GOP Platform: Women Not Human

Haiku said:
They want to force the discussion with their language.."killing babies" which they think starts with a fertilized egg. We're talking about birth control and women's health and choice. They're full of self righteous shit.
Click to expand...

you kill an unborn child and call it birth control.....and yet you have the gall to call us full of shit......
 
Bijou said:
The fact of the matter is, women will exercise dominion over their own bodies whether mouth-breathing cavemen like it or not. Suck on it. Mothers get to decide. End of story. Law or no law. Abortions have been taking place for ages and will continue to, even if christ-y nutballs manage to overturn Roe v Wade. Furthermore, since you're a man who will never know what it is to bear a child, nor is your choice in the matter of whether it stays or goes relevant, your opinion on the issue carries zero weight, whether you scream 'murderer', or whine and snivel about 'sanctity', your passion is no more valued than gnat shit, because as a man, you have the luxury of CHOOSING complete and utter detachment from the situation, even if you're the father.
Click to expand...

so only a woman has the compassion necessary to kill her unborn child?.....
 
Bijou said:
It IS a human life, however undeveloped. That's irrelevant. What matters is who can decide whether to keep it or kill it. Only the mother can. To provide 'rights' to the unborn requires rescinding those same rights from its mother. That's why this issue is a no-brainer for reasonable people. Reasonable people don't have to scratch their heads over that one: mom wins. End of story. That's why abortion is legal, doofus.
Click to expand...

rescinding "rights" which were wrongly awarded only a few decades ago....obviously "mom" doesn't win by killing her children....a "mom" HAS children.....abortion is not legal because of reasonable people, it's legal because of evil people.......
 
Bijou said:
You want to make moral decisions for others. You don't have that right.
Click to expand...

???....it is true that others can't make moral decisions for you......but society is based upon having standards to judge moral decisions......you might make the moral decision to kill your husband......society DOES have the right to punish you if you are foolish enough to do it......so a woman goes through great anguish and reaches a decision........if she makes the wrong decision and kills an unborn child, society shouldn't be applauding her right to do so....they should be saying "what the fuck is the matter with you"......
 
ZappasGuitar said:
You are wrong...

It's not "LiberalS in our children'S schoolS taking bag luncheS away because they say that the luncheS..."

It was ONE Liberal nut from ONE CHILD'S school who took away ONE lunch...whereas it was ALL CHILDREN who would have been affected by the Republican plan to reclassify ketchup...so how about if we're going to make a point we stick to the real facts?
Click to expand...


Oh here we go. How convenient for your argument...I love it how the ever so subjective argument from libs is that when something happens that makes them look bad they can say, 'Hey, don't generalize us', while at the same time doing that exact thing to their opponent...Come on Zappa, you're a smart guy, you can do better than this.
 
King of Owls said:
bad logic. if that were the case, third trimester abortions would also be legal. (outright banned or severe restrictions in 36 states).

Also a handful of states ban them even earlier than that.

The reason it is legal is because for the majority of abortions, it's just a clump of cells.
Click to expand...

Nonsense. The 'clump of cells' argument is flawed as well, because right now we are on mars looking for what? Cells, water, precursors of life. We have a definition of life on the cellular level, and people like you want to toss that out based on convenience of the person responsible for gestation, and incubation of that life. Answer me this question, it takes two people to make a pregnancy occur right? Then in the most likely use of abortion today, which is clearly as a form of birth control, why is the baby's father not needed for approval as well? Would he not have to step up if the mother chose to continue the gestation, and bring the child into the world? Ofcourse he would. The father has rights too.
 
Last edited:
j-mac said:
Nonsense. The 'clump of cells' argument is flawed as well, because right now we are on mars looking for what? Cells, water, precursors of life. We have a definition of life on the cellular level, and people like you want to toss that out based on convenience of the person responsible for gustation, and incubation of that life. Answer me this question, it takes two people to make a pregnancy occur right? Then in the most likely use of abortion today, which is clearly as a form of birth control, why is the baby's father not needed for approval as well? Would he not have to step up if the mother chose to continue the gustation, and bring the child into the world? Ofcourse he would. The father has rights too.
Click to expand...

