You cons will cite absolutely any crap, unbelievable.
Amgreatness? Really? AmMoron wasn't available?
Donald Trump Jr. texted Meadows ideas for overturning 2020 election BEFORE it was called
- Thread starter Frederick Foresight
- Start date
You cons will cite absolutely any crap, unbelievable.
Amgreatness? Really? AmMoron wasn't available?
That's funny coming from Cons who have hounded Clintons for decades.
Your problem is that you want to put everyone into two camps. I am neither Republican nor Democrat. I have an opinion on an issue. Debate the issue not where you think someone belongs you. Because of the thought process you apply there is a culture war. We don't need to divide ourselves into two camps. We can have different opinions on all sorts of issues, some represent liberal thought processes, others conservative. I am for much stronger gun controls but strongly opposed to allowing legal abortion. I believe gun ownership should be permitted if the person PROVES they are capable and responsible in the presence of firearms, meaning they should demonstrate through a test and training that they are capable and responsible. I am opposed to abortion because I strongly believe biological evidence points to life from inception. That means a woman or man or whoever DOES NOT have full control over their bodies. They had the choice to fuck then they should not be allowed to murder life. Rape or other other forced intercourse should definitely warrant exceptions.
There you have it, one can have conservative thoughts on one issue and liberal ones on another issue.
Stop putting everyone into two buckets. That's outright stupid.
There you have it, one can have conservative thoughts on one issue and liberal ones on another issue.
Stop putting everyone into two buckets. That's outright stupid.
Last edited:
But do you believe in law and order? If someone broke the law, should they get a pass because it's been a while!
And of course you make exception for rape victims to get an abortion? Yes or No.
There are different ways to consider that, the most obvious to most being that you are a half-wit, so would you care to rephrase it so we could better grasp what you were trying to say?
Human females are born with as many as seven million eggs, the life of the fetus/baby strictly speaking existed when it's own mother was herself a fetus. The sperm was also in existence before and itself, life. Or did you mean conception?
Why would there be any exception for rape of incest?
Last edited:
Whether I believe in law and order? Yes I do. Yes, I would want rape victims who become pregnant to have a free choice to abort the pregnancy. But not anyone else.
Last edited:
So that is the respectful person you want everyone believe you are? Halfwit just because someone disagrees with you? No wonder this country is so divided.
"Human development begins after the union of male and female gametes or germ cells during a process known as fertilization (conception)."
That is what I believe. I am not here to argue with you on this topic. I posted to demonstrate that someone can hold liberal and conservative views at the same time.
Why an exception? Because this is the one single incident where the female gender clearly did not consent to intercourse and becomes pregnant through a criminal act. Who is thick here?
"Human development begins after the union of male and female gametes or germ cells during a process known as fertilization (conception)."
That is what I believe. I am not here to argue with you on this topic. I posted to demonstrate that someone can hold liberal and conservative views at the same time.
Why an exception? Because this is the one single incident where the female gender clearly did not consent to intercourse and becomes pregnant through a criminal act. Who is thick here?
Then why shouldn't rioters be held responsible for their crimes?
But that's a life too, why is that life expendable?
A) I never claimed or postulated that rioters should not be held responsible. Where did you get that from? In fact I want all rioters held responsible, including those during all the BLM destruction.
B) Because we have to sometimes make difficult decisions about conflicting interests. In the case of rape this would in my book rise to the importance of hearing the woman who has been criminally violated in one of the most egregious acts. Other women have a choice to get fucked. They make a choice to have unprotected sex with the full knowledge of the possibility of a pregnancy. And I would add that if the life of the mother is endangered due to pregnancy complications and it would according to the advice of medical professionals come down to the life of the mother or baby but not both then the woman should be able to make a choice. If the woman is unconscious then the husband or else medical professional should make the decision to save the life of the mother.
I appreciate you may differ in opinion but that's all you have, a different opinion, not a better argument. What is on your side, however, disingenuous is to try to bait me with the "expandable baby" argument while you have no qualms to have millions of unborn killed just because the to be mother did not feel right about it. She felt right to get that unprotected dick inside of her, that she apparently felt very right about but she does not want to bear any of the consequences, and you seem to be totally OK with that. That dishonest af.
B) Because we have to sometimes make difficult decisions about conflicting interests. In the case of rape this would in my book rise to the importance of hearing the woman who has been criminally violated in one of the most egregious acts. Other women have a choice to get fucked. They make a choice to have unprotected sex with the full knowledge of the possibility of a pregnancy. And I would add that if the life of the mother is endangered due to pregnancy complications and it would according to the advice of medical professionals come down to the life of the mother or baby but not both then the woman should be able to make a choice. If the woman is unconscious then the husband or else medical professional should make the decision to save the life of the mother.
I appreciate you may differ in opinion but that's all you have, a different opinion, not a better argument. What is on your side, however, disingenuous is to try to bait me with the "expandable baby" argument while you have no qualms to have millions of unborn killed just because the to be mother did not feel right about it. She felt right to get that unprotected dick inside of her, that she apparently felt very right about but she does not want to bear any of the consequences, and you seem to be totally OK with that. That dishonest af.
Then what's the hurry? Let the law proceed at it's own pace.
I don't care about your opinion, you don't get to decide what others should do based on your flimsy distinction of 'life' which you are OK to dispose off based on your vague moral reasoning that stenches of misogyny. Not to mention you have nothing to say about men who fuck women, why doesn't the law make them responsible for the child's upbringing,.
Fuck the 'millions of unborn' that you want to virtue signal about, millions of kids suffer every day, hundreds and thousands of them die in shit conditions but you assholes want to force woman to give birth because some woman decide to get fucked without your permission.