Nancy Pelosi's foible on Birth Control: As Explained by Megyn Kelly

[RandallFlagg]

How naive.

Abortion IS a form of birth control. Since the innocent in the womb is slaughtered before he or she is born, you control the birth... or more to the point, the death of the child. In essence, birth control. By slaughtering the child, you stop the birth, prevent the birth, and therefore control the birth. So, what will you do now?

Pardon me, but you are in no position to deflect. The errors of your platform have been laid out before you. Rendered useless. All you can do is to make small talk. You can spare us all by acknowledging that Democrats once supported freedom of religion, and then explaining why in the past 20 years you felt it necessary to attack it instead of defend it.

Liberals such as yourself are paradoxes of morality.

There's no moral question about it. Fetuses aren't babies.

And given that you guys are trying to snatch the food from the mouths of hungry children, I'll take you seriously when you start caring about the kids that have been born rather than the ones who haven't.

Prove it.

 

[JoeB131]

I was six years old in 1993, but there are liberals here old enough to remember that Supreme Court case, and how Democrats were all up in arms about denying someone their religious freedom. They should be mature and realistic enough to now that they have completely reversed their opinions on religious freedoms, in regards to Hobby Lobby. Political convenience, just another way to feign a way to care about women, or of religious freedom. No, they don't care about women or people of faith, but will use them for political gain.

The problem is your maturity level hasn't improved since you were six.

The RFRA was passed to protect INDIVIDUALS, not corporations. A corporate entity can't have a religious affiliation.

But, no, you guys really need to run against contraception, something that 99% of women use. That's really going to be a winner for you guys. Trust me.

 

[LoneLaugher]

Your point? You are right of course, but abortion in your case would be for 'cosmetic' reasons, not 'medical.'

Birth control is not abortion.

How naive.

Abortion IS a form of birth control. Since the innocent in the womb is slaughtered before he or she is born, you control the birth... or more to the point, the death of the child. In essence, birth control. By slaughtering the child, you stop the birth, prevent the birth, and therefore control the birth. So, what will you do now?

Pardon me, but you are in no position to deflect. The errors of your platform have been laid out before you. Rendered useless. All you can do is to make small talk. You can spare us all by acknowledging that Democrats once supported freedom of religion, and then explaining why in the past 20 years you felt it necessary to attack it instead of defend it.

Liberals such as yourself are paradoxes of morality.

Birth control prevents abortions.

English is a difficult language. Even for native speakers.

This idiot thinks birth control is the act of controlling a birth. Why do we park on driveways and drive on parkways?

Can a birth be controlled by actually allowing said birth?

You imbecile.

 

[RandallFlagg]

I was six years old in 1993, but there are liberals here old enough to remember that Supreme Court case, and how Democrats were all up in arms about denying someone their religious freedom. They should be mature and realistic enough to now that they have completely reversed their opinions on religious freedoms, in regards to Hobby Lobby. Political convenience, just another way to feign a way to care about women, or of religious freedom. No, they don't care about women or people of faith, but will use them for political gain.

The problem is your maturity level hasn't improved since you were six.

The RFRA was passed to protect INDIVIDUALS, not corporations. A corporate entity can't have a religious affiliation.

But, no, you guys really need to run against contraception, something that 99% of women use. That's really going to be a winner for you guys. Trust me.

Tell you what.....remind me of your bullshit argument AFTER the November elections, when you lose the Senate.

 

[JoeB131]

Tell you what.....remind me of your bullshit argument AFTER the November elections, when you lose the Senate.

Guy, the fact that you are going to win a few senate seats in backwards states with less population than some cities, doesn't mean the country has fallen back in love with you.

It's like the Special Olypmics. Even if you win, you are still retarded.

You won't win the big states, and you won't win the presidency in 2016.

I'm really sorry you guys don't seem to understand this.

 

[LoneLaugher]

I was six years old in 1993, but there are liberals here old enough to remember that Supreme Court case, and how Democrats were all up in arms about denying someone their religious freedom. They should be mature and realistic enough to now that they have completely reversed their opinions on religious freedoms, in regards to Hobby Lobby. Political convenience, just another way to feign a way to care about women, or of religious freedom. No, they don't care about women or people of faith, but will use them for political gain.

