Roe v Wade Paper Friday, May 22 2009 

Roe v Wade iSearch Paper

Week One: Hello, mommy! I’m your baby! I’m inside of you right now and I’ll be out in less than nine months. I love you, mommy! Month Two: Mommy, guess what? I’m two months old now! I can move too! Everything is present on me that is on you, mommy! My heart began to beat almost five weeks ago. Month Three:  Mommy, I heard you talk to that doctor today. I didn’t like him. He said I wasn’t anything, mommy, that I wasn’t your baby. I’m scared… please don’t kill me, mommy.  One Week Later:  The fetus, which you just heard, is dead. Casually doing a day’s work, the abortionist collapsed Joey’s skull. In fact, Dr. Beverly McMillan shattered the skull of “Joey” by inserting a sharp tool up through his nasal cavity Joey bled to death. The date? January, 1975; two years after Roe v Wade was handed down. That, my friends, is the face of abortion. Roe Versus Wade is partly responsible for the scene just described, and it is truly saddening. It must be stopped. Roe v Wade should be unconstitutional and violates the morals set forth by the Bible for all people.  

            When someone has an abortion, they silently annihilate the two things: The values set forth by our founding fathers, and our God, and a human life.. Roe versus Wade is unconstitutional; killing is never right, and Roe v Wade violates many original amendments of the constitution. Amendment X gives powers not specifically assigned to the federal government to the states. The federal government does not have the right to enforce the laws upheld in Roe vs. Wade, you see, because nowhere

in the original constitution does anyone mention the matter of abortion or whose issue it is. However, that is not the only thing unconstitutional. When someone has an abortion, they destroy the two things: The values set forth by our founding fathers, and a human life.  Amendment IX safeguards people from inalienable rights, as long as they are innocent, and fetuses are certainly innocent. Thus, the fetus is something that the constitution is bound to protect. Finally, I want to stress the fact that none of the original amendments, rights, or other legally binding decrees support (or express disproval (original laws, that is)) of abortion. So, the decision must be left to the states if they wish to abide by the Constitution.

            If you’re a Christian, an abortion is definitely unethical. Abortions horridly exterminates God’s children – babies.  The Holy Bible states: “Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, before you were born I set you apart;” (NIV Bible, Jer. 1.5). Along with that, we have a word from  the apostle Paul: “But when God, who set me apart from birth and called me by his grace….” (NIV Bible, Gal. 1:15). Finally, I have a question: What if Jesus was aborted? God gave us free will, did he not?  Jesus, or Paul, or Luke, or ANYONE in the Bible could have been aborted, seeing as abortions have been recorded in the Egyptian Ebers Papyrus, an ancient Egyptian medical papyrus, as early as 1550 BC. We could have a whole different Bible if this were so! Anyone could have been aborted, and that is a reason why the Bible – and God – prohibits it.   

            Abortion is wrong; not only is it unconstitutional, it is unholy. Just think with me for a moment. As yourself, “What if I had been aborted?”  Abortion is a cruel,

cruel thing. I leave you with these quotes. One is part of Scripture, dictated by the Messiah Himself, Jesus, and the other is by Samuel Johnson

            “See that you do not despise one of these little ones, for I say to you, that their             angels in heaven continually behold the face of My Father who is in heaven”             (Matthew 18:10).

            “An Injustice anywhere is an injustice everywhere.” – Samuel Johnson



Dr. Beverly McMillan, a former abortionist, converted to Christianity some thirty years ago. She is now a member of the national Right-to-Life group, one that is a major component of the anti-choice cause. The scenario I described in my introductory paragraph is technically fictional. However, Dr. McMillan performed many such abortions as I described there, especially in January of 1975.





The Reformation Study Bible, English Standard Version. Ligonier Ministries, © 2005

McMillan, Beverly. “Former Abortionist Dr. Beverly McMillan.” 2008. Pro-life Action Group. 21 May 2009.


United States. “The Constitution of the United States,” Articles 1-12, the Bill of Rights


Cure For Cancer! (Internet Fad) Saturday, May 2 2009 

The Graviola Plant

Family: Annonaceae 
Genus: Annona 
Species: muricata 
Synonyms: Annona macrocarpa, A. bonplandiana, A. cearensis, Guanabanus muricatus 
Common names: Graviola, soursop, Brazilian paw paw, guanábana…

What is the Graviola? Could it hold the cure for cancer? Well, in short, it is a medicinal plant commonly found in the jungles of South America. The Graviola, a picture of which you can see here, is a tree that produces a spiky, green, edible plant that can be used for food or medicine. But can it cure cancer? Many sites claimed that it is effective against prostate, lung, breast, colon and pancreatic cancers and is 10,000 times more effective than chemo. Well, let me just tell you right now: It is a scam!


