37 comments:

• Ed Walters posted at 5:36 pm on Thu, Jan 31, 2013.

  Posts: 143

  Mr. Kinderman: The post concerning Roe v Wade has people for it and against it, and will never come to satisfiy everyone, you are correct as this and all other forums are open to dicussion and will never satisfy everyone since all people think and act differently. According to the Supremes, abortion is legal, so get over it and is the reason I suggested shutting it down, its like running in circles going nowhere fast. Hopefully STD would not be a factor for a man and woman that remain faithfull to each other.

  Mr. Barrow: You evidently are not fimilar with the cycle of animals, there are only certain times of the year when a female dog comes into season, other than than she will have nothing to do with a male. Deer, Elk will mate only in the "rut" when the males will fight for the right to mate with a female. You should watch Animal Planet, or get a book that will explain the reproductive cycle of animals to you. Female dogs or "bitches" as we in the business call them will come into season twice a year, and only 2-3 days out of a 14 day cycle will the female allow the male to advance on her, depends on the color of the discharge. And NO Eric this is not a ridiculous statement, it`s a fact. Ask Google.

  • Link

   

• Eric Barrow posted at 8:48 am on Thu, Jan 31, 2013.

  Posts: 1013

  What a ridiculous statement. Ed do you think that a dog or any other animal understands the reproductive process and has sex soley to procreate? No they are driven to sex by desire same as the rest of us, just as God intended.

  • Link

   

• Jerome Kinderman posted at 12:57 am on Thu, Jan 31, 2013.

  Posts: 2028

  Mr. Walters, you state that "Perhaps its time to take the Roe v Wade discussion down."

  Why? That's a rather odd statement to make on a forum designed for debating issues such as this. Or is it that because you don't believe any resolution would occur through further discussion (argument)? Well, if that's you reasoning (which of course I'm only guessing it might be), then I suppose it's time "to take discussion down" altogether.

  As for animals vs. humans of course you're correct. But insofar as your last offering, I believe there's other reasons for protection other than to keep from having a baby - STD's being a very important one.

  • Link

   

• Ed Walters posted at 1:05 pm on Wed, Jan 30, 2013.

  Posts: 143

  Perhaps its time to take the Roe v Wade discussion down. Also one point for people that don`t know, animals have sex for the sole purpose of reproduction, humans, any time is a good time. Unless a husband and wife agree that a baby is wanted in their life, protection of some sort is needed. Everyone agree ???????[wink]

  • Link

   

• Patrick W Maple posted at 1:06 pm on Sun, Jan 27, 2013.

  Posts: 1795

  Typical liberal ms collateral damage...can't answer the question so she attacks the questioner. Sound familiar?

  • Link

   

• Patrick W Maple posted at 1:03 pm on Sun, Jan 27, 2013.

  Posts: 1795

  I like that Stan...can I steal it? How about use it...I like it. The Yo Jo-Bob too!

  • Link

   

• Ed Walters posted at 4:48 pm on Sat, Jan 26, 2013.

  Posts: 143

  No need to be sorry Jerome, evidently I slipped up. Never the less I have a scar on my scrotum where the doctor made an insission, thus removing the way the sperm is transferd to fertilize the egg from the holding tank called the testes.

  • Link

   

• Joanne Bobin posted at 2:33 pm on Sat, Jan 26, 2013.

  Posts: 3213

  I've already stated my case. YOU have added nothing to the conversation except to insult others.

  You're not even worth bothering with from this point on.

  • Link

   

• Joanne Bobin posted at 2:28 pm on Sat, Jan 26, 2013.

  Posts: 3213

  Since some people are so dense that they do not understand these issues, there is no sense in attempting to explain AGAIN AND AGAIN.

  Not everyone in this world is the "angel" you pretend to be, Mr. Kinderman.

  • Link

   

• stan taves posted at 12:31 pm on Sat, Jan 26, 2013.

  Posts: 275

  Jim, outstanding to say the least. I would only add that it all starts with leadership -- Wash DC -- that feels entitled to wealth that has yet to be created -- deficit spending. It IS the big LIE, and it saturates the entire culture. Here's a little something I wrote in '99: Three thieves came walking down the road; each one beneath his chosen load. The 1st of these he takes your things, but everything will be replaced; so the thief of things is rarely chased. The 2nd theif to come along; he takes a life, he thinks he's strong. But steal a life, be careful boy; another's life is not a toy. But the king of thieves, he steals the truth; yes the liar is the most uncooth. For he's the one who plants the seeds; deciet that grows into the thieves.

