Roe vs Wade vs facts

[Cecilie1200]

The moment they unite. Period.

Not according to the constitution. Why do you hate the Constitution?

The Constitution does not address that question one way or the other. Why do you wrap yourself in a Constitution you've never read?

 

[Cecilie1200]

Pain. Liberals are fine with ripping developing babies and throwing them into the baby equivalent of a wood chipper dipped in acid. They do not care about others. They are self-centered. It used to be an insult. Now it is a badge of honor.

I care about other people. I have little concern with a fetus in a woman's womb. None of my business. It's her body, not mine

Your scientific acumen is just staggering.

A fetus is not part of his mother's body. Again, interminably, I must refer you to the DNA evidence. Every ACTUAL part of a woman's body carries the same DNA as every other part of her body. The fetus, however, has a unique DNA signature from his mother's. He is a separate organism. Unlike your position, this is not biased opinion; this is biological, scientific fact.

Nice try. Yes, the DNA is different in the fetus than the mother’s body. So what? That fetus is INSIDE her body which SHE is responsible for, not you or the nanny-state government.

If you were really pro-LIFE, you would ASSIST those families with BORN children who could use your involvement, and there are PLENTY.
Do you??
Set your priorities in a PRACTICAL way.

"So what"? How very scientific of you. "So the DNA proves your point. Who cares about DNA? I FEEELZ that I'm right!!"

If the woman didn't want a separate human being - and make no mistake, I HAVE noted that you have admitted that the baby is a separate, individual human being, no matter how hard you tried to pretend that wasn't what happened - inside her body, perhaps she shouldn't have created him. I have zero tolerance for any argument that says, "It's okay to kill living humans if they are inconvenient, and the government has no right to protect human life because LOCATION!" Not only is it the most imbecilic fail at logic in the history of ever, it's evil. I also have no sympathy for someone who is adult enough to be fucking, but not adult enough to understand the consequences of fucking or how to avoid them, and then actually expects not only to be allowed to kill an innocent baby because SHE behaved like a careless trollop, but expects to be PITIED for how hard it all is on HER.

Furthermore, if you were REALLY concerned about "born children", rather than just trying to drag everyone down to your repulsive level so you don't have to feel guilty for being a monster, you would take the time to actually find out whether or not your accusations are grounded, rather than just flinging them around like a monkey throwing his own shit, hoping to make others as dirty as you are.

Do you know me? Do you know anything about me or my life? No? Then you have no way of knowing what I do or don't do in regards to this issue or any other. You are simply ASSuming because YOU are a selfish piece of shit, everyone else must be as well.

As far as "practical" goes, I have no desire to be "practical" about killing other humans. And if I did, I'm sure I could find some who are far more inconvenient and less valuable. Always keep in mind that if you are going to set a standard where people have no intrinsic value and matter only insofar as other people think they do, YOU are going to come off worse in that measurement.

Wow, what a diatribe. Seems like you were throwing bunch of stuff at a wall and hoping something would stick.

Ok, let’s see ... You have “no sympathy for someone who is adult enough to be fucking, but not adult enough to understand the consequences of fucking”.
Well babe, that’s not your concern. They don’t need your sympathy, i.e., fuck off.
Not my concern either ... until the innocent child is born (+ a week).

Your “killing human beings” rhetoric is ridiculous. Big big difference between an embryo and observable sentient born infant.
The born infant can cry! (joke!).
Seriously though, i’d have no problem with killing an embryo that mother does not want over a dog or cat that i’ve grown to love.

Wow, what a lame response. "You talked too much! It has to all be wrong, because it's doesn't fit on a bumper sticker!"

 

[cnm]

The Constitution does not address that question one way or the other. Why do you wrap yourself in a Constitution you've never read?

Yes it does. Until such an entity can be counted it is not a person according to the Constitution.
You know Jesus cries every time you make yourself look supercilious.

 

[PK1]

I care about other people. I have little concern with a fetus in a woman's womb. None of my business. It's her body, not mine

Your scientific acumen is just staggering.

A fetus is not part of his mother's body. Again, interminably, I must refer you to the DNA evidence. Every ACTUAL part of a woman's body carries the same DNA as every other part of her body. The fetus, however, has a unique DNA signature from his mother's. He is a separate organism. Unlike your position, this is not biased opinion; this is biological, scientific fact.

Nice try. Yes, the DNA is different in the fetus than the mother’s body. So what? That fetus is INSIDE her body which SHE is responsible for, not you or the nanny-state government.

If you were really pro-LIFE, you would ASSIST those families with BORN children who could use your involvement, and there are PLENTY.
Do you??
Set your priorities in a PRACTICAL way.

"So what"? How very scientific of you. "So the DNA proves your point. Who cares about DNA? I FEEELZ that I'm right!!"

If the woman didn't want a separate human being - and make no mistake, I HAVE noted that you have admitted that the baby is a separate, individual human being, no matter how hard you tried to pretend that wasn't what happened - inside her body, perhaps she shouldn't have created him. I have zero tolerance for any argument that says, "It's okay to kill living humans if they are inconvenient, and the government has no right to protect human life because LOCATION!" Not only is it the most imbecilic fail at logic in the history of ever, it's evil. I also have no sympathy for someone who is adult enough to be fucking, but not adult enough to understand the consequences of fucking or how to avoid them, and then actually expects not only to be allowed to kill an innocent baby because SHE behaved like a careless trollop, but expects to be PITIED for how hard it all is on HER.

