If you're willing to kill unborn babies, you're willing to do anything...

[Syriusly]

The right to lifers are at it again pretending they care about the unborn. Now the already born? They could care less and when a piece of shit like trump kicks kids off of food stamps and tries to get rid of programs like ACA that helps millions of kids? So what. Get over it. Or like when he separated kids from their parents at the border and many of them haven't been reunited? So what. The 401 k's of his base are doing great and no, Obama didn't separate kids from parents unless it was necessary like when the parent was a felon.

Please explain how the rights of children in the womb are (apparently in your view) contingent upon how we care for those who have somehow avoided being aborted.

What 'children in the womb' are you talking about?

When a woman is pregnant she is carrying potential life. She may end up giving birth to a baby- she may not.

I say that the rights of the living, legal human being who is pregnant trumps the non-existing rights of potential life within her.

 

[Lakhota]

 

[Chuz Life]

At the very least, that video shows child indoctrination. I think to the point of abuse.

There is nothing funny about using children as political tools. Especially when the message is such and obvious biological and even a religious lie.

If "god" actually thought that every sperm was sacred. . . Why would he make it so that millions are wasted in an attempt for only one to reach the egg and fertilize it?

Your post is a fail, except for the fact that I am able to use it to maybe show how idiotic your thinking really is.

 

[Chuz Life]

More biology fail.

Noted.

 

[Chuz Life]

The right to lifers are at it again pretending they care about the unborn. Now the already born? They could care less and when a piece of shit like trump kicks kids off of food stamps and tries to get rid of programs like ACA that helps millions of kids? So what. Get over it. Or like when he separated kids from their parents at the border and many of them haven't been reunited? So what. The 401 k's of his base are doing great and no, Obama didn't separate kids from parents unless it was necessary like when the parent was a felon.

Please explain how the rights of children in the womb are (apparently in your view) contingent upon how we care for those who have somehow avoided being aborted.

What 'children in the womb' are you talking about?

When a woman is pregnant she is carrying potential life. She may end up giving birth to a baby- she may not.

I say that the rights of the living, legal human being who is pregnant trumps the non-existing rights of potential life within her.

I love "physics."

Fascinating stuff.

Care to explain how a mere "potential" human organism can actually physically exist but at the same time only be a "potential" human organism? How can they physically exist and (according to you) not exist or only "potentially" exist. . . at the same time?

Please give specific details about how that is physically possible.

 

[Syriusly]

The right to lifers are at it again pretending they care about the unborn. Now the already born? They could care less and when a piece of shit like trump kicks kids off of food stamps and tries to get rid of programs like ACA that helps millions of kids? So what. Get over it. Or like when he separated kids from their parents at the border and many of them haven't been reunited? So what. The 401 k's of his base are doing great and no, Obama didn't separate kids from parents unless it was necessary like when the parent was a felon.

Please explain how the rights of children in the womb are (apparently in your view) contingent upon how we care for those who have somehow avoided being aborted.

What 'children in the womb' are you talking about?

When a woman is pregnant she is carrying potential life. She may end up giving birth to a baby- she may not.

I say that the rights of the living, legal human being who is pregnant trumps the non-existing rights of potential life within her.

I love "physics."

Fascinating stuff.

Care to explain how a mere "potential" human organism can actually physically exist but at the same time only be a "potential" human organism at the same time?

Please give specific details about how that is physically possible.

Frankly I don't get your question. It isn't a matter of physics- its biology.

You think that that little smidge of cells that exists as soon as egg merges with sperm and becomes a zygote is a human being.
I don't.

The fact is that a huge percentage of fertilized eggs- what you would call human beings- never are born and become children. Most of the time women don't even know it happened.

I happen to think that a woman who is pregnant is absolutely both legally and demonstrably a human being. And that the cells within her have the potential to become a human being.

And that the woman should control her own body- and decide whether to risk her health or not by attempting to grow and give birth to a human child.

Not me, not you, not a bunch of old guys who are happy to tell women what they should be doing- the woman who is going through it.

 

[Chuz Life]

The right to lifers are at it again pretending they care about the unborn. Now the already born? They could care less and when a piece of shit like trump kicks kids off of food stamps and tries to get rid of programs like ACA that helps millions of kids? So what. Get over it. Or like when he separated kids from their parents at the border and many of them haven't been reunited? So what. The 401 k's of his base are doing great and no, Obama didn't separate kids from parents unless it was necessary like when the parent was a felon.

Please explain how the rights of children in the womb are (apparently in your view) contingent upon how we care for those who have somehow avoided being aborted.

What 'children in the womb' are you talking about?

When a woman is pregnant she is carrying potential life. She may end up giving birth to a baby- she may not.

I say that the rights of the living, legal human being who is pregnant trumps the non-existing rights of potential life within her.

I love "physics."

Fascinating stuff.

Care to explain how a mere "potential" human organism can actually physically exist but at the same time only be a "potential" human organism at the same time?

Please give specific details about how that is physically possible.

Frankly I don't get your question. It isn't a matter of physics- its biology.

You think that that little smidge of cells that exists as soon as egg merges with sperm and becomes a zygote is a human being.
I don't.

