Ten pages about the Republican war on women and the argument by Republicans is about the unfairness of women having a constitutional right to control her body and future life with the use of that constitutional right. But there is no Republican war on women.
Navigation
Install the app
How to install the app on iOS
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
More options
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
War On Women Big Fail
- Thread starter Misty
- Start date
No I didn't. You gave us the science class. I just responded to point out it was a deflection to open up a religious abortion debate about zygotes.But they do have a pair of testes. Last time I checked, there would be no child without his sperm, thus the uterus and the egg contained within are useless. Meaning no abortion, and no reason to be outraged. There is a reason human sexual reproduction requires a male and a female, that's how we mammals were designed through evolution or what have you. Unless humans reproduce asexually, I think the man has just as much a right to decide the fate of the child, seeing as how he contributes one half of the genetic code for the child in the first place. A willing father and an unwilling mother will more than guarantee the child's fate.
Human Biology says both males and females share equal roles in reproduction. Therefore, it is easy to say that the woman shouldn't have all of the authority. Spare me the "it's her body" garbage. She chose to have unprotected sex, resulting in the subsequent abortion. So, both of them should be equal in the decision making process. But here's the fiat... if they don't wish to go through the rigors of that process, they need only not have sex (or have it with a condom) until they are fully prepared to handle the implications.
It's not rocket science.
Males have a role in the production of a zygote. They have no role in the development of the zygote into a fetus or the development of the fetus inside the female.
The male sperm initiates the process when it penetrates the outer membrane of the egg. The male is the initiator of the development. The sperm fertilizes the egg, the egg does not fertilize the sperm. Do you think a child will be a child with only half of the genetic code? Do you seriously know anything about human biology? Go read up. Males produce the sperm, females produce the egg. Without one or the other, the process has nowhere to go. The sperm triggers cell mitosis within the egg, the formation of the zygote and subsequent development. That's why at the beginning, you see two nuclei in the egg itself before they divide. I'm sorry, but you're wrong.
The discussion was about the rights of the male part of the relationship that caused the impregnation of the female. Once he donates his sperm he can walk away and never be seen or heard from again. Whatever develops inside of the female is totally dependent on the female. You are deflecting the argument into one about the rights of nuclei and zygotes.
This is the part that doesn't seem to sink in.
What isn't sinking in is how you lost two arguments to me in less than 24 hours. Plus, Camp started the discussion about the role of the male sperm within the egg.
Wait a minute fantasy boy. Two arguments. You do live in that temple of delusion. Must be creepy in there.
Last edited:
Oh, he absolutely does. At that point, the woman can either deny him fatherhood or force him into servitude for the next 18 years, and there is nothing he can do about it.
How unfortunate. Last time I checked, men don't have a uterus.
But they do have a pair of testes. Last time I checked, there would be no child without his sperm, thus the uterus and the egg contained within are useless. Meaning no abortion, and no reason to be outraged. There is a reason human sexual reproduction requires a male and a female, that's how we mammals were designed through evolution or what have you. Unless humans reproduce asexually, I think the man has just as much a right to decide the fate of the child, seeing as how he contributes one half of the genetic code for the child in the first place. A willing father and an unwilling mother will more than guarantee the child's fate.
Human Biology says both males and females share equal roles in reproduction. Therefore, it is easy to say that the woman shouldn't have all of the authority. Spare me the "it's her body" garbage. She chose to have unprotected sex, resulting in the subsequent abortion. So, both of them should be equal in the decision making process. But here's the fiat... if they don't wish to go through the rigors of that process, they need only not have sex (or have it with a condom) until they are fully prepared to handle the implications.
It's not rocket science.
It isn't rocket science. It is absolutely her body. You can't remove that.
