Can someone help explain why abortion is much worse than the Iraqi War?

[petsr4ever]

As I read through the posts, I find that the majority of people who have posted believe that a life taken by abortion is more important than one taken in war. An aborted life is the murder of an “innocent” being. I disagree. No one life is any more important than any other. I wonder how any of you would feel if the lives taken in war were your mother, father, sister, brother, child, or friend.

I am no longer a member of the Catholic church, but when I was growing up in the church, I remember being taught that unless you were baptized, you couldn’t go to heaven. So, in other words, according to the teaching of the church, an "innocent’ child would be unable to go to heaven just because someone else didn’t get that child baptized? What’s that all about? And now all of you are saying that an unborn child’s life is more important than that of someone killed in war? BUT that same “innocent” child can’t go to heaven if it isn’t baptized? Now, that just doesn’t make one bit of sense to me. Neither does a whole bunch of other stuff, and that is why I am an EX-Catholic today.

 

[RobbyS]

As I read through the posts, I find that the majority of people who have posted believe that a life taken by abortion is more important than one taken in war. An aborted life is the murder of an “innocent” being. I disagree. No one life is any more important than any other. I wonder how any of you would feel if the lives taken in war were your mother, father, sister, brother, child, or friend.

I am no longer a member of the Catholic church, but when I was growing up in the church, I remember being taught that unless you were baptized, you couldn’t go to heaven. So, in other words, according to the teaching of the church, an "innocent’ child would be unable to go to heaven just because someone else didn’t get that child baptized? What’s that all about? And now all of you are saying that an unborn child’s life is more important than that of someone killed in war? BUT that same “innocent” child can’t go to heaven if it isn’t baptized? Now, that just doesn’t make one bit of sense to me. Neither does a whole bunch of other stuff, and that is why I am an EX-Catholic today.

The impression you are getting is because the other side is saying that the life of a fetus has no value, or infinitely less value than
other things that a woman wants. I say they have equal value, remembering that “value” is not the really the right word if one is talking about intrinsic worth. Every human being is equal in the eyes of God, who is the only one who has put a “true” price on our heads.

As for baptism, the emphasis on baptism is really an emphasis on the necessity of the Church. The old saying “Extra ecclesia non salus est” tells us that the world is an unsafe place, but there is safety within the Church, and to baptize is to bring the child under the protection of the Church. The old Augustinian notions are in disfavor, but don’t be put off by that. There are several theologies that are compatible with the dogmas of the Church. We really don’t know who outside the Church will be saved: that is up to God. The image I have in mind is the
man who is outside the walls of a fortress that is besieged by an enemy. He may disappear from our sight, and we don’t tell if he escapes the enemy of not. Nor can we be absolutely sure of the safety of those inside. An enemy missle may catch us out in the open, in an unguarded place.

 

[nancy_dalrymple]

As I read through the posts, I find that the majority of people who have posted believe that a life taken by abortion is more important than one taken in war. An aborted life is the murder of an “innocent” being. I disagree. No one life is any more important than any other. I wonder how any of you would feel if the lives taken in war were your mother, father, sister, brother, child, or friend.

I am no longer a member of the Catholic church, but when I was growing up in the church, I remember being taught that unless you were baptized, you couldn’t go to heaven. So, in other words, according to the teaching of the church, an "innocent’ child would be unable to go to heaven just because someone else didn’t get that child baptized? What’s that all about? And now all of you are saying that an unborn child’s life is more important than that of someone killed in war? BUT that same “innocent” child can’t go to heaven if it isn’t baptized? Now, that just doesn’t make one bit of sense to me. Neither does a whole bunch of other stuff, and that is why I am an EX-Catholic today.

Hello, I just did a thread today do babys go to heaven if their not baptised, I was told they go to heaven. I always believed they went to heaven,right back to the Father,they were proberly too good for this world. God Bless Nancy

 

[c659smith]

Hello, I just did a thread today do babys go to heaven if their not baptised, I was told they go to heaven. I always believed they went to heaven,right back to the Father,they were proberly too good for this world. God Bless Nancy

There is no official teaching that they go to limbo. The fate of unbaptized children has not been determined.

Jews could not enter heaven including infants prior to Christ (The Messiah). the gates of heaven just were not opened because of Original Sin and scripture is clear on this.

