Why Can't the Pro-Choice Crowd Be Honest?

[JBeukema]

Gadawg supports killing Mormons

After all, every state gets to make their own laws and COTUS should never intervene to protect the lives of those the member States fail to protect

An executive order is not law or in the criminal code.
DUMB ASS.

An executive order in the United States is an order issued by the President, the head of the executive branch of the federal government. In other countries, similar edicts may be known as decrees, or orders-in-council. Executive orders may also be issued at the state level by a state's Governor or at the local level by the city's Mayor. U.S. Presidents have issued Executive Orders since 1789, usually to help officers and agencies of the Executive branch manage the operations within the Federal Government itself. Executive orders do have the full force of law...

Executive order (United States) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Dr.Drock]

I don't debate insane spew. It's a waste of time.

Alright I'll try to have an Allie-style point/counterpoint debate.

I'll get us started;


You're a lizard-lipped, duty-headed, poopoo-face.



Now your rebuttal;

 

[AllieBaba]

Link?

 

[Dr.Drock]

Link?

Link to you calling yourself a great debater and an instance of you name-calling?


Umm, you want me to link this particular thread we're posting on now?

 

[Gadawg73]

Gadawg supports killing Mormons

After all, every state gets to make their own laws and COTUS should never intervene to protect the lives of those the member States fail to protect

An executive order is not law or in the criminal code.
DUMB ASS.

An executive order in the United States is an order issued by the President, the head of the executive branch of the federal government. In other countries, similar edicts may be known as decrees, or orders-in-council. Executive orders may also be issued at the state level by a state's Governor or at the local level by the city's Mayor. U.S. Presidents have issued Executive Orders since 1789, usually to help officers and agencies of the Executive branch manage the operations within the Federal Government itself. Executive orders do have the full force of law...

Executive order (United States) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Nope, sorry.
Executive orders, JUST LIKE THE ONE YOU CITE, can be easily rescinded by the executive individually, or the next one in line as the one you cite and by legislative authority immediately, at any time.
NO LAW CAN HAVE THAT DONE..
Seperation of Powers you need to study.

 

[JBeukema]

You don't get your own facts, dude.

Abortionism is a religion. It is a matter of faith.


That's why they can never be honest.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Even the feminists admit that colonial and common law generally forbid abortion past quickening

And before (maybe) anyone gets any silly ideas about "Aha! They thought that's when life started", let's just point out that that was simply the moment their much-more-rudimentary medical science could definitively identify a healthy pregnancy. And even if they DID believe that was when life started . . . well, we don't refer back to the 18th century for definitive medical and scientific wisdom on anything else, so there's no reason this would be an exception.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Even the feminists admit that colonial and common law generally forbid abortion past quickening

SOME feminists. Some of them are still clinging desperately to their outdated myths.

 

[Cecilie1200]

And more.
So where in that jumble did you establish that we were attempting to legislate religion?

Nowhere.

It's just the usual disjointed and angry garbage from a loser.

Where did I ever claim that?
Never.
DUMB ASS.

Well I assumed since you QUOTED that question, you were actually responding to it.

I should have known you were just on an incoherent spiel apropos of nothing.

I am, once again, profoundly grateful that I have Gadawg on ignore. Just the occasional stray bit of post I get from others' quotes is more than enough to convince me I made the right decision.

 

[AllieBaba]

There's something wrong with him.

 

[Cecilie1200]

And more.
So where in that jumble did you establish that we were attempting to legislate religion?

Nowhere.

It's just the usual disjointed and angry garbage from a loser.

Lol there's those superb debating techniques again!



I think we all know what created implies.

No, WE all know what it MEANS. Whatever connotations your fevered brain, rotted by the hatred and stupidity that marks ALL bigots, have assigned to the word are not our problem.

Create - To bring into existence

Don't blame any of us just because YOU can't bear to hear essential historical American documents quoted.

 

[Dr.Drock]

And more.
So where in that jumble did you establish that we were attempting to legislate religion?

Nowhere.

It's just the usual disjointed and angry garbage from a loser.

Lol there's those superb debating techniques again!



I think we all know what created implies.

No, WE all know what it MEANS. Whatever connotations your fevered brain, rotted by the hatred and stupidity that marks ALL bigots, have assigned to the word are not our problem.

Create - To bring into existence

Don't blame any of us just because YOU can't bear to hear essential historical American documents quoted.

Me making note that christians are creationists shows I have a fevered brain rotted by hatred and a bigot?


Ok you win, that's a very rational assessment.


That's the best attribute you pro-lifers have, you can debate the abortion issue with intellect and rational and you never just go off the deep end by letting your emotions get the best of you.

 

[AllieBaba]

Still waiting for a link to that religious legislation here.

 

[JBeukema]

And more.
So where in that jumble did you establish that we were attempting to legislate religion?

Nowhere.

It's just the usual disjointed and angry garbage from a loser.

Lol there's those superb debating techniques again!



I think we all know what created implies.

No, WE all know what it MEANS. Whatever connotations your fevered brain, rotted by the hatred and stupidity that marks ALL bigots, have assigned to the word are not our problem.

Create - To bring into existence

Don't blame any of us just because YOU can't bear to hear essential historical American documents quoted.

Why is he bitching about the language in the DoI?

