A question for the anti-choice crowd.

[Czernobog]

Yeah..the mere fact that you can "make sense" out of an intentionally nonsense statement is only further evidence of your batshit crazy.

I didn't say it made sense.... only more sense than anything else that's happened this weekend.

We'll, it certainly made more sense than your claim that America stopped being America after some imaginary date that doesn't even exist anywhere except inside your own fevered brain.

Sent from my 5054N using Tapatalk

 

[Czernobog]

So, it is also your batshit crazy contention that only feminists have abortions? You really are completely disconnected from fact-based reality, aren't you?

It is my contention that having good an abortion makes one a deal facto Feminist. Real women would rather die than doing so.

Like I said. Bat. Shit. Crazy. You know, I'm sure there are some professionals out there that could help you with your delusions.

Sent from my 5054N using Tapatalk

 

[Anathema]

Well, it certainly made more sense than your claim that America stopped being America after some imaginary date that doesn't even exist anywhere except inside your own fevered brain.

No. The Real, authentic, original America died when Lincoln decided to invade a sovereign foreign nation. After that point it's been all downhill.

 

[Anathema]

Like I said. Bat. Shit. Crazy. You know, I'm sure there are some professionals out there that could help you with your delusions.

I'm contemplating Dr's Smith and Wesson right now.

 

[Czernobog]

Well, it certainly made more sense than your claim that America stopped being America after some imaginary date that doesn't even exist anywhere except inside your own fevered brain.

No. The Real, authentic, original America died when Lincoln decided to invade a sovereign foreign nation. After that point it's been all downhill.

Except that Lincoln never did that. What did happen is that the leaders of some states decided to commit treason, and attempted to steal United States territory. They were taught the errors of their ways.

I understand how someone who hates the very government that protects his right to spew such hateful, batshit crazy rhetoric might be incapable of understanding that.

Sent from my 5054N using Tapatalk

 

[Czernobog]

Like I said. Bat. Shit. Crazy. You know, I'm sure there are some professionals out there that could help you with your delusions.

I'm contemplating Dr's Smith and Wesson right now.

I wouldn't do that. There no need for suicide. I'm sure that all you need are the right meds.

Sent from my 5054N using Tapatalk

 

[Anathema]

I wouldn't do that. There no need for suicide. I'm sure that all you need are the right meds.

I don't do medication. Never have. Therapy doesn't work either. Just at a point where I'm not sure it's worth the fight any more.

 

[Anathema]

Except that Lincoln never did that. What did happen is that the leaders of some states decided to commit treason, and attempted to steal United States territory. They were taught the errors of their ways.

I understand how someone who hates the very government that protects his right to spew such hateful, batshit crazy rhetoric might be incapable of understanding that.

Yes, Lincoln did do that. The 10th Amendment prevented him from forcing an end to slavery on the South. He made it clear he would support such a move.

Thee Southern States reasonably chose to rescind their membership in the US. Lincoln sent troops into Virginia.

 

[Czernobog]

Except that Lincoln never did that. What did happen is that the leaders of some states decided to commit treason, and attempted to steal United States territory. They were taught the errors of their ways.

I understand how someone who hates the very government that protects his right to spew such hateful, batshit crazy rhetoric might be incapable of understanding that.

Yes, Lincoln did do that. The 10th Amendment prevented him from forcing an end to slavery on the South. He made it clear he would support such a move.

Thee Southern States reasonably chose to rescind their membership in the US. Lincoln sent troops into Virginia.

No, it didn't. The very founding of our nation was that all men have the same rights. The Constitution was designed to protect those rights for all men. The very idea that some men were not entitled to those rights, and could be, in fact, owned as property, flew in the face of that very founding principle.

And the fact that 150 years later there are still people who don't understand that is sad. So, not only do you hate your own country, but you hate your fellow man, as well. Ya know what? You prove with your every post that you have no business lecturing anyone about ethics, and morality, as you are clearly devoid of either.

Sent from my 5054N using Tapatalk

 

[hadit]

Why do liberals claim to respect science while totally ignoring it when it comes to abortion?

