Login or Edit
Pro-Life TeensPro-Life TeensPro-Life TeensPro-Life Teens

Andrea Clark Loses Her Battle for Life

— Posted by John (May 8, 2006 at 11:06 am)

Via Pro-Life Blogs:

Andrea passed away peacefully a little before 3pm today, with her family and her friends at her bedside. We love her so very much and we are going to miss her terribly. We hope that the battle that we fought for our sister will bring to light and bear witness to the horrible acts committed in the name of ethics in hospitals across the state of Texas.

The fact that we had to fight this battle is both frightening and a sad commentary on the so-called “ethics” now being practiced in medical facilities in this state. The battle for life is a difficult one, in the best of situations, but when a family is put through what we had to go through at such a time, it is especially agonizing.

We wish so much that we could have spent more time at our sister’s side, when she was living and fighting for her life, rather than having to visit our attorney’s office, give interviews to radio and television stations to let the public know of the atrocity about to befall Andrea, and literally stand outside the hospital and beg them not to kill our sister. In attempting to deprive Andrea of the most basic of her human rights–life–St. Luke’s Hospital managed to deprive her family and her of that which is most dear to us all, when we are faced with the death of a loved one: a proper goodbye.

How, in the name of God, anyone can call putting someone to death when they are at their most helpless and begging for their lives “ethical,” we cannot imagine.

Melanie Childers

Our prayers go out for Andrea and her family during this time. Please include them in your prayers, too.

As I wrote in a previous post, the Texas Futile Care Law (also called the Texas Advance Directives Act) has got to go. Yenlang Vo, for one, is still struggling for her life, and the TFCL is only making matters worse.

Not Dead Yet, the nation’s leading disability rights advocacy organization, recently weighed in on the controversy over so-called “futile care”:

Essentially, futile care policies provide that a physician may overrule a patient or their authorized decision-maker in denying wanted life-sustaining treatment. Futile care policies do not generally require that the treatment be objectively futile, but allow doctors to use subjective criteria such as quality of life judgments and even economic factors as grounds for denying treatment.

It’s also a concern to disability advocates who, until recently, were excluded from the relatively small group of players that has played a major role in pushing for the “futility” statute and other changes in Texas health care policies. “We think that all health care consumers should be questioning whether it’s advisable, or even constitutional, for doctors to have this kind of power,” said Diane Coleman, president of Not Dead Yet.

I couldn’t agree more. NDY continues:

Coincidentally, Bob Kafka, Texas NDY Organizer, withdrew from the Advance Directives Coalition just days before the news hit the web about Andrea Clark. He withdrew over efforts to “improve” the “futility” statute.

“I have come to the conclusion that the essence of any futility law embraces involuntary euthanasia,” says Kafka. “The ability of a doctor to overrule both the patient and their surrogate in withdrawing life-sustaining treatment is in violation of the principle of patient autonomy. There’s no way to ‘fix’ this law. It just needs to be killed – or euthanized, for those who prefer softer language. I am increasingly suspicious of the willingness of the medical community to honor ‘autonomy’ of old, ill and disabled people ONLY in those cases where they want to die [emphasis added].”

Kafka is right. If there was ever a time to be suspicious, this is it.

This entry is filed under Euthanasia. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

40 Comments on “Andrea Clark Loses Her Battle for Life”

Please Note: Visitor comments do not necessarily reflect the views of Generations for Life or our parent organization, the Pro-Life Action League.

  1. Lauren says:

    You can thank George W. Bush for this one!!!!!!! funny how he would side with corporations over “life”! You guys are the ones who voted him in!

    Comment posted May 9th, 2006 at 11:29 am
  2. Lauren says:

    I wanted to post a question to all those who write on this site regularly since I dont have any of your e-mails..

    1. Do you think abortion should be outlawed?
    2. Do you think abortion should be criminalized?
    3. If so, what penalty and to whom?
    4. Should birth control be outlawed? If you only think certain kinds, tell.
    5. Do you think all women regret their abortions?
    6. Do you think public schools should be able to provide both kinds of sex education, abstinence and comprehensive protective information?
    7. Describe Planned Parenthood.
    8. What is a woman’s natural instinct?
    9. Abortion for rape and/or incest? Do you believe in parental and spousal notification in all circumstances?
    10. Do you believe that the separation of church and state exists historically? Why or why not? Despite whether it does or does not exist, do you believe that it should or shouldn’t?

    You can post those or email them to lpatriz@luc.edu. If you do send through email, please title it “post”.
    Thanks,
    Lauren

    Comment posted May 9th, 2006 at 11:36 am
  3. Phil says:

    Its sad to see that she died, but maybe that law will be dismantled because of the attention her story received, and others who might have fallen victim to it may live.

    Comment posted May 9th, 2006 at 3:36 pm
  4. Phil says:

    Lauren, I campaigned for Nader, the first and last politician I voted for.

    Comment posted May 9th, 2006 at 3:37 pm
  5. Lauren says:

    Those that don’t vote might as well be silent.

    Comment posted May 9th, 2006 at 4:43 pm
  6. Phil says:

    Well I can’t seem to find one I agree with….and why contribute my voice to a system that I believe to be inherintly corrupt and based a falfse premises?

    If one person does nothing but vote, and another doesn’t, but makes postive changes in their community by taking part in locally based organizing cooperatives, which one has accomplished more. Emma Goldman once referred to voting as “the opiate of the masses.”

    Comment posted May 10th, 2006 at 3:37 am
  7. Lauren says:

    No my friend…. religion is the opiate of the masses.

    Comment posted May 10th, 2006 at 9:18 am
  8. Eric says:

    Lauren says: “[R]eligion is the opiate of the masses.”

    Oh, I just love it when the pro-aborts quote Karl Marx! Perfect—both insulting religious faith and tacitly approving Marxism. I love it!

    Lauren, please don’t ever stop posting on this blog. Please.

    Comment posted May 10th, 2006 at 11:39 am
  9. Lauren says:

    If you understood ANYTHING, and I do mean ANYTHING about Karl Marx, you’d understand that the communism Marx endorsed is nothing like the communism that has ever been practiced in the world.

    Secondly, asshole, and yes I called you an asshole, cry about it (which im sure you will), Marx did not dismiss religion. He said that it provides comfort, which it does. Here’s Marx’s own words since you seem to know it all…

    “Religious suffering is, at one and the same time, the expression of real suffering and a protest against real suffering. Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people.”

    Comment posted May 10th, 2006 at 1:30 pm
  10. Lauren says:

    When religion loses touch with reality and REAL suffering and tragedy is when it goes awry. Its intent to affect certain ends are corrupt. Its intent is to harm other ends. You want women to be a subjugate race and you want to control my body. Has anyone ever called you a pervert eric? That’s what you are. seriously.