The fact is that a huge percentage of fertilized eggs- what you would call human beings- never are born and become children. Most of the time women don't even know it happened.

I happen to think that a woman who is pregnant is absolutely both legally and demonstrably a human being. And that the cells within her have the potential to become a human being.

And that the woman should control her own body- and decide whether to risk her health or not by attempting to grow and give birth to a human child.

Not me, not you, not a bunch of old guys who are happy to tell women what they should be doing- the woman who is going through it.

You have the right to be wrong and ignorant. . . I suppose. However, you do not have the right to expect others to share in your ignorance.

You really should question your own conclusions about the life cycle of mammals (including humans.)

What you are trying to claim without saying the word is that human beings somehow magically morph out of something less than a human organism. . . And that is not physically or biologically the case.

Your "biological father" is not your biological father because he contributed some cells to a blob that only eventually became you.

The DNA of the living cells proves that he was your biological parent. . . Even at your very first cell division.

Do you deny that YOU were biologically conceived?

 

[GreenAndBlue]

The right to lifers are at it again pretending they care about the unborn. Now the already born? They could care less and when a piece of shit like trump kicks kids off of food stamps and tries to get rid of programs like ACA that helps millions of kids? So what. Get over it. Or like when he separated kids from their parents at the border and many of them haven't been reunited? So what. The 401 k's of his base are doing great and no, Obama didn't separate kids from parents unless it was necessary like when the parent was a felon.

Help everybody understand your comments. Are you or are you not saying that it is okay for YOU and others to deny basic human rights to children in the womb. . . . Just because you don't think those opposed to abortions are doing enough for all the other children you described?

Please explain how the rights of children in the womb are (apparently in your view) contingent upon how we care for those who have somehow avoided being aborted.

Yep
The explaining is showing how stoopid that person is

 

[Chuz Life]

The right to lifers are at it again pretending they care about the unborn. Now the already born? They could care less and when a piece of shit like trump kicks kids off of food stamps and tries to get rid of programs like ACA that helps millions of kids? So what. Get over it. Or like when he separated kids from their parents at the border and many of them haven't been reunited? So what. The 401 k's of his base are doing great and no, Obama didn't separate kids from parents unless it was necessary like when the parent was a felon.

Help everybody understand your comments. Are you or are you not saying that it is okay for YOU and others to deny basic human rights to children in the womb. . . . Just because you don't think those opposed to abortions are doing enough for all the other children you described?

Please explain how the rights of children in the womb are (apparently in your view) contingent upon how we care for those who have somehow avoided being aborted.

Yep
The explaining is showing how stoopid that person is

Notice how they go into total silence when you press them for answers to hard questions?

 

[GreenAndBlue]

The right to lifers are at it again pretending they care about the unborn. Now the already born? They could care less and when a piece of shit like trump kicks kids off of food stamps and tries to get rid of programs like ACA that helps millions of kids? So what. Get over it. Or like when he separated kids from their parents at the border and many of them haven't been reunited? So what. The 401 k's of his base are doing great and no, Obama didn't separate kids from parents unless it was necessary like when the parent was a felon.

Help everybody understand your comments. Are you or are you not saying that it is okay for YOU and others to deny basic human rights to children in the womb. . . . Just because you don't think those opposed to abortions are doing enough for all the other children you described?

Please explain how the rights of children in the womb are (apparently in your view) contingent upon how we care for those who have somehow avoided being aborted.

Yep
The explaining is showing how stoopid that person is

Notice how they go into total silence when you press them for answers to hard questions?

Exactly

And it’s science itself that has proven this as mass murder of us babies

Which then proves educators are noting but crooks and liars that now covers up science

 

[Chuz Life]

The right to lifers are at it again pretending they care about the unborn. Now the already born? They could care less and when a piece of shit like trump kicks kids off of food stamps and tries to get rid of programs like ACA that helps millions of kids? So what. Get over it. Or like when he separated kids from their parents at the border and many of them haven't been reunited? So what. The 401 k's of his base are doing great and no, Obama didn't separate kids from parents unless it was necessary like when the parent was a felon.

Help everybody understand your comments. Are you or are you not saying that it is okay for YOU and others to deny basic human rights to children in the womb. . . . Just because you don't think those opposed to abortions are doing enough for all the other children you described?

Please explain how the rights of children in the womb are (apparently in your view) contingent upon how we care for those who have somehow avoided being aborted.

Yep
The explaining is showing how stoopid that person is

Notice how they go into total silence when you press them for answers to hard questions?

Exactly

And it’s science itself that has proven this as mass murder of us babies

Which then proves educators are noting but crooks and liars that now covers up science

It's such a simple thing to appreciate and understand, once the mental blocks are removed and there is no more pretense or bias.

 

[GreenAndBlue]

When one thing is proved ... it becomes like a dominoes falling one by one fast


Science proves the fetus has its own dna so it has a name

It’s name is it’s dna code

So science proves this and that domino falls to prove something else

Then proves educators are crooked to the core

And media


Then that proves what they support are the harm to America. Which is liberalism

What we see now is many dominoes gonna fall to totally stop liberalism world wide

The very weak gdp scores that liberal nations have is another big falling domino

Then the domino falls to show who elects the crooks

Women

And then the men will bring a logic test for voting to stop the unwise from voting in liberal harm

Nothing now can stop this coming result ... too many wise and too many men now KNOWS !!