Furthermore, if you were REALLY concerned about "born children", rather than just trying to drag everyone down to your repulsive level so you don't have to feel guilty for being a monster, you would take the time to actually find out whether or not your accusations are grounded, rather than just flinging them around like a monkey throwing his own shit, hoping to make others as dirty as you are.

Do you know me? Do you know anything about me or my life? No? Then you have no way of knowing what I do or don't do in regards to this issue or any other. You are simply ASSuming because YOU are a selfish piece of shit, everyone else must be as well.

As far as "practical" goes, I have no desire to be "practical" about killing other humans. And if I did, I'm sure I could find some who are far more inconvenient and less valuable. Always keep in mind that if you are going to set a standard where people have no intrinsic value and matter only insofar as other people think they do, YOU are going to come off worse in that measurement.

Wow, what a diatribe. Seems like you were throwing bunch of stuff at a wall and hoping something would stick.

Ok, let’s see ... You have “no sympathy for someone who is adult enough to be fucking, but not adult enough to understand the consequences of fucking”.
Well babe, that’s not your concern. They don’t need your sympathy, i.e., fuck off.
Not my concern either ... until the innocent child is born (+ a week).

Your “killing human beings” rhetoric is ridiculous. Big big difference between an embryo and observable sentient born infant.
The born infant can cry! (joke!).
Seriously though, i’d have no problem with killing an embryo that mother does not want over a dog or cat that i’ve grown to love.

Wow, what a lame response. "You talked too much! It has to all be wrong, because it's doesn't fit on a bumper sticker!"

You need to learn how to debate!
Stick with 1 or 2 claims or statements, then see what response you get specific to them ...

 

[Cecilie1200]

The Constitution does not address that question one way or the other. Why do you wrap yourself in a Constitution you've never read?

Yes it does. Until such an entity can be counted it is not a person according to the Constitution.
You know Jesus cries every time you make yourself look supercilious.

The Constitution ALSO says nothing about being a person.

You know, Jesus says, "Who?" every time your name is mentioned.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Your scientific acumen is just staggering.

A fetus is not part of his mother's body. Again, interminably, I must refer you to the DNA evidence. Every ACTUAL part of a woman's body carries the same DNA as every other part of her body. The fetus, however, has a unique DNA signature from his mother's. He is a separate organism. Unlike your position, this is not biased opinion; this is biological, scientific fact.

Nice try. Yes, the DNA is different in the fetus than the mother’s body. So what? That fetus is INSIDE her body which SHE is responsible for, not you or the nanny-state government.

If you were really pro-LIFE, you would ASSIST those families with BORN children who could use your involvement, and there are PLENTY.
Do you??
Set your priorities in a PRACTICAL way.

"So what"? How very scientific of you. "So the DNA proves your point. Who cares about DNA? I FEEELZ that I'm right!!"

If the woman didn't want a separate human being - and make no mistake, I HAVE noted that you have admitted that the baby is a separate, individual human being, no matter how hard you tried to pretend that wasn't what happened - inside her body, perhaps she shouldn't have created him. I have zero tolerance for any argument that says, "It's okay to kill living humans if they are inconvenient, and the government has no right to protect human life because LOCATION!" Not only is it the most imbecilic fail at logic in the history of ever, it's evil. I also have no sympathy for someone who is adult enough to be fucking, but not adult enough to understand the consequences of fucking or how to avoid them, and then actually expects not only to be allowed to kill an innocent baby because SHE behaved like a careless trollop, but expects to be PITIED for how hard it all is on HER.

Furthermore, if you were REALLY concerned about "born children", rather than just trying to drag everyone down to your repulsive level so you don't have to feel guilty for being a monster, you would take the time to actually find out whether or not your accusations are grounded, rather than just flinging them around like a monkey throwing his own shit, hoping to make others as dirty as you are.

Do you know me? Do you know anything about me or my life? No? Then you have no way of knowing what I do or don't do in regards to this issue or any other. You are simply ASSuming because YOU are a selfish piece of shit, everyone else must be as well.

As far as "practical" goes, I have no desire to be "practical" about killing other humans. And if I did, I'm sure I could find some who are far more inconvenient and less valuable. Always keep in mind that if you are going to set a standard where people have no intrinsic value and matter only insofar as other people think they do, YOU are going to come off worse in that measurement.

Wow, what a diatribe. Seems like you were throwing bunch of stuff at a wall and hoping something would stick.

Ok, let’s see ... You have “no sympathy for someone who is adult enough to be fucking, but not adult enough to understand the consequences of fucking”.
Well babe, that’s not your concern. They don’t need your sympathy, i.e., fuck off.
Not my concern either ... until the innocent child is born (+ a week).

Your “killing human beings” rhetoric is ridiculous. Big big difference between an embryo and observable sentient born infant.
The born infant can cry! (joke!).
Seriously though, i’d have no problem with killing an embryo that mother does not want over a dog or cat that i’ve grown to love.

