What's new
US Message Board 🦅 Political Discussion Forum

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Roe v. Wade getting overturned!!

NotfooledbyW

Gold Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2014
Messages
19,619
Reaction score
3,549
Points
245
ding220810-#4,620 “Which is apparently the only reason you deny that after fertilization a new, genetically distinct human has come alive. Abortion is intended to kill that life.”

NFBW220810-#4,622 My support for a woman to be able to choose to continue or end a pregnancy is based on my secular humanist respect for women as equals to men and no respect for what some Christians opine that sacred life begins at conception. I believe sacred life begins at viability and it should not be a matter that is to be determined by expecting politicians to vote on it. That is the most absurd idea I have ever heard. END2208110026

NFBW220811-#4,623 Ending the life of a nonviable human being that has never had a conscious thought and is fully Incapable of oxygenating its own blood is not murder or inhuman or immoral or a violation of a non-existent unborn right. Am I clear ???????

ding220811-#4,624 But the reason you deny the science that a new genetically distinct human being comes alive after fertilization is because it's easier for you to dismiss their death and right to life if you don't see them as human beings.
You want to play king. Women should acknowledge that they understand that getting an abortion is literally ending the life of a new, living, genetically distinct human being; one that has never existed before and will never exist again. Your minimizing the consequences of abortion does no one any favors. It's dishonest and ghoulish.

NFBW: ding knew my point on murder back in August. He is hard up for distraction to not know I argued that abortion was murder when a fetus reached viability at 22 weeks. If a woman does not choose to abort by a viability date then she needs a medical resson such as her life is in danger.

ding220814-#4,808 So just to be clear, you believe abortion is murder 1 day after your so called "viability" date. What is it called 1 day prior to your so called "viability" date when the human life is killed?

NFBW: We can’t trust anything ding writes to be honest - he is throwing crap at the wall after engaging a little.

END2221300200
 
Last edited:

beagle9

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 28, 2011
Messages
35,752
Reaction score
11,612
Points
1,400
Correct - homicide of the innocent is utterly indefensible. His task is impossible, so like most pro-aborts he flails and fumbles at a hopeless cause.
Yep, and we've seen the horrid pictures of little babies that have been ripped from their mother's wombs, otherwise that were healthy developing little babies/human beings with all their tiny little human beings features such as their heartbeat's, eyes, ears, feet, toes, and etc, otherwise as such to be identified with, but NFBW is trying to justify somehow a so callled doctor being free to just do a monstrous thing as if we as a CIVILIZED people would always ignore that monstrous thing because of his wicked way of justifying these monstrous things. To remain CIVILIZED we must act civilized, otherwise we are not civilized. An uncivilized person attempts to justify uncivilized Acts.
 

beagle9

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 28, 2011
Messages
35,752
Reaction score
11,612
Points
1,400
ding220810-#4,620 “Which is apparently the only reason you deny that after fertilization a new, genetically distinct human has come alive. Abortion is intended to kill that life.”

NFBW220810-#4,622 My support for a woman to be able to choose to continue or end a pregnancy is based on my secular humanist respect for women as equals to men and no respect for what some Christians opine that sacred life begins at conception. I believe sacred life begins at viability and it should not be a matter that is to be determined by expecting politicians to vote in it. That is the most absurd idea I have ever heard. END2208110026

NFBW220811-#4,623 Ending the life of a nonviable human being that has never had a conscious thought and is fully Incapable of oxygenating its own blood is not murder or inhuman or immoral or a violation of a non-existent unborn right. Am I clear ???????

ding220811-#4,624 But the reason you deny the science that a new genetically distinct human being comes alive after fertilization is because it's easier for you to dismiss their death and right to life if you don't see them as human beings.
You want to play king. Women should acknowledge that they understand that getting an abortion is literally ending the life of a new, living, genetically distinct human being; one that has never existed before and will never exist again. Your minimizing the consequences of abortion does no one any favors. It's dishonest and ghoulish.
I like how you placed ding's words at the end of your post, otherwise maybe in hopes that after someone read them they would accidentally give a thumbs up to the post as if it were ding's post somehow by mistake ????