  • Link

   

• Jerome Kinderman posted at 11:22 am on Sat, Jan 26, 2013.

  Posts: 2028

  So a man's refusal to use a condom is an excuse for a woman to not take responsibility for either her own contraceptive responsibilities or self control? What kind of message does that convey?

  Also, many men don't want their partners to use any contraception? Repeat "excuse" offered above.

  Etc.

  Etc.

  Etc.

  Again, what has happened to all of our own sense of personal responsibility when it comes to our lives; and especially when it comes to procreation? Are we really no different than our four-legged mammals? This is very confusing and perplexing. I don’t buy it for one moment. I have a higher level of respect for not only myself but for women as well. This in spite of those who believe I hate the gentler gender, which of course I do not.

  • Link

   

• Jerome Kinderman posted at 9:26 pm on Fri, Jan 25, 2013.

  Posts: 2028

  I'm sorry (again) Mr. Walters, but during a vasectomy, the testes (testicles) are not involved. It's the vas deferens that are severed and cauterized that keeps the sperm from leaving the man's body to fertilize the egg.

  • Link

   

• Jerome Kinderman posted at 9:04 pm on Fri, Jan 25, 2013.

  Posts: 2028

  Mr. Diskin, generally speaking I've never offered a negative opinion regarding the use of contraception. Yes, my faith is my foundation upon which my opinions are based; but I am not Catholic. Because I believe that human life begins at conception (the fertilization of the egg), aside from the "day after pill" and abortion most other forms of contraception that I can think of at this moment shouldn't be a problem.

  As far as miscarriages are concerned, as you state they are natural - not something anyone does to the fertilized egg. "Why" one occurs is often beyond the knowledge of the woman and even her doctor. Of the 1,250,000 abortions performed each year in the United States alone, miscarriages are not included in that atrocious statistic.

  • Link

   

• Joanne Bobin posted at 12:11 pm on Fri, Jan 25, 2013.

  Posts: 3213

  "I have one child who lives in Texas. I asked him about condoms and their availability in the Lone Star State; He claims that they are readily available at most stores including Walmart right next to the register. But they're not free. "

  Once again this commenter proves that he does not recognize the REAL world outside of Lodi.

  1. He doesn't know that many men REFUSE to use condoms so their availability doesn't matter.
  2. Many men DO NOT WANT their partners to USE ANY birth control, example: Christian fundamentalists who do not believe in birth control.
  3. Women are many times forced to use a birth control method that can be hidden from their partners due to #'s 1-2 above.
  4. Women are ABUSED by partners who discover that birth control is being utilized, i.e., BEATEN black and blue.

  From "futureswithoutviolence.org":

  25% of women calling the National Domestic Violence Hotline reported "reproductive coercion."

  "Reproductive coercion is defined as threats or acts of violence against a partner’s reproductive health or reproductive decision-making. It includes forced sex, a male partner pressuring a woman to become pregnant against her will and interference with the use of birth control. The women who reported this form of abuse said that their male partners either would not allow them to use birth control or sabotaged their birth control method (such as poking holes in condoms or flushing pills down the toilet). Some of the women said they had to hide their birth control.
  
  “Birth control sabotage is a serious form of control that leads to unintended pregnancy and sexually transmitted infections,” said Futures Without Violence President Esta Soler. “While there is a cultural assumption that some women use pregnancy as a way to trap their partner in a relationship, this survey shows that men who are abusive will sabotage their partner’s birth control and pressure them to become pregnant as a way to trap or control their partner.”

  I suggest that the aforementioned commenter get educated about what goes on in our society instead of making ill-informed comments about people having to PAY for condoms. It is embarassing, really!

  • Link

   

• Joanne Bobin posted at 11:58 am on Fri, Jan 25, 2013.

  Posts: 3213

  It is called "States Rights."

