Don't shop at Dick's (Sports).. they are covering cost of travel for women who want to abort

I'll say it now. ANY company that takes a stand against little babies, I'll boycott in a heartbeat. I doubt any more of them will join in. It's clearly a losing proposition, especially now that Roe v Wade is gone. They'll be seen as losers on the losing side. Companies don't want that.

Great, then stop posting here since the odds are very strong you use at least one of those companies with your computer, tablet or phone.
 
Those who are planning to boycott Dick's Sporting Goods will need to do the same for other businesses that have this same sort of protection for their employees.

Don't shop Amazon.
Don't wear Levis
Don't buy Starbucks.
Don't watch NetFlix
Take your money out of JP Morgan Chase & Co. and Citigroup.
Oh, and don't use that Mastercard in your wallet.
I assume the future citizens of Americastan plan to create their own "Christian"-approved companies and distribution systems to use within their borders. Hell, they may even have their own currency.

They appear to be separating themselves from what they are told is "evil".
 
CremeBrulee

How do pieces of shit as stupid as you are survive puberty? Natural selection really needs to catch up. Drooling retards like you are supposed to wander into heavy machinery or fall asleep in a bathtub. Who is keeping you alive? Do you live in a basement with pads all over the place? Is there a floor drain so that someone can just hose your filth down once a week?

OOOOHHHHH.......
I glad you agree.
 
Abortion is not a natural death. I'm not talking about a natural death here. If you argument regarding abortion is that they're not "viable"--well, plenty of elderly and sick people are also not "viable" without significant support, resources and money. No, not natural death. Off them, just like we abort babies. You should be fine with this. Euthanize them. It would be less painful for them than pulling babies' limbs apart in the womb.
I don't have any problem euthanizing them if that's their wish or the wish of their caretaker. You seem to be arguing under the premise that I'm for forced abortions rather than leaving it up to the choice of the mother. If we were to make this analogous to elderly people who couldn't make their own decisions then my stance is entirely consistent. Why would me being in favor of a woman's right to choose equate to me wanting to euthanize every non viable person against their families wishes?
What do you mean "unwilling"? Very few mothers are raped. Most mothers copulate willingly and then just don't like the results--and make the baby pay.
I mean unwilling in terms of pregnancy. Consent to sex is not consent to pregnancy.
And now, our God-forsaken nation (I mean that) is going around screeching about losing our "rights". Our rights to kill our own children!
God is all for child massacres. Have you ever read the Bible? 😆
 
And by the way, it's the same argument. It's not letting nature/a treatment take its course, and then acting as if the snapshot in time is perpetual. So it must be morally okay.
No it's not the same argument. My antibiotics aren't being siphoned from an unwilling human being.
 
I don't have any problem euthanizing them if that's their wish or the wish of their caretaker. You seem to be arguing under the premise that I'm for forced abortions rather than leaving it up to the choice of the mother. If we were to make this analogous to elderly people who couldn't make their own decisions then my stance is entirely consistent. Why would me being in favor of a woman's right to choose equate to me wanting to euthanize every non viable person against their families wishes?

I mean unwilling in terms of pregnancy. Consent to sex is not consent to pregnancy.

God is all for child massacres. Have you ever read the Bible? 😆

Oh so there it is. If the "caretaker" wants to off grandpa that's okay too. All righty then.

Your secular hell, not mine.
 
No it's not the same argument. My antibiotics aren't being siphoned from an unwilling human being.

1. What do you mean "siphoned"? Pregnancy can be delicate for some women but it also offers some lifetime protections. Did you know that? Lowers your risk for certain cancers. Etc.

2. How is the mother "unwilling"? Was she actually forcibly raped? If not, she's willing. Take the action, accept the consequence.
 
Oh so there it is. If the "caretaker" wants to off grandpa that's okay too. All righty then.

Your secular hell, not mine.
That's exactly how it is now you moron. My uncle had a stroke 3 weeks ago, then an aneurysm. 2 weeks ago my aunt decided to take him off oxygen, pump him full of morphine and let him pass peacefully. It's the line of viability. Im not suggesting you get to murder grandpa because he twisted his ankle.
1. What do you mean "siphoned"? Pregnancy can be delicate for some women but it also offers some lifetime protections. Did you know that? Lowers your risk for certain cancers. Etc.
It also carries with it risks and changes to your body.
2. How is the mother "unwilling"? Was she actually forcibly raped? If not, she's willing. Take the action, accept the consequence.
Terminating unwanted pregnancies is taking action.
 
That's exactly how it is now you moron. My uncle had a stroke 3 weeks ago, then an aneurysm. 2 weeks ago my aunt decided to take him off oxygen, pump him full of morphine and let him pass peacefully. It's the line of viability. Im not suggesting you get to murder grandpa because he twisted his ankle.

It also carries with it risks and changes to your body.

Terminating unwanted pregnancies is taking action.

A baby, left alone in the womb, will develop normally and be able to survive outside the womb.

This is a huge difference. A mother who kills her baby "aborts" the process. There was no "aborting" with your uncle. I'm sure he was never going to get better, sadly.
 
A baby, left alone in the womb, will develop normally and be able to survive outside the womb.

This is a huge difference. A mother who kills her baby "aborts" the process. There was no "aborting" with your uncle. I'm sure he was never going to get better, sadly.
My point was that non viable people don't get to make choices, their caregivers do.
 
Plenty of us willing to provide transportation for women to exercise autonomy over their own bodies
Precisely. Please educate the morons on your side thinking their "rights" were taken away. Abortion will still be accessible in this country. In fact it will still be very convenient to get an abortion depending on what the people of your state voted for. Imagine that, the SCOTUS put the decision back to the people on a hotly debated topic.
 
Not comparable. Your uncle as a comparison is not like a fetus.
Your "not uh" is not a very convincing argument. They are both alike in that they require the assistance of others for life and the people responsible for that assistance should have the autonomy in deciding what that assistance should look like.

How about your argument for compulsory nurturing outside the womb? Should parents be obligated to donate organs and blood if their children require them?
 
No one's choice is the same as a fertile female. No one else decides that they will bring a life into existence or not only for it to finally die.
We do make decisions that result in the death of people living, acting, consciously going about a life already in process.
 

Forum List

Back
Top