However Church teaching is that without Baptism we are not forgiven of Original sin. But as in abortion or Miscarriages there is baptism by blood.

The Catholic Church teaching and scripture is to Baptise whole families including Infants as soon as possible so Original Sin is absolved.

Remember Jesus showed us the way to Baptism in being batised Himself and was the appearance of the Holy Spirit.

Scripture though tell us that Jesus loved children and stated not to stop the little children from coming to Him. So the final word on that is God’s not man. I am certainly not one to say when or how God Judges and will not judge anyone as I do not want to be judged myself as I need Mercy. I think if most were judged we would fail miserably

I would definitely like to think that if infants not baptised by blood that were to die without Baptism were stalled from entering Heaven immediately would one day enter heaven when Jesus returns.

 

[zachforn]

Intent is at the very heart of what is sinful.

So much of this thread deals with intention, so what is “intention”?

Thought experiment:

Someone will give you a million dollars if you drink a drink that will cause you almost unbearable pain for one day. Let’s say he changes the bet: instead of drinking the drink you only have to “intend” to drink the drink. In the end, the only solution becomes there is no way to have the intention of doing something until the thing is actually done. The only way to truly intend to drink the drink is to actually drink the drink, every other action is only you planning to show the person that you are trying to show you have the intention, but you don’t really have the intention of drinking it.

Again, the only way to show intention is to drink the drink. In this idea there is no such thing as intention. ALL DEATHS OF INNOCENTS IS SINFUL MURDER (INTENDED OR NOT, SUCH INTENTIONS ONLY EXIST IN THE PERFORMANCE OF A DEED).

I know it sounds bad, but it may be that those who participate in a war that kills innocent people are guilty of murder.

 

[Memaw]

There is no official teaching that they go to limbo. The fate of unbaptized children has not been determined.

Jews could not enter heaven including infants prior to Christ (The Messiah). the gates of heaven just were not opened because of Original Sin and scripture is clear on this.

However Church teaching is that without Baptism we are not forgiven of Original sin. But as in abortion or Miscarriages there is baptism by blood.

The Catholic Church teaching and scripture is to Baptise whole families including Infants as soon as possible so Original Sin is absolved.

Remember Jesus showed us the way to Baptism in being batised Himself and was the appearance of the Holy Spirit.

Scripture though tell us that Jesus loved children and stated not to stop the little children from coming to Him. So the final word on that is God’s not man. I am certainly not one to say when or how God Judges and will not judge anyone as I do not want to be judged myself as I need Mercy. I think if most were judged we would fail miserably

I would definitely like to think that if infants not baptised by blood that were to die without Baptism were stalled from entering Heaven immediately would one day enter heaven when Jesus returns.

It would really be wonderful if all Catholics would learn what the Catholic Church really believes and teaches before everyone speculates on what it it believes. I have had 2 babies die before birth so unable to be Baptized. I know my babies are in the hands of God as they never committed a sin on their own. Also the babies that have been aborted are in God’s hands. They did not choose to die for the faith so they cannot be martyrs. and are not capable of receiving Baptism by Blood or Baptism by desire. God has never revealed to us just what lies ahead for unbaptized babies, or children, no matter how they die. But we DO know they do not go to Hell. SOOOO there must be a special plan God has for them even tho we do not know what it is. HE loves them more than we do and I trust HIM with my babies. We do not know, but HE does. That’s enough for me.

It is those who choose to harm these innocent babies and children that we need be concerned about, so pray they see how horrible the crimes they are committing are. They need our prayers and God’s forgiveness and Mercy before they die. God Bless, Memaw

 

[nancy_dalrymple]

Here is my interpertation of a baby that dies without Baptizm, read Ecclesiastes 12:6-7
Love of Christ Nancy PS your baby is with God, born of sin or not, they are innocent.

 

[petsr4ever]

Hello, I just did a thread today do babys go to heaven if their not baptised, I was told they go to heaven. I always believed they went to heaven,right back to the Father,they were proberly too good for this world. God Bless Nancy

Yes, I believe that unborn babies go straight to God (heaven). There is absolutely no reason why they wouldn’t. I don’t care how the scriptures are translated or “taken”. There is NO REASON that they wouldn’t go straight to God. If the church maintains that they don’t, just because they haven’t been baptized, then a person could also say then that abortion is OK, because the soul of an unborn child is worthless. As far as the idea of “Limbo” goes—there is no such thing as Limbo. Who the heck ever came up with that, anyway? No limbo, no purgatory. You are either with God for all eternity after you die, or you are not with God period. With God=Heaven, without God=hell. And I still maintain that the soul of an innocent and good person that was killed in war is just as valuable as the soul of an unborn child. A soul is a soul. Period. That’s my story and I’m sticking to it.