The problem is your maturity level hasn't improved since you were six.

The RFRA was passed to protect INDIVIDUALS, not corporations. A corporate entity can't have a religious affiliation.

But, no, you guys really need to run against contraception, something that 99% of women use. That's really going to be a winner for you guys. Trust me.

Tell you what.....remind me of your bullshit argument AFTER the November elections, when you lose the Senate.

After all....that IS all that matters, right?

 

[TemplarKormac]

Here's a question for Joe. One half in, one half out. So which is it, a baby or a fetus? It can't be both, now can it? Is it a baby when the feet come out, or is it when the head comes out? A knee? A toe? A finger? An eyelash? Joe has no background in biology, neither do I, but I study it as a hobby. However, I can use his twisted logic against him. His hypocrisy about children, for example, born or in the womb has been on display for weeks now. He whines about compassion for those children at the border, but oh, doesn't give a damn about the ones they kill in the womb. The hypocrisy is stark, mind you. He would subsidize their parents, keep them in relative poverty and dependence on almighty government, give these children a sub par education if they are indeed born and grow up... he'll even have the guts to call it compassion.

So, how is "taking the food from the mouths of children" worse than taking the life from ones in the womb? Food... or life. Oooh, thats a tricky one. What good is food to a child when they're dead?

Chew on that one, Joe.

 

[RandallFlagg]

The problem is your maturity level hasn't improved since you were six.

The RFRA was passed to protect INDIVIDUALS, not corporations. A corporate entity can't have a religious affiliation.

But, no, you guys really need to run against contraception, something that 99% of women use. That's really going to be a winner for you guys. Trust me.

Tell you what.....remind me of your bullshit argument AFTER the November elections, when you lose the Senate.

After all....that IS all that matters, right?

You're goddamned right. Anything to stop you liberal Nazis. ANYTHING.

 

[LoneLaugher]

Here's a question for Joe. One half in, one half out. So which is it, a baby or a fetus? It can't be both, now can it? Is it a baby when the feet come out, or is it when the head comes out? Joe has no background in biology, neither do I, but I study it as a hobby. But I can use his twisted logic against him. His hypocrisy about children, born or in the womb has been on display for weeks now. He whines about compassion for those children at the border, but oh, doesn't give a damn about the ones they kill in the womb. The hypocrisy is stark, mind you. He would subsidize their parents, keep them in relative poverty and dependence on almighty government, give these children a sub par education if they are indeed born and grow up... he'll even have the guts to call it compassion.

So, how is "taking the food from the mouths of children" worse than taking the life from ones in the womb? Food... or life. Oooh, thats a tricky one. What good is food to a child when they're dead?

Chew on that one, Joe.

Uh oh, Joe! He's really got you now. How are you going to respond to that?

 

[LoneLaugher]

Tell you what.....remind me of your bullshit argument AFTER the November elections, when you lose the Senate.

After all....that IS all that matters, right?

You're goddamned right. Anything to stop you liberal Nazis. ANYTHING.

I love that. "Liberal Nazis". Just beautiful.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Here's a question for Joe. One half in, one half out. So which is it, a baby or a fetus? It can't be both, now can it? Is it a baby when the feet come out, or is it when the head comes out? Joe has no background in biology, neither do I, but I study it as a hobby. But I can use his twisted logic against him. His hypocrisy about children, born or in the womb has been on display for weeks now. He whines about compassion for those children at the border, but oh, doesn't give a damn about the ones they kill in the womb. The hypocrisy is stark, mind you. He would subsidize their parents, keep them in relative poverty and dependence on almighty government, give these children a sub par education if they are indeed born and grow up... he'll even have the guts to call it compassion.

So, how is "taking the food from the mouths of children" worse than taking the life from ones in the womb? Food... or life. Oooh, thats a tricky one. What good is food to a child when they're dead?

Chew on that one, Joe.