  The interview with Carolyn Jones of the Texas Observer was on Fresh Air with Terry Gross on NPR on January 22nd. Below is the article on which the interview was based.

  http://www.texasobserver.org/new-study-says-cuts-to-family-planning-in-texas-have-had-far-reaching-effects/

  http://jezebel.com/5892155/texas-womens-health-fund-to-lose-federal-funding-over-abortion-row

  http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/15/texas-loses-entire-womens_n_1349431.html

  http://www.npr.org/2011/09/20/140449957/gov-perry-cut-funds-for-womens-health-in-texas

  • Link

   

• Thomas Heuer posted at 10:58 am on Fri, Jan 25, 2013.

  Posts: 1030

  Well said David.

  • Link

   

• Thomas Heuer posted at 10:56 am on Fri, Jan 25, 2013.

  Posts: 1030

  Nice try but the adult in the room is not the one "struggleing to respond" who is so repeatedly prone to "histrionics.. And it is well known what is going on in Texas as well as many of the other southern states. That is only a matter of watching the news, reading a paper. But to act naive is really a joke. To not recognize that the christian right (not all christians just the politically aggressive) would act openly about their motives is like thinking a racist is going to blatently reveal his true prejudice. Thats why it is so difficult to ascertain the true motives of the various tea parties. BTW thanks for the "Wow! Unbelievable!"I find the lack of cocern for the needs of "real" people unbelievable as well.

  • Link

   

• David Diskin posted at 9:52 am on Fri, Jan 25, 2013.

  Posts: 121

  Jerome, and Jim, if you are truly concerned about the aborting of fetuses, might I suggest you focus your attention on miscarriages?

  Studies show that as many as 80% of ALL FERTILIZED EGGS are aborted naturally, most often before the mother even realizes she is pregnant.

  These would be fetuses that, as Jerome suggests, have a "soul".

  And it seems to me that one of the very best ways to lower the number of naturally aborted fetuses would be to increase the use of various forms of birth control.

  • Link

   

• Jerome Kinderman posted at 7:32 am on Fri, Jan 25, 2013.

  Posts: 2028

  I would think providing a reference for such claims about Texas might be in order.

  As for any state bending to a Christian-based anything will be met with some sort of First Amendment suit.

  I suppose though that any counseling in favor of aborting a child would be considered just that - counseling. But if a mention of adoption or even (gasp!) keeping the child is provided that must be brain washing.

  I have one child who lives in Texas. I asked him about condoms and their availability in the Lone Star State; He claims that they are readily available at most stores including Walmart right next to the register. But they're not free. Oh darn; what to do? Would "buying" them be a consideration? On the other hand, I just Googled "Planned Parenthood Houston, Texas" and was treated to a plethora (and I DO mean a PLETHORA) of centers in and around the Greater Houston, Texas area all able and ready to serve whoever walks through their doors - and most of their services are either free or based upon whatever a customer is able to pay.

  So let's cease with the histrionics - there's plenty of abortions to go around in the good ol' USofA. Each one more than happy to add to the millions already served. Hey, now that's a grand idea!! I remember when McDonald's was new they would post almost precisely how many burgers were sold. Now I believe their sign just says something like "Millions and millions served." Planned Parenthood and other facilities that sell abortions or give them away for free might want to consider following Ronald McDonald's lead (although Ronald wasn't around at the very beginning).

  On the other hand (there's almost always "another hand"), what is so wrong with providing ALL options besides just aborting their unborn babies? There are many couples unable to have children that would welcome one who for whatever reason(s) isn't wanted by their birth mothers - why not give both the child and the adopting parents a chance at life?

  Or what about keeping the baby? Or at least giving it a try? Now if a parent is unable or unwilling to raise their baby, they can just take it to any hospital, police station or firehouse and no one will ask any questions - they'll simply take the baby and turn it over to CPS who will do their level best to find it a home. Just like a puppy or a kitten.

  My how we've evolved!

  • Link

   

• Joanne Bobin posted at 6:43 am on Fri, Jan 25, 2013.

  Posts: 3213

  I was listening to a program the other day about the changes that Texas had made in order to discourage abortion.

  Basically, they have refused any federal money for family planning clinics, effectively cutting off the funding of clinics used principally by low income women for receiving birth control and well-woman exams.

  Conversely, the state has funded "crisis pregnancy" clinics, mostly Christian based, where women who are already pregnant are sent to receive "counseling" meant to encourage them to have their babies and either put them up for adoption or keep them.

  The first thing these clinics do is show women graphic photos of aborted fetuses obviously meant to discourage any thought of abortion.

