when Christians who have these values, which respect the most values of the church: gay marriage ban no abortions no no global world order ect. @ Father sifleur but concern for foreign aid, the poor, the destitute, rejection, are Christian values, and left!

hummm I think the extreme right … BOUTIN girlfriend or whatever is found.

Christians vote right or extreme right.

Yes, far-right Christian Democratic Party or Christine Boutin. @ Whistler Father is adamant again, but there are Christians on the left as there are Christians on the right.

the FN and the MPF.

((((((( NO ONCE IN POWER THEY HOLD their promises !!!)))))) PARTY FOR ME I VOTE FOR CONS!

the right to life, but yes ….

The FN is not a paradox.

You tell that to parents who have seen their kids screw up by being sick!

fn is the disposition of the mind

Death penalty for all the gauchos!

there is a difference between what the MLP said and what is written in are "program" – for the moment she said was not wanting to touch the abortion law but in the FN's program there is a paragraph on the unclear protection of life from conception to death – with a couple who would supposedly referrendum performs … I think the FN is definitely something against abortion but is not stupid as to say it now – c surprise for later lol say we are for the death penalty, c catchy especially recalling some facts Miscellaneous – be honest and say that in countries where it applies no less crime is much less. Justice has a duty to protect society not to allow the latter to satisfy his revenge. And c another debate.

c-sick habit of mixing all those who make the case for anti fn – and why a person who kill him is absolutely live – especially at our expense, the death penalty in heinous crimes I'm for – yet I'm not no party – when I'm al abortion but not against it should be at the expense of the person and not a whole society to pay

Yes and no, there is, in this political party, the idea appears to exclude those who hurt very badly in society and its members.

A woman has the right to be beaten by an opponent during a real game, a woman is naked in nature, if she is busty with blue sky, They say she may be well rolled, of course if it travels by car, it is refined (oil, it's ugly), she may have the brain without a belt, it can only be found in adultery, if she is an adult and take well air, it can be switched without light, but with a match, it is severe, it has the power to be maintained, but she is often insatiable All means are good to hold, even to the foot under the table, but it is often maquilleet epilating, To have a more slender body, if it is released, she sees the flip side, With the great risk of being chased, being of the people or of high society, it remains the only companion of man She can only really good nurse, it is very essential in all!

Ben made it worse too good chocolate cake too!

It is true that a woman that aligns the men in her bed, it is called a slut, while the contrary they are Don Juan. (I do not share this view. The most liberated women I find it very bad and everyone does what he wants without being judged by others trapped shit!)

1 – In the anus, numerous live microorganisms that exist in that place and that their role is to contribute to the "decomposition" (I do not know if this is the appropriate term) of faeces (faeces = shit-sorry for this explanation, because I do not banish this term exists in the dictionary!) These microorganisms are found ONLY in the anus, this implies how much their presence in another place can be dangerous. So when a man enters his wife through the anus: a-these organisms can penetrate through the small hole (where he pees) and may cause him serious illness including impotence and the fact of not being fertile (this means that male fertility ans spermatozoon become unfit for the fertilization of the ovum of the woman). It becomes stréril! And that's not counting local infections and the poor wretch can not make love to his beloved because he bobo! b-after penetration into the anus, the man will surely make a small tour vagina, and that there can be dramatic. 2 – Around the anus is a sphincter muscle that works a bit automatically, by contraction-expansion, ie when you want to f ***, and we're sitting on the toilet it opens (it's psychological) but not when sitting still, it remains closed! Fortunately, because otherwise, imagine the damage! This is not a voluntary act I think it's a reflex action * (or it looks like him) is not made to receive something, iln'est not designed for anything! So when the man entered through that door! it extended to every muscle as it expands! And strength, the loss of muscle strength! As a result it fails to close completely over! Well imagine you there are people whose anal sphincter muscle does not contract any further! They are obliged to put diapers! This is not funny and plus it stink! Sources: My uncle, a professor of surgery, general medicine and infectious diseases

@ Manel Christiano, you doing what else in life besides thinking about ass?

Thank you for the info

That's why it should not go against nature

Fortunately I have never practiced it. It disgusts me already … There, you put the package!

Are you Doctor? .. I do not believe everything you just tell. waste "poop" are already prepared and stored in the small intestine. these wastes can not leave because the anus is sealed. an anus is closed premeditated by man, because being away from home, the man manages to keep up the house .. into the toilet. So the man contracts and relaxes the muscle volontairement.c is only the digestive juice and digestion which convert food waste. no anus. also gives your stem .. thank you!