After reading those words at the end, one might forget that it was your post that was posted because of the long words written by ding you stuck at the end. Is this some form of posting trickery that you use, otherwise by posting the way that you do ?? How does ding's words get posted in the context or positioning that you posted them without your response coming next ?? Shouldn't it be that you use the quote function to highlight what you are fixing to respond too, and then your response comes next or after that ??
 

NotfooledbyW

Gold Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2014
Messages
19,619
Reaction score
3,549
Points
245
one might forget

Go read it now It’s proof ding has been lying again My views are clear and consistent

1 Abortion is murder after viability : not murder before viability unless to save the life of the mother which I most cases it would be under Jewish law.

2 Abortion kills a human being sometimes when it is in the embryonic stage and sometimes when it is in the The Fetal Stage of Pregnancy the embryo or fetus dies during an abortion but the woman’s right to terminate superseded the right of the unborn priir to viability

3 I agree in General with Jewish doctrine on abortion:

Jewish law does not consider the fetus to be a being with a soul until it is born. It does not have personhood. Furthermore, before 40 days, some poskim, or deciders of Jewish law, have a low bar for allowing an abortion.

The Talmud, in Yevamos 69b, cites the view of Rav Hisda that “until forty days from conception the fetus is merely water. It is not yet considered a living being.”

If there is a threat to a woman’s life, the safety of the mother takes precedence over continuing the pregnancy at any stage.

END2211300333
 

HeyNorm

Platinum Member
Joined
Nov 25, 2022
Messages
1,428
Reaction score
879
Points
893
NFBW221128-#5,895 “And do you believe there is no constitutional human rights distinction between a human being who is pregnant and a human being who needs to use the pregnant human being‘s body for nine months in order to stay alive?”

HeyNorm221130-#5,976 Another mistake. It is the rare fetus that requires 9 months gestation to survive.

Human gestational length averages 38 weeks (8.74 months) from conception. However, pregnancy is customarily measured from the date of the last menstrual period — about 2 weeks before conception. By this scale, pregnancy lasts 40 weeks, or 9.20 months.

NFBW: Off by 0.26 months and you can’t be bothered to answer the question ding is hiding from?

do you HeyNorm believe there is no constitutional human rights distinction between a human being who is pregnant and a human being who needs to use the pregnant human being‘s body for 8.74 months in order to stay alive?”

END2211300032

That is the average gestation period. But it is rare for the pre born to require that length of time to survive. Most would survive if birth happened well before then.

And………
 

HeyNorm

Platinum Member
Joined
Nov 25, 2022
Messages
1,428
Reaction score
879
Points
893
Yep, and we've seen the horrid pictures of little babies that have been ripped from their mother's wombs, otherwise that were healthy developing little babies/human beings with all their tiny little human beings features such as their heartbeat's, eyes, ears, feet, toes, and etc, otherwise as such to be identified with, but NFBW is trying to justify somehow a so callled doctor being free to just do a monstrous thing as if we as a CIVILIZED people would always ignore that monstrous thing because of his wicked way of justifying these monstrous things. To remain CIVILIZED we must act civilized, otherwise we are not civilized. An uncivilized person attempts to justify uncivilized Acts.

Great response.

Ding asked, if abortion is wrong on the day of viability, what do you call it on the day before viability?

No answer from him, just deflection.

I would think it would fall under the civil right standard known as “similarly situated”. The difference in one day could not be so great as to grant life on one date, and deny it on the next.
 

HeyNorm

Platinum Member
Joined
Nov 25, 2022
Messages
1,428
Reaction score
879
Points
893
" Not Science Just More Dumb Shit From Sanctimonious Carnivores "

* Entitled To Valid Claims Of Mind And Not Preformation Hubris *


An extraterrestrial as an apex predator willing to exploit hue mammon for food or slave labor would more greatly appreciate a hue mammon which understood a universal scale of exploitation and offered empathy for all that suffer , while understanding that on a universal scale of exploitation an ethical conflict based on suffering does not exist for those incapable of sentience .