We don't. Science says a fetus isn't a person yet, and they are often spontaneously aborted, and you sometimes have to induce abortion to save the health or life of the woman. That is the science, which you refuse to accept.

Nonsense. Science says a near full term unborn baby is a living human being. Pro-aborts strenuously try to deny that.

And I would have no problem with your position if it were only "near full term" abortions that you wanted to limit. But, it isn't, is it?

Sent from my Samsung using Tapatalk.

Too late. They're already limited.

Roe V Wade makes it illegal to abort a viable fetus with the exceptions being a threat to the woman's life or there's a very serious problem with the pregnancy.

On top of the regulations that Roe V Wade list, the bush boy banned late term abortions in 2005.

Actually, that is not true. Roe v Wade made it illegal for states to ban first term abortions, but it did not make late term abortions illegal. What it does is allow states to make late term abortions illegal if they want to do so.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Like I said. Bat. Shit. Crazy. You know, I'm sure there are some professionals out there that could help you with your delusions.

I'm contemplating Dr's Smith and Wesson right now.

Do it now, beat the rush.

 

[Anathema]

Do it now, beat the rush.

You might just get your wish in the near future.

 

[P@triot]

It's not "her" body sweetie. It's the body of the baby. When she has an abortion - is she killed or is the baby killed? When she has an abortion, is her skull caved in or is the baby's skull caved in? When she has an abortion, is her arm vacuumed off or is the baby's arm vacuumed off?

Oops.....thanks for play hon.

Its not a baby, sweetie. It is a non-viable fetus; property, insider her body, and she has every right to say, "get it out." The idea of "killing" it bothers you so much? Fine. You carry it. We'll transfer it from her body to yours. No? Then shut the fuck up. She gets to do with her own damn body what she wants, including what invasive growth does, or does not, feed off of her.

Sent from my 5054N using Tapatalk

It is a baby and science has already proven that. It even has unique DNA. And do you know why you want me to (and I quote) "shut the fuck up"? Because I'm killing you with facts and exposing you for the ignorant tool that you are.

Like all progressives, you're a disingenuous asshat that starts his position with a lie. When a woman has an abortion - is she killed or is the baby killed? When she has an abortion, is her skull caved in or is the baby's skull caved in? When she has an abortion, is her arm vacuumed off or is the baby's arm vacuumed off?

Boom...bitch! Suck it. You're a typical progressive. You have an irrational position (i.e. its ok to murder defenseless babies) so you must start with a lie in an attempt to defend the indefensible, irrational position.

 

[P@triot]

Abortions do not kill "children" - so quit lying. Fetuses are not children. Fetuses are still attached to the mother and therefore part of her body.

That's a special kind of stupid that could only come from progressives. When a baby is born, it is still attached to the mother via the umbilical cord. Does that mean the born baby is "part of her body" and thus it would be ok to murder at that point?

Idiot.

 

[P@triot]

Until a fetus is viable, it is not a person, and abortion should be between a woman, and her doctor. If you agree that, prior to viability (second trimester), an abortion is the personal choice of a woman, and her doctor, then you are pro-choice, and why are you arguing?

That is astounding and appalling sexism. An abortion should be between a woman and her doctor?!? A person not even involved in the creation of the child?!? As a man - why do I have no say over someone murdering my baby?

If you're going to support abortion - you should at least have the basic fucking decency to recognize the father in the decision process. Only a liberal would place a fucking doctor above the father.

That is of course up to the woman. Not required. Optional.

Spoken like a true idiot Witchit. What you just stated is 100% illegal. The law cannot discriminate. It must be applied equally among all citizens. Which means if it is ok for a mother to abort a baby without the fathers consent, then it is 100% ok for the father to abort a baby without the mothers consent. It is unconstitutional to hold one set of laws for one set of people and another set of laws for another set of people.

 

[P@triot]

Answer this question: If a doctor tells the mother that it is either her or the fetus because carrying it will kill her, do you still believe she should be able to choose to have an abortion, or are you one of those who thinks it's tough shit for her and she shouldn't have an abortion?