Outside the very last point on which you approach that I have some doubts to have known cases that match what you describe, I would tend to refute your argument (not necessarily what you assert, but the consequences or deductions that you draw). 1) Some micro-organisms that exist there. Yes, unreservedly. 2) They may also become pathogenic. Yes. However, some environments are especially equipped for defense. 3) After [...] surely do a small tour vagina. It can. Or not. Personally, whenever I happened to go from back to front, I always made a detour to the bathroom before. No question, in fact, mixing the two. I even tried (with some success) to educate those of my friends that I knew "practitioners." Yeah, it cuts a little note, but when it's clear to both, it poses no real problem. 4) micro-organisms can enter through the meatus should be noted that one can wear a condom. 4) micro-organisms can enter through the meatus should be noted that one can wear a condom (in many cases it is strongly recommended). Apart from this solution, nature is still rather well done. Have you noticed how often, after an orgasm, want to have to go pee? This reaction is not psychological (as opposed to what one of my friends has long believed), nor the only result that prostate snaps into position "standard". It is an internal cleaning mechanism, which aims to remove the seeds eventually introduced into the urethra. This is useful for everyone since it can also nab the nasty microbes in the vagina. On the question of the anal sphincters is like all practices: enough is enough. A little exercise is good for health. Many sports that require attention. Too little sports seriously damaging and even killing. Same thing here. Any damage that you describe do exist, but they correspond to extreme practices and remain very marginal in relation to the total number of sodomites. Those who have. Desproblèmes those who are most often people who do not take basic precautions, or who have not been sufficiently attentive to their bodies. In summary, your post is unnecessarily alarmist and, in this form, untrue. Basically, as it is written, it looks like "smoking kills" on cigarette packages: "sodomy will make you sterile and incontinent" (you forgot "and send you straight to hell"). NO. The reality, as often is much more nuanced. Sodomy is a practice that requires care and vigilance. And which, I grant you, those who do not want should not be forced. As in all areas of love. No? ================================ @ Anna: Why? Did you find anything in the "life", more important or more interesting than the ass? ================================ @ Christiano: the reference to your source confirms what I thought. Your uncle, by the nature of its activity, is typically in the syndrome of "the tree that hides the. Your uncle, by the nature of its activity, is typically in the syndrome of "the tree that hides laforêt" sodomites the few who have problems come to see the multitude that goes do not contact, outcome, he sees only the minority. QED.

A link, a book title, anything, but a source please! I remain skeptical!

1 – In the anus, numerous live microorganisms that exist in that place and that their role is to contribute to the "decomposition" (I do not know if this is the appropriate term) of faeces (faeces = shit-sorry for this explanation, because I do not banish this term exists in the dictionary!) These microorganisms are found ONLY in the anus, this implies how much their presence in another place can be dangerous. So when a man enters his wife through the anus: a-these organisms can penetrate through the small hole (where he pees) and may cause him serious illness including impotence and the fact of not being fertile (this means that male fertility ans spermatozoon become unfit for the fertilization of the ovum of the woman). It becomes stréril! And that's not counting local infections and the poor wretch can not make love to his beloved because he bobo! b-after penetration into the anus, the man will surely make a small tour vagina, and that there can be dramatic. 2 – Around the anus is a sphincter muscle that works a bit automatically, by contraction-expansion, ie when you want to f ***, and we're sitting on the toilet it opens (it's psychological) but not when sitting still, it remains closed! Fortunately, because otherwise, imagine the damage! This is not a voluntary act I think it's a reflex action * (or it looks like him) is not made to receive something, iln'est not designed for anything! So when the man entered through that door! it extended to every muscle as it expands! And strength, the loss of muscle strength! As a result it fails to close completely over! Well imagine you there are people whose anal sphincter muscle does not contract any further! They are obliged to put diapers! This is not funny and plus it stink!

Super!

ahem! ok, I'll think banning sodomy in my life then! horrib is' what you say!

Yes, but it's so good …

should not be clairvoyant to think about what will happen in the spincter destroying them but you have to be perverse to practice sodomy with a woman (I do not speak of homosexuals is their problem

yes, it's a biology course with highly structured examples thank you

Finally, something sensible and intelligent to say in this topic. It is always wise to give such information to a lot of people who know nothing about this practice and fellatio and cunnilingus.

My dear, it is also practiced between two men … Anyway, thank you for the comment very unsavory, I would not die silly.

After these explanations will reflect the followers of this practice, I have to tell you, "VIVE LA Jobs."

