FLDS - Abortion Hypocrites

[jillian]

yup.. because a fetus at 8.5 months just isn't a human at all!




Look at this little anomaly of female genitalia! Let's hang his little demon ass now before he thinks his premature self qualifies as a human being!

That's nice... it's not a fetus at 8.5 months, though. Do get your terms straight.

Or stop being misleading...

BTW, do you think that people who are pro choice don't know what a baby looks like?

 

[AllieBaba]

If they think an unborn baby is non-human, one doubts their ability to gauge what is human, period.

 

[Shogun]

That's nice... it's not a fetus at 8.5 months, though. Do get your terms straight.

Or stop being misleading...

BTW, do you think that people who are pro choice don't know what a baby looks like?

apparently, they don't know what a prenatal HUMAN looks like.


i would imagine that premature babies make my point about a developing human regardless of wanton, bullshit standards like "it's a human after it is birthed".

Would you like to jump on that bandwagon too?

 

[Shogun]

It is a human, but it is a foetus nonetheless. That is why it is called that and not a baby. English words have meanings. Look them up in a dictionary if you are unsure of their meaning...

So, a premie FETUS just isn't a baby until it climbs out of the vagina, eh?

indeed. tell me about the meaning of words some more. Thus far, Im still the only one do post evidence of the vocab being used.

 

[Shogun]

Again, there is nothing in what you posted that attempts to prove that a fetus is a living human.

yea.. "Human Zygote" through "stages of development" sure are obscure, aren't they?

 

[Shogun]

Was it born?

Does it matter? Looks like a fetus to me!

 

[Shogun]

Ah so now its facts we are discussing?

Make up your mind, boyo.

It's always been facts. Scroll up, lil dawgie. Youll notice that one of use cites dictionaries, medical terminology and universities while the other resorts to silly 5th grade foot stomping.


please, feel free to provide as much evidence as you can.. You know, outside of (excuse me while I laugh at you) uh, think progress dot com.

 

[Shogun]

I ignored it? No, actually I already adressed it. Scroll up, genius.
Wow...it says biology.edu...that means it must be right.
If you judge accuracy by the website address, that might explain some of your problems.

As opposed to your stupid ******* pretzel logic? Indeed, it's easily more solid than ANYTHING you've posted thus far.




I mean, the rest of us may not be brilliant enough to find facts from polls at liberal blogs but, hey...

 

[Larkinn]

It's always been facts. Scroll up, lil dawgie. Youll notice that one of use cites dictionaries, medical terminology and universities while the other resorts to silly 5th grade foot stomping.

Wow, are you still on that?

I destroyed that cite. Its not from a university, its from a student pro-life group. The very definition of unbiased scientists.

If thats where you get your facts from, that explains a whole hell of a lot.

please, feel free to provide as much evidence as you can.. You know, outside of (excuse me while I laugh at you) uh, think progress dot com.

Well I already corrected you once, so know I guess you are just lying. I never posted anything from ThinkProgress. But do keep on with the bullshit.

As opposed to your stupid ******* pretzel logic? Indeed, it's easily more solid than ANYTHING you've posted thus far.

Something from a pro-life group isn't "solid". At least if your going to post bullshit opinions don't steal them from someone else, post your own.

I mean, the rest of us may not be brilliant enough to find facts from polls at liberal blogs but, hey...

Again with the lie. Is this going to become a pattern with you? By the way, you are "brilliant" enough to find "facts" from pro-life groups as pretend they are from scientists.

Next want to tell us all again how a zygote BECOMES human?

 

[Shogun]

No, actually, Roe v. Wade is a legal fact. As opposed to your bullshit opinion about what might happen in the future.

Indeed, for 30/200+ years it has been precedent... But it's not a law as you assumed earlier. And, about as impressive a any other legal fad that passes through. After all, I probably CAN'T name about a half a dozed temporary legal precedents that become invalid through legislation.





And whether its a human or not is NOT a fact.



says you. MY medical sources say otherwise. Now, did you have something to post as evidence or shall i keep bludgeoning you about the head and neck with more dot edu's and links to medical jargon?


Yeah, thats what I thought, *****. No response to the facts, just insults.


yea.. facts like how you just ADMITTED it was human.

Here, *****. your own words:


Of course it says human, we are talking about the children of HUMANS. Of course human is going to be mentioned, what do you think the mother is, a poodle?

I made the text pink to reflect the person who made the statement.




LMFAO. They are the same thing, moron.

No, they really aren't the same thing. Feel free to post the legislation that was passed to reflect the law or RvW. Or, give me one more thing in this brimming ******* plethora of hilarity to laugh at.





Whose talking about our nations history? And I haven't posted anything from Thing Progress. Your OPINION about history is meaningless. Current law is. Get used to it.


Again, RvW isn't law. It wasn't passed by anyone. No one voted on it. And, to be sure, it sure as **** isn't a settled issue. This may mean a lot in larkin's lil world but out here where grown ups ponder deeper thoughts it's pretty relevant.