The supposition that an inchoate fetus , without a capacity for sentience , is cognizant and capable of issuing conscientious objection is a lie .

An argument for a homunculus is arcane and absurd , in that it presupposes cognizance from the point of conception , as its sin mythology lunatics continue to foster the mundane homunculus assertion with a heartbeat standard .

Wait, what? The fetus exploits the mother?

How so?

The mother willingly participated (except for rape) in the creation, with full knowledge. How can anyone say that is in anyway exploitation? It is what the mother agreed to.

🤦‍♂️
 

Monk-Eye

Gold Member
Joined
Feb 3, 2018
Messages
2,494
Reaction score
548
Points
140
" Little Girls With Hurt Feelings For Dysfunctional Baby Dolls "

* More Gawd Talk For From Vain Beasts *

The ultrasound challenges your bull crap, because the mother See's her beautiful child in her womb, and it definitely makes her aware that to do anything to harm or kill that beautiful child would be a great and sinful thing. Thank God technology found people like you and your cohort's out for whom attempt to separate child and mother with unholy lies and unholy influences that would somehow convince a woman that she should take her babies life if she just doesn't want it. Shame on you and those who rally for you.
As ultrasounds usually begin around 13 weeks , while fetal abnormalities become evident through to 20 weeks , where at 24 weeks natural viability which is supposed to account for the diagnostic and procedures .

Thus the ultrasound challenges your bull crap , because neither the mother , nor society , may see a beautiful child in her womb , rather perhaps there may be seen another missed fortune among an infinitude of others for which some manifestation of creation has optioned to allow .
 

Monk-Eye

Gold Member
Joined
Feb 3, 2018
Messages
2,494
Reaction score
548
Points
140
" Milking Adipose Tissue Becoming Gorge Ass "

* Self Ownership Maternal Private Property *

Wait, what? The fetus exploits the mother?
The supposition in Roe v. Wade getting overturned!! is whether an extraterrestrial , also an apex predator , would decide whether to enslave or eat hue mammon apes based on whether hue mammon apes adopted a universal criteria for exploitation , wherein empathy for sentient beings is made a valid criteria for exclusion from exploitation , wherein empathy for beings without sentience is made an invalid criteria for exclusion from exploitation .

* Absolute Dependence Versus Cooperative Independence *
How so?
The mother willingly participated (except for rape) in the creation, with full knowledge. How can anyone say that is in anyway exploitation? It is what the mother agreed to.
🤦‍♂️
Self ownership through progeny is the responsibility of the individual and not to be dictated or determined by a collective majority for populism and democracy as tyranny by majority .

This us republic maintains a credo of e pluribus unum which espouses independence as individualism with equal protection of negative liberties among those entitled by live birth to receive them .

Individualism necessarily precludes the individual .
 

CarsomyrPlusSix

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2022
Messages
1,981
Reaction score
1,474
Points
1,918
The supposition in Roe v. Wade getting overturned!! is whether an extraterrestrial , also an apex predator , would decide whether to enslave or eat hue mammon apes based on whether hue mammon apes adopted a universal criteria for exploitation , wherein empathy for sentient beings is made a valid criteria for exclusion from exploitation , wherein empathy for beings without sentience is made an invalid criteria for exclusion from exploitation .
You are a never ending supply of quotes proving your own insanity.

This one may be your most insane rambling yet.

Extraterrestrial hue mammons? What?

Yeah no, I've read Roe and I've read Dobbs. Roe was nonsense, it was always nonsense, sorry you're so attached to insane nonsense, but keep it out of the law, thanks.
One thing that neither any SCOTUS ruling ever nor the Constitution ever mentions is "extraterrestrial hue mammons."

