This Video is The Perfect Illustration of the Hateful Radical Left and the Steadfast Prayerful Christian Right.

[CrusaderFrank]

We now know the definitions of a woman. Anyone the Republican White-wing wants to make a second-class citizen......based of myth religions.

Womxn or birthing persons

 

[CrusaderFrank]

What about Latinx womxn?

 

[Superbadbrutha]

And they're doing everything they can to take control, right now.

A period of Theocratic White Nationalism, on the way. Our very own Jihadis.

Is this Tucker Carlson

 

[Canon Shooter]

At what point does personal responsibility enter into your argument?

That's not really pertinent to the question.

The bottom line is that the woman now has a child that she didn't want, and she has it because the law no longer allows her to terminate her pregnancy.

We're beyond the question of "personal responsibility". We've now entered the arena of "how fucked up is the kid's life going to be because Mashmouth is pro-life?

Mashmouth is far too big a coward to tackle that question. Perhaps you could give it a shot?

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

That's not really pertinent to the question.

Was it ever pertinent?

The bottom line is that the woman now has a child that she didn't want, and she has it because the law no longer allows her to terminate her pregnancy.

We're beyond the question of "personal responsibility". We've now entered the arena of "how fucked up is the kid's life going to be because Mashmouth is pro-life?

Negative. A pro-lifer’s personal responsibility does not supercede the personal and legal responsibility of a woman or parents not to neglect or abuse their own child.

Mashmouth is far too big a coward to tackle that question. Perhaps you could give it a shot?

It’s a moot point for two reasons:

1.) Even with the option of abortion available to them now, some do not choose that option but neglect the child anyway.

2.) Some who choose to have a child also neglect and abuse them anyway.

So, not having abortion as an option is not necessarily a factor when it comes to child abuse and neglect.

Personal responsibilty has to factor in at some point. A woman can’t very well blame pro-lifers because she chose to be a piece of shit and beat her child. The responsibilty to not do so does not suddenly fall on the shoulders of Mashmouth after the child is born.

 

[Canon Shooter]

Was it ever pertinent?


Negative. A pro-lifer’s personal responsibility does not supercede the personal and legal responsibility of a woman or parents not to neglect or abuse their own child.

Oh, agreed. That doesn't mean it won't happen, though.

How happy a childhood do you think that kid's gonna' have? Can we even assume the kid won't be neglected and/or abused?

It’s a moot point for two reasons:

1.) Even with the option of abortion available to them now, some do not choose that option but neglect the child anyway.

2.) Some who choose to have a child also neglect and abuse them anyway.

So, not having abortion as an option is not necessarily a factor when it comes to child abuse and neglect.

Got it.

So, because abuse and neglect already occurs, it's cool if it happens again.

Twisted logic, bro but, you know, whatever blows your skirt up...

Personal responsibilty has to factor in at some point. A woman can’t very well blame pro-lifers because she chose to be a piece of shit and beat her child. The responsibilty to not do so does not suddenly fall on the shoulders of Mashmouth after the child is born.

Anyone who demands and, in fact, sees laws enacted to prohibit something a woman may want to choose shares some of the blame, and along with that blame comes a level of responsibility. It's like telling someone telling their kid they have to watch a scary movie and then whines when the kid has nightmares.

This is what Mashmouth demands. It's not something he wants, he, and every other zealot freak like him demand it.

Look at it this way: Pro-lifers like to say "Oh, but the baby could've grown up to cure cancer or invent a better mousetrap." Hey, maybe so. But if the woman is forced to give birth, and then abuses and beats her child, that's one child who wouldn't have been abused and beaten had Mashmouth and his merry band of religious zealots had just shut the fuck up and worried about themselves...

 

[jknowgood]

Here is the right wings example of a Good Christian

You can be a Christian, but in the end its God that makes the final decision and his word says life starts at conception. Just saying.

 

[Superbadbrutha]

You can be a Christian, but in the end its God that makes the final decision and his word says life starts at conception. Just saying.

Where does it say that? When does the Bible say Adam had life?

 

[jknowgood]

Where does it say that? When does the Bible say Adam had life?

Jeremiah 1:5.

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

Oh, agreed. That doesn't mean it won't happen, though.

How happy a childhood do you think that kid's gonna' have? Can we even assume the kid won't be neglected and/or abused?

Can we assume he will be?

Got it.

So, because abuse and neglect already occurs, it's cool if it happens again.

Not what I said. But if it does happen again, who are you going to blame?

Twisted logic, bro but, you know, whatever blows your skirt up...

What’s twisted about pointing out that people who choose not to abort can neglect and abuse their children anyway?

Twisted logic is blaming a pro-lifer for someone else’s crime of abusing their child.

Anyone who demands and, in fact, sees laws enacted to prohibit something a woman may want to choose shares some of the blame, and along with that blame comes a level of responsibility. It's like telling someone telling their kid they have to watch a scary movie and then whines when the kid has nightmares.

There are already laws against child abuse so this doesn’t wash. One doesn’t need the option of abortion to know that abusing a child is morally and legally wrong. And they don’t suddenly forget that it is morally and legally wrong if abortion is banned.

