Danish teen girl will be charged for fighting off rapist.

[idb]

Ah, I see the problem...you're an idiot.

No, the problem is that you are a lying soulless moron who will lie to disguise your lack of a moral capacity.

Wow, all that typing and still...all I see is an idiot.

Not my fault you have a shiny monitor that reflects back your own image, dumbass.

Good one!

 

[aris2chat]

[
Everyone has strength and weaknesses. Males will tend to be brutes full of testosterone interfering with their ability to think. Women will tend to be more empathetic and nurturing, they can calm stressful situation and think rationally under stress. Men are muscle, women brains, they balance each other.

No, some jobs men are better at, some women will do better at others. There is place for both.

Yeah, women make better social workers and that's about it. Important jobs like engineer, businessman, scientist, plumber, auto repairman, farmer, electrician are almost all male.

Sorry, not accurate. Many of those jobs used to be closed to women by bigoted men. Go back through history and women have been mathematicians, scientists, engines, business persons, even mechanics and hydraulicists . Queen Elizabeth used to fix car and truck engines. Women used to build planes, cars and tanks. Women can build their own houses and fix just about anything in the home if they need to. I used to fix planes and even have a design patent that probably saved your life every time you flew anything from a 747 or earlier. I used to build computers as well. Women have been involved in building rockets and shuttles and gone into space.
Why do you think women cannot be engineers and technically intelligent?

 

[JimBowie1958]

Women used to build planes, cars and tanks.

and they STILL DO.

 

[aris2chat]

It is against the law to profit from the sale of tissue across state lines. It i not against the law to tack on reasonable costs to the handling of the tissue transported.

Fetal tissue cannot be directly transplanted but the tissue can be used to grow organs which are then transplanted.

the soliciting of tissue, which is what the video makers were doing is against the law.

U.S.C. Title 42 - THE PUBLIC HEALTH AND WELFARE

The requests were obviously nothing more than enticements to get PP to reveal their business of selling baby parts, and cretins like you are defending that whole industry.

How can you defend the profiteering of the murder of innocent unborn babies?

Were you in a Death Camp, you would have been kicking Jews in the face to cram more in the ovens and get your extra slice of potato?

Women have a right to donate tissue and researchers have a right to use tissue to save lives. Those than handle and carry tissue have a right to be paid for their work and expenses.

Read the law

If they can take a tiny bit of tissue and grow a human heart or liver for someone in need of a transplant, why is that so wrong? If tissue can be used to make vaccines that save lives, why should their research be blocked?

Tissue would either be tossed in a furnace or donated. Why shouldn't it serve to help others in some way like developing treatment for Parkinsons?

Some states have restrictions on fetal tissue but federal law permits the use.

It is dead tissue, why do you care if it is donated for research? It would otherwise be just garbage.

They are not killing unborn babies for tissue, they are taking tissue that would be destroyed and finding ways to advance medicine and save lives.

If women choose not to be mothers, that is their right. Their body, their health. Even in the last trimesters the baby can be terminated so the woman can be given life saving treatment. In any emergency room in the country, the first life to save is the mother's if possible. You put the life, mental and physical, of the woman first and foremost. She can always try to carry at a later time or adopt when she is ready.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Women have a right to donate tissue and researchers have a right to use tissue to save lives. Those than handle and carry tissue have a right to be paid for their work and expenses.

No matter what your semantical contortions are, the fact is that baby parts are being sold.

That is a moral repugnance that would have even made Hitler recoil in shock.

My God, you people have lost your moral framework.

God help you.

 

[aris2chat]

Women have a right to donate tissue and researchers have a right to use tissue to save lives. Those than handle and carry tissue have a right to be paid for their work and expenses.

No matter what your semantical contortions are, the fact is that baby parts are being sold.

That is a moral repugnance that would have even made Hitler recoil in shock.

My God, you people have lost your moral framework.

God help you.

Hitler's men were experimenting on live children and twins.

Dead tissue has no feeling but can save lives. We take blood from living people to do tests on and even give it to strangers. We donate organs. We even transplant brains. We even transplant eggs and sperm and let others carry our children and give birth to them. Why is research on tissue repugnant? It make more sense to burn it?

They are not killing people for tissue, they are taking tissue that has been removed and finding a use for it to help others. How is that different than asking for family to donate organ from the person that just died or donate the body to science? Student will learn and experiment on the body so they can one day save lives. Tissue will be used for research. It is a difference in size. A woman donates her tissue after removal.

Worms have more need for it?

 

[JimBowie1958]

Dead tissue has no feeling but can save lives.