Roe cited a fictional "right to privacy" and hallucinated that this fictional right had a penumbra, a shadow right, which meant that you can kill your own kid just because, and it was always in the Constitution, just because of course it was. This garbage nonsense stands repealed as it should have been. Nothing based on this "right to privacy" has any legitimacy whatsoever, and all of it, not just Roe, should be repealed immediately.
 

Monk-Eye

Gold Member
Joined
Feb 3, 2018
Messages
2,494
Reaction score
548
Points
140
" Keep Telling Yourselves That While Being Dressed Up In Clown Attire "

* Working On That Ego Death *

You are a never ending supply of quotes proving your own insanity.
This one may be your most insane rambling yet.
Extraterrestrial hue mammons? What?
The naturalism camp is taunting the creation in full form camp whether its adherents would intend to refer to an extraterrestrial as gawd .

* Ewes Guise Have A Compelling Problem Of Formidable Adversary *
Yeah no, I've read Roe and I've read Dobbs. Roe was nonsense, it was always nonsense, sorry you're so attached to insane nonsense, but keep it out of the law, thanks.
One thing that neither any SCOTUS ruling ever nor the Constitution ever mentions is "extraterrestrial hue mammons."

Roe cited a fictional "right to privacy" and hallucinated that this fictional right had a penumbra, a shadow right, which meant that you can kill your own kid just because, and it was always in the Constitution, just because of course it was. This garbage nonsense stands repealed as it should have been. Nothing based on this "right to privacy" has any legitimacy whatsoever, and all of it, not just Roe, should be repealed immediately.
This moniker has been explaining the obvious consistency of roe with us constitution for more than 25 years , and it is clear and evident to any other than a traitor to principles of individualism for which us republic credo of e pluribus unum expects .

The decision of dobbs is sedition , however how could the dumbfounded conclusions of scotus in dobbs be faulted entirely for its stupidity that is rampant throughout jurisprudence , throughout political institutions and throughout facilitators of the fee press ?

Any citizen has legal standing to prohibit state interests in protecting a wright to life of a zef which has not met a live birth requirement , that is required of a citizen , that is therefore required for equal protection .

Those facts are clearly evident and would be common public knowledge had institutions , pro choice for abortion , had simply followed a simply directive to " Demand Any Nomination For Us Supreme Court Justice Explain Blackmun ' Logically Of Course ' Statement From Roe V Wade " .

That all eat toe was able to ignorantly claim that " potential life " did not have anything to do with an ability to survive an imminent birth , after relating that roe did not explain why it did not apply in 1st and 2nd trimesters , and after failing to intimate a " Logically , of course , a legitimate state interest ... not .. prior to live birth . " is a despicable and pathetically dumbfounded conclusion !

But hey , if the prochoice trope is too incompetent to submit the filing on my behalf , even though off the record concurrence with the deductions has been offered , expect to see it just the same .

A wright to privacy arises as incidental to the actual constitutional basis for roe v wade , because once state interests are prohibited from protecting a wright to life of a zef , as a zef has not met a birth requirement to receive equal protection with a citizen is the principle constitutional basis for abortion , then us 10th amendment as applied supposes us 9th amendment for equal protection of negative liberties , which ensures that populism and democracy as tyranny by majority do not prevail over principles of individualism expected of us republic -
Notice For Public Record : Foundational Nuances Of Us 9th Versus Us 10th Amendments For Individuals States And Federal Interests !
 
Last edited:

CarsomyrPlusSix

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2022
Messages
1,981
Reaction score
1,474
Points
1,918
obvious consistency
Bullshit. Roe had no basis in the Constitution whatsoever.

it is clear and evident to any other than a traitor to principles of individualism
I'm extremely individualist - the unborn are individual human beings with human rights, you bigoted fuck.

The decision of dobbs is sedition
Not here in reality on Earth where words have meanings, you stupid fuck.

Hatemongering slur - just more retardation from a known retard.
 

