Gee Cee

Yes - she does have a nice pair.

Now that we all know what they are worth, do you think they will still be there in the morning?

It means giving women the right to kill unborn babies whenever they feel like it. We are almost there!

It must have been a couple of years ago, but I distinctly remember Ballaughbiker making a refence to "bikers eating babies". If you get your way BB, and abortion becomes the norm, your poor biker friends may well starve to death.

I would like to congratulate Ballaughbiker and Maynragh. Between them, they have turned an interesting thread into the most boring one that I have ever seen on MF.

As I have already said, it is you that is obsessed with cost. Not me. You have now earned a well deserved place on my 'Ignore List'.

It was you that raised the question of cost, not me. You did so at 10:09AM on Monday. Yes - I do feel that a mistake has been made. A very grave mistake.

I am not a hypocrite. As many on this forum will testify, I am just as bothered about those who have been born. Especially if they choose to ride in the TT races! You ask "what am I prepared to do about it"? Well I'm sorry, but I do not understand the question. What is this 'IT' that you want me to do something about?

Much of this discussion about when a life becomes viable is quite irrelevant to the real issue. A deliberate smokescreen perhaps? Babies tend to be aborted when they are several months old. I'm not sure what the limit is now, but let's say for the sake of argument, that an abortion can take place up to 24 weeks. Everyone seems to agree that after 24 weeks abortion should not be allowed. The pro-abortionists need to consider what state the foetus is in at 23 weeks and 6 days. I for one doubt that it is possible to tell the difference between a foetus that is 23 weeks and 6 days old, and one that is 24 weeks old. Despite this, there are many people who would happily kill one, and protect the other. It doesn't matter what time period you choose, the same argument will apply. The only way to be sure that you are not killing babies, is to outlaw abortion.

Maybe we need to compromise? Let's build an abortion unit at Nobles. That way the pro-abortionists will be happy - they get their clinic. The anti-abortionists will also be happy - Nobles are bound to have a 12 month waiting list.

Just because I am against abortion, does not mean that I am religious. I have never presumed to inflict religious views on anyone. In an earlier post John Wright referred to the "struggle between ethical viewpoints and popular viewpoints". John's comment gets to the crux of the problem. The popular view point seems to be that if a girl gets pregnant, and doesn't want the baby, then she can have an abortion. The ethical viewpoint is that having sex is liable to lead to pregnancy. If you don't want a baby, then don't have sex. If you do have sex, and become pregnant, then you should give birth to the child, rather than have it killed. That is what the debate is about. I support the ethical viewpoint. Most people on here seem to support the popular viewpoint.

I really do not see that a woman having an abortion, is facing up to her responsibilities. Far from it. Rather than facing up to her responsibilities, she is running away from them.

It's not very often that I disagree with you Roger, but on this occasion I do. There is the world of difference between punishing a woman for getting pregnant, and expecting her to face up to her responsibilities. I expect people to face up to their responsibilities. At no point have I ever suggested that anyone should be punished.

So having got themselves into "very difficult circumstances". These people then expect Joe Public to foot the bill for sorting the mess out. Absolutely unbelievable.

"We as a society tolerate lawful killing" "We pick and chose" These must rank as some of the saddest comments ever posted on MF.