The procedure is not on dead babies, but living ones that feel every cut and tear.

 

[aris2chat]

Dead tissue has no feeling but can save lives.

The procedure is not on dead babies, but living ones that feel every cut and tear.

fetus is not a separate life but a parasite living off the woman. It is her choice to be a host or to remove it. Once removed it has no life of it's own. Dead tissue. A fetus in the first or second trimester is not an infant that can live outside the womb. It might have a chance in the third trimester.

tissue used for research is not a living feeling infant.

The woman that chooses to have an abortion can also choose to donate the tissue or let it be burned with the garbage. She is not having an abortion just to provide research tissue. She is having the abortion anyway. That is her legal choice. So is donating the tissue.

 

[JimBowie1958]

fetus is not a separate life but a parasite living off the woman.

An unborn baby is not a parasite as it has its own separate intelligence and is a human life; it is not some insect.

That isthe root issue here; too many of you libs have forgotten that human life is sacred.

Once removed it has no life of it's own.

Which proves nothing. Children depend on their parents for staying alive till they are at least about ten years old.

 

[aris2chat]

fetus is not a separate life but a parasite living off the woman.

An unborn baby is not a parasite as it has its own separate intelligence and is a human life; it is not some insect.

That isthe root issue here; too many of you libs have forgotten that human life is sacred.

Once removed it has no life of it's own.

Which proves nothing. Children depend on their parents for staying alive till they are at least about ten years old.

Kid are living on the streets without parents and able to fend for themselves from around four or five. Younger children will often be cared for by the older children.

If they can feed themselves and move on their own legs and beginning to speak............... does not mean they should be on their own but in some parts of the world they are able.

Toddlers can get their own food and something to drink when they need. They can wipe their own butts and brush their own teeth. They can dress themselves. they are capable of follow basic rules and instructions. They have a sense of right and wrong.

Some children travel alone from around five. They are sent away to schools. They can be left alone for a time without a parent hovering over them. They can amuse themselves. They don't have to be told everything they have to do.

Don't under estimate young children. They are quite capable.

It some areas children are working with animals or on the farm providing food and even an income for some work at very young ages. They are capable of caring for infants and toddlers if need be. They might be capable of saving a life or taking one.

By ten, some girls are already married and having children of their own.

Some adult are also incapable of caring for themselves.

 

[LuckyDuck01!]

Perhaps a tourist boycott of Denmark should begin and not let up until the women of Denmark are allowed to use pepper spray, hammers, or whatever is handy to protect themselves from rapists.

 

[flacaltenn]

Victims should not be treated as criminals. Women have a right to not just say no but defend themselves if necessary. No man has a right to abuse a woman or treat her as inferior.

You were doing ok till you got to the end. Fact is women are inferior - smaller, weaker, and lacking in tech aptitude.

There's no neg button anymore -- but I got Rhonda Rousey's twitter address and perhaps she's like to chat with you about that theory.. Place your bets guys.. Not on who wins --- but how fast SpeedShooters gets to the ambulance.

 

[aris2chat]

fetus is not a separate life but a parasite living off the woman.

An unborn baby is not a parasite as it has its own separate intelligence and is a human life; it is not some insect.

That isthe root issue here; too many of you libs have forgotten that human life is sacred.

Once removed it has no life of it's own.

Which proves nothing. Children depend on their parents for staying alive till they are at least about ten years old.

A child after birth can live without a mother. A child in the first two trimesters cannot. They don't have a developed brain or organs or even structural system. They are not infants, they are early formations of a fetus.

A woman has a right to decide when she wants or if she wants to become a mother. She is not a baby factory or slave breeding stock. She might have other ambitions in life. She might have heath issues that would be complicated by a pregnancy. She might not want to have her body deformed over the better part of a year. She just might no be the nurturing type. She might have been a victim if abuse or rape. She might be too young or too mentally immature to be a mother. She might have a disability.
Her reasons are her own. The choice it her own. It is not something she should be forced to do.

What happens to the tissue afterwards is also her choice.

She is not paid for the tissue nor is PP. PP and tissue banks have handling and processing expenses they are legally allowed to charge for. Not the same as changing for the tissue. on an open auction a fetus might be worth thousands. PP charges from fifty to a hundred for handling and transporting, not so different from handling of other human tissue or blood for lab testing. They have to package and store the tissue till it is transported. Can't just shove it in the lunch room fridge.

Tissue banks and medical bio transporters can bid on fees for handling, not on the tissue itself.