Well if it's her body, perhaps she should exercise more restraint when choosing a sexual partner. She shares just as much responsibility as the man, your uber feminism notwithstanding. If a woman can reproduce by herself then you had better alert the scientific community. Otherwise, what she does with her body will determine one of two life altering things will happen, either a) she doesn't have sex, and won't need the life altering abortive procedure OR, she will have sex, and risk her own mortality in the administration of this abortive procedure. Abortion is a form of surgery, and contrary to what you think, it isn't all a bed of roses.
So what makes you think she can do with the child as she pleases? Without the man, there is no child to abort. No reason for the woman to get outraged over being denied an abortion, furthermore there would be no human species.
Like I said, people like you make a mountain out of a molehill. You refuse to acknowledge the male's role in the reproductive cycle. This isn't the mythical land of the Amazons.
I know what their role is.
You guys like to live in this world of what people should do and for all of your bleetings you sound like children stamping your feet. People should.
The reality is that they don't. People don't do what they should.
You put your penis in, ejaculate and then you are done. That's it.
So, you ignore the process that is initiated upon ejaculation, do you? You are as dense as you are liberal. It's like cranking a car. Unless the key is inserted and turned the car doesn't start. The engine doesn't turn over and the car doesn't go anywhere. Without oxygen, there is no fire, without fire there is no smoke! See where I'm going? Without sperm there is no child, without the child there is no need for an abortion, and without the need for abortion, there is no need for her to stamp her feet in protest. How much must I dumb this down for you?
Ironically, you have men within your own party dictating the liberal positions on abortive rights. Oh. That must have slipped my tongue. That makes you a hypocrite, my friend.
No I didn't. You gave us the science class. I just responded to point out it was a deflection to open up a religious abortion debate about zygotes.Males have a role in the production of a zygote. They have no role in the development of the zygote into a fetus or the development of the fetus inside the female.
The male sperm initiates the process when it penetrates the outer membrane of the egg. The male is the initiator of the development. The sperm fertilizes the egg, the egg does not fertilize the sperm. Do you think a child will be a child with only half of the genetic code? Do you seriously know anything about human biology? Go read up. Males produce the sperm, females produce the egg. Without one or the other, the process has nowhere to go. The sperm triggers cell mitosis within the egg, the formation of the zygote and subsequent development. That's why at the beginning, you see two nuclei in the egg itself before they divide. I'm sorry, but you're wrong.
The discussion was about the rights of the male part of the relationship that caused the impregnation of the female. Once he donates his sperm he can walk away and never be seen or heard from again. Whatever develops inside of the female is totally dependent on the female. You are deflecting the argument into one about the rights of nuclei and zygotes.
This is the part that doesn't seem to sink in.
What isn't sinking in is how you lost two arguments to me in less than 24 hours. Plus, Camp started the discussion about the role of the male sperm within the egg.
You retorted with your own version of science, I responded by schooling you on human biology. I never intended to start a religious discussion in the first place. The concept of the man having the same rights as the woman is not even a religious. The machinations involved in reproduction are not religious, they are an essential part of the human species.
Don't put words into my mouth.
Disir
Platinum Member
- Sep 30, 2011
- 28,003
- 9,607
- 910
What is the war on women in America?
The War on Women predates Obama. Whether you choose to acknowledge it or not. Further, Obama is not up for reelection and the Republicans still don't have a plan and since they are the ones that are a part of the problem then it doesn't look good for them either.
By and large reproductive health and rights.
War on Women - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia
abortion on demand and free birth control are not reproductive health. They are a cop out because liberal women are unable to keep their legs together.
They are part and parcel of reproductive health.
You must be so proud, you twisted information into a bunch of crap. Get a legit argument.
Black fetuses are being aborted at much higher numbers than whites. Fact. Google it you lazy fuck.
BlackGenocide.org Abortion and the Black Community
So why the liberal war on blacks and their unborn children? Why so racist and hateful?