  Their chief purpose is to frighten and brainwash already vulnerable women into bending to their (the clinic's) will.

  As for birth control, both single and MARRIED women are told they should practice abstinence as the ONLY method of preventing pregnancy.

  So to all you men out there - if you and your wife do not want children or do not want more children, best to find some new hobbies to fill those long days and nights!

  • Link

   

• Joanne Bobin posted at 6:29 am on Fri, Jan 25, 2013.

  Posts: 3213

  Mr. Walters stated: "Vasectomies will cause impotencey, ahhhh I believe that is what a vasectomy is for. Now your going to tell me that, that is some kind of birth control, well it is, and therefore no other form of birth control will be necessary."

  It really blows my mind that there still exist men who have no knowledge of the male reproductive system beyond what they learned from their buddies behind the barn when they were 13.

  A vasectomy is intended to prevent sperm from leaving their cozy little home and so prevents them from ever meeting up with an egg. At this point I would recommend that you consult your physician for a full explanation.

  As far as impotence, yes, there are documented cases of men who have become psychologically impotent after a vasectomy because they feel they have "lost their manhood" by no longer being able to "make a baby." Some men who feel they have been pressured by their partner may also experience psychological impotence.

  That is why most doctors counsel their patients before performing this procedure.

  • Link

   

• Jerome Kinderman posted at 4:50 am on Fri, Jan 25, 2013.

  Posts: 2028

  I've struggled over whether to respond to this comment. The reason for my concern is that I may be criticizing a child, and I certainly wouldn't want to hurt a child's feelings.

  If it was not posted by a minor, then the only thing I can think to write would be: "Wow! Unbelievable!"

  I'll leave it at that.

  • Link

   

• Thomas Heuer posted at 3:22 am on Fri, Jan 25, 2013.

  Posts: 1030

  It is interesting to note that the nation as a whole continues to gain increasing support for the Roe V Wade decision and don't want to see its repeal. 70 % want to preserve the decision while only 9% want its complete repeal as identified in a Wall Street Journal article.

  http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2013/01/21/40-years-post-roe-v-wade-views-on-abortion-remain-divided-complex/
  

  • Link

   

• Thomas Heuer posted at 2:57 am on Fri, Jan 25, 2013.

  Posts: 1030

  There are people imprisoned in unconscienable conditions, tortured with broken limbs, non-anestitized amputations, kept in undersized boxes or cells with bodies bent beyond human tolerances, without opportunity to go to a toilet and all for reasons we would find trivial or insane. This is more of a concern to me, "REAL PEOPLE" alive, experiencing pain, hoping for rescue but doubtful it will reach them. Thats why we have Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch which is their closest opportunity for hope.
  Abortion is a medical fact of life for living people.
  A real people need for reasons that match the number of unfortunate circumstances it serves.
  There is no life before the first breath.
  There is only potential for life.
  There is no life for the brain dead.
  What memories could there be in the unborn. Absolutly none.
  There is no sense of self.
  The idea of what could be tends to fog the intellect as to what actually is going on.
  Only by anthropomorphic projection (imagination) are you able to conjure a life where it does not yet exist.

  An exhilerating advocacy of the idle affluent

  As I've said before Karen Shivoe was brain dead yet had a beating heart. A beating heart does not create a living thinking communicating being.

  No matter how strongly those who feel the idea of having a child is and it is a powerful emotional driver especially if the child is wanted it isn't unlke the drive that sees having an unwanted child with little to no support as a life come to end.
  Who would cherish the stigma of the welfare life?
  Who would cherish the under-paid part-time work life?
  What are the possibilities of attracting a mate or father?
  If we only have one life and no other then we need our choices to make the best of it. The living born people have the priority and those that are tortured and unjustly imprisoned need our rescue.

  Of course men are the ones who got the women into their plights and they are the ones who TAKE the choice to not have the children but would write the legislation to make women have the child and then deride them as "welfare moms" for doing it.

  This is why it needs to be a womans right to choose because men have already been allowed their choice and continue to be allowed their choices.
  

  • Link

   

• Jerome Kinderman posted at 4:32 pm on Thu, Jan 24, 2013.

  Posts: 2028

  I'm sorry Mr. Walters, I am not a "Dr." in any way shape or form.