    Comment posted May 10th, 2006 at 1:31 pm
  11. Lauren says:

    Eric,

    Does it ever bother you to think that you probably never made an independent decision on your own? That you’re only following in the steps of your whack father? Do you ever think to yourself is there any way out of this? I feel bad for you, I really do. I can’t imagine if I just blindly followed a church or a parent. Do you have any independent thoughts? If you ever come around I’m always here.

    Btw, what would you do with me if I was your daughter?

    Here’s a better question…
    what would you do if your daughter had an abortion and didnt regret it?

    what would you found birth control pills in your daughter’s purse?

    what would you do if you found out one of your children was gay?

    Would you and your father hate them? Would you send them away?

    You people really are the embodiment of hatred.

    Comment posted May 10th, 2006 at 1:49 pm
  12. rosie says:

    Lauren,
    What would you do if your daughter became a devout catholic?

    Comment posted May 10th, 2006 at 4:29 pm
  13. joe says:

    “…that the communism Marx endorsed is nothing like the communism that has ever been practiced in the world.”

    Karl Marx wanted us to share everything including our wives and children. Marriage would be abolished and children would be brought up by the state.

    My understanding is that Russia attempted to get close to this when they abolished marriage in a specific area to see what would happen. It got so bad even the they decided it wouldn’t work. I imagine they started killing each other. Anything less the Communists probably would have been fine with.

    Despite what we were taught in school, Communism was not even a good idea to begin with. It was all around a bad idea, not just in the way it has been implemented.

    I don’t think Lauren is a Communist, even if says she hates religion. I also refuse to believe she hates religion. Without religion, specifically Catholicism, she would be some guys slave right now, wouldn’t have the right to vote and certainly would not be able to play on the Internet.

    “Btw, what would you do with me if I was your daughter?”

    Restraining order… Definitely.

    Comment posted May 10th, 2006 at 5:02 pm
  14. Eric says:

    Lauren writes: “[A]sshole, and yes I called you an asshole . . . . You people really are the embodiment of hatred.

    And you, Lauren, are the embodiment of irony.

    As to your silly questions, I would answer them (again—I’ve answered most of them already on other threads) if I thought it would make any difference. But you have amply proved yourself unwilling to entertain the “independent thougth” that your prejudices about pro-lifers might be mistaken.

    You say you feel sorry for me. I don’t usually treat people I feel sorry for like crap, but perhaps you really mean it, somehow.

    I feel sorry for you too, Lauren. All this anger. And what’s worse, this sorry need to justify that anger, over and over again, to the very people you pretend to consider incapable of understanding you.

    Sad.

    Comment posted May 11th, 2006 at 1:25 am
  15. Lauren says:

    Can you understand why I am so angry?

    Comment posted May 11th, 2006 at 10:10 am
  16. Eric says:

    Because it’s legal in this country to chop little people up into tiny pieces under cover of “choice”? No, wait . . . You approve of that . . .

    Sorry, why are you angry again?

    Comment posted May 11th, 2006 at 1:44 pm
  17. Quinn says:

    I stand by my initial impression of Lauren which is that she is a 16 year-old high school girl that likes to act as if she is intelligent without providing the evidence of intelligence through her arguments.

    I’ll answer your first and second list of questions succinctly and without any further elaboration.

    1. Do you think abortion should be outlawed? YES
    2. Do you think abortion should be criminalized? YES
    3. If so, what penalty and to whom? EXECUTION FOR ANYONE WHO HAS PARTICIPATED IN THE MURDER OF THAT CHILD AND FOR ANYONE WHO PUBLICLY PROMOTES ABORTION OR THE KILLING OF ANY INNOCENT PERSON
    4. Should birth control be outlawed? If you only think certain kinds, tell. YES. WILL DO MORE RESEARCH TO DISCOVER IF ANY KINDS OF BIRTH CONTROL ARE SAFE ENOUGH TO USE
    5. Do you think all women regret their abortions? ALL WOMEN WITH A WORKING CONSCIENCE DO
    6. Do you think public schools should be able to provide both kinds of sex education, abstinence and comprehensive protective information? NO. PUBLIC SCHOOLS SHOULD NOT EXIST.
    7. Describe Planned Parenthood. AIDS TO CHILD SEX PREDATORS/RAPISTS. HEAR PP HELP RAPISTS TO AVOID GETTING CAUGHT BY LISTENING TO THESE 93 RECORDED PHONE CALLS http://traditionalvalues.org/1/pph/index2.php
    8. What is a woman’s natural instinct? THAT ASSUMES THAT PEOPLE ARE INSTINCTIVE. ASSUMING YOU ARE REFERRING TO A MOTHER’S NATURAL INSTINCT IT IS TO PROTECT AND CARE FOR HER BABY
    9. Abortion for rape and/or incest? Do you believe in parental and spousal notification in all circumstances? PARENTAL CONSENT IS WRONG BECAUSE THAT LAW ENDS WITH “AND THEN YOU CAN KILL YOUR BABY”. ANY LAW THAT ENDS LIKE THAT IS A BAD LAW. KILLING AN INNOCENT BABY BECAUSE THEIR FATHER COMMITTED A CRIME IS WRONG. NO CHILD IS TO BE PUNISHED BECAUSE OF THE CRIME ONE PARENT COMMITTED. ITS TOTALLY UNJUST TO PUNISH A CHILD FOR THEIR FATHER’S CRIME.
    10. Do you believe that the separation of church and state exists historically? Why or why not? Despite whether it does or does not exist, do you believe that it should or shouldn’t? I DON’T GIVE A RIP ABOUT THIS PHRASE THAT LIBERAL GOD-HATERS USE. THIS PHRASE IS PRESENTLY WRONGLY APPLIED (CONTRARY TO JEFFERSON’S USAGE) ALMOST EXCLUSIVELY AS A WEAPON AGAINST CHRISTIANS. I WANT AND PROMOTE A CONSTITUTIONAL MONARCHY. DEMOCRACIES AND REPUBLICS ARE AMORAL AT BEST AND IMMORAL AT WORST AS THE RECENT PALESTINIAN ELECTIONS DEMONSTRATED. SEE A MUCH BETTER CONSTITUTION FOR AMERICA HERE http://www.shadowgov.com

    what would you do if your daughter had an abortion and didnt regret it? FIRST, WE WOULD KNOW SHE IS LYING AND THAT SHE REGRETS HER ABORTION TO SOME EXTENT. SINCE WE HELPED TO FORM HER CONSCIENCE WELL IT WOULD BE IMPOSSIBLE NOT TO REGRET HAVING MURDERED HER CHILD. AND SECONDLY, WE WOULD DISFELLOWSHIP HER SO THAT SHE WOULD FEEL COMPELLED TO REPENT AND ASK GOD AND US FOR FORGIVENESS AS THE APOSTLE PAUL TAUGHT US TO RESPOND TO THE UNREPENTANT SEXUALLY IMMORAL IN 1 COR 5

    what would you [DO IF YOU] found birth control pills in your daughter’s purse? THROW THEM AWAY AND MAKE SURE THAT EVERY MOMENT OVER THE NEXT 6 MONTHS SHE HAD A PARENT OR TRUSTED FRIEND SUPERVISING HER.