Why are you so ignorant? There is no black genocide. You just get really desperate because you can't prove it..
black genocide was the original purpose of planned parenthood. its founder clearly stated that----look it up, you might learn something
No. It was taken out of context from what she said. You should look into that.
nope, you are wrong. I'm sorry if that busts your bubble of liberal love, but its a fact. Its also a fact the PP has aborted many more black than white fetuses.
No. You're claiming that black genocide was the original purpose of planned parenthood. You are lying. What you are referencing is taken from Sanger. You are lying.
Disir
Platinum Member
- Sep 30, 2011
- 28,003
- 9,607
- 910
But they do have a pair of testes. Last time I checked, there would be no child without his sperm, thus the uterus and the egg contained within are useless. Meaning no abortion, and no reason to be outraged. There is a reason human sexual reproduction requires a male and a female, that's how we mammals were designed through evolution or what have you. Unless humans reproduce asexually, I think the man has just as much a right to decide the fate of the child, seeing as how he contributes one half of the genetic code for the child in the first place. A willing father and an unwilling mother will more than guarantee the child's fate.
Human Biology says both males and females share equal roles in reproduction. Therefore, it is easy to say that the woman shouldn't have all of the authority. Spare me the "it's her body" garbage. She chose to have unprotected sex, resulting in the subsequent abortion. So, both of them should be equal in the decision making process. But here's the fiat... if they don't wish to go through the rigors of that process, they need only not have sex (or have it with a condom) until they are fully prepared to handle the implications.
It's not rocket science.
Males have a role in the production of a zygote. They have no role in the development of the zygote into a fetus or the development of the fetus inside the female.
The male sperm initiates the process when it penetrates the outer membrane of the egg. The male is the initiator of the development. The sperm fertilizes the egg, the egg does not fertilize the sperm. Do you think a child will be a child with only half of the genetic code? Do you seriously know anything about human biology? Go read up. Males produce the sperm, females produce the egg. Without one or the other, the process has nowhere to go. The sperm triggers cell mitosis within the egg, the formation of the zygote and subsequent development. That's why at the beginning, you see two nuclei in the egg itself before they divide. I'm sorry, but you're wrong.
The discussion was about the rights of the male part of the relationship that caused the impregnation of the female. Once he donates his sperm he can walk away and never be seen or heard from again. Whatever develops inside of the female is totally dependent on the female. You are deflecting the argument into one about the rights of nuclei and zygotes.
This is the part that doesn't seem to sink in.
What isn't sinking in is how you lost two arguments to me in less than 24 hours. Plus, Camp started the discussion about the role of the male sperm within the egg.
I didn't lose anything. You cherry picked in an attempt to make an argument and you failed.
Here:
A Man with 34 Children Confesses His Failings as a Father - Video
That should fit right in with your theatrics.
Which mouth. You claim we had some kind of argument or discussion in the last 24 hours. That was your sock puppet. Be careful, if you confuse them to much someone who gives a crap might revel your secret.No I didn't. You gave us the science class. I just responded to point out it was a deflection to open up a religious abortion debate about zygotes.The male sperm initiates the process when it penetrates the outer membrane of the egg. The male is the initiator of the development. The sperm fertilizes the egg, the egg does not fertilize the sperm. Do you think a child will be a child with only half of the genetic code? Do you seriously know anything about human biology? Go read up. Males produce the sperm, females produce the egg. Without one or the other, the process has nowhere to go. The sperm triggers cell mitosis within the egg, the formation of the zygote and subsequent development. That's why at the beginning, you see two nuclei in the egg itself before they divide. I'm sorry, but you're wrong.
The discussion was about the rights of the male part of the relationship that caused the impregnation of the female. Once he donates his sperm he can walk away and never be seen or heard from again. Whatever develops inside of the female is totally dependent on the female. You are deflecting the argument into one about the rights of nuclei and zygotes.
This is the part that doesn't seem to sink in.
What isn't sinking in is how you lost two arguments to me in less than 24 hours. Plus, Camp started the discussion about the role of the male sperm within the egg.