 

[Antithesis]

Over 1900 years of church tradition say they are in hell, from St Augustine to St Thomas and most of the popes up to modern times agree. The only arguement that ever was, was whether they suffered or not. Are we smarter than them now or just more arrogant? There is a reason we deserve hell by default and its called Original Sin. It is a real sin defined by the church, so babies are not innocent, they are filthy lifeless abominations to God who demands nothing less than absolute perfection. No one is innocent, we are all guilty for this sin so we all deserve hell from the moment of our conception. This modern hope bullocks is a false hope to help a people weak in there faith blinded by their animal instincts to protect a creature that God found unworthy of Him. Do as we are called to do be more like God and accept wthout the feeling of loss that they are in hell and rejoice that His will is done with perfection. Love God all the more that in his divine mercy that he allowed other children to live long enough to have a real hope in baptism the only one He promised.

 

[rinnie]

I know that my Baby is also with God, because I believe what the RCC teaches. We rely on the Mercy of God. And we all know that God does and will have mercy on the inocent.

I did just read something, I need to check it out better, but if we are in a state of Grace we can ask God to accept their souls in Baptism and it is a valid Baptism. So if we would go to confession, and after we would be in a State of Grace this is possible through consent of being the parent. But I am no sure of this being Church teaching but need to check it out. But I do know the Church teaching is we rely on Gods Mercy.

 

[nancy_dalrymple]

I know that my Baby is also with God, because I believe what the RCC teaches. We rely on the Mercy of God. And we all know that God does and will have mercy on the inocent.

I did just read something, I need to check it out better, but if we are in a state of Grace we can ask God to accept their souls in Baptism and it is a valid Baptism. So if we would go to confession, and after we would be in a State of Grace this is possible through consent of being the parent. But I am no sure of this being Church teaching but need to check it out. But I do know the Church teaching is we rely on Gods Mercy.

OK rinnie, if you get into a car crash and your baby dies and you have brain damage and cannot go to confession to ask God for forgiveness and you did sin before that, i believe the child goes back to the Father and i dont need any church teaching to tell me differnt. It is common sence that God is all knowing all loving, and want’s us to be with him or he would have never came in the form of Man to redeem us of ORIGINAL sin.Show me if we have been redeemed where a innocent baby can sin? that is something i will never except. Love of Christ Nancy

 

[dancny]

First I would like to address some comments on original sin:
405 Although it is proper to each individual,295 original sin does not have the character of a personal fault in any of Adam’s descendants. It is a deprivation of original holiness and justice, but human nature has not been totally corrupted: it is wounded in the natural powers proper to it, subject to ignorance, suffering and the dominion of death, and inclined to sin - an inclination to evil that is called concupiscence". Baptism, by imparting the life of Christ’s grace, erases original sin and turns a man back towards God, but the consequences for nature, weakened and inclined to evil, persist in man and summon him to spiritual battle.

406 The Church’s teaching on the transmission of original sin was articulated more precisely in the fifth century, especially under the impulse of St. Augustine’s reflections against Pelagianism, and in the sixteenth century, in opposition to the Protestant Reformation. Pelagius held that man could, by the natural power of free will and without the necessary help of God’s grace, lead a morally good life; he thus reduced the influence of Adam’s fault to bad example. The first Protestant reformers, on the contrary, taught that original sin has radically perverted man and destroyed his freedom; they identified the sin inherited by each man with the tendency to evil (concupiscentia), which would be insurmountable. The Church pronounced on the meaning of the data of Revelation on original sin especially at the second Council of Orange (529)296 and at the Council of Trent (1546).297

A hard battle. . .

407 The doctrine of original sin, closely connected with that of redemption by Christ, provides lucid discernment of man’s situation and activity in the world. By our first parents’ sin, the devil has acquired a certain domination over man, even though man remains free. Original sin entails “captivity under the power of him who thenceforth had the power of death, that is, the devil”.298 Ignorance of the fact that man has a wounded nature inclined to evil gives rise to serious errors in the areas of education, politics, social action299 and morals.

