You do know the REAL reason the left has always supported abortion right?

Wolverine said:
https://www.cnsnews.com/commentary/...autonomous-life-womb-proves-personhood-starts

The problem for this view, Dumitru writes, is that so-called “clumps” whether in a uterus or in a lab, don’t behave like clumps of cells. Instead, they appear to act independently, or autonomously, of any signals from the mother’s body, whether in or out of the womb. And “clumps” don’t do that.

As Ana Maria explains, “This one little cell, with its complete genetic content, can and does begin to divide and to grow, even in an experimental dish in an incubator in the closet space of some unmarked lab. … That means, as we suspected, embryos know what they’re supposed to do to live, and they try to live, whether they’re in their mother or not.”

And it means not only that the embryo is a living being, but that it’s a person. This demolishes another argument for legal abortion, that the unborn may be living, but not yet persons—in other words, deserving of legal protection.
Click to expand...

The clump of cells is not a person...and the argument for it here is childish.

People like you want to demand that a woman bow to your wishes on this issue.

Screw you.

And screw the religious convictions causing you to be this screwed up.
 
Stone
Senior Member

This message is hidden because Stone is on your ignore list.


To fly over the flyover and wrath (yes verb tense) your firstborn like the angel of death over Egypt!:cool:

You voted for Trump. You HATE America. Eat shit.

You SCUM think you have the moral highground on anything? LMFAO. You are all immoral Satan worshipping scum.
Jesus knows which party is closer to his aspirations. Hint. He rode a donkey not an elephant, you fuckin scum.;)
 
T. A. Gardner said:
Quote Originally Posted by Taichiliberal View Post
Interesting....you want to control who has a child no matter what the circumstances, and then you want the impregnator to be absolved of all accountability.

Can you say "hypocrite" boys & girls? Sure you can....I knew you could!
Click to expand...


No. I want "fair and equal." In cases of consensual intercourse that results in a pregnancy, either it becomes the woman's responsibility and hers alone--the man is just a sperm donor--or it's equally the man's and woman's responsibility and both have to make a decision on how they will proceed. If the woman is sleeping with the trailer park and can't ID the father prior to birth and decides to have the birth, the man gets a say in how to proceed. If he chooses not to bear responsibility, then that's that. She should learn to keep her legs together next time.
For couples that have had a child and are raising it, child support post birth--like years later in a divorce--is determined as it is now.
So, it is possible that the woman doesn't want the child while the man does. In the case of an unmarried couple, this would result in the man having to pay all expenses for the child and mother related to the child's birth but he would unilaterally get the child and the mother would be free from further responsibility.

In non-consensual sex situations such as rape, nothing changes. The man gets no say in what happens and could be held libel for child support if the woman keeps the child.

What I want is for it to be fair and equal. This follows normal contract law. Both parties get and give consideration and have a say in things. Fair and equal.
Click to expand...

you wrote, " ... we need to abolish child support payment by men under most circumstances."

Why? By your biased stereotype "examples", YOU determine if YOU like the person's economic/social status....if you don't, then the guy is off the hook....if not, then HE gets equal say. The weak link in your chain of "logic" is that you want to ignore the FACT that "consensual intercourse" is the common denominator. Essentially, you're expressing the same ludicrous caste/class system bias that (supposedly) this country was created to get away from. Old habits die hard, I guess.

You cannot compare a divorce couples legal determination regarding child support to your seriously flawed example regarding abortion. Apples & oranges....as the child was wanted by both prior to later irreconcilable differences. As to married folk having abortions: https://www.statista.com/statistics...tions-by-marital-status-in-the-us-since-1973/

and as to your other example: if a guy who is just dating/hooking up with a woman finds out she's pregnant and he decides he wants to be a solo daddy, he is STILL putting the burden of bringing the pregnancy to term (birth) on the woman. In effect, he has turned the woman into a form of surrogacy. If she consents, payment is due, if not, then he needs to put a hat on it next time until he's sure he's found Ms. Right.

Your version of fair and equal is not always fair or equal.
 