And, given the wide support for the pro-life movement, you might just find yourself REAL pissed off within the next decade.





LMAO...again you are basing something on whether its a fact or opinion based on the internet address. You are aware that most universities allow individuals to set up private pages with the .edu ending, right?


No, Im pouring salt in your gash by mentioning the urls. If you had the balls to click the linky linky...


After all, you have taken each link to find out that they were, in fact, private pages using .edu's didn't you! Nope, Im pretty sure you didn't do that. Confronting reality has never been your strong suit.




Pwned, *****. Man this is easy. At least make it hard for ***** sake.


HA!

YOU saying pwned is like a midget claiming he can slam dunk a basketball. Im sure having to avoid posting your own evidence IS easy.

go ahead and say pwned a few more times, dude. You might actually believe it after a while.

 

[Shogun]

By the way...that .edu site you keep babbling about as an unrefutable scientific source?

http://www.princeton.edu/~prolife/

Thats their main page. Its a pro-life advocacy student group at Princeton



As I said, opinion. Oh, but its from a .edu site, so its must be fact

As I said, pwned *****.

Oh..

so advocacy groups can't collect relevant info? Thank goodness you wasn't playing that tune after posting a link to think progress!




But hey, I'm so solid that i'll even nix that one, just for you, and return to bitchslapping you with the rest of em. Kinda sucks not being able to post your own evidence, eh? I mean, since a HUMAN zygote not being HUMAN really is a contested issue in obstetrics.

 

[Shogun]

If they think an unborn baby is non-human, one doubts their ability to gauge what is human, period.

meh.. for people like larkin it's more of a matter of defending a personal "liberal" identity rather than comprehending factual variables. He probably got a hand job at a feminist rally and has been foaming at the mouth ever since.

What is truly hilarious is that, for all the naysayers throwing out words like "pwn" none of them, not a single ******* one, has posted evidence to back up their opinons outside of strawmen and shit talking. Now, I don't mind the shit talking since it's fun and I obviously have the upper hand. But, I only wish I could have seen larkin in a debate class or giving a biology presentation. It would be the kind of shit that millions of people enjoy on collegehumor.com.

 

[Ravi]

No offense, Shog, but you couldn't ***** slap a balloon.

 

[Shogun]

here.. see how THIS feels on your cheek...



The Unborn Victims of Violence Act of 2004 (Public Law 108-212) is a United States law which recognizes a "child in utero" as a legal victim, if he or she is injured or killed during the commission of any of over 60 listed federal crimes of violence. The law defines "child in utero" as "a member of the species homo sapiens, at any stage of development, who is carried in the womb."[2]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unborn_Victims_of_Violence_Act


The operative portion of the law, now codified as Title 18, Section 1841 of the United States Code, reads as follows:

Sec. 1841. Protection of unborn children

(a) (1) Whoever engages in conduct that violates any of the provisions of law listed in subsection (b) and thereby causes the death of, or bodily injury (as defined in section 1365) to, a child, who is in utero at the time the conduct takes place, is guilty of a separate offense under this section.

(d) As used in this section, the term “unborn child” means a child in utero, and the term “child in utero” or “child, who is in utero” means a member of the species homo sapiens, at any stage of development, who is carried in the womb.


step 1: pack the supreme court

step 2: create some LAWS (not just scotus rulings) that set our own precedent.

step 3:

 

[Shogun]

The Senate passed the bill with a 61-38 vote and denied a pivotal amendment considered for the bill. The amendment, which was introduced by Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), would have imposed tougher penalties for injuring or killing a pregnant woman and her fetus but would classify such attacks as a single-victim crime, avoiding the recognition of the fetus as a separate person and the question of when a fetus attains personhood. This alternative measure was rejected by a 50-49 vote.





http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3693/is_200405/ai_n9367499

 

[Shogun]

# United States: A February 2007 CBS News poll about abortion in the U.S. asked, "What is your personal feeling about abortion?", and 30% said that it should be "permitted only in cases such as rape, incest or to save the woman's life", 31% said that abortion should be "permitted in all cases", 16% that it should be "permitted, but subject to greater restrictions than it is now", 12% said that it should "only be permitted to save the woman's life", and 5% said that it should "never" be permitted.[11]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Societal_attitudes_towards_abortion#North_.26_Central_America

so,

31% - In all cases

vs.

30% - rape, incest, save a womans life
16% - greater restrictions
12% - ONLY to save a womans life
5% - never







31% vs 63%


yea, i'd say the pendulum is swinging your way.

 

[Larkinn]

Indeed, for 30/200+ years it has been precedent... But it's not a law as you assumed earlier. And, about as impressive a any other legal fad that passes through. After all, I probably CAN'T name about a half a dozed temporary legal precedents that become invalid through legislation.