  Since I’ve already stated that I believe conception takes place with the fertilization of the egg, its adhering to the uterine wall has no bearing on my position; that action takes place a few days later; by the time the fertilized egg gets to that point, a human child is already underway toward birth considering its gender has already been determined.

  If a woman really wishes to ease her own mind, I would suggest that rather than depending upon a device that still has the professionals not completely understanding how it works, utilize other forms of contraception that will give her better than a 50/50 chance against becoming pregnant in the first place.

  Finally, considering that you believe that vasectomy is the same as castration, I have to wonder about your standpoint. While rending a man impotent is rare through this procedure, it is not its intention - as you suggest.

  • Link

   

• Ed Walters posted at 4:03 pm on Thu, Jan 24, 2013.

  Posts: 143

  Dr.Kinderman: you say that I might not be completely accrate when I state that the morning after pill might not be the best solution to aborting a conception that never took place. Come on Jerome, its better than a 50/50 bet and will ease a womans mind that does not want a baby in the first place. Your last paragraph is your best source of information as you seem content to believe the pill actually works. The egg has to "stick" to the uderine wall, the idea of the pill is to keep the egg from attaching itself to the wall, thus preventing conception. Are we on the same page? After 3 grown kids, grandchildren and a great grand daughter to be born any minute, I know how the program works. Intern Ed

  • Link

   

• Jerome Kinderman posted at 2:32 pm on Thu, Jan 24, 2013.

  Posts: 2028

  Mr. Walters, you may not be completely accurate when you state that, “If the thought of conception enters a womans mind due to a one night stand, the morning after pill would be the best solution since there is no evidence that conception ever took place.”

  The drug you’re referring to (“Morning After Pill” or levonorgestrel”) could very well interrupt a fertilized egg, as there are many of us who believe that conception (the fertilization of the egg) is the moment when life begins: http://tinyurl.com/bd35mnu reveals the following:

  “Although scientists aren't completely sure how it works, they believe that levonorgestrel prevents pregnancy either by stopping the ovulation process or by disrupting the ability of sperm and egg to meet in the fallopian tubes. Some speculate that the drug may prevent the fertilized egg from implanting as well, perhaps by making the uterine lining less receptive to the egg.”

  You state that there’s no evidence that conception ever takes place; but now there’s still evidence that shows they’re not complete sure about this. Considering that there are many drugs that medical professionals aren’t quite sure how they work, this might be why erring on the side of caution is where we choose to lay our opinion.

  As for vasectomies causing impotency and as such is the purpose for them, I’ll have to disagree vehemently. What vasectomies do is simply keep sperm from fertilizing the egg, not to keep a man from “performing.” A vasectomy is not a castration. You might be just a bit confused in this regard.

  • Link

   

• Ed Walters posted at 1:08 pm on Thu, Jan 24, 2013.

  Posts: 143

  The question concerning abortion is one that will never have an answer to satisfy everyone, except by the Supremes on a 5 to 4 vote. The best way to prevent an unwanted baby is taking steps to stop before starting. After reading the latests stats concerning abortion, abortion 51% in favor, so do the math. If the thought of conception enters a womans mind due to a one night stand, the morning after pill would be the best solution since there is no evidence that conception ever took place.

  Joanne: Vasectomies will cause impotencey, ahhhh I believe that is what a vasectomy is for. Now your going to tell me that, that is some kind of birth control, well it is, and therefore no other form of birth control will be necessary. Enjoy sex.

  • Link

   

• Joanne Bobin posted at 11:43 am on Thu, Jan 24, 2013.

  Posts: 3213

  Mr. Kinderman - I know that both you and Sugden are of one mind. Misogynists such as Sugden - and from previous comments, you, have the belief that women 1. Control the decision to abort and 2. Go out and have random sex and then can easily "get rid of the problem."

  Until that attitude is changed, then yes - men who make such statements and oppose abortion ARE misogynists.

  And I won't rehash the letter from WVAF in which he wishes cancer on women who use birth control and impotence on men who have vasectomies.

  It is simply "disgusting."

  • Link

   

• Jerome Kinderman posted at 11:19 am on Thu, Jan 24, 2013.