SO, while a baby has Original sin it does not have Personal SIn because it hasn’t had the chance to commit it. It is not now, or has ever been Church teaching that unbaptized babies go to hell. They are left to the Mercy of God which is all encompassing.

So, here is a scenario: Dad, Mom and baby are driving home from church. Mom went to confession before mass and kept her mind pure during mass. Dad didn’t go to confession for whatever reason, baby is a baby and doesn’t even know what confession is. There is a horrible crash.

In all honesty I don’t know who goes where except the baby has no personal sin and probably returns to the Father and lives with Him in heaven. Mom and Dad? If Mom made a good confession dies in a state of grace it is conceivable that she goes straight to heaven. Dad may even be in a state of grace as do not and would not have the knowledge of His soul.

As to why a war is not worse than abortion:

1. Abortion is a rebellion against God in the most grevious way. We are telling God that we not only wish to sin by sleeping around but that when we are blessed with a child we will kill it, read murder, for our own benefit. We give God the finger and resume our lives.
2. Abortion is the opposite of love. In love we sacrifice for those we love. In abortion we kill those we should love for our pleasure.
3. Abortion takes an innocent, helpless, human life and destroys it. A life that cannot defend itself, cannot speak for itself, cannot represent itself and it is swept away like trash.

In a war civilians can leave, we call them refugees. thousands do. They flee the area and hide. If they choose to stay and are killed, they should have known the danger.

All of the soldiers in the Iraqi have volunteered to fight. We don’t have a draft and neither do they. Everyone there should understand the consequences of their decision which the possibility of their death or maiming.

Sadaam was a murderer who suppressed his people and if you read more than main media you will find that in most of Iraq, especially southern Iraq, the people are living relativly quiet peaceful lives.

The war is not illegal. The United States had the right to declare the war based on the intellignece it had, the congress voted on the war and accepted it and war was declared. It was not sime unilateral decisin by Pres Bush but a congressionally approved action. There is no illegality in the war and it is media spin for that sayd differently.

 

[Memaw]

Over 1900 years of church tradition say they are in hell, from St Augustine to St Thomas and most of the popes up to modern times agree. The only arguement that ever was, was whether they suffered or not. Are we smarter than them now or just more arrogant? There is a reason we deserve hell by default and its called Original Sin. It is a real sin defined by the church, so babies are not innocent, they are filthy lifeless abominations to God who demands nothing less than absolute perfection. No one is innocent, we are all guilty for this sin so we all deserve hell from the moment of our conception. This modern hope bullocks is a false hope to help a people weak in there faith blinded by their animal instincts to protect a creature that God found unworthy of Him. Do as we are called to do be more like God and accept wthout the feeling of loss that they are in hell and rejoice that His will is done with perfection. Love God all the more that in his divine mercy that he allowed other children to live long enough to have a real hope in baptism the only one He promised.

I do not know where you got those ideas from but the Catholic Church has never in its 2,000 year history ever taught that unbaptized babies or children that die before the age of reason, ever go to Hell. The truth is we just don’t know for sure, what God has for them. Jesus did say that in order to enter Heaven we must be baptized. And we do know that only those who have committed grave sin and die without repenting of it, will go to Hell. So we trust God with his babies, and they do really belong to Him. I am afraid you have a very bleak idea of God and his Love and Mercy. If you are a Catholic you really need to study your Catholic faith and seek help in understanding it properly. God Bless, Memaw

 

[icknish]

Because there is a difference between murder and killing. An enemy that would do everything in their power to kill you without provocation is MURDER but generally you have a choice to fight back.
Abortion is MURDER as the child inside a mother’s womb does not have a choice as it is completely defenseless and has provoked no one.
But sadly, even though war is not always MURDER, war has killing and murder in it’s very ugly nature, but there are always choices, if you don’t like those choices find a solution, but make every attempt to make that solution in line with Gods will. God does allow killing at times but not MURDER (The Ten Commandments make that clear).
With abortion there is no choice it is always MURDER.

 

[StevenFrancis]

The table below summarizes some of the Iraqi casualty figures.