Actually it IS law. I didn't assume it, I stated a fact. Roe v. Wade interprets the Constitution of the United States which is not exactly a legal fad. And no, you can't name ANY Constitutional rights that have been taken away through legislation, because there haven't been any.

I suggest you steer the issue away from the law, at least then you have half a chance in hell.

says you. MY medical sources say otherwise. Now, did you have something to post as evidence or shall i keep bludgeoning you about the head and neck with more dot edu's and links to medical jargon?

Yes, do keep posting advocacy groups. Thats so scientific.

yea.. facts like how you just ADMITTED it was human.

Here, *****. your own words:


Of course it says human, we are talking about the children of HUMANS. Of course human is going to be mentioned, what do you think the mother is, a poodle?

I made the text pink to reflect the person who made the statement.

Wow, are you really this stupid? Can you read? Where exactly do I say that a fetus is a human?

No, they really aren't the same thing. Feel free to post the legislation that was passed to reflect the law or RvW. Or, give me one more thing in this brimming ******* plethora of hilarity to laugh at.

The Constitution IS the law. Roe v. Wade is an interpretation of the Constitution.

Again, RvW isn't law. It wasn't passed by anyone. No one voted on it. And, to be sure, it sure as **** isn't a settled issue. This may mean a lot in larkin's lil world but out here where grown ups ponder deeper thoughts it's pretty relevant.

What the USSC says is law, is law. It was an interpretation of the Constitution, which is the law of the land. If you don't think the Constutiton is law, theres pretty much no hope for you.

Its not settled? Oh wait thats the woosh of your unsubstantiated bullshit opinion. Useless. Actually less than useless in a weird bizarro world where Roe v. Wade somehow isn't law.

And, given the wide support for the pro-life movement, you might just find yourself REAL pissed off within the next decade.

Wide support? You mean the minority of Americans?

No, Im pouring salt in your gash by mentioning the urls. If you had the balls to click the linky linky...

Keep mentioning it, its really quite hilarious that you give me such obvious setups.

After all, you have taken each link to find out that they were, in fact, private pages using .edu's didn't you! Nope, Im pretty sure you didn't do that. Confronting reality has never been your strong suit.

Your "pretty sure I didn't do that". Did perhaps the part where I posted the mission statement of one of your urls escape your feeble gaze? Like pretty much everything else of worth it seems to have escaped you.

YOU saying pwned is like a midget claiming he can slam dunk a basketball. Im sure having to avoid posting your own evidence IS easy.

go ahead and say pwned a few more times, dude. You might actually believe it after a while.

Aww little baby. Keep claiming Roe v. Wade isn't the law. This is fun.

 

[Larkinn]

Oh..

so advocacy groups can't collect relevant info? Thank goodness you wasn't playing that tune after posting a link to think progress!

Oh, I thought you were posting facts from universities. Now you admit that you are just posting shit from advocacy groups? Well good to know you've admitted at least one failing.

By the way, since you seem to be mentally ill, I will make this very clear to you.

I NEVER POSTED ANYTHING FROM THINK PROGRESS.

You've told that lie 3 or 4 times now. I know your bit slow, but even you should be able to get that.

But hey, I'm so solid that i'll even nix that one, just for you, and return to bitchslapping you with the rest of em. Kinda sucks not being able to post your own evidence, eh? I mean, since a HUMAN zygote not being HUMAN really is a contested issue in obstetrics.

I don't need too. Frankly I think tearing you a new asshole just by destroying the bullshit you are putting out here destroys any shred of credibility you might have had without me posting any evidence.

step 1: pack the supreme court

step 2: create some LAWS (not just scotus rulings) that set our own precedent.

step 3

You might want to study some basic stuff like, oh I don't know, how the US government works before deciding how to get your little agenda passed.

meh.. for people like larkin it's more of a matter of defending a personal "liberal" identity rather than comprehending factual variables. He probably got a hand job at a feminist rally and has been foaming at the mouth ever since.

Actually its a matter of destroying obviously fallacious and just really pathetic arguments like the ones you've posted. I'm undecided on abortion because honestly I don't know if its a child or not. But this retarded bullshit that you've posted about it being a fact that its a child, about Roe V. Wade not being law, and this crap about posting from "universities" is some of the stupidest shit I've ever heard.

 

[Dr Grump]

So, a premie FETUS just isn't a baby until it climbs out of the vagina, eh.

You got it... Well done Shoggie! You might have actually learned something!

 

[Shogun]

I thoroughly disagree and find your opinion simply illogical. A premature baby is still a baby weather five minutes OUT of the vag or five minutes UNTIL jettison. It truly is ridiculous that you go to this length to validate open hunting in a no kill limit Fetus hunting season.



Larkin, did it take you a day to catch your breath? I wish that I gave a damn about laughing at you more in this thread but I just don't. Turning you into a court jester like Bruce Banner's angry alter ego only entertains for so long.