You retorted with your own version of science, I responded by schooling you on human biology. I never intended to start a religious discussion in the first place. The concept of the man having the same rights as the woman is not even a religious. The machinations involved in reproduction are not religious, they are an essential part of the human species.
Don't put words into my mouth.
Disir
Platinum Member
- Sep 30, 2011
- 28,003
- 9,607
- 910
How unfortunate. Last time I checked, men don't have a uterus.
But they do have a pair of testes. Last time I checked, there would be no child without his sperm, thus the uterus and the egg contained within are useless. Meaning no abortion, and no reason to be outraged. There is a reason human sexual reproduction requires a male and a female, that's how we mammals were designed through evolution or what have you. Unless humans reproduce asexually, I think the man has just as much a right to decide the fate of the child, seeing as how he contributes one half of the genetic code for the child in the first place. A willing father and an unwilling mother will more than guarantee the child's fate.
Human Biology says both males and females share equal roles in reproduction. Therefore, it is easy to say that the woman shouldn't have all of the authority. Spare me the "it's her body" garbage. She chose to have unprotected sex, resulting in the subsequent abortion. So, both of them should be equal in the decision making process. But here's the fiat... if they don't wish to go through the rigors of that process, they need only not have sex (or have it with a condom) until they are fully prepared to handle the implications.
It's not rocket science.
It isn't rocket science. It is absolutely her body. You can't remove that.
Well if it's her body, perhaps she should exercise more restraint when choosing a sexual partner. She shares just as much responsibility as the man, your uber feminism notwithstanding. If a woman can reproduce by herself then you had better alert the scientific community. Otherwise, what she does with her body will determine one of two life altering things will happen, either a) she doesn't have sex, and won't need the life altering abortive procedure OR, she will have sex, and risk her own mortality in the administration of this abortive procedure. Abortion is a form of surgery, and contrary to what you think, it isn't all a bed of roses.
So what makes you think she can do with the child as she pleases? Without the man, there is no child to abort. No reason for the woman to get outraged over being denied an abortion, furthermore there would be no human species.
Like I said, people like you make a mountain out of a molehill. You refuse to acknowledge the male's role in the reproductive cycle. This isn't the mythical land of the Amazons.
I know what their role is.
You guys like to live in this world of what people should do and for all of your bleetings you sound like children stamping your feet. People should.
The reality is that they don't. People don't do what they should.
You put your penis in, ejaculate and then you are done. That's it.
So, you ignore the process that is initiated upon ejaculation, do you? You are as dense as you are liberal. It's like cranking a car. Unless the key is inserted and turned the car doesn't start. The engine doesn't turn over and the car doesn't go anywhere. Without oxygen, there is no fire, without fire there is no smoke! See where I'm going? Without sperm there is no child, without the child there is no need for an abortion, and without the need for abortion, there is no need for her to stamp her feet in protest. How much must I dumb this down for you?
Ironically, you have men within your own party dictating the liberal positions on abortive rights. Oh. That must have slipped my tongue. That makes you a hypocrite, my friend.
What party is that, hon?
What is the war on women in America?
By and large reproductive health and rights.
War on Women - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia
abortion on demand and free birth control are not reproductive health. They are a cop out because liberal women are unable to keep their legs together.
They are part and parcel of reproductive health.
Black fetuses are being aborted at much higher numbers than whites. Fact. Google it you lazy fuck.
BlackGenocide.org Abortion and the Black Community
So why the liberal war on blacks and their unborn children? Why so racist and hateful?
Why are you so ignorant? There is no black genocide. You just get really desperate because you can't prove it..
black genocide was the original purpose of planned parenthood. its founder clearly stated that----look it up, you might learn something
No. It was taken out of context from what she said. You should look into that.
nope, you are wrong. I'm sorry if that busts your bubble of liberal love, but its a fact. Its also a fact the PP has aborted many more black than white fetuses.