Its legal. Nothing morally repugnant. It is otherwise just bio waste, which also has expenses and regulations to dispose of properly.

tissue to potentially save lives or ash to feed plants and worms. Why is that so hard a choice?

You have more concern for a few week old fetus that is not wanted than for human lives that might benefit from research?

A few week old fetus is not an new born infant. A fetus is not living on its own, it lives off a woman, it take from from her nutrition and has her body process out the waste. It saps from her bones and tissue. It is subject to her immune system. It is affected by her diet and habits. It is not a separate life form, just cuddling to stay warm. It can't be handed off when it become uncomfortable. Her body become sick trying to get rid of it. Hormones can have very negative and even violent havoc on her and her life.

Pregnancy is not easy, child birth is worse. You have to be ready and want it. You have to take the time to get regular checkup and proper diet and exercise. You have to be willing for the commitment, even if just the nine months. It is not a school project of keeping an egg in a fanny pouch for a few days and turn it over a few times.

When it is right it can be wonderful experience. It is not always right for all women.

 

[Conservative65]

That's not what he said...or even implied.

Well others commenting, just reading their responses to him, and also for the reasons why I choose not to read his comments, I think it's the usual pro-"refugee", pro-anyone and anti-native population of your own nation stuff that he's prone to commenting.

Then you are relying on the interpretation of the permanently outraged.
Don't trust them to give you the real facts.

With regard to rape, I can't comment on the Colorado stuff as of course I choose not to read his posts. However, rape....IF some savage came at me, I'd kick him in the testicles, text a group of male friends telling them to get to the spot and pronto, then he'd be told IF he ever thought about doing this again he'd have his testicles cut off and fed to him and if anyone had a problem with that, tough shit.

If I had had any weapon at hand, I'd slash him and tell him did he want me to cut his testicles off and feed them to him.

I read his posts. He said he was for law and order and this girl was guilty because she broke the law. I asked him about Colorado's marijuana laws and he was quick to say Colorado was OK to do that despite federal law, something higher on the scale of laws, saying it was illegal. He tried to justify breaking the law because he believed the feds should butt out and they were behind the times. In others words, following the laws is for other people and not him.

And yet, raping a woman is not against the law in his lexicon. Rapists apparently do not have to follow law in PMH's world.

He said nothing about the person that committed the crime against her.

 

[Conservative65]

And yet, raping a woman is not against the law in his lexicon. Rapists apparently do not have to follow law in PMH's world.

That's just dumb, really dumb.

I agree. That's why I support the girl's self defense move. It is dumb that rapists don't have to follow the law but the women (or men) the attack are held to the letter of the law.

They are both being held to the letter of law. What part of that did you miss?

And welcome to old adage, The Law Is An Ass...

Yet you support laws being broken when you disagree with them.

 

[Conservative65]

fetus is not a separate life but a parasite living off the woman.

An unborn baby is not a parasite as it has its own separate intelligence and is a human life; it is not some insect.

That isthe root issue here; too many of you libs have forgotten that human life is sacred.

Once removed it has no life of it's own.

Which proves nothing. Children depend on their parents for staying alive till they are at least about ten years old.

A child after birth can live without a mother. A child in the first two trimesters cannot. They don't have a developed brain or organs or even structural system. They are not infants, they are early formations of a fetus.

A woman has a right to decide when she wants or if she wants to become a mother. She is not a baby factory or slave breeding stock. She might have other ambitions in life. She might have heath issues that would be complicated by a pregnancy. She might not want to have her body deformed over the better part of a year. She just might no be the nurturing type. She might have been a victim if abuse or rape. She might be too young or too mentally immature to be a mother. She might have a disability.
Her reasons are her own. The choice it her own. It is not something she should be forced to do.

What happens to the tissue afterwards is also her choice.

She is not paid for the tissue nor is PP. PP and tissue banks have handling and processing expenses they are legally allowed to charge for. Not the same as changing for the tissue. on an open auction a fetus might be worth thousands. PP charges from fifty to a hundred for handling and transporting, not so different from handling of other human tissue or blood for lab testing. They have to package and store the tissue till it is transported. Can't just shove it in the lunch room fridge.

Tissue banks and medical bio transporters can bid on fees for handling, not on the tissue itself.

Its legal. Nothing morally repugnant. It is otherwise just bio waste, which also has expenses and regulations to dispose of properly.

tissue to potentially save lives or ash to feed plants and worms. Why is that so hard a choice?

You have more concern for a few week old fetus that is not wanted than for human lives that might benefit from research?