 

[Chuz Life]

When one thing is proved ... it becomes like a dominoes falling one by one fast


Science proves the fetus has its own dna so it has a name

It’s name is it’s dna code

So science proves this and that domino falls to prove something else

Then proves educators are crooked to the core

And media


Then that proves what they support are the harm to America. Which is liberalism

What we see now is many dominoes gonna fall to totally stop liberalism world wide

The very weak gdp scores that liberal nations have is another big falling domino

Then the domino falls to show who elects the crooks

Women

And then the men will bring a logic test for voting to stop the unwise from voting in liberal harm

Nothing now can stop this coming result ... too many wise and too many men now KNOWS !!

Please don't dismiss the multitude of women who see abortion for the crime against humanity that it is too. Many of whom have suffered the painful realization of what an abortion really is, first hand.

 

[Lakhota]

 

[Chuz Life]

Your phony claims about your concern for children born would be much more convincing, if you weren't so dismissive of their rights and lives before they somehow survived your denials about them, while they were still in the womb.

 

[Montrovant]

Tell all the guys that...! Then no girl would get pregnant out of wedlock....and then abortion would not be an issue...

Not a guys RESPONSIBILITY UNTIL he can give birth....stupid women do stupid things!

Tubal ligation should work for women 99.999% Of the time!....Cheaper and easier than continual abortions!

Wait, men aren't responsible for women getting pregnant?

No asshole, women are responsible unless you are a guy giving birth. Keeping you legs together has the effect, unless raped of stopping pregnancy....too bad you never learned that!

Well, I hate to break it to you, but women don't get pregnant spontaneously...it takes a man, too...too bad you never learned that!

You know what also stops pregnancy? A guy keeping it in his pants. But it's only the responsibility of the woman, according to you. Got it.

You ever hear of in vitro fertilization?....asshole!...all LESBIANS LOVE IT...YOU SHOULD TOO!...ROTFLMFAO!

In vitro fertilization is for women who are trying to get pregnant. Weren't we discussing what people should do to avoid pregnancy, and who bears responsibility when a woman does get pregnant?

But go on, do tell how lesbians making use of in vitro fertilization is an important point when it comes to men not being responsible for getting a woman pregnant through sexual intercourse.

Or perhaps your point was that men are not necessary for in vitro fertilization. If that is the case, I hate to have to tell you this, but the process still requires sperm.

 

[Chuz Life]

Not a guys RESPONSIBILITY UNTIL he can give birth....stupid women do stupid things!

Tubal ligation should work for women 99.999% Of the time!....Cheaper and easier than continual abortions!

Wait, men aren't responsible for women getting pregnant?

No asshole, women are responsible unless you are a guy giving birth. Keeping you legs together has the effect, unless raped of stopping pregnancy....too bad you never learned that!

Well, I hate to break it to you, but women don't get pregnant spontaneously...it takes a man, too...too bad you never learned that!

You know what also stops pregnancy? A guy keeping it in his pants. But it's only the responsibility of the woman, according to you. Got it.

You ever hear of in vitro fertilization?....asshole!...all LESBIANS LOVE IT...YOU SHOULD TOO!...ROTFLMFAO!

In vitro fertilization is for women who are trying to get pregnant. Weren't we discussing what people should do to avoid pregnancy, and who bears responsibility when a woman does get pregnant?

But go on, do tell how lesbians making use of in vitro fertilization is an important point when it comes to men not being responsible for getting a woman pregnant through sexual intercourse.

Or perhaps your point was that men are not necessary for in vitro fertilization. If that is the case, I hate to have to tell you this, but the process still requires sperm.

I think it is worth noting that IVF offers further proof that a new child's Life begins at and by conception.

 

[JoeB131]

...you have no morals or scruples whatsoever.

Fetuses aren't babies.

50 million American women have had abortions? Are you saying they all have no morals or scruples.

 

[JoeB131]

Abortion will always be an issue until the Supreme Court finally recognizes the biological (NOT religious) fact that a child's life and basic human rights begins at and by conception.

It is scientifically inarguable that a human's life and their aging as a human organism begns at conception.

The onus is on the pro-aborts to prove why a child's rights should not begin when their life does

Well, one more time, in that debate you ran away from, once you declare civil rights for spooge, you are taking away rights from the woman it is inside.

By your logic, not only would you have to charge any woman who has an abortion with murder, but you'd have to treat every miscarriage as a homicide investigation.

"Logan, next time, you put the Crime Scene Tape around the Tampon!"

 

[JoeB131]

Here's a biology question for you Clayton. . . . .

When does a child first start to age and develop?

HINT: "when you can no longer stomach the denial of the fact that they are a child" is not an acceptable answer.

One more time.

If she wants it, it's a baby in nine months.
If she doesn't want it, it's "That thing I need to take care of on Tuesday".

Her body. Her choice. Period.