Pro-life at 51%

[Shogun]

So it's a woman's fault if they trust a man but not a man's fault for being untrustworthy?

She was speaking about getting so caught up in things that you just can't say 'no', therefore you have to have the ability to do away with the consequences should there be any. Why is it okay for the female to get so caught up in things that it totally takes priority over everything, inclusing the risk of getting pregnant. But, now you're saying that the guy is untrustworthy if he is equally caught up in the moment and doesn't pull out? Hypocrisy much? It's YOUR body, as I've heard ad nauseum, you are responsible for what you put into it and how you allow it to get there, but now you want to conveniently shift all the responibility to the guy? Are you ever responsible for anything?

Once again, where have I shifted "ALL" the responsibility to the guy? I made one ******* comment on a very common occurrence. ONE. When a guy says "I'll pull out" and at 180 pounds is on top of a woman weighing 115 pounds, it's kinda hard to start SHOVING HIS FAT ASS OFF when it becomes obvious he has no intention of pulling out.

It ain't rocket science. (But it IS the weight of gravity compounded by the frenzy of the moment.)

ahh.. the ole "i'm a helpless little girl someone protect me" routine..


gotcha.

 

[Shogun]

caveat emptor. chances are, if you are ******* "spontaneously" in the restroom stall of a night club irresponsibly then perhaps, and I know this is a giant shocker, your own poor choices have resulted in a path that you can't blame on a pair of testicles.

If the guy who promised to pull out in the night club toilet stall, doesn't and the woman gets pregnant, will he also be half pregnant and have a say in if she can abort or not?

How does that scenario fit into the Great Shogum Compromise?

Well I was hardly referring to restroom stall quickies. That was Shogun's own version, typically laced with his pornographic imagination.

and yet you just mentioned "slurping up the afterbirth"... yea.. you should probably cry about language...

 

[MaggieMae]

And when you can no longer address the issue, you personally attack. Because I don't see any evidence to back up your statements there.

You think women who belong to religous cults and are FORCED to father children by the so-called "prophet" aren't doing so against their will? I can cite many examples, kiddo. And the "choice" to have sex or not is quite often NOT up to the woman. I could even tell you a few horror stories about having to put up with my drunken husband who demanded sex from me, which, if I turned him down would result in even worse consequences--like broken bones. Fortunately, I used birth control which he didn't know about. Being the good Catholic he was, raping his wife was his right and if a child was the result, he had the Pope on his side.

You need to re-think your ranting nonsense, at least on those two issues.

You need to quit thinking that if people don't think like you do, they need to be "corrected" or are out of their minds.

I didn't hear anyone step forward to say they were "forced" to have children when the state inappropriately stormed the FDLS compound, took dozens of women and children, gave them pelvic exams (against their will) and then dumped them back together when they were unable to find anyone who would claim they were being or had been "abused".

Of course...the REASON that took place was because a mentally ill person who had a record of attempting to set people up in such a manner made ridiculous claims.....which were found to be untrue and unwarranted in any way.

Once again, have you any evidence of hordes of women being "forced" to carry children against their will?

Do try to keep up, or at least read more than just the headlines:


Texas report: Kids in sect suffered neglect, abuse
By MICHELLE ROBERTS
Associated Press Writer
December 24, 2008

SAN ANTONIO —
A dozen girls were sexually abused at a polygamist group's ranch targeted in a high-profile raid last spring, and parents neglected more than 250 other children living there by doing nothing to protect them from becoming future victims, Texas child welfare officials said in a report released Tuesday.

The Department of Family and Protective Services concluded there was evidence that 12 girls, ages 12 to 15, were "spiritually" married to adult men in the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, which runs the Yearning For Zion Ranch in Eldorado. Seven of them had one or more children, the report said.

An additional 262 children were listed as neglected because the agency said their parents knew there was sexual abuse in the household but did not move to protect the children from possible abuse.

The report, which summarizes the investigations done on all 439 children at the western Texas ranch, was issued at the request of the Health and Human Services executive commissioner, a gubernatorial appointee who oversees the protective services agency.

"The Yearning for Zion case is about sexual abuse of girls and children who were taught that underage marriages are a way of life. It is about parents who condoned illegal underage marriages and adults who failed to protect young girls - it has never been about religion," the agency said.

The report, an unusual step taken to help satisfy expected questions from the state Legislature when it convenes in January, summarized individual investigations and the history of the case. The findings, though shared with law enforcement, are separate from ongoing criminal cases.