This is what Mashmouth demands. It's not something he wants, he, and every other zealot freak like him demand it.

Look at it this way: Pro-lifers like to say "Oh, but the baby could've grown up to cure cancer or invent a better mousetrap." Hey, maybe so. But if the woman is forced to give birth, and then abuses and beats her child, that's one child who wouldn't have been abused and beaten had Mashmouth and his merry band of religious zealots had just shut the fuck up and worried about themselves...

And if she had exercised more personal responsibility in avoiding getting pregnant and more personal responsibility in not abusing a helpless child, the child would grow to be happy and possibly start his/her own family.

Are you suggesting that if abortion is banned that women who have unwanted pregnancies are no longer bound by child abuse laws? That they somehow forget that child abuse is illegal?

What about you? If they ban guns, do you forget that murder is illegal?

I must add here that I am not necessarily in favor of overturning Roe-vs.-Wade. I just think that most pro-choice arguments are lame and I think way too many people use abortion as an excuse to not take responsibility for their actions.

 

[Canon Shooter]

Can we assume he will be?

Well, if the woman didn't want the child, and wanted to terminate the pregnancy, it's probably better to assume the worst case scenario instead of foolishly believing the kid will be perfectly fine...

Not what I said. But if it does happen again, who are you going to blame?'

Of course it would be the mother. But I also wouldn't hesitate to point out that the child might not have the best life, because, at least in part, because zealots like Mashmouth want abortion outlawed...

What’s twisted about pointing out that people who choose not to abort can neglect and abuse their children anyway?

"Choose"? As in "choice"? I think most who would choose not to terminate a pregnancy would not abuse the child...

Twisted logic is blaming a pro-lifer for someone else’s crime of abusing their child.

Twisted logic is imposing your will on someone who doesn't want it and then getting upset when they go awry...

There are already laws against child abuse so this doesn’t wash. One doesn’t need the option of abortion to know that abusing a child is morally and legally wrong. And they don’t suddenly forget that it is morally and legally wrong if abortion is banned.

Of course.

But the worst scenario I can imagine for a child is to be put into an environment in which the child is resented.

Pro-life zealots like Mashmouth don't give a shit about that, though...

And if she had exercised more personal responsibility in avoiding getting pregnant and more personal responsibility in not abusing a helpless child, the child would grow to be happy and possibly start his/her own family.

No form of birth control is 100%. The only thing that works 100% of the time is abstinence and, well, I think we can probably agree that that's not gonna' happen.

Did you ever have sex outside of marriage? I sure the fuck have; almost every day, in fact. Now, my smokin' hot Puerto Rican girlfriend is 52, so she's not getting pregnant anytime soon, but if someone has sex outside of marriage, but is taking reasonable precautions, is that irresponsible?

Are you suggesting that if abortion is banned that women who have unwanted pregnancies are no longer bound by child abuse laws? That they somehow forget that child abuse is illegal?

Why would you even suggest something so stupid?

No, that's not what I'm suggesting...

What about you? If they ban guns, do you forget that murder is illegal?

I'm not saying they forget about the law. I'm saying some will ignore the law...

I must add here that I am not necessarily in favor of overturning Roe-vs.-Wade. I just think that most pro-choice arguments are lame and I think way too many people use abortion as an excuse to not take responsibility for their actions.

My problem with the whole pro-life crowd is that once the kid is born, they couldn't give a shit about it. Every zealot I know is damned and determined to see that every pregnancy goes full term but, if a child is born into a bad situation, they're not the least bit interested in seeing to the well-being of that child.

I abhor the very idea of abortion, but I also abhor the idea of a child being born to a mother who wants nothing to do with it. I abhor the idea of the government saying what a woman can and cannot do with regards to termination of a pregnancy. Once we allow that, we'll open the door for the government to start making other medical decisions, taking away that right from the patient and their doctor. That should scare the shit out of you. Think about it: you have cancer, but some government bean-counter decides it's too advanced for you to reap any benefit from treatment, so you can't get medical care for it.

How would that sit with you?

 

[Superbadbrutha]

Jeremiah 1:5.

Genesis 2:7 And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

 

[jknowgood]

Genesis 2:7 And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

Was there a womb? Anyway try job 31:15. Did not who made me in the womb make them? Did not the same one form us both within our mothers?

 

[bodecea]

Bodecea doesn't see anything wrong with the colored woman in the video.

"colored woman".................. Your white sheet is showing.

 

[Mashmont]

"colored woman".................. Your white sheet is showing.

Any idea what NAACP stands for? Mashie didn't make that acronym up.

 

[munkle]

The Left is degenerate filth.

 

[Mac1958]

Anyone who demands and, in fact, sees laws enacted to prohibit something a woman may want to choose shares some of the blame, and along with that blame comes a level of responsibility. It's like telling someone telling their kid they have to watch a scary movie and then whines when the kid has nightmares.

This is what Mashmouth demands. It's not something he wants, he, and every other zealot freak like him demand it.