    what would you do if you found out one of your children was gay? FIND OUT WHICH HOMO-PEDOPHILE MOLESTED HIM AND HAVE HIM CONVICTED (IF THEY CAN RECALL WHO IT WAS) BECAUSE WHEN IT COMES TO SO-CALLED GAY MEN THEY REPRODUCE BY MOLESTING CHILDREN. AND I WOULD ALSO GET HIM INTO COUNSELING WITH A PSYCHIATRIST WHO IS AFFILIATED WITH NARTH http://www.narth.com

    Would you and your father hate them? Would you send them away? WE WOULD GIVE THE MOST LOVING AND CARING TREATMENT AVAILABLE WHICH IS WHAT I DESCRIBED ABOVE

    Comment posted May 11th, 2006 at 8:00 pm
  18. Lauren says:

    chop little people up? Who’s chopping little people up? lol. I’m not disguising anything as choice. A woman has a right to an abortion. End of story.

    I am angry because you think you have the right to make my decisions for me, do you not?

    Comment posted May 11th, 2006 at 10:44 pm
  19. Eric says:

    Lauren says: “I am angry because you think you have the right to make my decisions for me, do you not?”

    Quite the contrary. I don’t think either one of us has the right to decide to kill your unborn child.

    Comment posted May 12th, 2006 at 1:20 pm
  20. Eric says:

    By the way, I think I should say that I disagree with almost the entirety of Quinn’s response to Lauren’s questions, starting with his unfortunate decision to write it in ALL CAPITAL LETTERS.

    In particular, I oppose criminal penalties for women who have abortions, a desperate act almost always done under extreme duress. Any penalties for abortion should be imposed upon the abortionists, as was typically the case prior to Roe v. Wade.

    Also worth noting, I oppose and abhor the notion of “disfellowshipping” anyone, which even if it were not contrary to the Gospel (Lk 15:11-32), utterly fails to take into account human nature. If you want to all but ensure that your daughter never repents, “disfellowship” her.

    Comment posted May 12th, 2006 at 1:50 pm
  21. Quinn says:

    What is Paul telling us to do here Eric?

    1 Corinthians 5:1 It is actually reported [that there is] sexual immorality among you, and such sexual immorality as is not even named among the Gentiles — that a man has his father’s wife! 2 And you are puffed up, and have not rather mourned, that he who has done this deed might be taken away from among you. 3 For I indeed, as absent in body but present in spirit, have already judged (as though I were present) him who has so done this deed. 4 In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, when you are gathered together, along with my spirit, with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ, 5 deliver such a one to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus. 6 Your glorying [is] not good. Do you not know that a little leaven leavens the whole lump? 7 Therefore purge out the old leaven, that you may be a new lump, since you truly are unleavened. For indeed Christ, our Passover, was sacrificed for us. 8 Therefore let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, nor with the leaven of malice and wickedness, but with the unleavened [bread] of sincerity and truth. 9 I wrote to you in my epistle not to keep company with sexually immoral people. 10 Yet [I] certainly [did] not [mean] with the sexually immoral people of this world, or with the covetous, or extortioners, or idolaters, since then you would need to go out of the world. 11 But now I have written to you not to keep company with anyone named a brother, who is sexually immoral, or covetous, or an idolater, or a reviler, or a drunkard, or an extortioner — not even to eat with such a person. 12 For what [have] I [to do] with judging those also who are outside? Do you not judge those who are inside? 13 But those who are outside God judges. Therefore “put away from yourselves the evil person.”

    I wonder whose advice I should follow here? Eric’s or Paul’s? Hmmmmmm……….I think I’ll go with Paul here ;)

    The Catholic Church would be much much better off if those in it followed what Paul wrote here, to disfellowship the unrepentant sexually immoral and others who commit the gross sins Paul mentions and are unrepentant of it.

    I am interested what your response to Lauren’s questions would be since you say that you “disagree with almost the entirety of my responses”.

    Comment posted May 12th, 2006 at 4:29 pm
  22. Quinn says:

    Eric said

    “Also worth noting, I oppose and abhor the notion of “disfellowshipping” anyone, which even if it were not contrary to the Gospel (Lk 15:11-32), utterly fails to take into account human nature. If you want to all but ensure that your daughter never repents, “disfellowship” her.”

    In that passage the offender who leaves his family with his father’s inheritance REPENTS and comes back. The unrepentant sexually immoral is who we would be disfellowshipping according to Paul’s command in 1 Cor 5. Once they repent and ask to be forgiven, we would let that person fellowship with us. Doing things God’s way works better than Eric’s way every time.

    You also said

    “In particular, I oppose criminal penalties for women who have abortions, a desperate act almost always done under extreme duress. Any penalties for abortion should be imposed upon the abortionists, as was typically the case prior to Roe v. Wade.”

    You could say the same thing about many thieves Eric. Many thieves are stealing because they are “under extreme duress” and as a result are committing “a desperate act”. Should those who steal not be forced to make restitution one they are convicted because of these factors?

    If a woman is being forced by her boyfriend or parents or both to have her baby killed, then she would not be guilty. If she willingly works with others to kill her innocent child then she is guilty of attempted murder and the punishment for attempting the crime is the same as if you actually committed the crime. For example, if you aim and fire a gun at a person to kill them, but the gun malfunctions and does not go off, then you should be given the same punishment that you would be given had the gun worked properly.

    Comment posted May 12th, 2006 at 5:56 pm
  23. Eric says:

    Quinn, if I had been a member of the Corinthian community that had written to Paul about how to deal with this particular fellow, I would have followed Paul’s instructions.

    Note that there is nothing about “disfellowshipping” in the story of the Prodigal Son. The father saw his son coming and ran out to embrace him before the son spoke any words of repentance.

    As to my responses to Laurens questions, I’ve already in effect answered many of them on this blog already; I’m sure others will be answered in due course as well. But it should be amply evident that Lauren and I agree on almost nothing.

    Comment posted May 15th, 2006 at 10:19 am
  24. Lauren says:

    Quinn haha I’m sorry most of your responses dont warrant a response, but dont worry I’ll be posting them soon.. lmao. Please tel l me that your shadow gov really was a joke.. Please.. lol. omg.