Wow, what a lame response. "You talked too much! It has to all be wrong, because it's doesn't fit on a bumper sticker!"

You need to learn how to debate!
Stick with 1 or 2 claims or statements, then see what response you get specific to them ...

"You're too smart! You need to learn to be more like me!"

Stick with being ignorant, and stop trying to teach ignorance to others.

 

[PK1]

Nice try. Yes, the DNA is different in the fetus than the mother’s body. So what? That fetus is INSIDE her body which SHE is responsible for, not you or the nanny-state government.

If you were really pro-LIFE, you would ASSIST those families with BORN children who could use your involvement, and there are PLENTY.
Do you??
Set your priorities in a PRACTICAL way.

"So what"? How very scientific of you. "So the DNA proves your point. Who cares about DNA? I FEEELZ that I'm right!!"

If the woman didn't want a separate human being - and make no mistake, I HAVE noted that you have admitted that the baby is a separate, individual human being, no matter how hard you tried to pretend that wasn't what happened - inside her body, perhaps she shouldn't have created him. I have zero tolerance for any argument that says, "It's okay to kill living humans if they are inconvenient, and the government has no right to protect human life because LOCATION!" Not only is it the most imbecilic fail at logic in the history of ever, it's evil. I also have no sympathy for someone who is adult enough to be fucking, but not adult enough to understand the consequences of fucking or how to avoid them, and then actually expects not only to be allowed to kill an innocent baby because SHE behaved like a careless trollop, but expects to be PITIED for how hard it all is on HER.

Furthermore, if you were REALLY concerned about "born children", rather than just trying to drag everyone down to your repulsive level so you don't have to feel guilty for being a monster, you would take the time to actually find out whether or not your accusations are grounded, rather than just flinging them around like a monkey throwing his own shit, hoping to make others as dirty as you are.

Do you know me? Do you know anything about me or my life? No? Then you have no way of knowing what I do or don't do in regards to this issue or any other. You are simply ASSuming because YOU are a selfish piece of shit, everyone else must be as well.

As far as "practical" goes, I have no desire to be "practical" about killing other humans. And if I did, I'm sure I could find some who are far more inconvenient and less valuable. Always keep in mind that if you are going to set a standard where people have no intrinsic value and matter only insofar as other people think they do, YOU are going to come off worse in that measurement.

Wow, what a diatribe. Seems like you were throwing bunch of stuff at a wall and hoping something would stick.

Ok, let’s see ... You have “no sympathy for someone who is adult enough to be fucking, but not adult enough to understand the consequences of fucking”.
Well babe, that’s not your concern. They don’t need your sympathy, i.e., fuck off.
Not my concern either ... until the innocent child is born (+ a week).

Your “killing human beings” rhetoric is ridiculous. Big big difference between an embryo and observable sentient born infant.
The born infant can cry! (joke!).
Seriously though, i’d have no problem with killing an embryo that mother does not want over a dog or cat that i’ve grown to love.

Wow, what a lame response. "You talked too much! It has to all be wrong, because it's doesn't fit on a bumper sticker!"

You need to learn how to debate!
Stick with 1 or 2 claims or statements, then see what response you get specific to them ...

"You're too smart! You need to learn to be more like me!"

Stick with being ignorant, and stop trying to teach ignorance to others.

I’m an agnostic scientist. I’m proud of being ignorant when i don’t know something. It’s called intellectual honesty.
You, however, seem to believe in folklore stories, like Jesus being supernatural.
You would do yourself AND everyone else a favor by admitting YOUR IGNORANCE.

 

[Cecilie1200]

"So what"? How very scientific of you. "So the DNA proves your point. Who cares about DNA? I FEEELZ that I'm right!!"

If the woman didn't want a separate human being - and make no mistake, I HAVE noted that you have admitted that the baby is a separate, individual human being, no matter how hard you tried to pretend that wasn't what happened - inside her body, perhaps she shouldn't have created him. I have zero tolerance for any argument that says, "It's okay to kill living humans if they are inconvenient, and the government has no right to protect human life because LOCATION!" Not only is it the most imbecilic fail at logic in the history of ever, it's evil. I also have no sympathy for someone who is adult enough to be fucking, but not adult enough to understand the consequences of fucking or how to avoid them, and then actually expects not only to be allowed to kill an innocent baby because SHE behaved like a careless trollop, but expects to be PITIED for how hard it all is on HER.

Furthermore, if you were REALLY concerned about "born children", rather than just trying to drag everyone down to your repulsive level so you don't have to feel guilty for being a monster, you would take the time to actually find out whether or not your accusations are grounded, rather than just flinging them around like a monkey throwing his own shit, hoping to make others as dirty as you are.

Do you know me? Do you know anything about me or my life? No? Then you have no way of knowing what I do or don't do in regards to this issue or any other. You are simply ASSuming because YOU are a selfish piece of shit, everyone else must be as well.

As far as "practical" goes, I have no desire to be "practical" about killing other humans. And if I did, I'm sure I could find some who are far more inconvenient and less valuable. Always keep in mind that if you are going to set a standard where people have no intrinsic value and matter only insofar as other people think they do, YOU are going to come off worse in that measurement.

Wow, what a diatribe. Seems like you were throwing bunch of stuff at a wall and hoping something would stick.