Taichiliberal said:
you wrote, " ... we need to abolish child support payment by men under most circumstances."

Why? By your biased stereotype "examples", YOU determine if YOU like the person's economic/social status....if you don't, then the guy is off the hook....if not, then HE gets equal say. The weak link in your chain of "logic" is that you want to ignore the FACT that "consensual intercourse" is the common denominator. Essentially, you're expressing the same ludicrous caste/class system bias that (supposedly) this country was created to get away from. Old habits die hard, I guess.

You cannot compare a divorce couples legal determination regarding child support to your seriously flawed example regarding abortion. Apples & oranges....as the child was wanted by both prior to later irreconcilable differences. As to married folk having abortions: https://www.statista.com/statistics...tions-by-marital-status-in-the-us-since-1973/

and as to your other example: if a guy who is just dating/hooking up with a woman finds out she's pregnant and he decides he wants to be a solo daddy, he is STILL putting the burden of bringing the pregnancy to term (birth) on the woman. In effect, he has turned the woman into a form of surrogacy. If she consents, payment is due, if not, then he needs to put a hat on it next time until he's sure he's found Ms. Right.

Your version of fair and equal is not always fair or equal.
Click to expand...

Fair and equal?
Isn't it the woman who lies down and allows the man to penetrate her? She shares no responsibility for that?
 
RB 60 said:
Quote Originally Posted by Taichiliberal View Post
you wrote, " ... we need to abolish child support payment by men under most circumstances."

Why? By your biased stereotype "examples", YOU determine if YOU like the person's economic/social status....if you don't, then the guy is off the hook....if not, then HE gets equal say. The weak link in your chain of "logic" is that you want to ignore the FACT that "consensual intercourse" is the common denominator. Essentially, you're expressing the same ludicrous caste/class system bias that (supposedly) this country was created to get away from. Old habits die hard, I guess.

You cannot compare a divorce couples legal determination regarding child support to your seriously flawed example regarding abortion. Apples & oranges....as the child was wanted by both prior to later irreconcilable differences. As to married folk having abortions: https://www.statista.com/statistics/...us-since-1973/

and as to your other example: if a guy who is just dating/hooking up with a woman finds out she's pregnant and he decides he wants to be a solo daddy, he is STILL putting the burden of bringing the pregnancy to term (birth) on the woman. In effect, he has turned the woman into a form of surrogacy. If she consents, payment is due, if not, then he needs to put a hat on it next time until he's sure he's found Ms. Right.

Your version of fair and equal is not always fair or equal.
Click to expand...

Fair and equal?
Isn't it the woman who lies down and allows the man to penetrate her? She shares no responsibility for that?
Click to expand...

As opposed to the guy? Takes two to tango, you know. Essentially, you're just parroting a version of T.A. Gardner's blather.....which I deconstructed. Been there, done that.
 
Taichiliberal said:
As opposed to the guy? Takes two to tango, you know. Essentially, you're just parroting a version of T.A. Gardner's blather.....which I deconstructed. Been there, done that.
Click to expand...

I didn't read that, sorry. You haven't, nor can you "deconstruct" my post. Period.
 
So if the "Living entity" is left to their own devices ... they will proceed to grow "naturally"


The Life-energy of the "Living entity" that animates the body made of elements is called the "soul". That is all.


Only in the human form of life does a "Living entity" create karma and thus accrue karma's re-actions.

In lower stratum of Body(s) the "Living entity" does NOT creates karma nor accrue "karma" [pay-back] ---in other births the "Living entity" burns-up past karma...until all such past acts are paid-for [experienced by the persona of the "Living entity"].

Bhagavad-gita Chapter 8, Verse 6
"Whatever state of being one remembers when he quits his body, that state he will attain without fail."
 
RB 60 said:
Quote Originally Posted by Taichiliberal View Post
As opposed to the guy? Takes two to tango, you know. Essentially, you're just parroting a version of T.A. Gardner's blather.....which I deconstructed. Been there, done that.
Click to expand...