No. You're claiming that black genocide was the original purpose of planned parenthood. You are lying. What you are referencing is taken from Sanger. You are lying.
You do realize that Margaret Sanger founded Planned Parenthood, right?
Disir
Platinum Member
- Sep 30, 2011
- 28,003
- 9,607
- 910
abortion on demand and free birth control are not reproductive health. They are a cop out because liberal women are unable to keep their legs together.
They are part and parcel of reproductive health.
Why are you so ignorant? There is no black genocide. You just get really desperate because you can't prove it..
black genocide was the original purpose of planned parenthood. its founder clearly stated that----look it up, you might learn something
No. It was taken out of context from what she said. You should look into that.
nope, you are wrong. I'm sorry if that busts your bubble of liberal love, but its a fact. Its also a fact the PP has aborted many more black than white fetuses.
No. You're claiming that black genocide was the original purpose of planned parenthood. You are lying. What you are referencing is taken from Sanger. You are lying.
You do realize that Margaret Sanger founded Planned Parenthood, right?
Yes, I do. I am also aware that the pro life crowd has attempted on multiple occasions to take her out of context. You wish to do the same?
Males have a role in the production of a zygote. They have no role in the development of the zygote into a fetus or the development of the fetus inside the female.
The male sperm initiates the process when it penetrates the outer membrane of the egg. The male is the initiator of the development. The sperm fertilizes the egg, the egg does not fertilize the sperm. Do you think a child will be a child with only half of the genetic code? Do you seriously know anything about human biology? Go read up. Males produce the sperm, females produce the egg. Without one or the other, the process has nowhere to go. The sperm triggers cell mitosis within the egg, the formation of the zygote and subsequent development. That's why at the beginning, you see two nuclei in the egg itself before they divide. I'm sorry, but you're wrong.
The discussion was about the rights of the male part of the relationship that caused the impregnation of the female. Once he donates his sperm he can walk away and never be seen or heard from again. Whatever develops inside of the female is totally dependent on the female. You are deflecting the argument into one about the rights of nuclei and zygotes.
This is the part that doesn't seem to sink in.
What isn't sinking in is how you lost two arguments to me in less than 24 hours. Plus, Camp started the discussion about the role of the male sperm within the egg.
I didn't lose anything. You cherry picked in an attempt to make an argument and you failed.
Here:
A Man with 34 Children Confesses His Failings as a Father - Video
That should fit right in with your theatrics.
Uh yeah, seeing as how I maintain constant relations with my father, given how many men in my church and childhood friends are committed fathers, you link is nothing but theatrics. You think you know so much about men, you don't know squat.
Contrarily, I can provide examples of how women are as detestable as you claim men to be, in their failures to be good mothers:
Woman abandoned kids in car so she could perform oral sex on boyfriend cops - NY Daily News
You must be so proud since the overwhelming number of the children being killed are poor and black.
Why are you promoting a war on blacks and their unborn children?
You must be so proud, you twisted information into a bunch of crap. Get a legit argument.
Black fetuses are being aborted at much higher numbers than whites. Fact. Google it you lazy fuck.
BlackGenocide.org Abortion and the Black Community
So why the liberal war on blacks and their unborn children? Why so racist and hateful?
Why are you so ignorant? There is no black genocide. You just get really desperate because you can't prove it..
black genocide was the original purpose of planned parenthood. its founder clearly stated that----look it up, you might learn something
No. It was taken out of context from what she said. You should look into that.
Does it concern you that black babies are aborted at much higher rates than whites? Please be specific.
Disir
Platinum Member
- Sep 30, 2011
- 28,003
- 9,607
- 910
The male sperm initiates the process when it penetrates the outer membrane of the egg. The male is the initiator of the development. The sperm fertilizes the egg, the egg does not fertilize the sperm. Do you think a child will be a child with only half of the genetic code? Do you seriously know anything about human biology? Go read up. Males produce the sperm, females produce the egg. Without one or the other, the process has nowhere to go. The sperm triggers cell mitosis within the egg, the formation of the zygote and subsequent development. That's why at the beginning, you see two nuclei in the egg itself before they divide. I'm sorry, but you're wrong.