Ok, let’s see ... You have “no sympathy for someone who is adult enough to be fucking, but not adult enough to understand the consequences of fucking”.
Well babe, that’s not your concern. They don’t need your sympathy, i.e., fuck off.
Not my concern either ... until the innocent child is born (+ a week).

Your “killing human beings” rhetoric is ridiculous. Big big difference between an embryo and observable sentient born infant.
The born infant can cry! (joke!).
Seriously though, i’d have no problem with killing an embryo that mother does not want over a dog or cat that i’ve grown to love.

Wow, what a lame response. "You talked too much! It has to all be wrong, because it's doesn't fit on a bumper sticker!"

You need to learn how to debate!
Stick with 1 or 2 claims or statements, then see what response you get specific to them ...

"You're too smart! You need to learn to be more like me!"

Stick with being ignorant, and stop trying to teach ignorance to others.

I’m an agnostic scientist. I’m proud of being ignorant when i don’t know something. It’s called intellectual honesty.
You, however, seem to believe in folklore stories, like Jesus being supernatural.
You would do yourself AND everyone else a favor by admitting YOUR IGNORANCE.

I'm sure you're proud of your ignorance. As far as I can tell, you don't have anything else.

Now that you have argued so vociferously about how "brilliant" you are that you have convinced me you're dumber than I originally thought, we're done here.

 

[PK1]

Wow, what a diatribe. Seems like you were throwing bunch of stuff at a wall and hoping something would stick.

Ok, let’s see ... You have “no sympathy for someone who is adult enough to be fucking, but not adult enough to understand the consequences of fucking”.
Well babe, that’s not your concern. They don’t need your sympathy, i.e., fuck off.
Not my concern either ... until the innocent child is born (+ a week).

Your “killing human beings” rhetoric is ridiculous. Big big difference between an embryo and observable sentient born infant.
The born infant can cry! (joke!).
Seriously though, i’d have no problem with killing an embryo that mother does not want over a dog or cat that i’ve grown to love.

Wow, what a lame response. "You talked too much! It has to all be wrong, because it's doesn't fit on a bumper sticker!"

You need to learn how to debate!
Stick with 1 or 2 claims or statements, then see what response you get specific to them ...

"You're too smart! You need to learn to be more like me!"

Stick with being ignorant, and stop trying to teach ignorance to others.

I’m an agnostic scientist. I’m proud of being ignorant when i don’t know something. It’s called intellectual honesty.
You, however, seem to believe in folklore stories, like Jesus being supernatural.
You would do yourself AND everyone else a favor by admitting YOUR IGNORANCE.

I'm sure you're proud of your ignorance. As far as I can tell, you don't have anything else.

Now that you have argued so vociferously about how "brilliant" you are that you have convinced me you're dumber than I originally thought, we're done here.

Wow, what a lame retort.
How about saying something specific that demonstrates my “dumbness”? Just saying it because you want to believe it ... well ... is like confirming your blindness to reality.

 

[KGB]

Roe Vs Wade Vs facts
Abortion is not legal under American constitutional law.
Too bad the founders of the nation can't come back to tell us what a bunch of idiots we are.
For the U.S. government to execute someone, or give authority to execute someone, a person has to be found guilty of committing a crime in a court of law.
The U.S. government was never given authority to randomly choose people to be executed.
No state that authorizes abortion can do so without being in violation of federal constitutional rights.
There is no greater form of corruption that one innocent person having to die because another person claims they have a RIGHT under the law.
The Atheist Democrats have an answer for everything, they say "it's not a person until it's born"
OK well, i'm going to go to the Ford plant and drive a truck off the property without paying for it, before they install the antenna, because it's not a truck yet.
What are we? 12 years old?
I guess bullsht is more believable when it comes from someone in a suit with a big title.
We know the Democrats are going to take the side of evil, but what is staggering to think about is how many Republicans have been going along with this.
Every politician who considers themselves a proponent of the Constitution should have been banging pots and pans together in every interview, saying we need to stop these unconstitutional executions.
The Democrats took a few horror stories of "back alley abortions" and legalized a holocaust with them.
We call ourselves a Christian nation and we kill far more people than the pagans did in human sacrifice, and we have surpassed barbarism of the Aztecs ripping someone's heart out and pushing them down a pyramid.
The whole time the Atheist Democrats are laughing their ass off of what they do to our country.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
People say there may be a time when a woman has to choose between her life and the kid's.
Well, i guess that decision is up to her, but if the Democrats are going to use that to get their foot-in-the-door for an abortion clinic on every corner, then we have to stop it completely.

Let's be reminded that Ron Paul has been a doctor his whole life, and never saw one case where a woman had to choose between her life or the baby's life.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
If we're going to be telling woman they're not going to be having abortions, then we're going to have to do an emergency clean up of the adoption / foster care system.
Currently 70% to 80% of children who enter the system suffer some form of abuse.
The child molester Democrats are going to be standing by waiting to expand
their control over that too.
We're going to need wise people in politics to solve these problems, not these dopes in suits we got.

A Fetus is not a Citizen. It has no rights. Unless of course you want activists to step in and claim representation

It’s an unborn child. It’s no different than any other child except where it resides....