All the children from the ranch were placed in foster care in April after authorities raided it in response to calls to a domestic abuse hot line. Those calls are being investigated as a hoax, though a dozen FLDS men now face charges including sexual abuse and bigamy based on documents and evidence seized at the ranch.

"We received what we believed was a bona fide abuse/neglect report. We were required by law to investigate," DFPS spokesman Patrick Crimmins said of the April raid.

The children were returned to their parents in June after the Texas Supreme Court ruled the state had overstepped in removing all the children when it only had evidence of abuse or neglect involving about a half-dozen teenage girls. Many of the children seized were boys or younger than 5.

The individual investigations, which covered 146 families, concluded that 91 families had children who were abused or neglected. Crimmins said that conclusion confirmed what investigators initially suspected - that girls were being forced into underage marriages and other children were exposed to that harm.

FLDS spokesman Willie Jessop disputed the findings.

"The department has made many allegations that it's never been able to back up, in an effort to justify their barbaric actions," he said. "They need to learn how to say we're sorry instead of trying to justify their actions."

The Health and Human Services executive commissioner, Albert Hawkins, is satisfied with the report, which includes a history of the raid and legal decisions made during the case, spokeswoman Stephanie Goodman said.

"It's easy to forget that when (child welfare authorities) arrived at the ranch, it was a very confusing situation," she said.

Since the investigations, most of the 200 parents have been through parenting classes and signed agreements promising to protect their children from alleged abusers. All but 15 of the children's cases have been dropped from court oversight because the agency believes they can be kept safe. One girl has been returned to foster care.
The FLDS, which believes polygamy brings glorification in heaven, is a breakaway sect of the Mormon church, which renounced polygamy more than a century ago.

The sect's prophet, Warren Jeffs, who is among the 12 men charged in Texas, was convicted in Utah as an accomplice to rape and awaits trial in Arizona on other charges related to the marriages of the sect girls there.

---

On the Net:

Department of Family and Protective Services' Eldorado page: DFPS - Eldorado Information

 

[MaggieMae]

spontaneity isn't an excuse for irresponsibility. Funny how you are the first to leap to excuses, eh? And, in regards to the looming reality of illegal abortions I guess you'll have to readjust your thinking the next time you are in a club bathroom, bent over for some guy that just bought you a drink.

Indeed, I've had lots of sex. How funny it is that your sole rebuttal seems to be insisting that you are the only person to ever have fucked someone!

And, my partners have never had a problem with ******* a concerned, responsible person. I'd hate to see what kind of festering bacteria pot your vag is given the kind of herpe-inviting stance you enjoy taking.

Indeed, when it comes to the potential killing of a human being there should be no margin of error. Apparently, you'd also think our laws against drunk driving are too fascist too! Seriously, if your sexuality is reflected in your failed "you have never had sex' arguement then I makes sense why you'd need to facilitate your self esteem with your ass. Unfortunately for you, 51% and counting disagree with your logic and your cesspool method.

I'll wager I'm a much classier person than you are on the topic of, personal decisions regarding, or in fact performance during, sex. You, on the other hand, have just proven yourself to be nothing more than a holier-than-thou pig.

Just for your, er ******* edification, here are ALL the polls going back a couple of years. There's only ONE that shows a 51% approval rating. Surprise, surprise, even FOX's numbers aren't that high.

Abortion

CLEARLY you are not. And, given how many times you've insisted that myself and others are virgins you'll have to forgive me for laughing at your misplaced self righteousness.



Again, look at the trends over the last 20 years. You are not gaining ground. Feel free to stomp your foot and throw a fit.

Hey, stupid, I'm not the one throwing hissy fits and talking like an adolescent fratboy to make a point. That would be you.

 

[AllieBaba]

Every one was returned but one.

I wonder if you took a random sampling of 200 in any town if they would fare so well?

 

[MaggieMae]

Are you PMS ing?

It's the way it talks. Read some of its other postings. Unfucking real that this asshole actually gives a sweet shit one way or the other over an aborted fetus. I get the impression he could get off by slurping up the afterbirth. Shogun, male or female, is one crude dude.

It's cute the way nooby motherfuckers react to some good ole Shogun. Listen, *****.. don't cry about my posts when you are going to react in kind. It kinda illustrates the flakeyness of your entire thread input. If you don't like the tone of my words or the mudhole that gets stomped in your ass then I suggest you discover the block user button.

slurping up the afterbirth? for real.. cry me another river. I LOVE irony.