NotfooledbyW

Gold Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2014
Messages
19,619
Reaction score
3,549
Points
245
NFBW: i know what makes ding hide. ding is not a woman and women who get an abortion are not behaving the way his Catholic perspective on the universe demands.

ding220811-#4,624 Women should acknowledge that they understand that getting an abortion is literally ending the life of a new, living, genetically distinct human being; one that has never existed before and will never exist again.

NFBW: When ding attacks me, often times based on one lie or the other, this unique brand of Catholic is attacking women as well for failing to live up to his God, the FATHER’s standards.

JESUS000000 “For yours is the kingdom and the power and the glory for ever and ever, amen.”

ding220811-#4,624 Your minimizing the consequences of abortion does no one any favors. It's dishonest and ghoulish.

NFBW: Shaming women by Catholic men who will never go through what only a woman can go through most times to please their man really sucks.

JESUS000000 But you—who are you to judge your neighbor?

END22110939
 
Last edited:

NotfooledbyW

Gold Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2014
Messages
19,619
Reaction score
3,549
Points
245
populism and democracy as tyranny by majority do not prevail over principles of individualism expected of us republic -
NFBW: Trumpism Christian populism failed to achieve a ballot box victory in 2020 but the stench of the tyranny of that minority will stink up the Catholic dominated SCOTUS for a long time to come until challenged by principled individuals who honor law and the CONSTITUTION and reproductive rights are restored in each and every state for women.

End2211300954
 

ding

Confront reality
Joined
Oct 25, 2016
Messages
104,646
Reaction score
16,976
Points
2,220
Location
Houston
NFBW: i know what makes ding hide. ding is not a woman and women who get an abortion are not behaving the way his Catholic perspective on the universe demands.

ding220811-#4,624 Women should acknowledge that they understand that getting an abortion is literally ending the life of a new, living, genetically distinct human being; one that has never existed before and will never exist again.

NFBW: When ding attacks me, often times based on one lie or the other, this unique brand of Catholic is attacking women as well for failing to live up to his God, the FATHER’s standards.

JESUS000000 “For yours is the kingdom and the power and the glory for ever and ever, amen.”

ding220811-#4,624 Your minimizing the consequences of abortion does no one any favors. It's dishonest and ghoulish.

NFBW: Shaming women by Catholic men who will never go through what only a woman can go through most times to please their man really sucks.

JESUS000000 But you—who are you to judge your neighbor?

END22110939
You’re beef isn’t with me. It’s with SCOTUS, state legislators and religion.

That the basis for your beliefs were not well thought out is your fault not mine. That’s why your story keeps changing and you are all over the map.
 

NotfooledbyW

Gold Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2014
Messages
19,619
Reaction score
3,549
Points
245
I'm extremely individualist - the unborn are individual human beings with human rights, you bigoted fuck.
NFBW Are you using a pregnant woman’s body, right now as you rant and rage, in order to be alive?

If not where do you and @beagle and ding and HeyNorm get the authority to speak for the unborn individuals who are using a pregnant woman’s body fur nine months to survive? Where hotshot where?

END2211301008
 

ding

Confront reality
Joined
Oct 25, 2016
Messages
104,646
Reaction score
16,976
Points
2,220
Location
Houston
NFBW Are you using a pregnant woman’s body, right now as you rant and rage, in order to be alive?

If not where do you and @beagle and ding and HeyNorm get the authority to speak for the unborn individuals who are using a pregnant woman’s body fur nine months to survive? Where hotshot where?

END2211301008
Your beef is with SCOTUS and state legislators, bro.
 

NotfooledbyW

Gold Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2014
Messages
19,619
Reaction score
3,549
Points
245
You’re beef isn’t with me. It’s with SCOTUS, state legislators and religion.

That the basis for your beliefs were not well thought out is your fault not mine. That’s why your story keeps changing and you are all over the map.
see ding is running away to hide again by posting trash that has no argumentative value.
 

ding

Confront reality
Joined
Oct 25, 2016
Messages
104,646
Reaction score
16,976
Points
2,220
Location
Houston

💲 Amazon Deals 💲

Forum List

Top