Really?

I don't know any child who can't cry. I don't know any child who doesn't have a liver, heart, mouth, brain and central nervous system.

98% of all abortions in America happen in the first 2 months. At that point it's about the size of a bean. It has no organs, it can't breathe, it can't eat, it can't talk or walk or do anything that a baby or human being can do.

Saying a zygote, embryo and fetus are the same thing as a child except where it resides is a big fat lie.

Stop lying.

I tell you what, take that "child" that has no human characteristics out of the woman's body and let it live on it's own. If it's no different from a child then it will be just fine. The lungs it doesn't have will let it breathe air. The brain it doesn't have will control it's body, Well it doesn't have a body but since it doesn't have a brain that's not a problem.

Tell me how that zygote, embryo and fetus does without the host woman's body giving it all it needs.

But then you don't have to tell me. That blob of cells the size of a bean isn't alive and isn't the same thing as a child.

So a newborn is fully functional & can operate on its own? The unborn child has distinct human DNA, distinct human genetics & is human. It’s a biological fact that life begins at conception. Abortion is murder, plain & simple.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Wow, what a lame response. "You talked too much! It has to all be wrong, because it's doesn't fit on a bumper sticker!"

You need to learn how to debate!
Stick with 1 or 2 claims or statements, then see what response you get specific to them ...

"You're too smart! You need to learn to be more like me!"

Stick with being ignorant, and stop trying to teach ignorance to others.

I’m an agnostic scientist. I’m proud of being ignorant when i don’t know something. It’s called intellectual honesty.
You, however, seem to believe in folklore stories, like Jesus being supernatural.
You would do yourself AND everyone else a favor by admitting YOUR IGNORANCE.

I'm sure you're proud of your ignorance. As far as I can tell, you don't have anything else.

Now that you have argued so vociferously about how "brilliant" you are that you have convinced me you're dumber than I originally thought, we're done here.

Wow, what a lame retort.
How about saying something specific that demonstrates my “dumbness”? Just saying it because you want to believe it ... well ... is like confirming your blindness to reality.

How about the fact that between posts, you apparently forget everything that was said before? Seems pretty dumb to ME, but then, MY memory is longer than five minutes.

To bring you back up to speed, the entire conversation - if you can call it that - that we've had is that you intruded yourself into my consciousness by insisting that my posts involved too many words and demanding that they be "improved" by simplifying them down to a bumper sticker meme you could handle. THAT is why I have been calling you stupid, and why I will continue to call you stupid: because you introduced yourself as stupid.

Now really, clearing up your confusion is my last act of charity for this month, because you are so far off my "ignorant waste of time he doesn't deserve" meter it's not even funny.

You can ask for my attention again when you've done something to possibly deserve it besides overestimating yourself.

FLUSH!

 

[Votto]

Roe Vs Wade Vs facts
Abortion is not legal under American constitutional law.
Too bad the founders of the nation can't come back to tell us what a bunch of idiots we are.
For the U.S. government to execute someone, or give authority to execute someone, a person has to be found guilty of committing a crime in a court of law.
The U.S. government was never given authority to randomly choose people to be executed.
No state that authorizes abortion can do so without being in violation of federal constitutional rights.
There is no greater form of corruption that one innocent person having to die because another person claims they have a RIGHT under the law.
The Atheist Democrats have an answer for everything, they say "it's not a person until it's born"
OK well, i'm going to go to the Ford plant and drive a truck off the property without paying for it, before they install the antenna, because it's not a truck yet.
What are we? 12 years old?
I guess bullsht is more believable when it comes from someone in a suit with a big title.
We know the Democrats are going to take the side of evil, but what is staggering to think about is how many Republicans have been going along with this.
Every politician who considers themselves a proponent of the Constitution should have been banging pots and pans together in every interview, saying we need to stop these unconstitutional executions.
The Democrats took a few horror stories of "back alley abortions" and legalized a holocaust with them.
We call ourselves a Christian nation and we kill far more people than the pagans did in human sacrifice, and we have surpassed barbarism of the Aztecs ripping someone's heart out and pushing them down a pyramid.
The whole time the Atheist Democrats are laughing their ass off of what they do to our country.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
People say there may be a time when a woman has to choose between her life and the kid's.
Well, i guess that decision is up to her, but if the Democrats are going to use that to get their foot-in-the-door for an abortion clinic on every corner, then we have to stop it completely.

Let's be reminded that Ron Paul has been a doctor his whole life, and never saw one case where a woman had to choose between her life or the baby's life.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
If we're going to be telling woman they're not going to be having abortions, then we're going to have to do an emergency clean up of the adoption / foster care system.
Currently 70% to 80% of children who enter the system suffer some form of abuse.
The child molester Democrats are going to be standing by waiting to expand
their control over that too.
We're going to need wise people in politics to solve these problems, not these dopes in suits we got.

Except you missed out the part that life is considered to start when the baby is born.

Oppsie, missed that one.

And blacks used to be only 3/5 of a person under the law.

And your point is?

