So according to rush limbaugh, the republican party stands for...

[richard_daily]

Future response: But a baby can't survive without a parent either! They can't fend for themselves and would die without their parent. So it can't survive on it's own, does that mean babies have no individual rights either?


It writes itself, really.

they're fairly predicable, aren't they?

I can think of a few things that write themselves when looking at your avatar.

 

[bluntforcemama]

they're fairly predicable, aren't they?

I can think of a few things that write themselves when looking at your avatar.

Holy crows, you need to work on your "lines."

 

[richard_daily]

Holy crows, you need to work on your "lines."

No shit, they sure didn't work with you...

 

[bluntforcemama]

No shit, they sure didn't work with you...

I will always be the hardest person you could get to swallow a line.

 

[richard_daily]

I will always be the hardest person you could get to swallow a line.

And too paranoid to believe when it's the truth...

 

[Slowlane]

So you're admitting defeat then... since you can't or won't defend against it.

I don't blame you for bowing out. I'll even let you even have the last word, so as to keep your dignity.

I'm still waiting on you to put up some sort of rational argument.

 

[Slowlane]

they're fairly predicable, aren't they?

I can think of a few things that write themselves when looking at your avatar.

And for you to answer my original question.

 

[busybody..]

I'm still waiting on you to put up some sort of rational argument.

Im still waiting for answers myself from DICK DAILY

 

[Slowlane]

Im still waiting for answers myself from DICK DAILY

I don't think any real answers will be coming anytime soon - or anytime at all.

Both our questions are simple enough.

 

[busybody..]

Mine is simple

Peterson was convicted of 2 killings,

ergo ABORTION must be MURDER

if the killing was of a 7 month and he was "viable"

then BAM's vote to KILL LIVE BABIES

IS MURDER

YES/

NO/

Simple

 

[Tungwagger]

You did it here:




Granted, you're not as blind in your phrasing as the local lunatic busybody, but you still pass judgement on women who "spread their legs", women not being able to "control their animal urges" and "use abortion as birth control". All three statements reek of misogyny, and all of this is being said on a board where you're here to look at stories and pictures of naked women (or men) no less!

So where is your control of your animal urges then? Why not eshew sex altogether if it's a matter of controlling those urges? Where is the consistency? Or should this moral obligation to control these base urges only apply to women?





I haven't ignored it... I actually feel the same way you do on that point to be honest. However, I can divide my personal feelings from the argument. I don't need to provide a moral foundation for others, i trust that they can do it for themselves. Isn't that one of your basic tenants?

I was wondering how long it would take for you to refer to a catchphrase or name to get to what you really thought.

I don't subscribe to the leftist mentality of political correctness so as not to"offend". That's what has propelled this country to the level of "tolerating" just about everything the left has decided is sacred to them.(whether good or bad)

And as such, I won't be "guided" down a path of "understanding, and "tolerance" by the likes of you because you want to shame me into an opinion that is palatable to your way of thinking. Or ,at the very least shut me up so you can live under the delusion of winning the battle.

Thanks for being predictable.


I will never assume it is an easy decision for a woman to make. And quite possibly she could be haunted by the decision years later. Yet any attempt to dissuade a woman from aborting her child,(or to use a leftist phrase: "educate") is met with howls of protest and accusations of attempting to deny her, her rights.

Once again, you throw your own brand of morality on this board, yet condemn others for doing the same.

If you're offended by my opinions on this subject...Tough shit...

 

[Tungwagger]

Double damn post

 

[John Doe]

There's nothing wrong with supporting what you believe in as long as you can call it what it is. That includes euthanasia (the killing of old people). Eugenics, of course, doesn't need to mean ending of anybody's life.

Not necessarily just old people...

We can call it mercy-killing if you like. Another cool hyphen.

 

[Slowlane]

Not necessarily just old people...

We can call it mercy-killing if you like. Another cool hyphen.

I'm not against it. I'm against using words to hide the reality of it.