The discussion was about the rights of the male part of the relationship that caused the impregnation of the female. Once he donates his sperm he can walk away and never be seen or heard from again. Whatever develops inside of the female is totally dependent on the female. You are deflecting the argument into one about the rights of nuclei and zygotes.
This is the part that doesn't seem to sink in.
What isn't sinking in is how you lost two arguments to me in less than 24 hours. Plus, Camp started the discussion about the role of the male sperm within the egg.
I didn't lose anything. You cherry picked in an attempt to make an argument and you failed.
Here:
A Man with 34 Children Confesses His Failings as a Father - Video
That should fit right in with your theatrics.
Uh yeah, seeing as how I maintain constant relations with my father, given how many men in my church and childhood friends are committed fathers, you link is nothing but theatrics. You think you know so much about men, you don't know squat.
Contrarily, I can provide examples of how women are as detestable as you claim men to be, in their failures to be good mothers:
Woman abandoned kids in car so she could perform oral sex on boyfriend cops - NY Daily News
Who said anything about men being detestable?
I am not interested in how you conduct yourself, your relationship with your father or the people in your church.
I'm telling you point blank that you might want to check this out before you kick out your responsibility meme.
Disir
Platinum Member
- Sep 30, 2011
- 28,003
- 9,607
- 910
You must be so proud, you twisted information into a bunch of crap. Get a legit argument.
Black fetuses are being aborted at much higher numbers than whites. Fact. Google it you lazy fuck.
BlackGenocide.org Abortion and the Black Community
So why the liberal war on blacks and their unborn children? Why so racist and hateful?
Why are you so ignorant? There is no black genocide. You just get really desperate because you can't prove it..
black genocide was the original purpose of planned parenthood. its founder clearly stated that----look it up, you might learn something
No. It was taken out of context from what she said. You should look into that.
Does it concern you that black babies are aborted at much higher rates than whites? Please be specific.
We just did this, remember? You brought me an extremist Baptist preacher. When you are ready to be serious, then I will return the favor.
abortion on demand and free birth control are not reproductive health. They are a cop out because liberal women are unable to keep their legs together.
They are part and parcel of reproductive health.
black genocide was the original purpose of planned parenthood. its founder clearly stated that----look it up, you might learn something
No. It was taken out of context from what she said. You should look into that.
nope, you are wrong. I'm sorry if that busts your bubble of liberal love, but its a fact. Its also a fact the PP has aborted many more black than white fetuses.
No. You're claiming that black genocide was the original purpose of planned parenthood. You are lying. What you are referencing is taken from Sanger. You are lying.
You do realize that Margaret Sanger founded Planned Parenthood, right?
Yes, I do. I am also aware that the pro life crowd has attempted on multiple occasions to take her out of context. You wish to do the same?
The stated goal of Planned Parenthood according to her was to "prevent the multiplication of the unfit," this she continues would be "the most important and greatest step towards race betterment."
BluesLegend
Diamond Member
Situation Report, Pacific NW - As of 9:30am this morning there are no new reports of casualties in the war on women. That is all.
The discussion was about the rights of the male part of the relationship that caused the impregnation of the female. Once he donates his sperm he can walk away and never be seen or heard from again. Whatever develops inside of the female is totally dependent on the female. You are deflecting the argument into one about the rights of nuclei and zygotes.
This is the part that doesn't seem to sink in.
What isn't sinking in is how you lost two arguments to me in less than 24 hours. Plus, Camp started the discussion about the role of the male sperm within the egg.
I didn't lose anything. You cherry picked in an attempt to make an argument and you failed.
Here:
A Man with 34 Children Confesses His Failings as a Father - Video
That should fit right in with your theatrics.