What does that have to do with the subject at hand?

 

[Cecilie1200]

Lol there's those superb debating techniques again!



I think we all know what created implies.

No, WE all know what it MEANS. Whatever connotations your fevered brain, rotted by the hatred and stupidity that marks ALL bigots, have assigned to the word are not our problem.

Create - To bring into existence

Don't blame any of us just because YOU can't bear to hear essential historical American documents quoted.

Me making note that christians are creationists shows I have a fevered brain rotted by hatred and a bigot?


Ok you win, that's a very rational assessment.


That's the best attribute you pro-lifers have, you can debate the abortion issue with intellect and rational and you never just go off the deep end by letting your emotions get the best of you.

No, dumbfuck, you taking a quote from the Declaration of Independence and the Gettysburg Address as "Creationism" and "religion" is you being a fevered, hate-filled bigot. And speaking of "letting your emotions get the best of you" . . .

Although the emotion that overwhelmed you might not have been hatred and bigotry. It might just have been desperation to dismiss opponents before you ever had to actually DEBATE them. Better to say, "Oh, you're just religious; I don't have to listen (thank God, because I have no arguments)" than to actually listen to his arguments and, perish forbid, think about them. Right?

 

[Cecilie1200]

Lol there's those superb debating techniques again!



I think we all know what created implies.

No, WE all know what it MEANS. Whatever connotations your fevered brain, rotted by the hatred and stupidity that marks ALL bigots, have assigned to the word are not our problem.

Create - To bring into existence

Don't blame any of us just because YOU can't bear to hear essential historical American documents quoted.

Why is he bitching about the language in the DoI?

What does that have to do with the subject at hand?

As I pointed out, any pretext on which to say, "Oh, he's religious, so that invalidates anything he says and I don't have to actually debate" is more than welcome to pro-aborts. It's the political debate equivalent of sticking your fingers in your ears and humming as loudly as possible.

 

[JBeukema]

No, WE all know what it MEANS. Whatever connotations your fevered brain, rotted by the hatred and stupidity that marks ALL bigots, have assigned to the word are not our problem.

Create - To bring into existence

Don't blame any of us just because YOU can't bear to hear essential historical American documents quoted.

Me making note that christians are creationists shows I have a fevered brain rotted by hatred and a bigot?


Ok you win, that's a very rational assessment.


That's the best attribute you pro-lifers have, you can debate the abortion issue with intellect and rational and you never just go off the deep end by letting your emotions get the best of you.

No, dumbfuck, you taking a quote from the Declaration of Independence and the Gettysburg Address as "Creationism" and "religion" is you being a fevered, hate-filled bigot. And speaking of "letting your emotions get the best of you" . . .

Although the emotion that overwhelmed you might not have been hatred and bigotry. It might just have been desperation to dismiss opponents before you ever had to actually DEBATE them. Better to say, "Oh, you're just religious; I don't have to listen (thank God, because I have no arguments)" than to actually listen to his arguments and, perish forbid, think about them. Right?

What's he gonna do when someone points out that I'm an atheist?

 

[Cecilie1200]

Me making note that christians are creationists shows I have a fevered brain rotted by hatred and a bigot?


Ok you win, that's a very rational assessment.


That's the best attribute you pro-lifers have, you can debate the abortion issue with intellect and rational and you never just go off the deep end by letting your emotions get the best of you.

No, dumbfuck, you taking a quote from the Declaration of Independence and the Gettysburg Address as "Creationism" and "religion" is you being a fevered, hate-filled bigot. And speaking of "letting your emotions get the best of you" . . .

Although the emotion that overwhelmed you might not have been hatred and bigotry. It might just have been desperation to dismiss opponents before you ever had to actually DEBATE them. Better to say, "Oh, you're just religious; I don't have to listen (thank God, because I have no arguments)" than to actually listen to his arguments and, perish forbid, think about them. Right?

What's he gonna do when someone points out that I'm an atheist?

What makes you think facts play any part in his worldview . . . or his daily life in general, for that matter?

 

[Varth Dader]

Perhaps you could start by telling us WHY "this right fades over time", in your inestimable opinion. YOURS, not the Guttmacher Institute Bullet Points list, if you please.

Because rights are never in a vacuum and are always dependent and affected by other rights. The right fades over time because the life form in the woman's body grows and acquires more rights. The bigger the fetus, the more likely it is viable, the more it acquires right.

I'm not sure how much more I can say.

I wonder. If a woman is pregnant with twins, and reaches a point where she likely needs an abortion to save her life, do you think she should be forced to carry out the pregnancy? Or should she take her chances and go through with the pregnancy?

 

[JBeukema]

The bigger the fetus, the more likely it is viable, the more it acquires right.

So... fat kids have more rights than skinny kids?

What about underweight children?

Or is the target 'viability'? What the hell does that mean? You know we can save preemies today who were not 'viable' decades ago, right? 'Viability', then, is a moving and meaningless target. What about a child born on time at full size with a congenital heart defect or breathing problems? Left alone, the child will die - it is not 'viable'.

Does that mean that, instead of providing emergency medical care, we should crush her skull?

What about old people on respirators? People having heart attacks? People on dialysis?

I'm not sure how much more I can say.

You haven't said anything at all.