Awwww, c'mon Sho-Off. Try to convince the rest of us that you're not getting off on this entire conversation.

 

[MaggieMae]

Every one was returned but one.

I wonder if you took a random sampling of 200 in any town if they would fare so well?

Probably not. But then that would prove you wrong (or whoever said it) that no woman is ever forced to have a baby. A ludicrous comment if ever.

 

[Shogun]

I'll wager I'm a much classier person than you are on the topic of, personal decisions regarding, or in fact performance during, sex. You, on the other hand, have just proven yourself to be nothing more than a holier-than-thou pig.

Just for your, er ******* edification, here are ALL the polls going back a couple of years. There's only ONE that shows a 51% approval rating. Surprise, surprise, even FOX's numbers aren't that high.

Abortion

CLEARLY you are not. And, given how many times you've insisted that myself and others are virgins you'll have to forgive me for laughing at your misplaced self righteousness.



Again, look at the trends over the last 20 years. You are not gaining ground. Feel free to stomp your foot and throw a fit.

Hey, stupid, I'm not the one throwing hissy fits and talking like an adolescent fratboy to make a point. That would be you.

Whatever you say, ms. SLURP UP THE AFTERBIRTH.. Hey, maybe you can deny insisting that everyone else who disagrees with you must be a virgin next!



^ this is me.. laughing at you.

 

[Shogun]

It's the way it talks. Read some of its other postings. Unfucking real that this asshole actually gives a sweet shit one way or the other over an aborted fetus. I get the impression he could get off by slurping up the afterbirth. Shogun, male or female, is one crude dude.

It's cute the way nooby motherfuckers react to some good ole Shogun. Listen, *****.. don't cry about my posts when you are going to react in kind. It kinda illustrates the flakeyness of your entire thread input. If you don't like the tone of my words or the mudhole that gets stomped in your ass then I suggest you discover the block user button.

slurping up the afterbirth? for real.. cry me another river. I LOVE irony.

Awwww, c'mon Sho-Off. Try to convince the rest of us that you're not getting off on this entire conversation.

Like I said, Noobster... try not to be so ironic when you cry foul. I'll call you on it every time. But, you'd have known that had you not decided to choke on a mouthful of the Shogun, noobilicious.

As to "getting off"... sorry.. while I do enjoy my friction inducing role around here I'm afraid you'll have to save the innuendos for your netcam.

 

[AllieBaba]

I think she may have stolen "slurp up the afterbirth" from you, Shogun....perhaps she's a fan?

 

[Shogun]

I think she may have stolen "slurp up the afterbirth" from you, Shogun....perhaps she's a fan?

Aren't they all? She's probably swooning as we speak.

 

[AllieBaba]

No doubt.

 

[Shogun]

I bet Anguille remembers HER first time with Shoggy...

 

[AllieBaba]

You mean she wasn't drunk like the others?

 

[MaggieMae]

CLEARLY you are not. And, given how many times you've insisted that myself and others are virgins you'll have to forgive me for laughing at your misplaced self righteousness.



Again, look at the trends over the last 20 years. You are not gaining ground. Feel free to stomp your foot and throw a fit.

Hey, stupid, I'm not the one throwing hissy fits and talking like an adolescent fratboy to make a point. That would be you.

Whatever you say, ms. SLURP UP THE AFTERBIRTH.. Hey, maybe you can deny insisting that everyone else who disagrees with you must be a virgin next! Since you're the one making that feeble allegation, it's up to you to prove I implied that more than once. The afterbirth comment was directed solely at your frothing depictions. I'm not surprised you've now mentioned it twice. I knew you'd like that.


^ this is me.. laughing at you.

No shit.^ Awww, now I'm gonna cry.

 

[Dr Grump]

Again, who needs to hold a sign when voting will work just as well? There is no dispute that abortions were not always legal. Thus, they can become illegal again. Save your mellodrama for teh coathanger excuses.

You could also say that you deal with murder in real life, too. That a killer doesn't subscribe to some utopian concept that killing humans beings is against the law. I don't really care how you rationalize killing babies OR murderous killers. Call it utopian. Call it a moral high ground. If you want to act like a criminal savage then the rest of society will treat you like one.

ps, reality is not defined solely by how you think it should function. Go ask the ghost of David Ben Gurion all about utopian ideas and practical solutions. I'm sure you'll switch the foot you stood on when posting that giant pile of stupid.