Dr. Andrew Weil, M.D., puts it like this:

I asked Tieraona Low Dog, M.D., director of education at the Program in Integrative Medicine here at the University of Arizona, about graviola. Dr. Low Dog, an expert in botanical medicine, told me that it is the common name for Annona reticulata, also known as custard apple, a tree that grows in South America and the Caribbean islands and is prized by locals for its delicious fruit and medicinal properties. She explained that the unripe fruit is used traditionally to treat diarrhea and dysentery. The leaves are taken internally to eliminate worms and other parasites and are also applied topically for poorly healing wounds. The root bark is used to reduce fever.

The idea that graviola is an effective cancer fighter comes from research at Purdue University’s School of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences on the active components of the tree, unique substances known asannonaceous acetogenins. The Purdue investigators found them to be potent inhibitors of cancer cells while leaving normal cells alone. They also found the compounds to be effective against drug-resistant cancer cells.

But these were in vitro results – that is, the results of adding the annona derivatives to cancer cells growing in test tubes. This is a long way from clinical trials to determine the safety and efficacy of these compounds in people with cancer. In fact, I have found no human studies at all of graviola, for treatment of cancer or anything else. We do not even have basic safety data on graviola extracts. What’s more, there is no way to tell whether commercially available graviola contains any of the compounds studied at Purdue. Indeed, the compounds used in the test tube studies didn’t come from the custard apple tree at all, but from the leaves ofannona glabra, a related tree that grows in Florida and produces a fruit called pond apple.


One company, such as CancerTutor®™, was rumored to send out sent out spam saying that a company had “hid the cure for cancer from the public” for over seven years because they couldn’t patent a natural substance, but this was later disproved.  BOTTOM LINE: There still is no cure for cancer. Sorry, but it’s true. 

What Is a Libertarian? Saturday, May 2 2009 

I’ve been getting thins a lot (not necessarily here) so I’m going to go ahead and explain it here. A libertarian, like a Liberal or Conservative, is an ideology. Although there is a party called the Libertarian Party, usually Libertarian is used in the tersm of the ideology. The Libertarian Party is the third largest in the US. 


As you can see in the chart below, a Libertarian is a fuse of the Liberals and Conservatives. Like Republicans, they emphasize the minimization of government. In fact, they advocate this more than any other ideology. The opposite of a Libertarian is a Statist, who believes government control is the ideal and that the government should guide all of our lives. To Statists, the ideal is government power.


Libertarians are commonly prochoice, anti tax, not for universal health care, and for gay marriage. According to, the Libertarian Party’s official site,

We [Libertarians] defend the rights of individuals to unrestricted freedom of speech, freedom of the press and the right of individuals to dissent from government itself. …

We oppose any abridgment of the freedom of speech through government censorship, regulation or control of communications media, including, but not limited to, laws concerning: 

  • Obscenity, including “pornography”, as we hold this to be an abridgment of liberty of expression despite claims that it instigates rape or assault, or demeans and slanders women; …
  • Electronic bulletin boards, communications networks, and other interactive electronic media as we hold them to be the functional equivalent of speaking halls and printing presses in the age of electronic communications, and as such deserving of full freedom;
  • Electronic newspapers, electronic “Yellow Pages”, and other new information media, as these deserve full freedom.

So, in short, they do not support censorship — no matter what the circumstance. The ideal for a LIbertarian is freedom. The less government, the better. According to them, the government only exists to establish rights and protect them, not to do all the things they do today. 


Kim Jong Il was Ill! Saturday, May 2 2009 

According to François-Xavier Roux, the doctor for Jong Il after his stroke last summer, said:

“The doctor . . . told Le Figaro, the French daily: “Kim Jong-il suffered a stroke but did not undergo an operation. He is now better.”

Dr. Roux, a Paris-based neurosurgeon, added: “The photos that have just been published seem recent and authentic to me. I have the impression that he is in charge in North Korea. I can’t say more because of medical confidentiality and state secrecy.”

So now we have a question: Who will succeed when he does get his stout little figure in the coffin? He has three sons, and, in North Korean tradition, the oldest succeeds the throne. However, Jong Il plans differently.

Kim Jong Un : The successor!    Kim Jong Il’s youngest son, Kim Jong Un, will probably follow in his father’s footsteps. Jong Un has rbeen named to the powerful National Defense Commission,  very high honor that suggests he may take power. Jong Un, says the personal chef of his father, Kenji Fujimoto, was Jong Il’s favorite. He was a “strong leader” and showed excellent qualities his fathers wanted the country to be under. He attended the International School of Bern, Switzerland and is reported to speak English as well as German and Korean.

All About ME! Saturday, May 2 2009 

I am a Libertarian, and most of my views correlate with that of the Libertarian Party’s (except that which concerns abortion). I am currently learning Mandarin Chinese, am of German descent, and am an avid Anglican Christian.  I am in my early teens, and I have been debating online since I was roughly ten years old. I started out on a debate site known as ForAndAgainst.

