Who is the real extremist on abortion?

Darla said:
The real extremists on abortion are still alias and bravo.

Easy answers to stupid questions.

Next?
Click to expand...


Really?....did I say something about abortion that sounded extreme....? Did I say something about abortion at all ?
Or are you just shooting your mouth off to show your ignorance again.
Enlighten me.
 
20 minutes and nothing.....no 'enlightenment' from Diarrhea...

looks like shooting her mouth off to show her ignorance wins......
 
for Darla, thinking that people shouldn't kill their unborn children is extreme, thinking they should kill children born alive isn't.....
 
FactsRStubborn said:
I can only presume you have never had a child.

Also there was a time when democrats talked about coloreds the way you talk about an unborn child.

You like Hitler have a long history of dehumanizing your fellow citizens.

Have you no shame?
Click to expand...

Finaly, the Hitler reference. What took you so long?

I have two grown children. As a matter of fact I'm going to be a grandfather before the year is out.

A child will be brought into a home where it's wanted. A child that will be supported now and in the future. That's how children are supposed to be brought into the world.
 
FactsRStubborn said:
I read your post again an found it chilling that someone could talk about and dehumanize another human being that way. You say it like you are talking about a pimple. You are sick and would have fit quite nicely with Hitlers death squads. I am sure they too thought of ways to limit the suffering of those less than human jews
Click to expand...



Two consecutive posts referencing Hitler. You've outdone youself. :good4u:

Human beings are born and human beings die. That is the beginning and the end. Whatever is before or comes after is a whole new ball game. And if you want to talk about dehumanizing we insist people suffer until the suffering is so great their body finally fails rather than allowing euthanasia. There are people with illnesses like ALS who slowly deteriorate until they reach the point they will choke to death due to being unable to swallow. So, what do compassionate humans do? They feed them with a tube dragging out their suffering.

Let's not euthanize people. Let's torture them instead. Let's bring children into the world, neglect them, don't teach them how to live properly and when they screw up throw them in jail. That's much more compassionate. And don't forget the ego boost for those who go around saying how hard they worked and how they towed the line and how they struggled but, hey, they made it. Nobody helped them. It's just a matter of those who have been neglected and abused since birth to take responsibility. Tough love. Republican love.

It's no wonder Ann gave a speech about Mitt's love. She and everyone else can see the love he has for his fellow man. Cut jobs, lose medical care and top it off with campaigning on repealing ObamaCare. If those poor suckers can't make it let them die and keep replenishing that segment of society by forcibly bringing more children into the world against the objections of adults who know they don't have the financial ability to look after them. But people like Mitt and you don't care. Bring them into the world and throw them to the dogs. The ones who survive and manage to make a life for themselves, great. The ones who end up in poverty and/or prison...that's the roll of the dice. That's Repub love and caring in a nut shell.
 
PostmodernProphet said:
actually, it wasn't decided it didn't pass constitutional requirements....if I'm not mistaken, the same bill passed in Illinois the year after Obama left....
Click to expand...

Check out the video. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YUkbuhXzbvI&feature=player_embedded#

8:26: SB 1663 Failed to pass constitutional requirements. That was the video presented by the original poster. As for the bill later passing, after Obama had left, has nothing to do with what was currently going on.
 
bravo said:
Apples reading comp., as with most pinheads, leaves a lot to be desired....
Click to expand...

It clearly states at the end of the video the bill did not pass. What what part of "SB 1663 Failed to pass constitutional requirements" are you having difficulty understanding?
 
apple0154 said:
Check out the video. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YUkbuhXzbvI&feature=player_embedded#

8:26: SB 1663 Failed to pass constitutional requirements. That was the video presented by the original poster. As for the bill later passing, after Obama had left, has nothing to do with what was currently going on.
Click to expand...

really....bill fails when Obama was there to speak against it.....same bill passes after Obama is gone......nothing significant to see here, move along.....this is not the extremist you're looking for....
 
apple0154 said:
Finaly, the Hitler reference. What took you so long?

I have two grown children. As a matter of fact I'm going to be a grandfather before the year is out.

A child will be brought into a home where it's wanted. A child that will be supported now and in the future. That's how children are supposed to be brought into the world.
Click to expand...

Congratulations, apple! I'm sure you'll make a great grand-dad. :)
 
christiefan915 said:
Congratulations, apple! I'm sure you'll make a great grand-dad. :)
Click to expand...

Thanks, Christie. I'll have to start compiling some tall tales for when the child is older. Kids are smarter today. They won't believe the "five miles to school and home, through the snow, uphill both ways."
 
apple0154 said:
Obviously you didn't watch the video.
Click to expand...

and obviously you continue to ignore the fact that the same law was passed the following year in Illinois and the same law was passed on the federal level, challenged to the SC and upheld........so stop pretending it was unconstitutional.......
 
PostmodernProphet said:
and obviously you continue to ignore the fact that the same law was passed the following year in Illinois and the same law was passed on the federal level, challenged to the SC and upheld........so stop pretending it was unconstitutional.......
Click to expand...

I'm not pretending anything. At the time, those are the keys words, at the time it was considered unconstitutional and it was struck down. Things change and times change but in any case standing up for woman's rigths is the right thing to do, regardless.
 
apple0154 said:
I'm not pretending anything. At the time, those are the keys words, at the time it was considered unconstitutional and it was struck down. Things change and times change but in any case standing up for woman's rigths is the right thing to do, regardless.
Click to expand...

standing up for the rights of unborn babies is the right thing to do. Just because you don't know the joy of having a baby doesn't justify murder. It isn't everyone elses fault your ovaries are all dried up
 
PostmodernProphet said:
he'll have to be.....any chance the little nipper is unhappy, he'll have to kill it......
Click to expand...

The little "nipper" won't be unhappy because my son and daughter-in-law chose to have a child when they were prepared and capable of looking after it.

Responsible people won't give a child a cat or dog if they believe the child is not capable of looking after it. We have more respect for an animal than we do for people. We do not allow animals to needlessly suffer but when it comes to people we interfere in euthanasia and we have the gall to say we're free people. If one can not choose to live or die, if one can not choose to end their suffering, then we are far from being free people.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top