  Posts: 2028

  Why is it that any man who opposes abortion is a misogynist? This really has nothing to do with women or what men think of them. It has to do with valuing human life and in support of every American's right – male and female – to "life, liberty and their own pursuits of happiness." To snuff out 50 million Americans before they've even had a chance is unthinkable - but it's being done every day of the week while so many others are worrying about little fish in the Delta or poor defenseless trees in a forest. When human life is relegated to nothing more than an annoyance, we're destroying our own sense of humanity. After 50 million killed we've lost our right to think of ourselves as good and decent just for donating a couple of dollars to a food closet down the street. And to think of ourselves as caring and feeling human beings because just maybe one or two of those 50 million won’t need to use that food closet, we’ve become sub-human.

  • Link

   

• Jerome Kinderman posted at 11:10 am on Thu, Jan 24, 2013.

  Posts: 2028

  Considering the "fact" of 3,425 abortions per day (seven days per week), is it a far stretch to believe that at least a sizeable number of those are due to "women casually engaging in random sex and then casually having an abortion in order to eliminate an inconvenience?" I've seen many comments in favor of abortion on demand in order for a woman to "choose" what's best for her which included her belief that it might not be the best time to have a baby.

  Abortion is "disgusting." It is also immoral and without any doubt whatsoever it has weakened this country. Of those 50 million souls lost to the abortionists' trade, how many might have grown to be great leaders (maybe one or two Presidents?), doctors, physicists, and others who could have contributed great things to the United States? Or the majority who might have grown up just to be regular folks - even voters for the left? Ouch!

  • Link

   

• Jerome Kinderman posted at 10:58 am on Thu, Jan 24, 2013.

  Posts: 2028

  Considering the "fact" of 3,425 abortions per day (seven days per week), is it a far stretch to believe that at least a sizeable number of those are due to "women casually engaging in random sex and then casually having an abortion in order to eliminate an inconvenience?" I've seen many comments in favor of abortion on demand in order for a woman to "choose" what's best for her which included her belief that it might not be the best time to have a baby.

  Abortion is "disgusting." It is also immoral and without any doubt whatsoever it has weakened this country. Of those 50 million souls lost to the abortionists' trade, how many might have grown to be great leaders (maybe one or two Presidents?), doctors, physicists, and others who could have contributed great things to the United States? Or the majority who might have grown up just to be regular folks - even voters for the left? Ouch!

  • Link

   

• daniel hutchins posted at 10:54 am on Thu, Jan 24, 2013.

  Posts: 1266

  Joanne,

  A baby in a womb is not the woman's body.

  It is not a tumor.

  • Link

   

• daniel hutchins posted at 10:48 am on Thu, Jan 24, 2013.

  Posts: 1266

  woops. double post (key entry error) Not satisfied with edit..

  • Link

   

• daniel hutchins posted at 10:47 am on Thu, Jan 24, 2013.

  Posts: 1266

  IMO, Fertilization is the union of an egg, a sperm, and a divine spirit.

  The vagina is not a starting gate where a human divine soul lies waiting for its opportunity to join with the baby as it comes passing through the gate. This would mean that all of the baby kicking in the womb, and the care and comfort that we give to the baby are pointless and meaningless events taken upon a mere piece of flesh that is no different than a tumor.

  People who think that abortion is not murder have to answer the question of when the soul enters the body. It is not the point in time when the head pops out of the vagina, when we can finally hear the voiced emotions of the baby.

  When the human divine spirit enters the body, it is transformed from a spirit who enjoys all of its wisdom and memories of beloved fellowship that it enjoys in heaven, to an embryo that has no brain or nervous system, and possesses no sense of remembrance of all the people that it knew in heaven, but it possesses instinctive emotions and ability to pray.
  

  • Link

   

• Joanne Bobin posted at 10:34 am on Thu, Jan 24, 2013.

  Posts: 3213

  This letter is a disgusting attack on women and should never have been printed.

  Sugden "suggests," and that is a mild description, that women casually engage in random sex and then casually have an abortion in order to eliminate an inconvenience.

  I'll repeat my previous comment, that was deleted. Sugden is a misogynistic zealot.

  Shame on you Sugden, and shame on the LNS for printing this trash.

  • Link

   

• daniel hutchins posted at 9:42 am on Thu, Jan 24, 2013.

  Posts: 1266

  IMO, Fertilization is the union of an egg, a sperm, and a divine spirit.

  If anyone believes different,
  1)I have a right to feel sorry for them.

  • Link