A woman absolutely should have the right to abort the baby in that situation. That's a life and death medical necessity. It is akin to self-defense. Murder is illegal. However, I am permitted by law to take your life if you pose a threat to mine. Your scenario here is no different. If the baby poses a threat to the mothers life, she has the right to "defend" herself and terminate the life of the baby.

 

[P@triot]

No, it didn't. The very founding of our nation was that all men have the same rights. The Constitution was designed to protect those rights for all men. The very idea that some men were not entitled to those rights, and could be, in fact, owned as property, flew in the face of that very founding principle.

You have to love Czernobog "logic". Because some men were denied their Constitutional rights, all of society should be denied their Constitutional rights.

Slavery was wrong....but so was the way Abraham Lincoln went about ending it. He shredded the U.S. Constitution just like idiot progressives did with gay marriage. The federal government has 0 powers over marriage. 0. So the Supreme Court had no authority to even hear the case, much less rule on it and create legislation from the bench legalizing marriage in all 50 states. That reality is one of many reasons why you angry progressives hate the U.S. and the Constitution so much.

 

[P@triot]

But anyone getting an abortion is obviously liberal. And we raise little liberals. If we don't murder them first of course. I wouldn't raise a conservative.

A rare moment of honesty from the left.

 

[Czernobog]

No, it didn't. The very founding of our nation was that all men have the same rights. The Constitution was designed to protect those rights for all men. The very idea that some men were not entitled to those rights, and could be, in fact, owned as property, flew in the face of that very founding principle.

You have to love Czernobog "logic". Because some men were denied their Constitutional rights, all of society should be denied their Constitutional rights.

Slavery was wrong....but so was the way Abraham Lincoln went about ending it. He shredded the U.S. Constitution just like idiot progressives did with gay marriage. The federal government has 0 powers over marriage. 0. So the Supreme Court had no authority to even hear the case, much less rule on it and create legislation from the bench legalizing marriage in all 50 states. That reality is one of many reasons why you angry progressives hate the U.S. and the Constitution so much.

Bullshit. Lincoln "went about it" in exactly the right way - a Constitutional amendment. That was the entire reason that the Constitution was created in a way to be mutable. And Federal Government has just as much power over marriage as State Government. And, again, you're wrong about the Supreme Court. Guess what, Snowflake? We are not a Confederacy. The States are not independent powers. We are, and have always been a Republic. The States are subject to the Federal Government. All laws, whether local, state, or federal are bound by the Constitution, and the Supreme Court is the sole arbiter of whether a law violates the strictures of that governing document. Period.

 

[sealybobo]

No, it didn't. The very founding of our nation was that all men have the same rights. The Constitution was designed to protect those rights for all men. The very idea that some men were not entitled to those rights, and could be, in fact, owned as property, flew in the face of that very founding principle.

You have to love Czernobog "logic". Because some men were denied their Constitutional rights, all of society should be denied their Constitutional rights.

Slavery was wrong....but so was the way Abraham Lincoln went about ending it. He shredded the U.S. Constitution just like idiot progressives did with gay marriage. The federal government has 0 powers over marriage. 0. So the Supreme Court had no authority to even hear the case, much less rule on it and create legislation from the bench legalizing marriage in all 50 states. That reality is one of many reasons why you angry progressives hate the U.S. and the Constitution so much.

Bullshit. Lincoln "went about it" in exactly the right way - a Constitutional amendment. That was the entire reason that the Constitution was created in a way to be mutable. And Federal Government has just as much power over marriage as State Government. And, again, you're wrong about the Supreme Court. Guess what, Snowflake? We are not a Confederacy. The States are not independent powers. We are, and have always been a Republic. The States are subject to the Federal Government. All laws, whether local, state, or federal are bound by the Constitution, and the Supreme Court is the sole arbiter of whether a law violates the strictures of that governing document. Period.

Except Colorado and Michigan have legal pot. The feds don't enforce