    Comment posted May 16th, 2006 at 1:36 am
  25. Quinn says:

    LOL! Eric! There was no need to disfellowship that son since he left the family. It wasn’t as if he was trying to join his family and those in the congregation for a worship service after he took his inheritance and left.

    Paul’s teaching to the Corinthians is just as useful and necessary today if you want to eventually bring the unrepentant sexually immoral back into fellowship with the local church.

    Comment posted May 20th, 2006 at 2:24 pm
  26. Quinn says:

    The site is not my creation, but my pal’s Bob Enyart. He produced the new constitution for America and wrote the other material on the site. And that constitution is FAR better than our current one. So, please do share.

    Comment posted May 20th, 2006 at 2:25 pm
  27. Lucy says:

    Lauren;
    1. Abortion should be counted as legal automatically, reinforcing the truth that a woman is the sole owner of her body.

    2. See answer to number 1. Any laws against abortion should be viewed as a violation of anti slavery laws, logically.

    3. The penalty should be against anyone who attempts to intimidate a woman who is attempting to obtain an abortion. It should be viewed as both a violation against the clinic and against the woman. A proper forum to convince women that they have better options than abortion exist. They may be found in formats such as this blog, other websites, paid commercials on television or on the radio, newspaper editorials, or pamphlets that may be distributed to any member of the public who is receptive to recieving it in their hand. Books can be published, or seminars recorded on DVDs or CD’s…actually, considering the options available are enourmous…one might wonder what drives people to swarm clinics in the first place.

    4. Birth control is but another demonstration of mans ability through the excercise of his rational faculites to control nature. To argue against birth control is the same as arguing against the invention of the wheel. Both come from the same source, and provide the same service. Both create a situation where mankind is not left unarmed at the mercy of nature. It is these very developements that allow us to communicate on this computer that sits in front of each of us, or by phone, or by mail, or read at all. So please, all of those opposed to Birth Control, shut off your computers and admit that you are opposed to the thought process of humanity. At very least that should be the last we hear from Quinn.

    5. I know that not all women regret their abortions Lauren. Even if they did it would not be reason enough to remove the option. I have shoes I regret Lauren, this does not mean that they should not sell shoes. I regret missing a number of years of school, but I made that decision, and frankly I regret a few of the classes I have taken, and a few of the teachers. I regret a boyfriend or two. I regret a conversation or so that I’ve had, things I’ve said, done, not said, not done. The point is that we are free to make our decisions, with the risk of regrets, that we are not that which follows a recipe and comes out perfect every time. That we make decisions, some good, some bad, and we learn, if we are fortunate and wise, so that perhaps we can pass a little that we have learned to generations who may or may not hear us. So that they can build a better future. We cannot eliminate regrets without also eliminating joys. The wonderful sense when we accomplish something and it does turn out the way we wanted. I’ll take a lifetime of regrets for one fleeting moment of knowing accomplishment.

    6. I think that saying within the course of a comprehensive sex education course that abstinance is the only method that is fool proof is kind of a given. Otherwise schools are promoting sex, which of course is wrong. I’m not entirely certain that schools should be teaching sex ed, I think it belongs in the home, but if they do, public schools anyway, should give the whole speal. This of course includes stating that if you want to ensure that you will not become pregnant, don’t have sex. I think that it is the behavior of a responsible adult however, to give ways of being safer. The word education is key. Providing all available information is crucial. I don’t think anything else was ever billed as 100% effective. It’s just a matter of telling the kid to stay out of the pool, but teaching them to swim just in case.

    7.Planned Parenthood is an aggravating organization who I would love to support if they weren’t so prone to promoting one persons freedom at the expense of anothers. They provide good services to women with limited options and should be commended for doing so. They provide education to young women who might otherwise go without. Yet, they seek to tell businesses how to operate via legislation rather than pursue better avenues such as boycotting. They also did a wonderful job of ‘defacing’ an image from the Sistine Chapel in a fashion I believe Michaelangelo would have approved of and angering the Catholic Church. I loved that.

    8.We’ve been trained to distrust our instincts. A womans natural instincts are wonderful and beautiful. Our natural instincts are to protect life and the natural harmony of things. Our natural instincts are loving and caring. We are prone to desiring children when we are in a loving and safe place where are natural instincts can flourish. However, we are likely to override those instincts in favor of other directions. Leading us to engage in sexual activity in an arena other than that which is best for us. “If you loved me you would” kind of deal. It is in our nature to want love. It is not just women, but we are the mothers of the world. It is our instinct to want it to be safe and secure. We have been drawn away from our instincts however. It appears that the confusion of women is great in todays world, we are still trying to find our place. The one we were thrust out of.

    9. In all instances where abortion is considered it is the womans choice. In all instances it is the option of the woman as to who she will and will not inform.

    10.The foundations of this country were unique from anything that had ever existed to the best of our knowledge. They have never been executed perfectly, however, if executed perfectly, Thomas Jefferson alone made it abundantly clear that a separation of Church and State should be understood to be a critical element. It is only neccesary to examine the history of the world, and the results of a relationship between government and religion to grasp why this would be so. Consider ancient Egypt, Ancient Greece, Rome, Medevial England, Spain. Consider the Theocracies of today, the events of just a few days ago in Iraq. Consider the attrocities of Afghanistan. Even in instances where a Religion has been replaced with the Government ordered abscence of Religion the results have been devastating. The most vital thing in the world is that people be able to think freely, which includes choosing their own religion, or choosing against religion, each for their own reasons. Consider the witch trials of this country, or the Canidate for Governor of Florida who has been allegedly chosen by Jesus Christ. Consider the effect of this on the residents of Florida who are Hindu…as you apparently might as well be….a demonstration of little knowledge of Hinduism on behalf of the individual who made the arguement. Consider that even Catholics and Baptists are different and yet even Catholics and Jews have common ground, yet the manner in which the religions are observed are so very different, that they can cause disagreements in what kind of food is accepted, where, why and when.

    For whatever it might be worth Lauren…a more critical examination of Marx and the attempt to apply it to practical matters will display the truth that it will always work out just so. Marx did not put the Cart in front of the horse, he shot the horse, and generations have marveled at the fact that the Cart did not move without the horse.

    Comment posted May 30th, 2006 at 5:04 pm
  28. mary kay says:

    LUCY SAYS

    “4. Birth control is but another demonstration of mans ability through the excercise of his rational faculites to control nature. To argue against birth control is the same as arguing against the invention of the wheel. Both come from the same source, and provide the same service. Both create a situation where mankind is not left unarmed at the mercy of nature. It is these very developements that allow us to communicate on this computer that sits in front of each of us, or by phone, or by mail, or read at all. So please, all of those opposed to Birth Control, shut off your computers and admit that you are opposed to the thought process of humanity. At very least that should be the last we hear from Quinn.”