Uh oh, Joe! He's really got you now. How are you going to respond to that?

You can start by not playing cheerleader. Pathetic.

 

[RandallFlagg]

Tell you what.....remind me of your bullshit argument AFTER the November elections, when you lose the Senate.

Guy, the fact that you are going to win a few senate seats in backwards states with less population than some cities, doesn't mean the country has fallen back in love with you.

It's like the Special Olypmics. Even if you win, you are still retarded.

You won't win the big states, and you won't win the presidency in 2016.

I'm really sorry you guys don't seem to understand this.

You gotta love this guy. "Backwards states". What an asshole you are. Hell, why not just disallow those "backward states" from even voting? Hell, after all, they ARE "backwards". What an American you are......

Again, come back and talk shit to me after November. I suggest, however, that you will magically disappear from sites like this one; sitting, instead in a basement somewhere, planning your revenge on those "backward states" that kicked your ass.

 

[TemplarKormac]

It's like the Special Olypmics. Even if you win, you are still retarded.

Says the guy who can't spell "Olympics."

 

[TemplarKormac]

Tell you what.....remind me of your bullshit argument AFTER the November elections, when you lose the Senate.

Guy, the fact that you are going to win a few senate seats in backwards states with less population than some cities, doesn't mean the country has fallen back in love with you.

It's like the Special Olypmics. Even if you win, you are still retarded.

You won't win the big states, and you won't win the presidency in 2016.

I'm really sorry you guys don't seem to understand this.

You gotta love this guy. "Backwards states". What an asshole you are. Hell, why not just disallow those "backward states" from even voting? Hell, after all, they ARE "backwards". What an American you are......

Again, come back and talk shit to me after November. I suggest, however, that you will magically disappear from sites like this one; sitting, instead in a basement somewhere, planning your revenge on those "backward states" that kicked your ass.

Randall has a point. And at least then, I won't be the only one sitting in a basement!

 

[Noomi]

Here's a question for Joe. One half in, one half out. So which is it, a baby or a fetus? It can't be both, now can it? Is it a baby when the feet come out, or is it when the head comes out? A knee? A toe? A finger? An eyelash? Joe has no background in biology, neither do I, but I study it as a hobby. But I can use his twisted logic against him. His hypocrisy about children, born or in the womb has been on display for weeks now. He whines about compassion for those children at the border, but oh, doesn't give a damn about the ones they kill in the womb. The hypocrisy is stark, mind you. He would subsidize their parents, keep them in relative poverty and dependence on almighty government, give these children a sub par education if they are indeed born and grow up... he'll even have the guts to call it compassion.

So, how is "taking the food from the mouths of children" worse than taking the life from ones in the womb? Food... or life. Oooh, thats a tricky one. What good is food to a child when they're dead?

Chew on that one, Joe.

It is a baby when it is born.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Here's a question for Joe. One half in, one half out. So which is it, a baby or a fetus? It can't be both, now can it? Is it a baby when the feet come out, or is it when the head comes out? A knee? A toe? A finger? An eyelash? Joe has no background in biology, neither do I, but I study it as a hobby. But I can use his twisted logic against him. His hypocrisy about children, born or in the womb has been on display for weeks now. He whines about compassion for those children at the border, but oh, doesn't give a damn about the ones they kill in the womb. The hypocrisy is stark, mind you. He would subsidize their parents, keep them in relative poverty and dependence on almighty government, give these children a sub par education if they are indeed born and grow up... he'll even have the guts to call it compassion.

So, how is "taking the food from the mouths of children" worse than taking the life from ones in the womb? Food... or life. Oooh, thats a tricky one. What good is food to a child when they're dead?

Chew on that one, Joe.

It is a baby when it is born.

Human Biology disagrees. When you see a dog in the womb, do you not see it as a dog? A cat a cat? So why not the same distinction for human beings?