I didn't read that, sorry. You haven't, nor can you "deconstruct" my post. Period.
Click to expand...

Pay attention. what you posted was just a rehash of T.A. Gardner's nonsense....like minds think alike I guess. So If you read the exchange, you'll understand why it's not necessary to repeat myself.

https://www.justplainpolitics.com/s...upported-abortion-right&p=3975740#post3975740
 
Taichiliberal said:
Pay attention. what you posted was just a rehash of T.A. Gardner's nonsense....like minds think alike I guess. So If you read the exchange, you'll understand why it's not necessary to repeat myself.

https://www.justplainpolitics.com/s...upported-abortion-right&p=3975740#post3975740
Click to expand...

giphy.gif


I continue to stand by what I've said. What will you do to convince me?
 
RB 60 said:
Quote Originally Posted by Taichiliberal View Post
Pay attention. what you posted was just a rehash of T.A. Gardner's nonsense....like minds think alike I guess. So If you read the exchange, you'll understand why it's not necessary to repeat myself.

https://www.justplainpolitics.com/sh...40#post3975740
Click to expand...

giphy.gif


I continue to stand by what I've said. What will you do to convince me?
Click to expand...

Actually, you continue to emulate the meme you posted....a buffoon with delusions of intelligence. Let's get real, you don't have the intellectual courage or honesty to merely click a link, carefully and comprehensively read the content and then have a rational and logical discussion. With you and others like you here, it's just petulance and self aggrandizing braying. So be it. Unless you're willing to meet the simple standards for discussion, I'll just let you make the usual empty declarations of victory or false accusation and dump you in the IA bin for a month or two. Hopefully when I let you out, you'll have matured a bit.
 
Taichiliberal said:
Actually, you continue to emulate the meme you posted....a buffoon with delusions of intelligence. Let's get real, you don't have the intellectual courage or honesty to merely click a link, carefully and comprehensively read the content and then have a rational and logical discussion. With you and others like you here, it's just petulance and self aggrandizing braying. So be it. Unless you're willing to meet the simple standards for discussion, I'll just let you make the usual empty declarations of victory or false accusation and dump you in the IA bin for a month or two. Hopefully when I let you out, you'll have matured a bit.
Click to expand...

A buffoon with delusions of intelligence?
Seems to me you are describing yourself.
Your psychobabble won't convince me, nor
will your silly and infantile accusations.

Please, by all means, put me on ignore,
your willful ignorance and liberal whining
will never convince me your world view
should be considered valid. You should
learn how to communicate rationally, that
might be a start. Until then...

amorosa_bye_bye_idiot__by_blassnz-d5tlobz.png
 
RB 60 said:
A buffoon with delusions of intelligence?
Seems to me you are describing yourself.
Your psychobabble won't convince me, nor
will your silly and infantile accusations.

Please, by all means, put me on ignore,
your willful ignorance and liberal whining
will never convince me your world view
should be considered valid. You should
learn how to communicate rationally, that
might be a start. Until then...

amorosa_bye_bye_idiot__by_blassnz-d5tlobz.png
Click to expand...

There you have it, dear readers. This dunce couldn't clik an arrow or a link for a real discussion, but instead wastes time with cartoons and childish retorts.

I put RB60 and other clowns like him on IA from time to time....they incessantly follow my posts and threads, usually to devolve into what you see above. the IA bin clears my view for any real discussions. So I'll dump this dunce for about a month or two and see if he can resist commenting on anything I post...and even then I'll wait for a spark of rationality and/or maturity. Hope springs eternal.
 
Taichiliberal said:
There you have it, dear readers. This dunce couldn't clik an arrow or a link for a real discussion, but instead wastes time with cartoons and childish retorts.

I put RB60 and other clowns like him on IA from time to time....they incessantly follow my posts and threads, usually to devolve into what you see above. the IA bin clears my view for any real discussions. So I'll dump this dunce for about a month or two and see if he can resist commenting on anything I post...and even then I'll wait for a spark of rationality and/or maturity. Hope springs eternal.
Click to expand...

:)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top