71

Punishments for the performance of illegal abortions vary.72 If the pregnant woman herself performs an illegal abortion, she may be subject to imprisonment of up to one year or a fine.73 However, pursuant to the 1993 Federal Constitutional Court decision, a woman may not be punished for receiving an abortion during 12 weeks after conception if she requested the procedure and received appropriate counseling. Providers who perform an illegal abortion are subject to imprisonment of up to three years or a fine.74 Moreover, providers who attempt to perform an illegal abortion are subject to sanctions.75 Punishments are increased if a perpetrator acts against the will of the woman or if a perpetrator recklessly puts the woman's life in danger or causes serious harm to her health.76 :cry: EDIT: (Liebling:)))'s opinion, it's totally wrong because it's women's body).

1996 Abortion Law

On July 14, 1995, the German Parliament promulgated a new abortion law, which will take effect on January 1, 1996. Although the performance of an abortion remains illegal, the new law expands the circumstances under which an abortion can be legally performed.

The future abortion law is more liberal than the current one. A woman may have a legal abortion so long as it is performed within the first 12 weeks of pregnancy and she receives counseling from her doctor and from an outside counseling center.77 During the consultations, the doctor must give priority to protecting the "unborn child", while at the same time, allowing the woman to choose.78 In addition, abortion is legal in cases of rape and life and health endangerment.79

The future abortion law provides lesser punishments for the performance of an illegal abortion. Under the new abortion law, neither women who receive nor doctors who perform abortions will be punished, provided the counseling requirement is met.80 If abortions are performed within 12 weeks of conception, the new law does not punish women with imprisonment.81 But physicians who abrogate their duty to counsel will be punished by law up to one year in prison or a US$6,954 fine.82 The law also metes out penalties of up to five years in prison for family members who pressure a woman to terminate a pregnancy.83

Financing Abortions
Legal abortions are covered by the statutory health insurance schemes. The Social Security Code provides insured persons with the right to reimbursement for legal abortions performed in a hospital or other designated institution.84 When a legal abortion is performed, the statutory insurance scheme covers medical counseling, examinations, treatment, hospital stay, and the provision of medication.85 These schemes also enable low-income women access to legal abortion services.86

http://www.crlp.org/pub_bo_wowlaw_ger.html


EDIT: Liebling:)))'s opinion: The Abortion rights was changed and improved in 1996 is much better than before.

BUT... BUT... BUT...
It depends on different doctors who are agree to let their patients to have an abortion or not. First of all is check their social grounds. They would not let them to have an abortion if their social grounds is okay. They has to go to see Abortion cousellor.
It's up to Healthy insurance can cover the abortion costs or not. I am agree with those law. Why? Because it's protect women to have abortion many times which they must have known there're sex protection like condom, anti-baby pill, etc.
They are for an adoption, if mother dont want to keep healthy baby.
 
Last edited:
Ooops, at first I thought my response disappeared and then just now, I saw it in between Leibling's two posts.....
 
Tousi said:
Leibling said:

"Abortion legal up to 22 weeks time: dead, malfornation"

I know "malfornation" is misspelled and really means malnutrition but what does, "22 weeks time: dead" mean????
Click to expand...

unborn dead baby in mother's womb

malformed should be correct spelling... Sorry Tousi but thank you for correct me, not malnutrition.

Sorry for wrong spelling. It's malformation/malformed....
 
Last edited:
Magatsu said:
btw, women.. Europe included Sweden is working on open the 'clinics' for American-women to have the abortion if morons in Supreme Court remove your rights for making a decision about abortion. All women need to do is buy the airplane ticket and go there. They will not write down or input anything in any kind of record if any of you plan to have a abortion in Europe so that they will protect you from these Religious Right berserkers. They know that what Religious Right plan to do is morally wrong and against Jesus's teaching about imposing the beliefs on you. That's small 'good news' for you. Cheers.
.
Click to expand...

Abortion is legal on social economic grounds until at least 12 weeks in all of the following countries: Albania, Armenia, Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, France, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Kazakhstan, Latvia, Lithuania, Moldova, Netherlands, Norway, Romania, Russia, Slovak Republic, Sweden, Turkey, Ukraine, United Kingdom, Cyprus, Finland, Iceland, Luxembourg, Switzerland (since June 2001)

I didnt know about Sweden's abortion legal for Americans women.

As far as I know that there're abortion legal in Holland and England who accept people from other countries.

Alots of Germans went to Holland to have an abortion before the law changed in 1996.

http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,1564,1262302,00.html

http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,1564,917500,00.html :shock: (I didnt know about this).
 
True story, sad story.