    “To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it.” – A Short History of England, Ch.10 GKChesterton

    “Men do not differ much about what things they will call evils; they differ enormously about what evils they will call excusable.” – ILN, 10/23/09 GKChesterton

    “There’d be a lot less scandal if people didn’t idealize sin and pose as sinners.” – The Father Brown Omnibus GKChesterton

    MK

    Comment posted May 31st, 2006 at 8:10 am
  29. Lucy says:

    Mary Kay,
    The thing is, the reference was to rational man. Man being a generic reference to humanity of course. I don’t understand what it is you have against birth control. I mean, really how much do you hate women exactly? Not to mention men. I mean, those children, some of them are male. The ones starving to death or in state homes. How much hatred for humanity do you have pent up inside of you exactly? Have you thought about seeking therapy? I mean, really, this mean streak of yours, it’s getting a little out of hand, don’t you think?

    Truly, I was responding to Lauren. I don’t mind your opinion, but it could at least be coherent. Rational, the key is Rational.

    Comment posted May 31st, 2006 at 10:20 am
  30. mary kay says:

    Lucy,

    You need to somehow let me know what you are referring to. I don’t know what response was irrational…You mean the quotes from GK Chesterton. You are saying Chesterton was irrational…

    I’m very confused…And while I may have been caustic, I was never mean. I have never called you a name or degraded you in any way. I’m not saying that I was saintly, just that I did not attack you personally.

    If you would like to call a truce and continue this debate sans the aggression I would love too.
    Being sarcastic is very draining.
    My head hurts.
    And quite honestly, so does my heart.
    If I hurt your feelings or your sensiblities with the way I have said things I am sincerely sorry. I stand by my convictions, but you are right, I could have been kinder. We all make mistakes.
    I too am capable of losing sight of the fact that you may be sincere in your arguments and not just trying to pick a fight. As I said to Lauren, it takes a lot of guts to enter the enemy camp…
    mea culpa.
    peace?
    MK

    Comment posted May 31st, 2006 at 5:36 pm
  31. mary kay says:

    Mary Kay said: (as if Lucy were saying it…)

    I want abortion to be legal, I want to sleep with whoever I want and I want to do it with no consequences. I want those prolifers to get off my case and I want everyone to agree that it’s not really a baby…

    “Guess what, the world doesn’t revolve around you and what you want. You want to get a tattoo? go ahead. You want to drink til you fall down? go ahead. you want to scream at the top of your lungs that you have rights? go ahead. But we’re not talking about you (I know, I know that’s hard to comprehend cuz it’s all about you, what you want, what you deserve, what you demand, and your rights… but just for this moment, one teeny tiny second we’re going to think about someone else and what they need. Can you handle that?) Other people have rights too. And in this case the childs rights outwiegh yours because you want the right to “choose” and that child wants the right to live!”

    Okay, maybe I got a little carried away. And I will do better. But do you realize how you sound? It kind of gets people reacting before they can think straight…listen to what you said…

    . I mean, really how much do you hate women exactly?
    Have you thought about seeking therapy?
    Pretty please with a cherry on top get out of the way of the women who are trying to make a difficult decision and are coming from a place that you do not comprehend, will not comprehend and are far to petty to attempt to comprehend.

    If you wish to invoke your god have at it, but leave Thomas Jefferson out of this until you’ve developed a better understanding of what this country is supposed to be and what life is.

    While I appreciate that you are so self indulgent that you actually believe you know what is best for everyone else, because it is so unique…no one else has ever tried it…yes, get your hands off of my body.

    would simply appreciate it if you people would not insinuate you have nothing but love in your hearts for people you have made clear you would just as soon destroy as anything.

    When you are done thinking for people besides yourself we can discuss morality. Until then, I don’t think so. You don’t know what I think, you don’t know what I feel. What’s more, you don’t care. You wish to implicate me with the indocrination you have recieved without asking what actually makes me tick.

    ***Nor you I…

    See Eric, once again you’re correct. It really is a myth. Your guys are kind and loving at all times. No matter what. I’m glad that we have that all nice and cleared up.

    Okay? enough is enough? and yes truthfully I would have responded kindly if you had begun kindly, but I should have responded kindly anyway…again. sorry.
    MK

    Comment posted May 31st, 2006 at 6:00 pm
  32. Lucy says:

    I want abortion to be legal, I want to sleep with whoever I want and I want to do it with no consequences. I want those prolifers to get off my case and I want everyone to agree that it’s not really a baby…

    Perhaps we need to come to a better understanding of what an apology would be, and what it would mean to better try to understand one anothers position. However, proving that you are unable to understand what these things mean you post this. Your indoctrinated understanding of what it is I’m saying. I know it isn’t yours because everyone on your side makes the same accusations. I know it is simply what has been ground into your head. Obviously, the post that implied that you would like to begin fresh was a bit misleading as this was the follow up.

    In truth, was it that you would like me to be nicer?

    Perhaps I could not ask you to please not take Thomas Jefferson out of context, please not to abuse this great mans work without understanding what he meant, as you obviously do not.

    And in this case the childs rights outwiegh yours because you want the right to “choose” and that child wants the right to live!”
    This is presumptuous perhaps beyond compare. It denies the woman the right to choose how to live her life from that point on. I understand that adoption is the all time favorite easy out. Please consider what it requires however. It requires an endless stream of parents that would rather adopt than have their own child, or other various reasons, I know that you would like to offer. It requires my saying okay, I’ve made the problem someone else fix it. It’s an easy out that defies reality. There is instead a waiting list of children waiting to be adopted. There are children starving to death in other parts of the world. I marvel at the fact that your side is also generally anti welfare. I marvel that your side would generally strip the system of funding that is needed to fulfill your daydream that things actually work this way. Maybe your not one of them, but you refer to yourself as the enemy and I refer to the overall policy of the enemy.

    I wasn’t cruel, I was honest, all of what I said was in response to things you said to me. Just as you wish to do with Thomas Jefferson, you take what I’ve said out of context by floating them above absent of the trigger for such a response.

    So, sofar, we’ve had your apology, followed by an insult, followed by taking my words out of context, and then followed by another apology, and the explanation that I was indeed correct. Your kindness or lack thereoff follows me, the enemy, it does not precede me. You are therefore, kind to those who agree with you, and not so to those who do.

    I’m sorry, I’ve seen your tactics before. You have not now made yourself the bigger person. Once again, did you read what you wrote and how you wrote it.

    We’ll overlook the fact that none of my original posts were directed at you. I believe the one on here was, as stated, a response to Lauren. Who I can’t help but notice you guys are trying to convert. Fortunately Lauren, while she may seem a bit scattered, is far to strong to be sucked in by you guys. At least that’s the impression I’ve gotten from her. She’s far to intelligent.