Source Iraqi deaths March 2003 to…
June 2006 Iraq Family Health Survey 151,000 violent deaths.
June 2006 Lancet survey 601,027 violent deaths out of 654,965 excess deaths.
August 2007 Opinion Research Business survey 1,033,000 violent deaths as a result of the conflict.
February 2009 Iraq Body Count 91,059 – 99,431 violent civilian deaths as a result of the conflict.

Iraqi war TOTAL somewhere between 100,000 - and a little over a million persons

Abortions

Approximately 14.7 million per year world wide, of which approximately 1.3 Million per year happen in the U.S. Alone. Going with the very highest estimate for Iraq (military/civilian/terrorist/indirect) of 1.03 million, then every person who died from even the most far fetched connection to the Iraq war comes up to less than the number of babies killed in the U.S. alone for 1 year in a conservative estimate. Over the 7 years of the Iraqi travesty, (and I agree, by the way that it is both a tragedy and a travesty), perhaps 102.9 million babies have died, (about 8 million of them in the U.S.).

The number aren’t really what makes the abortion issue so important though. That make the abortion issue more urgent. What gives it it’s importance though is the fact that it is the prime civil right. It is the basic, fundamental prerequisite to civilisation itself. The right to exist. To be. To have birth. What, of man’s problems and abuses may we discuss if we were not allowed the right to our own lives? We, who are chatting back and forth on this forum were all granted the right to life. Those of us on the forum who are American, in fact, were granted the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. So, how, and by whose authority, did we the born garner the importance and pomp to decide whom of God’s intended creatures is granted the chance at a life? By what authority did we presume to decide that this one will live, and this one we’ll throw away. Aw heck, he was going to be born poor, and wouldn’t have a shot anyway. Is there a more presumptuous, wrongheaded, degrading and arrogant position to be held in any other realm of human debate? Even the secular atheist should understand the value of human life, and the lack of ability on the part of those of us who are born to correctly judge the potential of a person. Many persons of the very most humble of lives and beginnings have been of the greatest import to our society as a human race.

The right to life is self-evident.

Also…we should not wage war unless it is in the direct self defense of our own nation and her lands. It’s disgusting how we people mismanage just war doctrine. Perhaps one of the millions of people we’re keeping from achieving life to begin with could be the very person who has the answer to man’s wars as well.

Good luck in your arguments. Those who won’t hear, generally won’t hear.

Peace to you,

Steven

 

[nancy_dalrymple]

First I would like to address some comments on original sin:
405 Although it is proper to each individual,295 original sin does not have the character of a personal fault in any of Adam’s descendants. It is a deprivation of original holiness and justice, but human nature has not been totally corrupted: it is wounded in the natural powers proper to it, subject to ignorance, suffering and the dominion of death, and inclined to sin - an inclination to evil that is called concupiscence". Baptism, by imparting the life of Christ’s grace, erases original sin and turns a man back towards God, but the consequences for nature, weakened and inclined to evil, persist in man and summon him to spiritual battle.

406 The Church’s teaching on the transmission of original sin was articulated more precisely in the fifth century, especially under the impulse of St. Augustine’s reflections against Pelagianism, and in the sixteenth century, in opposition to the Protestant Reformation. Pelagius held that man could, by the natural power of free will and without the necessary help of God’s grace, lead a morally good life; he thus reduced the influence of Adam’s fault to bad example. The first Protestant reformers, on the contrary, taught that original sin has radically perverted man and destroyed his freedom; they identified the sin inherited by each man with the tendency to evil (concupiscentia), which would be insurmountable. The Church pronounced on the meaning of the data of Revelation on original sin especially at the second Council of Orange (529)296 and at the Council of Trent (1546).297

A hard battle. . .

407 The doctrine of original sin, closely connected with that of redemption by Christ, provides lucid discernment of man’s situation and activity in the world. By our first parents’ sin, the devil has acquired a certain domination over man, even though man remains free. Original sin entails “captivity under the power of him who thenceforth had the power of death, that is, the devil”.298 Ignorance of the fact that man has a wounded nature inclined to evil gives rise to serious errors in the areas of education, politics, social action299 and morals.

SO, while a baby has Original sin it does not have Personal SIn because it hasn’t had the chance to commit it. It is not now, or has ever been Church teaching that unbaptized babies go to hell. They are left to the Mercy of God which is all encompassing.