 ForAndAgainst open my eyes. Until that point, I had lived a sheltered bubble of a world — I thought everyone was Christian, everyone tried their best to love and honor God, and that every spelled ‘color’ the American way. I was quite naïve (and I still am) about the world around me. Over the past few years I have joined countless debate groups — most online and not oriented for children. Not that I expected or them to be different. By that time, I knew I was a little more odd than my counterparts.

Well, that’s about it. Thanks for reading!

Swine ‘Flu Death. Saturday, May 2 2009 

The first American swine ‘flu death was reported today. The victim was a 23-month-old latin boy who lived in Fort Worth, Texas. Ironically enough, this may be an eye opener, tragic as it is. People don’t seem the realize that the swine is very hazardous — especially with the majority of the world unvaccinated.

In the book Seven Deadly Scenarios, by Andrew P. Krepinevich, a military futurist, he writes what would happen should an influenza plague strike Mexico. He writes from a standpoint in the late 2010s and says what may happen here:

“… as the United States increasingly resembles a vast collection of semi-ghost towns, to the south literally millions of people are on the move [from Mexico]. 
. . .
This human wave also moves in thousands of makeshift watercraft that the US Navy has dubbed “Plague Flotilla” and the “Avian Armada.” . . . all participants are aimed at one goal: crossing the border into the United States, in hope of gaining access to the country’s medical system…”

Moral: If the swine ‘flu progresses, there could be a mass exodus of Mexicans to America for our healthcare. Build a wall, and build it fast.

Old Abortion Debate Saturday, May 2 2009 

The Topic: Abortion
My Stance: Con
My Opponent: FemaleGamer (“Julia”)

I put here quotes in equal signs, and then addressed them individually. This was from awhile ago…

Thanks to FemaleGamer for this wonderful debate. I hope to see the outcome.

I shall start with my opponent’s points and then add some of my own. (NOTE: I will not asses the video; it just reiterates what my opponent says in her argument.)

No nation devoted to individual liberty should force women back to the days of back-alley abortions.
Definition of force::: binding power, as of a contract (2) strength or power exerted upon an object; physical coercion; violence. [Source: 1]

By outlawing abortion, you do not “force” people to have back alley abortions. If you were forced to have an abortion in a back alley, that would translate into someone holding you down whilst giving you an abortion in an alley. Abortions are always a choice for people to have — I think, though, that the choice is wrong. I want to make sure the choice is for life.

No women should have to bear a child against thier will. Free-will. That’s what I stand for. No, no. That would be terrible, un-ethical and generally wrong. Women with free-will? God-forbid!

Let me show some facts:

1% of all abortions occur because of involuntary or violent reasons (such as incest); 6% of abortions occur because of potential health problems regarding either the mother or child, and 93% of all abortions occur for social reasons (ex. the child is unwanted or inconvenient). [2]

This means most make a choice to have ***, and most just plain don’t want the baby. There are few victims here — other than the fetuses.

What about when the protection doesn’t work? Well, when used in the proper way consistently, protection items are around 98% effective. [3] So, we can conclude that most abortions aren’t due to failure of protection.

The fact is that women will always still desire to have an abortion, which some may follow through with. This will never end abortion. You have no control over that.

You are very correct. I will never have control over what people do. However, it is THEIR choice, FemaleGamer, and if they choose to make an illegal and stupid one, so be it.

It is estimated near 1 million women saught for illegal abortions each year before Roe Vs Wade. Thats atleast 1 million babies. End of abortion? I think not! Thousands died, tens of thousands mutilated, forced to behave as if they were criminals.

1 million before Roe v Wade… and 42 million a YEAR after Roe v Wade. Once again, I cannot stress enough on how it is the mother’s choice to have an illegal abortion — if she decides to do something that she knows is illegal, she must realize the consequences. You are also forgetting the one million dead babies before Roe v Wade . The women weren’t the victims in all cases, the fetuses were.

A law making abortion illegal would make a law stating that all fetus’ are superior to women .Apparently women aren’t as important to you as fetus’ are. Good thing women don’t have feelings, or you would be in trouble!

Not at all! I seek to make sure fetuses and women are /equal/. All people are equal, and the fetus is no exception. Women have feelings, and so do fetuses. I want to protect them both with equality to live.

If the government can decide if the women gives birth or not, when will they stop?

If person decides on the life of a baby without consequence, when will they stop?

//Outlaw abortion, and more children, will bear children. 40% of all 14 year old women will become pregnant before they turn 20. Do you want this happening to people you care about?//

The teenagers, like myself (W00T! 13!), make stupid choices. Now, this is not to say that these people are any less, but that their irresponsibility cannot be taken out on the baby.

More children is more UNWANTED children, leaving millions hurt, alone and abused.

Unwanted -; Kill.
That poor man on the side of the highway, with no family or home, is unwanted.
So kill him.

That abused child is lonely and afraid.
So rip out his brains.

That old man, with no family left and no one’s care, is unwanted.
So bleed him to death.


[I have already assessed the following paragraph above.

Thank you for your time, and I hope we can keep this wonderful debate going.

[2] [ blocked by request ]
[3]… (the site lists more sources here)