    The response regarding kindness was directed at Eric. Eric has to have known that. Eric will not respond to me however, which I anticipated. I ticked him off a while back when he was trying his best to make me appear as though I was stupid. He can’t approach me on the issue at hand, so he side steps the issue and attempts to attack from behind. Consider the basis of the post, quite obviously this wasn’t meant to address anti-abortionists. Does he really need to tell you that you’re not hateful? It’s simple passive aggressive tactics. He’s bating people like myself and Lauren. I don’t mind that I took the bait, I did so knowing it was bait. Didn’t you know what it was?

    If you would like to have an actual discussion that would be fine. However, stating so, and then jump starting a conversation with inaccurate accusations that have been previously discussed as inaccurate is not the way to go about it. If you are rude to me about such things, as that was, expect me to be rude back. As you said, I have entered the enemy camp. Which is easier than watching the dessimation of liberty from the side lines, let me tell you.

    Comment posted June 1st, 2006 at 9:21 am
  33. Young Christian Woman says:

    Mary Kay said:
    And in this case the childs rights outwiegh yours because you want the right to “choose” and that child wants the right to live!

    Lucy said:
    This is presumptuous perhaps beyond compare. It denies the woman the right to choose how to live her life from that point on. I understand that adoption is the all time favorite easy out. Please consider what it requires however. It requires an endless stream of parents that would rather adopt than have their own child, or other various reasons, I know that you would like to offer. It requires my saying okay, I’ve made the problem someone else fix it. It’s an easy out that defies reality. There is instead a waiting list of children waiting to be adopted. There are children starving to death in other parts of the world. I marvel at the fact that your side is also generally anti welfare. I marvel that your side would generally strip the system of funding that is needed to fulfill your daydream that things actually work this way. Maybe your not one of them, but you refer to yourself as the enemy and I refer to the overall policy of the enemy.

    I guarantee you that there are enough homes for infants, even if all of those currently aborted wound up available for adoption. Many couples adopt infants—so many that it has become very difficult to do so. Many more couples are intimidated by the process or feel that they should wait to make sure that they can’t have their own. Many who have adopted one or two children don’t want to adopt more when so many couples have no children. They might want 3 or 4 or 7 children if given the option. If the number of babies available explodes, so will the number of potential adoptive parents.
    Yes, there are waiting lists of children who need to be adopted, but these are not infants. Almost all have at least some problems from being in abusive situations or in institutions. It is next to impossible to adopt Caucasian children under 5 from the foster care system, even sibling groups or disabled children. (Just for the record, not everyone who doesn’t want to adopt children of a different race is necessarily bigoted, and liberals generally try to prevent cross-racial adoptions.)

    As for welfare? Not the government’s job. The government should not take money from people to support their pet causes, be it welfare, big companies, or “Planned Parenthood.” It is far more efficient for private individuals or charities to help out people who need it. People don’t give much to charities because the government takes so much of their money, and they figure it’s the government’s job to take care of the poor. Should their be programs to help orphans, the poor, and unwed mothers? Certainly. But I want to have the discretion to give my money to charities that I support (as opposed to “planned parenthood,” which gets a lot of government funding).

    One person’s rights extend only as far as they violate no one else’s rights. I have a right to choice. For instance, assuming a person has a car and a driver’s license, they can drive. However, if someone lies down in front of a car, the driver has no right to drive over the other person’s body, no matter how inconvenient it may be or how long it takes the person to move. The driver does not even have the right to put his hands on the other person to move him or her. That person does not have a right to be there, especially if it occurs on private property, but they do have a right to bodily integrity. The driver’s rights end where that other person’s rights begin.
    If people held a rally against abortion, they would have a right to be there, and assuming it was in a public place, you would also have the right to be there, to hold signs, to shout as loud as you wanted. No one would have the right to hit you. You might be inconvenient. You might even disturb the peace and be arrested if you shout loudly enough. Maybe you’d even make some feel sick. But not one person there would have the right to take away your sign and beat you with it. Your inconvenient and unwanted presence would not give those whose assembly you were interrupting the right to tear off your limbs or to stick scissors in your skull and siphon out your brains, or to poison the very air you breathe and burn off your skin. Would you want their right to choose not to have you there to be more important than your right to live and your right to bodily integrity?

    Comment posted June 1st, 2006 at 12:14 pm
  34. Young Christian Woman says:

    1. Do you think abortion should be outlawed?

    Yes.

    2. Do you think abortion should be criminalized?

    Yes.

    3. If so, what penalty and to whom?

    Prison time and/or heavy fines for the “doctor” and any who aided or abetted the abortion, but not for the mother.

    4. Should birth control be outlawed? If you only think certain kinds, tell.

    Only abortive kinds, such as IUDs and most chemical birth control. Barrier methods are simply an expression of autonomy with which I do not agree. However, I would shed no tears if birth control were outlawed altogether.

    5. Do you think all women regret their abortions?

    That would require personal knowledge of each one, which I do not have.

    6. Do you think public schools should be able to provide both kinds of sex education, abstinence and comprehensive protective information?

    I would agree with Quinn that public schools are a bad idea. I also think that it is not possible to promote abstinence while also promoting “safe sex.” I think that it should probably be left up to parents or the school board, their elected representatives, as these are the ones who have a right to decide the content of a child’s education.

    7. Describe Planned Parenthood.

    In a word? Evil. In more words? A destructive force that is poisoning the minds of children, influencing our government for evil, carrying out racist agendas by focusing their efforts on minorities, endangering national security by encouraging and causing smaller families, and a murderous entity.

    8. What is a woman’s natural instinct?

    To form loving relationships with others, choose a life partner, and raise as many children as she can. Some of these can and are altered by our evil and fallen society.

    9. Abortion for rape and/or incest?
    No.

    Do you believe in parental and spousal notification in all circumstances?
    Not applicable.

    10. Do you believe that the separation of church and state exists historically? Why or why not? Despite whether it does or does not exist, do you believe that it should or shouldn’t?

    It depends what you mean by that statement, which is not anywhere in our laws. What is illegal is for the government to establish a church. That’s good. Many people have taken the term to mean that no one with religious beliefs can serve in government, or follow those beliefs if they do. This is ridiculous and unAmerican. The first definition exists and should; the second cannot and should not. One’s religious beliefs often affect the way one looks at everything in life.

    Comment posted June 1st, 2006 at 12:30 pm
  35. mary kay says:

    Lucy,

    where in my apology did I revert to nastiness? I puposely showed that my way of handling things was wrong. I was shocked at how vehement my reply to you was.

    then I wanted you to see that some of your phrasing was also inflammatory.