I don't see anything savage about first trimester abortion. My first option would be to adopt, then keep. I don't find anything savage about aborting a child in the second or third trimester if hte mother's life is at risk, or there is definitive evidence that, when born, the baby will have a severe mental disabilities...

 

[Shogun]

Hey, stupid, I'm not the one throwing hissy fits and talking like an adolescent fratboy to make a point. That would be you.

Whatever you say, ms. SLURP UP THE AFTERBIRTH.. Hey, maybe you can deny insisting that everyone else who disagrees with you must be a virgin next! Since you're the one making that feeble allegation, it's up to you to prove I implied that more than once. The afterbirth comment was directed solely at your frothing depictions. I'm not surprised you've now mentioned it twice. I knew you'd like that.


^ this is me.. laughing at you.

No shit.^ Awww, now I'm gonna cry.

Hey look! a "do as I say not as I do" ***** who thinks her own shit don't stink!

how NOVEL!

Abortion is also good for the environment. When there are more people than this planet can support we could well end up killing each other or dying of hunger. Maybe both.

Those who would have women endlessly pump out babies against their will, claiming it's because of their respect for life, only facilitate our possible extinction. It's quite perverse of them to call themselves pro life.

What women are these? Because I've never heard of someone having a baby against her will.

You make the choice when you decide the risk of getting pregnant is worth it. That's when the choice over whether or not to create life is made.

.

Omg, I think you must have (a) never even had a sexual encounter, and/or (b) still relying on mumbo jumbo printed for young girls back in the 40's.

LOOK FAMILIAR?

 

[Newby]

So it's a woman's fault if they trust a man but not a man's fault for being untrustworthy?

She was speaking about getting so caught up in things that you just can't say 'no', therefore you have to have the ability to do away with the consequences should there be any. Why is it okay for the female to get so caught up in things that it totally takes priority over everything, inclusing the risk of getting pregnant. But, now you're saying that the guy is untrustworthy if he is equally caught up in the moment and doesn't pull out? Hypocrisy much? It's YOUR body, as I've heard ad nauseum, you are responsible for what you put into it and how you allow it to get there, but now you want to conveniently shift all the responibility to the guy? Are you ever responsible for anything?

Once again, where have I shifted "ALL" the responsibility to the guy? I made one ******* comment on a very common occurrence. ONE. When a guy says "I'll pull out" and at 180 pounds is on top of a woman weighing 115 pounds, it's kinda hard to start SHOVING HIS FAT ASS OFF when it becomes obvious he has no intention of pulling out.

It ain't rocket science. (But it IS the weight of gravity compounded by the frenzy of the moment.)

Well, obviously you're very aware of the potential possibilities then whenever you take the guys word that he'll 'pull out', not to mention that any adult woman should know that's not remotely fail safe anyway. So, why would you agree to do it if that was the only method of birth control available? Again, just a total lack of repsonsibility.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Not a parasite?? Baby, they're parasites for a while after they are born.. completely reliant on the parent(s)

Those fetuses and lumps of cell tissue are things that grow into viable adult humans.... not really just lumps of tissue... big difference

The key is that the fetus, the newborn, or any other young developing human life is indeed a separate life that is completely reliant on the parent.. there is no difference.. and they are all indeed lives, just in different stages of development

Parasite is something that requires a host, so yes, technically it is a parasite. Just changing the meaning of the words doesn't make your point right. It's only genetic material, a lump of cells, until it reaches a certain stage, so it's not even a human.

It has a heartbeat. If a friend of yours were unconscious on the floor, the first thing you would look for to determine if she was ALIVE? a heartbeat.

I always love obsolete arguments like Kitten's. They serve to show how many people were out behind the boys' gym, smoking, during high school biology class.

 

[Cecilie1200]

It has a heartbeat. If a friend of yours were unconscious on the floor, the first thing you would look for to determine if she was ALIVE? a heartbeat.

Again, wrong premise.

I have a heartbeat too. Who has greater rights? Me or an unborn potential human?

This isn't about visceral response. It's about when is governmental action appropriate.

Well, since we seem to decide "who has greater rights" based solely on personal opinion, I'm going with the unborn human. As for "potential human", I consider that to describe YOU much more accurately than it does him. Believe me, if I were you, I wouldn't be encouraging anyone to terminate life based on the fact that it's worthless to other people, because you'd be in a whole world of trouble.