 

[Cecilie1200]

Roe Vs Wade Vs facts
Abortion is not legal under American constitutional law.
Too bad the founders of the nation can't come back to tell us what a bunch of idiots we are.
For the U.S. government to execute someone, or give authority to execute someone, a person has to be found guilty of committing a crime in a court of law.
The U.S. government was never given authority to randomly choose people to be executed.
No state that authorizes abortion can do so without being in violation of federal constitutional rights.
There is no greater form of corruption that one innocent person having to die because another person claims they have a RIGHT under the law.
The Atheist Democrats have an answer for everything, they say "it's not a person until it's born"
OK well, i'm going to go to the Ford plant and drive a truck off the property without paying for it, before they install the antenna, because it's not a truck yet.
What are we? 12 years old?
I guess bullsht is more believable when it comes from someone in a suit with a big title.
We know the Democrats are going to take the side of evil, but what is staggering to think about is how many Republicans have been going along with this.
Every politician who considers themselves a proponent of the Constitution should have been banging pots and pans together in every interview, saying we need to stop these unconstitutional executions.
The Democrats took a few horror stories of "back alley abortions" and legalized a holocaust with them.
We call ourselves a Christian nation and we kill far more people than the pagans did in human sacrifice, and we have surpassed barbarism of the Aztecs ripping someone's heart out and pushing them down a pyramid.
The whole time the Atheist Democrats are laughing their ass off of what they do to our country.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
People say there may be a time when a woman has to choose between her life and the kid's.
Well, i guess that decision is up to her, but if the Democrats are going to use that to get their foot-in-the-door for an abortion clinic on every corner, then we have to stop it completely.

Let's be reminded that Ron Paul has been a doctor his whole life, and never saw one case where a woman had to choose between her life or the baby's life.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
If we're going to be telling woman they're not going to be having abortions, then we're going to have to do an emergency clean up of the adoption / foster care system.
Currently 70% to 80% of children who enter the system suffer some form of abuse.
The child molester Democrats are going to be standing by waiting to expand
their control over that too.
We're going to need wise people in politics to solve these problems, not these dopes in suits we got.

Except you missed out the part that life is considered to start when the baby is born.

Oppsie, missed that one.

And blacks used to be only 3/5 of a person under the law.

And your point is?

No, blacks did not "used to be only 3/5 of a person under the law". God, I'm so tired of people babbling that out in support of all manner of stuff.

SLAVES had less of an impact on the census for purposes of Congressional representation. Free people had more of an impact on the census, regardless of their color. That's it, that's all, no statement whatsoever from the law on "the personhood of blacks".

 

[koshergrl]

Abortion is not legal under American constitutional law.

Please cite the specific prohibitive legislation.

Do you not know what the constitution is?

 

[Votto]

Roe Vs Wade Vs facts
Abortion is not legal under American constitutional law.
Too bad the founders of the nation can't come back to tell us what a bunch of idiots we are.
For the U.S. government to execute someone, or give authority to execute someone, a person has to be found guilty of committing a crime in a court of law.
The U.S. government was never given authority to randomly choose people to be executed.
No state that authorizes abortion can do so without being in violation of federal constitutional rights.
There is no greater form of corruption that one innocent person having to die because another person claims they have a RIGHT under the law.
The Atheist Democrats have an answer for everything, they say "it's not a person until it's born"
OK well, i'm going to go to the Ford plant and drive a truck off the property without paying for it, before they install the antenna, because it's not a truck yet.
What are we? 12 years old?
I guess bullsht is more believable when it comes from someone in a suit with a big title.
We know the Democrats are going to take the side of evil, but what is staggering to think about is how many Republicans have been going along with this.
Every politician who considers themselves a proponent of the Constitution should have been banging pots and pans together in every interview, saying we need to stop these unconstitutional executions.
The Democrats took a few horror stories of "back alley abortions" and legalized a holocaust with them.
We call ourselves a Christian nation and we kill far more people than the pagans did in human sacrifice, and we have surpassed barbarism of the Aztecs ripping someone's heart out and pushing them down a pyramid.
The whole time the Atheist Democrats are laughing their ass off of what they do to our country.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
People say there may be a time when a woman has to choose between her life and the kid's.
Well, i guess that decision is up to her, but if the Democrats are going to use that to get their foot-in-the-door for an abortion clinic on every corner, then we have to stop it completely.

Let's be reminded that Ron Paul has been a doctor his whole life, and never saw one case where a woman had to choose between her life or the baby's life.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
If we're going to be telling woman they're not going to be having abortions, then we're going to have to do an emergency clean up of the adoption / foster care system.
Currently 70% to 80% of children who enter the system suffer some form of abuse.
The child molester Democrats are going to be standing by waiting to expand
their control over that too.
We're going to need wise people in politics to solve these problems, not these dopes in suits we got.

Except you missed out the part that life is considered to start when the baby is born.

Oppsie, missed that one.

And blacks used to be only 3/5 of a person under the law.

And your point is?

No, blacks did not "used to be only 3/5 of a person under the law". God, I'm so tired of people babbling that out in support of all manner of stuff.

SLAVES had less of an impact on the census for purposes of Congressional representation. Free people had more of an impact on the census, regardless of their color. That's it, that's all, no statement whatsoever from the law on "the personhood of blacks".

If you only count someone as 3/5 of a person for a census what exactly are you saying dimwit?