It's difficult, all but impossible, to deal with someone who is politically animated by their religion, regardless of the religion.

They think God sent Trump and they think this is their chance. They're Holy Warriors and this is their country. So I guess we're gonna find out.

All behind a con man who doesn't give two shits about their religion. He just needs the adulation.

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

Well, if the woman didn't want the child, and wanted to terminate the pregnancy, it's probably better to assume the worst case scenario instead of foolishly believing the kid will be perfectly fine...

Why would that be the safer assumption? What do you base this assumption on and just how horrible do you think women who have abortions are?

If what you say is true then we have a much bigger problem than pro-choice vs. Pro-life. We have a potential child abuse epidemic that is averted only by aborting children.

Of course it would be the mother. But I also wouldn't hesitate to point out that the child might not have the best life, because, at least in part, because zealots like Mashmouth want abortion outlawed...

The child would have no life at all if you aborted it.

"Choose"? As in "choice"? I think most who would choose not to terminate a pregnancy would not abuse the child...

And yet, some do anyway.

You’re looking at this through the wrong end of the eyeglass. If abortion is banned and more children are born then more children will be abused and neglected. However, that would be due simply to the law of averages.
You’re not presenting a compelling argument that there would be more abuse simply because these women didn’t want to get pregnant. It presumes that most women who have unwanted pregnancies are amoral pieces of shit.

Twisted logic is imposing your will on someone who doesn't want it and then getting upset when they go awry...

Oh believe me, if things go awry, I’m blaming no one but the woman or parents. I just don’t think that basic human decency is so easily dismissed as you seem to think it is.

We expect basic human decency from everyone at all times, which means we expect it from Jane Doe before she gets pregnant. Then, what, she is no longer bound by these ideals if she has a child she doesn’t want?

Of course.

But the worst scenario I can imagine for a child is to be put into an environment in which the child is resented.

Why would she resent the child when it wasn’t the child’s fault she was born?

On the one hand you’re saying that pro-lifers would be at fault and on the other you’re saying the mother herself would blame the child.

Pro-life zealots like Mashmouth don't give a shit about that, though...

Or perhaps Mashmouth simply assumes a best case scenario wheras you seem to think most women who have abortions would otherwise have ignored their own better natures of kindness and empathy.

No form of birth control is 100%. The only thing that works 100% of the time is abstinence and, well, I think we can probably agree that that's not gonna' happen.

Did you ever have sex outside of marriage? I sure the fuck have; almost every day, in fact. Now, my smokin' hot Puerto Rican girlfriend is 52, so she's not getting pregnant anytime soon, but if someone has sex outside of marriage, but is taking reasonable precautions, is that irresponsible?

No, it’s not and I never suggested it was.

If a couple takes precautions well then, they did what they could. It’s not their fault the condom didn’t work.
At the same time though, contraceptives not working 100% is a known risk. Should we so easily discard a life for such mundane reasons?

Why would you even suggest something so stupid?

No, that's not what I'm suggesting...

I didn’t suggest it, I asked if it was what you are suggesting.

I'm not saying they forget about the law. I'm saying some will ignore the law...

And their own consciences, apparently.

My problem with the whole pro-life crowd is that once the kid is born, they couldn't give a shit about it. Every zealot I know is damned and determined to see that every pregnancy goes full term but, if a child is born into a bad situation, they're not the least bit interested in seeing to the well-being of that child.

Because it’s not their responsibility.

I abhor the very idea of abortion, but I also abhor the idea of a child being born to a mother who wants nothing to do with it. I abhor the idea of the government saying what a woman can and cannot do with regards to termination of a pregnancy. Once we allow that, we'll open the door for the government to start making other medical decisions, taking away that right from the patient and their doctor. That should scare the shit out of you. Think about it: you have cancer, but some government bean-counter decides it's too advanced for you to reap any benefit from treatment, so you can't get medical care for it.

How would that sit with you?

I already said I’m not in favor of banning abortion. I just don’t agree that if they do, most women will ignore their better natures and abuse a child just because the law changed.

Again, you’re saying pro-lifers would be to blame but the mother herself blames the child.

 

[Canon Shooter]

Because it’s not their responsibility.

Then they should stay out of the decision. But zealots can't do that.

If it's not a zealot's responsibility to care for the child, how is it the zealot's responsibility to see to it that the pregnancy is carried to term?

My underlying point on all of this is that it's a dangerous thing to allow the government to make our medical decisions. Frankly, I can't think of anything more frightening than that...

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

Then they should stay out of the decision. But zealots can't do that.

For pro-lifers, zealots and otherwise, the issue for them is the sanctity of life, not taking away a woman’s right to choose.

If it's not a zealot's responsibility to care for the child, how is it the zealot's responsibility to see to it that the pregnancy is carried to term?

The zealot thinks it’s the woman’s responsibilty to carry to term.

My underlying point on all of this is that it's a dangerous thing to allow the government to make our medical decisions. Frankly, I can't think of anything more frightening than that...

Exactly. Which is why I was wholeheartedly against vaccine and mask mandates.