Germany's Abortion Ordeal: In West, Suspects Face Forced Medical Exams
(BY MARC FISHER)



Bonn.--Driving with her husband from Holland back home to Germany a few weeks ago, the woman now known to all Germany as Kathrin K. was stopped by border police.

First, they searched the car for drugs. They didn't find any.

What they found instead--a plastic bag containing a nightgown, towels and sanitary napkins--convinced them nonetheless that she had committed a crime. Accusing her of having left the country to undergo an abortion--she denied it--they took her to a nearby hospital, where she was forced to have a vaginal examination.

Formally charged, Kathrin went on television this week to admit her abortion but decry the ordeal she had suffered. Her story became a sensation, intensifying the bitter division in Germany over abortion--a division so deep that abortion is legal in the country's east but not in the west.

For residents of the west, abortion is a crime even if it is performed outside the country.

Leaders of virtually every political party and citizens group in Germany, whatever their stands on abortion, seem in agreement that what happened to Kathrin K. is an outrage.

The Dutch Justice Ministry, spurred on by parliamentarians who say the German practice violates European Community guarantees of freedom of movement, today asked Germany to explain what its police have been doing.

German officials say the policy of compelling physical exams in cases of suspected abortions is rarely used; the Bonn Interior Ministry issued a statement saying that `in the last 10 years, there have been about 10 cases.'

But abortion rights activists and their opponents alike say even one forced examination is too many. `The Interior Ministry's denial can only be understood as a confirmation of this criminal practice,' said Heide Ruehle of the environment-oriented Greens party.

Among the thousands of legal and social issues that had to be resolved when the two Germanys merged last fall, only a handful were considered so hot that the two countries agreed to postpone any decision, and abortion was the most divisive of the bunch.

The two approaches to the problem have brought the debate in Germany to a powerful boil. The country has committed itself to finding a common solution by the end of next year.

`It was so degrading,' Kathrin told a television interviewer. The 22-year-old from southern Germany was eight weeks pregnant when she went with her husband to a clinic in Holland, less than an hour from the German border, to avoid the `bureaucratic war' that faces German women seeking to end a pregnancy.

Western German women who have abortions face up to a year in jail, whether they have the procedure done at home or in another country. Women in western Germany may have abortions legally only if a panel of doctors decides it is medically or socially necessary--a process that varies enormously in its strictness, depending largely on whether the woman lives in the conservative Catholic south or in the more liberal Protestant north.

In the former East Germany, abortion remains completely legal, without questions from the government.

Kathrin had already had one child after a difficult pregnancy. `I didn't want another so quickly,' she said. So she went to Holland, where the procedure was done on an outpatient basis for $300. Then she and her husband started the drive home.

At the border at Gronau, police pulled them over. When they found the bag and accused Kathrin, she said she had her period. But police took her to the prosecutor's office and then to a hospital, where, according to German press reports, one physician refused to conduct the examination. A second doctor agreed to do it.

In another forced examination case, police said they found a bill from an abortion clinic in a car being searched at the border. And in a third case, police said they sought the medical examination after a woman suffering bleeding after an abortion asked them for help.

`If we have certain suspicious, we are bound by law to pursue them,' border police spokesman Walter Musholt told the newsmagazine Der Spiegel.

Several women have been brought to trial for having illegal abortions recently, and some doctors who have approved abortions say they no longer keep records of those cases out of fear that police might seek to confiscate them.

Gerhard Ettinger, a public health physician, told the Bild am Sonntag newspaper that police use at least three hospitals for forced examinations of women returning from Amsterdam who are suspected of having had an abortion.

`We want to protect the unborn,' said former German interior minister Gerhart Daum of the Free Democrats, the junior partner in Chancellor Helmut Kohl's center-right government. `But to hunt on the border for women who've had abortions is pure persecution. The border police should have something more useful to do.'

Across party lines, many politicians are calling for an amnesty for women who have had abortions. And Minister for Women and Youth Angela Merkel, one of three former East Germans whom Kohl gave a place in his new cabinet, said the forced exams `show that we need new laws. In emergency situations, help, not punishment, is appropriate.'

But Merkel, a 36-year-old physicist who was an early leader of the 1989 East German revolution, has adopted the strict antiabortion position of Kohl's Christian Democratic Union. She argues that abortion should not be permitted to become the routine method of birth control that it was in communist East Germany, and also should be a crime punishable by imprisonment, as it is in the western part of the country.

`My goal is to clearly reduce the number of abortions,' Merkel told reporters. `We have seen that this will not be achieved by [just] threatening punishment. Society has a duty to make it easier for women to say yes to childbearing. There is no black or white in this question.'

Merkel rejects a proposal from liberal legislators to make first-trimester abortions legal, preferring government-required counseling for women who seek abortions.