 

[Cecilie1200]

Roe Vs Wade Vs facts
Abortion is not legal under American constitutional law.
Too bad the founders of the nation can't come back to tell us what a bunch of idiots we are.
For the U.S. government to execute someone, or give authority to execute someone, a person has to be found guilty of committing a crime in a court of law.
The U.S. government was never given authority to randomly choose people to be executed.
No state that authorizes abortion can do so without being in violation of federal constitutional rights.
There is no greater form of corruption that one innocent person having to die because another person claims they have a RIGHT under the law.
The Atheist Democrats have an answer for everything, they say "it's not a person until it's born"
OK well, i'm going to go to the Ford plant and drive a truck off the property without paying for it, before they install the antenna, because it's not a truck yet.
What are we? 12 years old?
I guess bullsht is more believable when it comes from someone in a suit with a big title.
We know the Democrats are going to take the side of evil, but what is staggering to think about is how many Republicans have been going along with this.
Every politician who considers themselves a proponent of the Constitution should have been banging pots and pans together in every interview, saying we need to stop these unconstitutional executions.
The Democrats took a few horror stories of "back alley abortions" and legalized a holocaust with them.
We call ourselves a Christian nation and we kill far more people than the pagans did in human sacrifice, and we have surpassed barbarism of the Aztecs ripping someone's heart out and pushing them down a pyramid.
The whole time the Atheist Democrats are laughing their ass off of what they do to our country.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
People say there may be a time when a woman has to choose between her life and the kid's.
Well, i guess that decision is up to her, but if the Democrats are going to use that to get their foot-in-the-door for an abortion clinic on every corner, then we have to stop it completely.

Let's be reminded that Ron Paul has been a doctor his whole life, and never saw one case where a woman had to choose between her life or the baby's life.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
If we're going to be telling woman they're not going to be having abortions, then we're going to have to do an emergency clean up of the adoption / foster care system.
Currently 70% to 80% of children who enter the system suffer some form of abuse.
The child molester Democrats are going to be standing by waiting to expand
their control over that too.
We're going to need wise people in politics to solve these problems, not these dopes in suits we got.

Except you missed out the part that life is considered to start when the baby is born.

Oppsie, missed that one.

And blacks used to be only 3/5 of a person under the law.

And your point is?

No, blacks did not "used to be only 3/5 of a person under the law". God, I'm so tired of people babbling that out in support of all manner of stuff.

SLAVES had less of an impact on the census for purposes of Congressional representation. Free people had more of an impact on the census, regardless of their color. That's it, that's all, no statement whatsoever from the law on "the personhood of blacks".

If you only count someone as 3/5 of a person for a census what exactly are you saying dimwit?

That you don't want slave-owners to use their helpless victims as leverage to gain power in the federal government. Because that was the purpose of the 3/5 Compromise, dimwit.

If you can't be bothered to learn history, don't try to cite it.

 

[Votto]

Roe Vs Wade Vs facts
Abortion is not legal under American constitutional law.
Too bad the founders of the nation can't come back to tell us what a bunch of idiots we are.
For the U.S. government to execute someone, or give authority to execute someone, a person has to be found guilty of committing a crime in a court of law.
The U.S. government was never given authority to randomly choose people to be executed.
No state that authorizes abortion can do so without being in violation of federal constitutional rights.
There is no greater form of corruption that one innocent person having to die because another person claims they have a RIGHT under the law.
The Atheist Democrats have an answer for everything, they say "it's not a person until it's born"
OK well, i'm going to go to the Ford plant and drive a truck off the property without paying for it, before they install the antenna, because it's not a truck yet.
What are we? 12 years old?
I guess bullsht is more believable when it comes from someone in a suit with a big title.
We know the Democrats are going to take the side of evil, but what is staggering to think about is how many Republicans have been going along with this.
Every politician who considers themselves a proponent of the Constitution should have been banging pots and pans together in every interview, saying we need to stop these unconstitutional executions.
The Democrats took a few horror stories of "back alley abortions" and legalized a holocaust with them.
We call ourselves a Christian nation and we kill far more people than the pagans did in human sacrifice, and we have surpassed barbarism of the Aztecs ripping someone's heart out and pushing them down a pyramid.
The whole time the Atheist Democrats are laughing their ass off of what they do to our country.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
People say there may be a time when a woman has to choose between her life and the kid's.
Well, i guess that decision is up to her, but if the Democrats are going to use that to get their foot-in-the-door for an abortion clinic on every corner, then we have to stop it completely.

Let's be reminded that Ron Paul has been a doctor his whole life, and never saw one case where a woman had to choose between her life or the baby's life.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
If we're going to be telling woman they're not going to be having abortions, then we're going to have to do an emergency clean up of the adoption / foster care system.
Currently 70% to 80% of children who enter the system suffer some form of abuse.
The child molester Democrats are going to be standing by waiting to expand
their control over that too.
We're going to need wise people in politics to solve these problems, not these dopes in suits we got.

Except you missed out the part that life is considered to start when the baby is born.

Oppsie, missed that one.

And blacks used to be only 3/5 of a person under the law.

And your point is?

No, blacks did not "used to be only 3/5 of a person under the law". God, I'm so tired of people babbling that out in support of all manner of stuff.