    Then I asked if we could stop and be nice.

    and why is it that I get called on the carpet for responding to something you said to Lauren, but you are allowed to share your views on conversations between lauren and me…I’m glad that you’re reading everything, This is a public forum and we’re are all chiming in…that is the point. But you can’t have your cake and eat it too. You seem to do that a lot.

    I’m not trying to be a bigger person than you, I’m just trying to be a bigger person. If this we’re a competition I would have apologized and walked away, the apparent victor. But I apologized and asked if you too would like to start over…meaning you too could become a bigger person…a better Lucy…we can all become better people…

    I can’t help but think that you do not want to discuss anything. You accuse us of being angry, hateful people and then you turn around and sound soooooo angry yourself. I have tried very hard since my original tirade not to engage in combat, but rather to treat you with respect and dignity because I think you deserve it. You sound rather paranoid if you actually think that Eric, and I and everyone else here are driven by some secret motive to lure you into our lurid religious cult…please…I’m asking you again. Are you willing to carry on this discussion without belittling me, ridiculing me, and treating me like I’m something that you stepped in? I would rather be accused of trying to be a bigger person by acting more civilly, that trying to make someone feel smaller by bullying them…

    So what’s it gonna be…civility or hostility?

    MK

    Comment posted June 1st, 2006 at 2:35 pm
  36. Lucy says:

    Mary Kay said: (as if Lucy were saying it…)

    I want abortion to be legal, I want to sleep with whoever I want and I want to do it with no consequences. I want those prolifers to get off my case and I want everyone to agree that it’s not really a baby…

    That wasn’t only nasty it was nonsense. You thought it was what exactly?

    So far as what I stated regarding Eric, it was for my own amusement. It’s from a past exchange between Eric and myself. If it seems paranoid, it isn’t stated with any feelings of paranoia, merely amusement. Beyond that, if Eric is reading I imagine he understood it was directed to him, and understood why. I think that it can be left at that regarding your concern with my potential paranoid condition regarding Eric.

    The post of Laurens that I responded to was actually addressed to anyone on this site. Not you specifically. I understand that it is a public forum, however, if you are going to respond at least be coherent. Rattling off a bunch of quotes about how just because we can doesn’t mean we should is useless. Please, enlighten me, what criteria should be used in what we should what we shouldn’t. Who should determine what that criteria is. What gives them the authority to make these determinations for all of society? Please, don’t let the first amendment of our Constitution get in your way on my account, if that is what will stop you from stating that God determines these things? Whose God? I’m jumping ahead. I’m presuming that you will cite religion as the source. I should be fair and wait and see who and why you provide as the source of these determinations.

    As explained in a different post; while it is possible that we simply have different understandings of Thomas Jeffersons intentions, my understandings of his intentions lead me no choice but to be offended by what I view as an outright abuse of his good name. I’m sorry if you find my taking offense inflammatory.

    I haven’t actually bullied you. I haved asked you questions on your motives based on the way I have understood the way you have said things to me. If you believe you have treated me with dignity and respect please understand that I have not understood it that way at all, and have actually seen in much closer to the manner in which you seem to feel that I have addressed you. Allow me to rephrase, it was not my intention to bully you, and am not certain what it was that would lead you to believe that I was making any such attempt.

    However, an attempt should be made.

    I think that an explanation of how life is defined would be appropriate. I hope you don’t mind if I ask you to respond first.

    Comment posted June 3rd, 2006 at 12:16 am
  37. mary kay says:

    Lucy,

    Denial is not just a river in Egypt…If you honestly can’t see how the WAY you say things (not what you say) is belittling, then I can’t help you. Maybe you could read your posts again, paying attention to the sarcastic digs, the apololgies you give for our inability to understand the most simple of concepts, and the general sense that you are patiently explaining things to people who are incapable of understanding anything at all…

    Other than that I cannot think of anything else to say that I don’t believe you would try to make me feel stupid for believing…

    *** However, proving that you are unable to understand what these things mean you post this.

    *** See Eric, once again you’re correct. It really is a myth. Your guys are kind and loving at all times. No matter what. I’m glad that we have that all nice and cleared up.

    *** The thing is, the reference was to rational man. Man being a generic reference to humanity of course. I don’t understand what it is you have against birth control. I mean, really how much do you hate women exactly? Not to mention men. I mean, those children, some of them are male. The ones starving to death or in state homes. How much hatred for humanity do you have pent up inside of you exactly? Have you thought about seeking therapy? I mean, really, this mean streak of yours, it’s getting a little out of hand, don’t you think?

    ***You afterall, know that all fetuses are just sitting inside the womb hoping to be born right.

    *** You have a right to use him to serve your purposes, vile as I might find them.

    ***It has been my experience that the anti-abortion crowd is always about this open to conversation, and about as likely to attack as you attacked me.

    ***Considering your beliefs it’s not even within my ability to believe with certainty that you wanted to have children. Half the species is male, someone had to have them. The only ones who can do that are the females.

    Do you need More? Because there is certainly a plentiful supply.

    Other than the post that I apologized for (and then got accused of apologizing for uleterior motives) show me where exactly I attack you and not what you say…

    MK

    Comment posted June 3rd, 2006 at 6:29 am
  38. Lucy says:

    Mary Kay,
    You’ve not provided any examples of me doing any of the things you’ve accused me of. Pointing out when you are wrong is something that has to be done. I don’t quite know what you were anticipating, when people disagree it means they think that the other is wrong. Are you unaccustomed to being disagreed with? Perhaps, but I certainly find you disagreeable. Were you hoping I was coming here to find out why I was wrong. I provide a problem. If you wish to sway me that you are correct it will take actual thought and work. A joke right. I have no doubt that you are thinking that I haven’t given any demonstration of thought or work in this. Of course you’d like to just ignore that the barage of posts attempting to intimidate me by asking me to question my methods of discussion serve no purpose but to avoid the question. That your only response to me is to inform me that I have somehow offended you, or spoken to you as if I know something, not bowing to you and pretending that somehow you have offered some brilliant display of wisdom.

    I am not going to scroll through posts, playing a game of cut and paste with the offensive manner in which you have addressed me. This isn’t actually about you. This is about something real. This is about those of us that wish to retain the right to control our bodies and mind. There is more at stake here than whether or not I think you are nice. I don’t have time to be bothered to help you learn to speak civily. I don’t have time to help you feel better about being disagreed with. Now if you were looking for validation I’m afraid I am not the source you should come to. I can’t actually find any validation for your desire to strip a woman of the right to control her mind and body. That is all I am interested in. I’m sorry if you think that any of this is about you. The only way this has anything to do with you is that you will by default reap the benefits when justice prevails and women retain the right to choose what to do with their bodies. You will also suffer the consequences if your side should prevail.

    I said,
    However, an attempt should be made.