`Germany is simply split,' said Christa Meves, a psychotherapist who has written extensively on family issues. `There is no majority anymore for the conservative position and the law will eventually be weakened.'

But that doesn't help Kathrin K. with the humiliation she carries with her from her border encounter, or with the irony of her experience. Kathrin is a relative newcomer to western Germany and its restrictive law. She moved from East Germany in 1988, when the trip was still an adventure beyond the Iron Curtain. Now that Germany is one again, she could have simply gone home to Jena, where her abortion would have been legal.

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?r102:S07MR1-1129:

Edit: I remember about that scandal.
 
I think the information is enough now. I hope you doesnt feel sleepy when you read my informations but it's important and interesting for women because of women rights.

I only give you the information about German law since I live in Germany and know that German law.


I judge nobody. It's up to you because it's your own body, you has the right to decide whatever you wants BUT... BUt... But... I'm not for anyone who abort many times which they know there're kind of sex protection if you dont feel ready to have baby in the future.


What is the wrong about adoption, if you doesnt feel mature to be mother?
 
Ok, Leibling, it means unborn dead. And German law says, "Abortion legal up to 22 weeks time for dead and malformed". Doesn't make sense...what happens if the baby dies after 22 weeks?
 
Tousi said:
Ok, Leibling, it means unborn dead. And German law says, "Abortion legal up to 22 weeks time for dead and malformed". Doesn't make sense...what happens if the baby dies after 22 weeks?
Click to expand...


malformation babies can find out easily under 22 weeks.

I know you would question me over dead unborn baby after 22 weeks.

Dead unborn baby was died under 22 weeks at most time. They delivered dead baby like they did with "abortion".

They would not do with "abortion" after 22 weeks time but give mother an injection or transfusion to open cm and labor pain to let her push dead baby out of the world. (I know it's sad :tears: when the mother see dead baby after push the baby out of the world).

I said this because I know some of my friends had an experience like this. I feel cry when they told me the stories what they had been through.
 
Last edited:
I see, Leibling, an injection and the mother pushes it out......ok, thanks, I didn't know....
 
http://biblia.com/jesusbible/judges2.htm
1- Theological sin, is to do something bad directly against God himself. They are the sins against the first Commandment of God, "You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind, and with all your strength" (Mr.12:30). They are the most serious sins, much worse than murder or abortion or steeling or adultery or lies, that are only moral sins, against the creatures of God… and, ironically, they are the sins we never confess, and that's why we are often in trouble, living in sin, while thinking we are saints!…
Click to expand...

See? Next time keep your religious briefs to yourself Reba and Crazymanw00t; because you both think Abortion is on top of the sinned world when we all are sinners therefore what makes you both so perfect? Not.

We are all sinners, Christians and non-Christians
Click to expand...
Of course, God can still forgive sins directly!.
Click to expand...

Crazymanw00t; Therefore on page one you said I am a sinner and carries out my baby is a sinner, Once I seek God for my forgivings, I no longer a sinner for that crime. So you were wrong to call me that, when it not your place to say that to me, You are not my God. My God already forgotten about the sinned I did, It was forgotten, You had to bring that up and rub it in my face which was wrong upon your part, You should be very shame of yourself. :(

Reba that goes the same to you, You have no right to tell us abortion is bad, It is none of your business what those women choose would be it's between God and them not you. therefore you not God either.

Remember both of you, It is not your duty to judged, only God judged. Leave us alone now, We don't want to hear anymore preaching from either of you.
 
oh come on you people!! this thread is MAKING ME SICK!!! i am sick and tired of people saying how bad abortion is blah blah!!! i dont believe in abortion either.... but WHEN IT COMES TO PERSONAL REASONS.. i dont see anything wrong with it.. period.. SHEESH.. stop it you people!! why do you have to keep criticizing cheri, dd and meg!?? come on! stop it please!!! we are all entitled to our own frigging opinions...

i bet you have some ugly secrets that you dont have the gall to expose.. so i APPLAUD cheri, dd and meggie for coming forward with their most shameful secrets!!! so hush your dirty mouths up!! it was SO BIG of them to do this!! sheesh!

we are just here to share our stories, opinions, feelings, input, feeback, experiences.. etc.. and LAST OF ALL SUPPORT.. but not to be PUT DOWN OR DEGRADED/CRITICIZED!! if you dont like it.. keep your damn mouth shut.. simple as that!! i havent said anything in this thread all along ... cuz i dont like anything that is being said.. but when i see this thread being endless.. i just want to put an end to this before people get boiled and end up being banned!! come on! please!!

what did alex say!!?? please respect others!! damn you guys!!! wake up!!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top