 

[LoneLaugher]

Here's a question for Joe. One half in, one half out. So which is it, a baby or a fetus? It can't be both, now can it? Is it a baby when the feet come out, or is it when the head comes out? Joe has no background in biology, neither do I, but I study it as a hobby. But I can use his twisted logic against him. His hypocrisy about children, born or in the womb has been on display for weeks now. He whines about compassion for those children at the border, but oh, doesn't give a damn about the ones they kill in the womb. The hypocrisy is stark, mind you. He would subsidize their parents, keep them in relative poverty and dependence on almighty government, give these children a sub par education if they are indeed born and grow up... he'll even have the guts to call it compassion.

So, how is "taking the food from the mouths of children" worse than taking the life from ones in the womb? Food... or life. Oooh, thats a tricky one. What good is food to a child when they're dead?

Chew on that one, Joe.

Uh oh, Joe! He's really got you now. How are you going to respond to that?

You can start by not playing cheerleader. Pathetic.

Well....you do know pathetic when you see it.

 

[LoneLaugher]

Here's a question for Joe. One half in, one half out. So which is it, a baby or a fetus? It can't be both, now can it? Is it a baby when the feet come out, or is it when the head comes out? A knee? A toe? A finger? An eyelash? Joe has no background in biology, neither do I, but I study it as a hobby. But I can use his twisted logic against him. His hypocrisy about children, born or in the womb has been on display for weeks now. He whines about compassion for those children at the border, but oh, doesn't give a damn about the ones they kill in the womb. The hypocrisy is stark, mind you. He would subsidize their parents, keep them in relative poverty and dependence on almighty government, give these children a sub par education if they are indeed born and grow up... he'll even have the guts to call it compassion.

So, how is "taking the food from the mouths of children" worse than taking the life from ones in the womb? Food... or life. Oooh, thats a tricky one. What good is food to a child when they're dead?

Chew on that one, Joe.

It is a baby when it is born.

Human Biology disagrees. When you see a dog in the womb, do you not see it as a dog? A cat a cat? So why not the same distinction for human beings?

Whoa! That is the argument that will finally win it for you! Brilliant!

 

[RandallFlagg]

Guy, the fact that you are going to win a few senate seats in backwards states with less population than some cities, doesn't mean the country has fallen back in love with you.

It's like the Special Olypmics. Even if you win, you are still retarded.

You won't win the big states, and you won't win the presidency in 2016.

I'm really sorry you guys don't seem to understand this.

You gotta love this guy. "Backwards states". What an asshole you are. Hell, why not just disallow those "backward states" from even voting? Hell, after all, they ARE "backwards". What an American you are......

Again, come back and talk shit to me after November. I suggest, however, that you will magically disappear from sites like this one; sitting, instead in a basement somewhere, planning your revenge on those "backward states" that kicked your ass.

Randall has a point. And at least then, I won't be the only one sitting in a basement!

Seriously though, you have to ask yourself this question: Why is it, that nearly as soon as the SCOTUS ruling for Hobby Lobby that the Nazi Left went into full frontal attack - not against policy or even law, nope. It was directed at the low information, stupid women voters who have somehow been "attacked" by the SCOTUS - those dirty rotten old men.

The Nazis have nothing to run AGAINST the republicans so they invent bullshit lies in an attempt to wage this bullshit "war" on women. It's actually pitiful.

Nearly 6 years of nothing. NOTHING. the most "Transparent administration in history". and this is all they have. 6 years of wasted time from a party that doesn't have a damned clue. 6 years. They are going to get their asses kicked in November. We know it and THEY know it.

Again, if you aren't in one of those "backwards states" - stay away from the downtown area of those "big cities" that (I guess) actually count. Keep your eyes to the skies, Democrats will be falling from buildings like rainwater. Remember, Safety first!

 

[TemplarKormac]

Did you know, that the fetus initiates the birthing process? Not the mother? The 'fetus' releases a chemical via the lungs that signals the mother's body that it is ready to be expelled from the birth canal. Readiness to breathe signals that the child is indeed life, as he/she is still inside the womb when this process occurs.

Fetus May Signal to Start Birth Process - Los Angeles Times

So, how can a clump of cells know when it is and is not a baby? Sorry, but no.