A few week old fetus is not an new born infant. A fetus is not living on its own, it lives off a woman, it take from from her nutrition and has her body process out the waste. It saps from her bones and tissue. It is subject to her immune system. It is affected by her diet and habits. It is not a separate life form, just cuddling to stay warm. It can't be handed off when it become uncomfortable. Her body become sick trying to get rid of it. Hormones can have very negative and even violent havoc on her and her life.

Pregnancy is not easy, child birth is worse. You have to be ready and want it. You have to take the time to get regular checkup and proper diet and exercise. You have to be willing for the commitment, even if just the nine months. It is not a school project of keeping an egg in a fanny pouch for a few days and turn it over a few times.

When it is right it can be wonderful experience. It is not always right for all women.

Yes she does. When she lies does and spreads her legs, whether the intention was to get pregnant or not, she's made the choice then. Excuses like you give her to be able to kill what resulted from that choice are invalid. If they really mattered to her, she would have considered them beforehand and maybe made a different choice. That they are considered only after the results of an action that produced the pregnancy makes them an excuse not a reason. For example, if she's too young or immature to be a mother, isn't she too young and immature to have sex? That's the double standard people like you apply.

You're another one that thinks someone that makes a choice to do what she knows can cause pregnancy then ridding herself of it because she doesn't like the results is OK. That means you oppose personal responsibility.

If you don't want the commitment, don't take the original action that produces it. She'll commit to having sex with anyone but won't commit to being responsible for the result.

 

[Conservative65]

I choose not to read his posts, but I gather he has said it was her own fault and thus she deserved to be raped, or something of this nature?

Unbelievable.

That's not what he said...or even implied.

Well others commenting, just reading their responses to him, and also for the reasons why I choose not to read his comments, I think it's the usual pro-"refugee", pro-anyone and anti-native population of your own nation stuff that he's prone to commenting.

Then you are relying on the interpretation of the permanently outraged.
Don't trust them to give you the real facts.

With regard to rape, I can't comment on the Colorado stuff as of course I choose not to read his posts. However, rape....IF some savage came at me, I'd kick him in the testicles, text a group of male friends telling them to get to the spot and pronto, then he'd be told IF he ever thought about doing this again he'd have his testicles cut off and fed to him and if anyone had a problem with that, tough shit.

If I had had any weapon at hand, I'd slash him and tell him did he want me to cut his testicles off and feed them to him.

That's not the point of his posts.

No one wanted this girl to be raped.
Everybody's glad that she had the pepper spray on hand and fought the filthy bastard off.
If she is to be charged because pepper spray is against the law then that is the law.
Can the police choose which laws they are going to enforce and which ones they aren't?

We all hope under the circumstances that she isn't prosecuted.

He has no point. When he said, on a different issue, that it's OK to break a law you don't like and tries to justify it, to then say this girl shouldn't have broken the law, the only point that needs to be addressed with him is that he has no credibility. To say this girl should have followed the law then say I didn't like this other law so it's OK that I break it, is called hypocritical and invalidates any argument you have.

 

[Conservative65]

I'm guessing rape is A-OK in your book?

Nope. But is law and order optional?

Apparently in your world it is.

No, that's what you want by allowing the girl to break the law, even though she had a terrific reason for doing so. Are laws optional, yes or no?

Mitigating circumstances should always be considered.

Is that the polices' role or the court's?
Should the police be able to make that call and act as judge, jury etc?

Police make calls like that all the time. It's called using good judgment and discretion.

 

[Conservative65]

In other words, you support breaking the law in place when you don't like it but hold this girl's feet to the fire because she did so defending herself. Got it hypocrite.

See just above.

In other words, you support breaking the law and try to justify it when it suits you. I had it the first time.

Many can justify it, but you are usually still charged, as this girl should be. She used a banned weapon and that is against the law.

People in Colorado have marijuana and it's against federal law. Should they be charged for using something the law says is illegal?

Should they be, after a state-wide ballot? No. Can they be, by the Feds, you bet your ass.

Since, as you Liberals say, federal law trumps State law, they should.

California had a statewide ballot called Proposition 8. It passed putting a hold on same sex marriages. Did you support upholding it using the same outlook as you do on marijuana in Colorado?

 

[JimBowie1958]

Since, as you Liberals say, federal law trumps State law, they should.

California had a statewide ballot called Proposition 8. It passed putting a hold on same sex marriages. Did you support upholding it using the same outlook as you do on marijuana in Colorado?

It is almost funny that you seem to expect the libtards to answer you.

It is hilarious that you seem to think that they actually have reasons for what they say.