FN you vote?

finally someone who does not trivialize sodomy as too many have tended to do today and thank you for detailed explanations as well mealtime it is not the most appetizing …

While we have yet found anything better than abortion to practice eugenics under the guise of humanism (malformed children, genetic defects, the mother of poverty, etc. …). Question a little provocative, but deserves consideration on its merits. @ Jay Casimir Where do you see an opposition? On the contrary, they complement. @ Jay Casimir You're confusing eugenics and neonaticide. One example: why do we see less and less with DS in our societies? Just because the medicine can detect this genetic abnormality before birth, and indeed they are aborted. This is called an abortion therapeuthic. Question: who is this therapeuthic? Not for the fetus, since it does not live! For the human race then? If this is not eugenics that, what is it? @ Francis The idea came from the Malthusian, I think. @ Sonnen There is no time limitation for IMG. And I know that despite their disabilities disability are happy to live. A fetus with a disability is as innocent as a fetus that is. A fetus with a disability is as innocent as a fetus n'estpas disabled. No? The abortion because it is believed that his disability is a burden on society, it is eugenics. No?

I do not know anyone who is serious for both eugenics and cons of abortion. These are the results of two opposing doctrines, in my opinion. @ Al: Being in eugenics, that killed at birth. Being against abortion is saying yes to life. Incompatibility, I think.

The man and his paradoxes …

Excellent question, thank you. For my part I am not for eugenics, but for abortion THE SOLE DISCRETION OF CONCERNED (not a social problem but an individual problem), in extreme cases such as rape, risk of death for Mom, trisomy or other serious risk to the baby. I am opposed to abortion in other cases. We have enough means of contraception in order to manage a priori the birth rate. @ Sonnen, tests are performed on the 3rd month for trisomy … and abortion can be performed.

Can. We can do everything. Like, for example, be against abortion on a right to life of an embryo (and human life is sacred, even in pregnancy) but advocate the death penalty. And for good human beings this time.

The ideology of extreme right opened the eradication of naturally disadvantaged people "especially for health reasons" in World War II shows! And just after the war the abuser of women has been institutionalized. Instead of aborting women why not castrate men! if only medically

I'm actually in this case: Currently abortion is primarily for reasons of convenience: parents do not feel how to accommodate an additional child, single mother and not for eugenic reasons. If it detects a case of trisomy in the 6th month of pregnancy, not miscarried. Many orphan diseases are detected too late for an abortion. Now I'm sorry, but a healthy child can live a happy life with adoptive parents. It should rather refer mothers who do not take care of a child to abandonment. In contrast, children with disabilities, especially in the case of multiple disability or mental disability will be miserable all their lives and will load all their lives for their parents and society. I am not opposed to the coup de grace when he was the only decent solution … @ Almire: A serial killer is a noxious: the felling is to save his future victims. By contrast a baby is a totally innocent man who has committed no crime to deserve the death that you want it. By contrast a baby is a totally innocent man who has committed no crime to deserve the death that you want luiinfliger. I notice the illogic of the supporters of the killing of babies that are to safeguard the lives of murderers @ AL: quite, I said initially I am in favor of eugenics, but not to abortion reasons of personal convenience or financial. What is the most common case today. I would add that it depends on the disability. If we can sail, we can offer him a life about right, but I'm talking multiple disabilities: http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polyhandicap there is more generous to offer her a quick death.

And those against the 2? I do. Against abortion (not tell me of abortions in rape cases this represents only 2% of abortions) and against any form of eugenics. However I am for IMG in case of severe disabilities. In the kind that would prevent the person from having his own life. But not because he is a dwarf or something lightweight. I know a specific example.

Funny as a question …. For me it is not inherently paradoxical, but it depends what is meant by eugenics. It seemed that eugenics was the desire to create the best possible beings. But when I talk about creating the best things I mean manipulating the embryo from the 1st stages of development into a perfect being has his taste. This is in no way opposed to abortion. For we may well wish to manipulate the embryo offspring as the desire, without resorting to abortion if this operation should fail, right?

Hundred million. This is the approximate number of abortions performed in the West, including Russia, since the legalization of abortion – legalization occurred in most of our old country, during the 70s. It is ten times the number of victims of Nazi concentration camp system, double the number killed during the Second World War, roughly the number of victims of Communism and Soviet Russia, Maoist China combined. In terms of demographic, so it's a catastrophe without precedent. And, incredibly, this was done mostly in silence. not a whisper, or the woman is almost a machine, killing far more efficient than humans and for good reason: by refusing to give life, it takes away. Drac @ Michel Fruges … democracy in all the worst crap are always in the name of the property, abortion, eugenics, GM, humanitarian war … propaganda invented the great mercy killing …. no?

These babies were not born. It's nothing of a crime

I think it is better to remove the "life" to be still not done that to abandon it later or bad deal. But that's my opinion and everyone has the right to have his …

Oh my poor … Dealing with so much ignorance … Do you know that before 14 weeks, it is not a living being? This is a bunch of cells. This is not a crime, since he has no conscience, it does not exist as a human being, this is only part of the female body! Scientists say it is indisputable! If I take your argument Sterile to the end, we can say Otis tumor (heap cell in the body of the woman) is murder … And if the woman decides to abort, it is is a reason. It sure is better to ban abortion and leave the poor kids growing up in poverty. Besides clandestine abortions, which kill thousands of women who, they are real people.