So, here is a scenario: Dad, Mom and baby are driving home from church. Mom went to confession before mass and kept her mind pure during mass. Dad didn’t go to confession for whatever reason, baby is a baby and doesn’t even know what confession is. There is a horrible crash.

In all honesty I don’t know who goes where except the baby has no personal sin and probably returns to the Father and lives with Him in heaven. Mom and Dad? If Mom made a good confession dies in a state of grace it is conceivable that she goes straight to heaven. Dad may even be in a state of grace as do not and would not have the knowledge of His soul.

As to why a war is not worse than abortion:

1. Abortion is a rebellion against God in the most grevious way. We are telling God that we not only wish to sin by sleeping around but that when we are blessed with a child we will kill it, read murder, for our own benefit. We give God the finger and resume our lives.
2. Abortion is the opposite of love. In love we sacrifice for those we love. In abortion we kill those we should love for our pleasure.
3. Abortion takes an innocent, helpless, human life and destroys it. A life that cannot defend itself, cannot speak for itself, cannot represent itself and it is swept away like trash.

In a war civilians can leave, we call them refugees. thousands do. They flee the area and hide. If they choose to stay and are killed, they should have known the danger.

All of the soldiers in the Iraqi have volunteered to fight. We don’t have a draft and neither do they. Everyone there should understand the consequences of their decision which the possibility of their death or maiming.

Sadaam was a murderer who suppressed his people and if you read more than main media you will find that in most of Iraq, especially southern Iraq, the people are living relativly quiet peaceful lives.

The war is not illegal. The United States had the right to declare the war based on the intellignece it had, the congress voted on the war and accepted it and war was declared. It was not sime unilateral decisin by Pres Bush but a congressionally approved action. There is no illegality in the war and it is media spin for that sayd differently.

You are unbelievable and I can get a better of what the Church eraly think’s about Baby’s I almost didnt want to believe that they could think such a thing. thank You for your honest (name removed by moderator)ut I do not believe in abortion and i am doing the 40 day’s in September. but i need to ask you about something that is , well i will e-mail you . Love of Christ Nancy

 

[petsr4ever]

Over 1900 years of church tradition say they are in hell, from St Augustine to St Thomas and most of the popes up to modern times agree. The only arguement that ever was, was whether they suffered or not. Are we smarter than them now or just more arrogant? There is a reason we deserve hell by default and its called Original Sin. It is a real sin defined by the church, so babies are not innocent, they are filthy lifeless abominations to God who demands nothing less than absolute perfection. No one is innocent, we are all guilty for this sin so we all deserve hell from the moment of our conception. This modern hope bullocks is a false hope to help a people weak in there faith blinded by their animal instincts to protect a creature that God found unworthy of Him. Do as we are called to do be more like God and accept wthout the feeling of loss that they are in hell and rejoice that His will is done with perfection. Love God all the more that in his divine mercy that he allowed other children to live long enough to have a real hope in baptism the only one He promised.

 

[petsr4ever]

Antitheses, you’ve gotta be kidding me. You really think that the soul of an unborn baby will go to hell because of “original sin”? What kind of God would punish someone (anyone) for a sin they had nothing to do with? It’s people like you with ideas like yours, that have driven me and many others even further away from the Catholic church.

Like the late and great George Carlin once said “I believed everything the Catholic church told me until I reached the age of reason, which was about the age of 3”. Amen to that brother George.

 

[Memaw]

Antitheses, you’ve gotta be kidding me. You really think that the soul of an unborn baby will go to hell because of “original sin”? What kind of God would punish someone (anyone) for a sin they had nothing to do with? It’s people like you with ideas like yours, that have driven me and many others even further away from the Catholic church.

Like the late and great George Carlin once said “I believed everything the Catholic church told me until I reached the age of reason, which was about the age of 3”. Amen to that brother George.

If you let someone that does NOT understand the Catholic Faith drive you away from the True Faith , then you didn’t know or understand your faith either. That is sad. you need to get to know your Catholic Faith and return home to the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church.
Sorry, but George Carlin couldn’t have learned that much before he was 3 years old. God Bless, Memaw

 

[Toughguy]

petsr4ever;

Like the late and great George Carlin once said “I believed everything the Catholic church told me until I reached the age of reason, which was about the age of 3”. Amen to that brother George.

So what the hell are you doing here then? Beat it. Go water the flowers on Carlin’s grave.