SLAVES had less of an impact on the census for purposes of Congressional representation. Free people had more of an impact on the census, regardless of their color. That's it, that's all, no statement whatsoever from the law on "the personhood of blacks".

If you only count someone as 3/5 of a person for a census what exactly are you saying dimwit?

That you don't want slave-owners to use their helpless victims as leverage to gain power in the federal government. Because that was the purpose of the 3/5 Compromise, dimwit.

If you can't be bothered to learn history, don't try to cite it.

My entire point, which you fully know and willfully try to ignore, is that the law be damned.

I could care less if the law says we can hunt down Jews and throw them in ovens cuz they are vermin. I need not be lectured by you, or any other Left wing halfwit, as to how to respect human life. We innately know the truth, that is, assuming we have a conscience or half a brain.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Except you missed out the part that life is considered to start when the baby is born.

Oppsie, missed that one.

And blacks used to be only 3/5 of a person under the law.

And your point is?

No, blacks did not "used to be only 3/5 of a person under the law". God, I'm so tired of people babbling that out in support of all manner of stuff.

SLAVES had less of an impact on the census for purposes of Congressional representation. Free people had more of an impact on the census, regardless of their color. That's it, that's all, no statement whatsoever from the law on "the personhood of blacks".

If you only count someone as 3/5 of a person for a census what exactly are you saying dimwit?

That you don't want slave-owners to use their helpless victims as leverage to gain power in the federal government. Because that was the purpose of the 3/5 Compromise, dimwit.

If you can't be bothered to learn history, don't try to cite it.

My entire point, which you fully know and willfully try to ignore, is that the law be damned.

I could care less if the law says we can hunt down Jews and throw them in ovens cuz they are vermin. I need not be lectured by you, or any other Left wing halfwit, as to how to respect human life. We innately know the truth, that is, assuming we have a conscience or half a brain.

That's nice. Not disputing the point. As I said, I'm just sick up to my eyeballs with people blithely misrepresenting this section of the Constitution, regardless of the purpose they're citing it for.

 

[Votto]

And blacks used to be only 3/5 of a person under the law.

And your point is?

No, blacks did not "used to be only 3/5 of a person under the law". God, I'm so tired of people babbling that out in support of all manner of stuff.

SLAVES had less of an impact on the census for purposes of Congressional representation. Free people had more of an impact on the census, regardless of their color. That's it, that's all, no statement whatsoever from the law on "the personhood of blacks".

If you only count someone as 3/5 of a person for a census what exactly are you saying dimwit?

That you don't want slave-owners to use their helpless victims as leverage to gain power in the federal government. Because that was the purpose of the 3/5 Compromise, dimwit.

If you can't be bothered to learn history, don't try to cite it.

My entire point, which you fully know and willfully try to ignore, is that the law be damned.

I could care less if the law says we can hunt down Jews and throw them in ovens cuz they are vermin. I need not be lectured by you, or any other Left wing halfwit, as to how to respect human life. We innately know the truth, that is, assuming we have a conscience or half a brain.

That's nice. Not disputing the point. As I said, I'm just sick up to my eyeballs with people blithely misrepresenting this section of the Constitution, regardless of the purpose they're citing it for.

For the record, I see no difference is counting a slave as 3/5 of a man on a census to saying that they equal 3/5 of a man.

It is akin to the legal view of prostitution and porn. Sure, legally there is a distinction, a distinction that is mock because they are really the same thing.

The fact that one is legal while the other is not is sheer lunacy.

So next time someone wants a prostitute, I reckon just ask them to film it so its all legal and such.

 

[PK1]

You need to learn how to debate!
Stick with 1 or 2 claims or statements, then see what response you get specific to them ...

"You're too smart! You need to learn to be more like me!"

Stick with being ignorant, and stop trying to teach ignorance to others.

I’m an agnostic scientist. I’m proud of being ignorant when i don’t know something. It’s called intellectual honesty.
You, however, seem to believe in folklore stories, like Jesus being supernatural.
You would do yourself AND everyone else a favor by admitting YOUR IGNORANCE.

I'm sure you're proud of your ignorance. As far as I can tell, you don't have anything else.

Now that you have argued so vociferously about how "brilliant" you are that you have convinced me you're dumber than I originally thought, we're done here.

Wow, what a lame retort.
How about saying something specific that demonstrates my “dumbness”? Just saying it because you want to believe it ... well ... is like confirming your blindness to reality.

How about the fact that between posts, you apparently forget everything that was said before? Seems pretty dumb to ME, but then, MY memory is longer than five minutes.

To bring you back up to speed, the entire conversation - if you can call it that - that we've had is that you intruded yourself into my consciousness by insisting that my posts involved too many words and demanding that they be "improved" by simplifying them down to a bumper sticker meme you could handle. THAT is why I have been calling you stupid, and why I will continue to call you stupid: because you introduced yourself as stupid.

Now really, clearing up your confusion is my last act of charity for this month, because you are so far off my "ignorant waste of time he doesn't deserve" meter it's not even funny.

You can ask for my attention again when you've done something to possibly deserve it besides overestimating yourself.
FLUSH!

Another lame long retort that does not address any specific issue related to this thread.
Name calling as a deflection is a loser position.