This is the result of overpopulation? Non.Il it is no concrete reason to commit such an act.

This does not surprise me to see that most people you meet are that normal … In most Western countries, the embryo is not considered "alive", we consider the fetus as a living being until the eighth week. The de-Christianization has been through it, the Church no longer has a say, abortion is legal and widely accepted in France for 35 years. If you have a religious view, it remains a terrible crime against innocent people, secular law can never change that …

I think we should fight the problem at its root, ie, unwanted pregnancies, this will prevent a woman to be in this predicament where it must take a choice.

When there is a tragedy but when there are 100 million is a statistic! Otherwise it is a serious )))))) genocide that dare not speak its name under the guise it takes responsibility away from sex while the means of contraception are many and varied, cheap and easy access and this, not to mention advertising campaigns … In France every year they shortened the lives of about 200,000 embryos.

crime? "I do not want to enter this debate. historic failure? If we judge that these are tens of millions of soldiers who fail to call for future wars against Islam or the south, eventually. Again that modern weapons make it largely useless mass armies, type 14-18.

A blessing for humanity to survive. We are already 6 billion. But I am not for abortion but for contraception.

"It's ten times the number of victims of Nazi concentration camp system" Raymond Barre had added that it was more serious "because it did not affect only Jews, but also innocent French"

It's still pretty funny this perpetual comparison with the Holocaust and World War II … M'enfin good if it amuses. For the rest of the abortion law is obvious, recall the situation before the law, abortions existed and the number of abortions was not negligible but in sometimes appalling conditions. By cons that I can not understand is how we can be to 200,000 abortions a year with contraception and condoms ….

Thank you for the courage of your convictions.

… Upstream, it is absolutely necessary that the pill is free for teens …

Too permissive, but they must see each particular case.

The law seems fair. I say that I am neither for nor against. Just for the free choice of women! 1) By cons, it is time to empower boys (men) leave the responsibility for contraception to girls (women). Above all, do bear financially, morally and physically that some children to make their partner before dropping them after the revelation of the pregnancy. This is what happens in the Scandinavian countries that have little or no help to women with "the single parent allowance. Taxpayers do not pay for the irresponsible! 2) We need more family planning to help women in their choice of contraception and / or decision to make regarding abortion. Thus, a number largest hospitals agreeing to perform IGV. Past 20th years, women's rights regress .. and everybody can not afford to get abortions abroad.

I am fundamentally against abortion, with exceptions. Disease-Rape-fetus or pregnant person, risk fatal childbirth-The age of the person (10-12 years is ineligible for example! )-inbreeding short, I sincerely believe that there are abuses on this side! It should not be allowed for example the abortion of a woman who already has undergone several "Well, that remains my opinion, I do not judge women who have had or will use it.

Much too permissive. I do not judge women in distress who are forced to resort to abortion. But I saw around me too many abortions merely correcting an oversight pill! The wife of a CEO who has made abortion for unwanted pregnancy and too late (in fact not a true "abortion", a Fause layer caused by Medoc given by his doctor). But I have seen women have abortions four or five times. It was their method of contraception! In cases like this, I found that tubal ligation should be mandatory.

abortion should be avoided where possible through greater prevention among young girls by giving them mpyens of contraception as recommended by Ms. Royal, who is often right on such subjects!

You seem bothered you. Well, if you have a little bun in the cupboard, takes. Maybe later you can no longer. In 1990, a young lady had already opened this topic with me, and I say "Take." The result of my board is a pretty girl who is now married. P. .. Time passes quickly.

Yes, euthanasia is also

Yes! Sm

my cousin wants to divorce his wife, but he finds that his wife had an abortion when they were together and wants to terminate it if he ever consider a divorce. I wonder if he faces jail if she told the judge asleep in ca judge can not be ignored. He aborted his wife (they were in a marriage) for her to continue school without problems. please reply

And then? or is the problem? one has the right to abortion and divorce in France ..

I have not experienced this situation but I think she also wanted an abortion if she will not get it do.

At first, his wife could have refused at that time .. Did she was forced under duress to abort? If yes .. then indeed he may be prosecuted (and it would be totally legitimate!) Note I'm talking about physical restraint .. Saying "If you miscarried not I leave you," is not a constraint. If he does not stress so it does not risk anything .. the fact of wanting to divorce now no difference.

Where do they live? If it is in France, she chose to abort herself and her husband was unable to oblige. It's legal, so it can not "condemn". But all this is very sad. I am against abortion, even if I do not judge women who are really forced to make that choice … For others, it has become a commonplace method of contraception. I find this criminal attitude …

ca how you look? their privacy?

Unless him put the knife to her throat, I do not see why anyone would accuse your friend of his wife's abortion …