I think you mean gestation!!

(gŭ-stā'shən)
pron.gif

n.
The act or faculty of tasting.
 
j-mac said:
Nonsense. The 'clump of cells' argument is flawed as well, because right now we are on mars looking for what? Cells, water, precursors of life. We have a definition of life on the cellular level, and people like you want to toss that out based on convenience of the person responsible for gustation, and incubation of that life. Answer me this question, it takes two people to make a pregnancy occur right? Then in the most likely use of abortion today, which is clearly as a form of birth control, why is the baby's father not needed for approval as well? Would he not have to step up if the mother chose to continue the gustation, and bring the child into the world? Ofcourse he would. The father has rights too.
Click to expand...

The brain isn't active until the 26th week, that's when a foetus can first be considered to be sentient.

26 weeks or 6 months: The foetus 14" long and almost two pounds. The lungs' bronchioles develop. Interlinking of the brain's neurons begins. The higher functions of the foetal brain turn on for the first time. Some rudimentary brain waves can be detected. The foetus will be able to feel pain for the first time. It has become conscious of its surroundings. The fetus has become a sentient human life for the first time.
Click to expand...
 
The thing I don't get about liberals, is that many of them are so quick to toss out the racist tag on someone they don't agree with politically, at the drop of a hat, but support something like abortion, which Margaret Sanger wanted to be legal as a means of eugenics. Sanger wanted to wipe out the Black race with abortion...True racism?....Hmmmm....Where are most of the PP's located today?
 
Aoxomoxoa said:
The brain isn't active until the 26th week, that's when a foetus can first be considered to be sentient.
Click to expand...

Hell, there are some adults that shouldn't be considered 'sentient'...Should we be allowe to kill them also, because it may be more convenient for us?
 
j-mac said:
Hell, there are some adults that shouldn't be considered 'sentient'...Should we be allowe to kill them also, because it may be more convenient for us?
Click to expand...

Are you volunteering? Sentient is a medical definition, so applies to everybody even if seemingly the lights are on but there's nobody home.
 
Aoxomoxoa said:
Are you volunteering? Sentient is a medical definition, so applies to everybody even if seemingly the lights are on but there's nobody home.
Click to expand...

LOL, Am I what? So, you'd like to see me horribly dismembered, and discarded? Why? Because we disagree on some things? That's kind of harsh, No?

Tell me, if the baby is just a clump of cells, is there a chance that that clump will mature into say, a toaster, a plant, a Buick? No...carried to term, those cells will be a human every time.
 
j-mac said:
LOL, Am I what? So, you'd like to see me horribly dismembered, and discarded? Why? Because we disagree on some things? That's kind of harsh, No?

Tell me, if the baby is just a clump of cells, is there a chance that that clump will mature into say, a toaster, a plant, a Buick? No...carried to term, those cells will be a human every time.
Click to expand...

You could advance a similar argument about sperm so you'll have to stop wanking.
 
Superfreak said:
Dem platform: children aren't human, women should be able to kill them if they want. They are not entitled to human rights protections, because, like, we are liberals and we get to decide who is human based on a whim, rather than science.
Click to expand...
So now the unborn are Children? How far are you guys going to take this?
 
j-mac said:
Hell, there are some adults that shouldn't be considered 'sentient'...Should we be allowe to kill them also, because it may be more convenient for us?
Click to expand...

In your case, yes. It is bad enough you are allowed to post here, nevermind live.
 
signalmankenneth said:
Self-Rape-By-Todd-Akin.jpg


August 21, 2012

An official from Missouri’s Republican Party on Monday defended Senate candidate Todd Akin after he suggested abortions should not be allowed in any case because victims of “legitimate” rape victims could not get pregnant.

GOP 4th Senate District Committeewoman Sharon Barnes told The New York Times “that abortion is never an option.”

In an interview with KTVI-TV over the weekend, Akin had said that “the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down,” referring to pregnancy after so-called “legitimate rape.”

Source: Raw Story . Read full article. (link)


aq7PwY3Jokep15_9f17_tw2.gif


527967_454140527953222_1447699872_n.jpg
Click to expand...

Priceless! Especially the one about the lady parts.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top