The Daily Static
  The Daily Static
UF Archives
Register
UF Membership
Ad Free Site
Postcards
Community
Geekfinder
UFie Gear
Advertise on UF
Forum Rules
& FAQ

Username

Password


Create a New Account

  
 

Back to UserFriendly Strip Comments Index
Catholic stock anyone? by Gary_72002-06-16 19:08:35
  Excuse me? by hypersapien2002-06-16 20:23:14
    Tax-wise, yes... by DaNutBall2002-06-16 20:33:01
      The biggest difference between now and then by Blackbyrd22002-06-16 20:48:02
        ... by Sehmket2002-06-16 20:57:35
          Yes that's right. For those that aren't Catholic: by DaNutBall2002-06-16 21:33:27
            No, I agree, by Blackbyrd22002-06-16 21:59:51
              ... by Sehmket2002-06-16 22:19:06
                Once more by Blackbyrd22002-06-16 22:59:18
                  abortion by nkjv2002-06-16 23:17:43
                    So, what you are saying is by Blackbyrd22002-06-16 23:19:41
                      No response? by Blackbyrd22002-06-16 23:32:30
                        I never said that by nkjv2002-06-16 23:47:35
                          You didn't answer the question by Blackbyrd22002-06-17 00:04:29
                            sad by nkjv2002-06-17 00:20:39
                              We disagree then. by Blackbyrd22002-06-17 00:38:49
                                U dont read about this subject much do you? by Red.Sonja2002-06-17 00:59:34
                                You don't read my posts very well, do you? by Blackbyrd22002-06-17 01:27:31
                                Breast Cancer by Red.Sonja2002-06-17 02:29:16
                                You say it yourself at the beginning. by Blackbyrd2 2002-06-24 23:22:04
Is this proven? No.

Twain (I think) once said there were three kinds of lies.
Lies, damn lies and statistics.

The text you have copied sounds like it probably came from the abortionfacts.com site. You'll excuse me if I take their propoganda with a grain of salt.

I could postulate quite convincing arguments for other reasons for the increase in breast cancer these days, but somehow I think it would fall on deaf ears. That's not the point, anyway.

I'm not even all that concerned about whether or not your stats are valid. Unless you can show that abortion is 100% fatal to the woman, you fail to refute my point.

Once again, you miss my point.

Would you forgo radiation therapy if you had cancer? Chemo? Surgery?
Of course not. But these procedures have their own risks. The risks are taken because the possible benefits outweigh the risks. This is a drastic example, but the basic principle remains.
I stipulate that there are times when the risks involved in abortion are outweighed by the benefits to the woman.
Once again, we've had this discussion. I see no point in rehashing it.
[ Reply ]
                                Here's some stats for you, by Blackbyrd22006-11-19 12:55:59
                                And some more, specifically about breast cancer by Blackbyrd22006-11-19 12:55:59
                                I looked over the article at the NEJM by Blackbyrd22006-11-19 12:55:59

 

[Todays Cartoon Discussion] [News Index]

Come get yer ARS (Account Registration System) Source Code here!
All images, characters, content and text are copyrighted and trademarks of J.D. Frazer except where other ownership applies. Don't do bad things, we have lawyers.
UserFriendly.Org and its operators are not liable for comments or content posted by its visitors, and will cheerfully assist the lawful authorities in hunting down script-kiddies, spammers and other net scum. And if you're really bad, we'll call your mom. (We're not kidding, we've done it before.)