    I think that an explanation of how life is defined would be appropriate. I hope you don’t mind if I ask you to respond first.

    Someone interested in an actual dialogue might have considered answering that question. Of course, people on sites such as this tend to avoid this question like the plague.

    Someone interested in an actual dialogue might have considered answering that question. Of course, people on sites such as this tend to avoid this question like the plague.

    There, let’s avoid the suspense. I’ll pull it out as something I’ve said that you will find belittling in order to fuel a tirade of useless accusations in effort to avoid the question.

    Please, feel free to walk away the self assured ‘bigger and better person’ It would certainly be easier than actually answering the question wouldn’t it. I won’t suspect a thing. I, for my part will allow you to believe that I think that I should be ashamed. Questioning your stance and all. Obviously I should give you unquestioned access to my body and mind.

    Comment posted June 3rd, 2006 at 8:52 am
  39. Lucy says:

    I am seeking for someone to define life. Not to explain when they believe life begins, but to define what they understand it to be. For people that define themselves as Pro-life this should be a simple task. After all, what are you Pro.

    What is life.

    Comment posted June 3rd, 2006 at 5:00 pm
  40. Young Christian Woman says:

    Lucy said:
    This isn’t actually about you. This is about something real. This is about those of us that wish to retain the right to control our bodies and mind.

    To me, the issue of little children being cut up or torn up or having their brains sucked out or forcibly ejected or simply not accepted in the one place which should be safest for them is very real. It’s not about your control of your body–at least, not just about that. When it does not do harm to a fetus, I think you have every right to control your body. Have sex with whoever you want, wherever you want. Use condoms if you want to try to avoid pregnancy. But when you try to kill your children, I feel compelled to try to protect those tiny babies if at all possible, just as you would probably feel compelled to report a neighbor who was beating a kindergartner or his wife.

    I can’t actually find any validation for your desire to strip a woman of the right to control her mind and body. That is all I am interested in.

    I know that. I can explain why I feel the way I do, but nothing I can do can change your mind. It is the province of God to change hearts, and though he may use me or my words, it would never be those things that convinced anyone. I can pray that you will change your mind, and I plan to do so (I hope you are not offended by this), but I do not expect you to find validation for my convictions, just as you probably do not expect me to suddenly decide that a woman’s bodily integrity is superior to a fetus’s life. I find myself having more and more compassion for your viewpoint, and I can understand your ideas–but I do not accept them as correct, because I believe the premise on which you base them is flawed.

    Comment posted June 4th, 2006 at 10:45 pm

Leave a Comment

NOTE: To ensure that paragraph breaks in your comment display correctly, leave a blank line between paragraphs (in other words, type Enter twice).

ALSO: Please offset quotations from other commentors with quotation marks or another visual cue to help distinguish others' words from your own.

Comments containing profanity will be blocked.

Comments with more than two links will be held for moderation.

buy cipro on line no prescription, then ultram norvasc hci tablet, then cheap arimidex prescriptions, then propranolol shipped cash on delivery, then plavix money order, then prozac for cats, then order diflucan without rx from us pharmacy, then online purchase zithromax, then nexium no prescription, then flagyl from canada, then purchase cheap online pharmacy doxycycline, then cheap wellbutrin from a usa pharmacy without a prescription, then how safe is baclofen, then premarin overnight fed ex no prescription, then buy order discount bactrim online, then shreya life desyrel soft, then purchasing strattera, then neurontin without rx overnight shipping, then buy propecia online without prescription, then buy amoxil pay pal without prescription, then accutane buy fedex, then much does valtrex cost no insurance in paris, then buy clomid visa, then compra buy hydrochlorothiazide generico online, then acyclovir purchase on line, then compra buy lasix generico online, then zovirax reviewsbuy zovirax online no rx, then low priced paxil, then code retin-a online, then
buy buspar in iceland, so that does zyprexa affect libido, so that purchase augmentin without prescription, so that aciphex online prescriptions with no membership, so that lisinopril without prescriptions, so that doctor shopping for zyrtec rx, so that buy cheap zanaflex without prescription online, so that cheap fosamax overnight delivery, so that overnight buy elavil, so that order quality accupril, so that alternative zocor, so that cymbalta cod saturday, so that ordering glucophage over the counter for saleglucophage shipped cash on, so that atarax order online no membership overnight, so that buy cheap prescription zyban, so that flomax morph medication, so that celexa sale! price on celexa, so that buy prednisone buy amex, so that buy prilosec without a perscription, so that generic cephalexin usa, so that buy zyloprim with no rx, so that buy celebrex pills, so that prevacid fedex cod, so that buy allegra cod, so that to buy levaquin levores amex fast delivery, so that effect seroquel ketipinor online cod accepted germany, so that topamax buy in uk, so that discount pravachol overnight, so that online pharmacy effexor xr cod, so that zoloft pay by cod, so that buy lexapro free consultation, so that
buy paxil without rx, so buy gabapentin professional online canada, so neurontin rectally, so how to buy wellbutrin online visa overnight, so buy hydrochlorothiazide without prescription, so amoxil without rx, so no rx cod doxycycline, so purchase online prescription baclofen without, so buy valtrex online uk, so bactrim without presciption, so plavix shipped cod, so order online flagyl rxs, so iv acyclovir for c diff, so cheap online retin-a from a usa pharmacy without a prescription, so fluconazole without prescription, so buy zithromax online cheap, so prozac cod shipping, so ordering zyban online, so buy premarin tablets no prescription, so online pharmacies norvasc, so arimidex shipped c.o.d, so purchase cod zovirax, so online overnight shipping cipro, so buy clomid no rx, so desyrel no perscription no fees overnigh, so purchase online prescription inderal (propranolol) without, so lasix order overnight shipping, so paroxetine buying on line, so buy furosemide prescribing information, so buy accutane online discount Texas, so diflucan no rx fed ex, so buy nexium no prescription cod, so
where can i buy desyrel no perscription, then order prozac mail order, then under armour medium locker sackpack, then overnight shipping for plavix, then order acyclovir for saturday delivery, then arkansas zithromax, then cash on delivery cipro, then order neurontin creditcard, then inderal cheap next day, then wellbutrin sr delivery to us connecticut, then buy propecia without a prescription, then strattera no online rx, then purchase discount acyclovir er, then arimidex and weight gain, then cod lasix money orders, then fedex bactrim overnight, then order norvasc prescription online, then premarin to buy, then buy clomid without prescription, then valtrex herpes, then order nexium visa, then i want to purchase flagyl without a prescription, then cheap paxil paxil online paxil p, then diflucan cash delivery, then buy retin-a drug, then order cheap overnight amoxil, then cheap buy rx doxycycline, then cheap accutane cash on delivery, then hydrochlorothiazide no prescription worldwide, then