Uh yeah, seeing as how I maintain constant relations with my father, given how many men in my church and childhood friends are committed fathers, you link is nothing but theatrics. You think you know so much about men, you don't know squat.
Contrarily, I can provide examples of how women are as detestable as you claim men to be, in their failures to be good mothers:
Woman abandoned kids in car so she could perform oral sex on boyfriend cops - NY Daily News
Who said anything about men being detestable?
I am not interested in how you conduct yourself, your relationship with your father or the people in your church.
I'm telling you point blank that you might want to check this out before you kick out your responsibility meme.
So this absolves you of any? I'm telling you point blank that you simply don't give a flying rat's ass whether you kill the child or not. You must have the rights and all of the authority. Furthermore, knowing committed fathers disproves your notion that all men are irresponsible fathers. Well I could just as easily travel down that road with women too. But that is a classic association fallacy.
So, of course you don't care, it doesn't mesh with your worldview, which I may add is not sacrosanct. Responsibility involves commitment on both ends. Well, what do you care about commitment anyway?
Black fetuses are being aborted at much higher numbers than whites. Fact. Google it you lazy fuck.
BlackGenocide.org Abortion and the Black Community
So why the liberal war on blacks and their unborn children? Why so racist and hateful?
Why are you so ignorant? There is no black genocide. You just get really desperate because you can't prove it..
black genocide was the original purpose of planned parenthood. its founder clearly stated that----look it up, you might learn something
No. It was taken out of context from what she said. You should look into that.
Does it concern you that black babies are aborted at much higher rates than whites? Please be specific.
We just did this, remember? You brought me an extremist Baptist preacher. When you are ready to be serious, then I will return the favor.
WTF are you talking about? I didn't bring up any preacher. Answer the question. Does it concern you that black babies are aborted at a much higher rate than whites? Yes or no.
Disir
Platinum Member
- Sep 30, 2011
- 28,003
- 9,607
- 910
http://www.nyu.edu/projects/sanger/documents/speech_no_healthy_race_without_bc.htmlThey are part and parcel of reproductive health.
No. It was taken out of context from what she said. You should look into that.
nope, you are wrong. I'm sorry if that busts your bubble of liberal love, but its a fact. Its also a fact the PP has aborted many more black than white fetuses.
No. You're claiming that black genocide was the original purpose of planned parenthood. You are lying. What you are referencing is taken from Sanger. You are lying.
You do realize that Margaret Sanger founded Planned Parenthood, right?
Yes, I do. I am also aware that the pro life crowd has attempted on multiple occasions to take her out of context. You wish to do the same?
The stated goal of Planned Parenthood according to her was to "prevent the multiplication of the unfit," this she continues would be "the most important and greatest step towards race betterment."
Disir
Platinum Member
- Sep 30, 2011
- 28,003
- 9,607
- 910
Why are you so ignorant? There is no black genocide. You just get really desperate because you can't prove it..
black genocide was the original purpose of planned parenthood. its founder clearly stated that----look it up, you might learn something
No. It was taken out of context from what she said. You should look into that.
Does it concern you that black babies are aborted at much higher rates than whites? Please be specific.
We just did this, remember? You brought me an extremist Baptist preacher. When you are ready to be serious, then I will return the favor.
WTF are you talking about? I didn't bring up any preacher. Answer the question. Does it concern you that black babies are aborted at a much higher rate than whites? Yes or no.
Sure you did. Who the hell do you think runs the site that you just brought? Again. When you get serious, I'll be serious.
Similar threads
- Replies
- 82
- Views
- 1K
- Replies
- 39
- Views
- 825
- Replies
- 59
- Views
- 3K
Latest Discussions
- Replies
- 18
- Views
- 22
- Replies
- 22
- Views
- 73
Forum List
-
-
-
-
-
Political Satire 8051
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
ObamaCare 781
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Member Usernotes 469
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-