My body MY CHOICE
Comments
-
Gosnell’s taint is all over you, Nancy.HHusky said:
Please don’t cry.46XiJCAB said:
Pesky details. Dazzler and his party will never wash Gosnell’s blood off their hands. Remember, we’re all responsible for everything Trump said and did that the Dazzler’s of the world suffered hurt feelers over.SFGbob said:
Correct, but Gosnell was in violation of the law and thus the conviction. But with the law Dazzler is now supporting Gosnell wouldn't be violating any laws if just makes sure to kill the baby as it's head crowns.46XiJCAB said:
Dazzler’s party enabled him with a hands off approach in PA. They all have the blood of those babies on their hands. Might as well have been standing next to him. Right Dazzler?SFGbob said:
Insurrectionists and Traitors!
Kidding!
Go right ahead. -
Speaking of crying. Maybe Dazzler wants to give the real reason why he stormed off the Woodshed 2.0. Dazzler?
-
Dazzler loves to cite how Gosnell was convicted.
What he’ll never acknowledge is that most of the state abortion laws that were used to convict Gosnell will be wiped out if the Rats he votes for are able to pass their pro-abortion law.
And that’s why we get nothing of substance and only the Kunt act from the Dazzler -
Yup, Dazzler wants to pretend Gosnell was operating in a vacuum. PA officials were not inspecting clinics like Gosnell’s, one well known pro-choice group was providing the pressure.
-
That's a logical and brave conclusion. As much as I want to have the most heinous of murderers put to death, i came to the same conclusion regarding capital punishment and there was no way around the logic for me.creepycoug said:There are some weird takes on this issue. It's one thing to want to protect state's rights, but some things are pretty fundamental. That's why you can't have slaves in some states and not others.
I've done some thinking about this, and my views have evolved. As much as it sucks to have more derelicts born into society every day and inevitably increase the welfare state, nobody has been able to make a thought-provoking argument to draw the line anywhere. If you can't draw the line, the Catholics are right: at conception. The rest, my body, viability, rape, incest, save the mother, etc, is just mental masturbation. There is no reconciling it. It is morally unacceptable.
There is literally no justification for it. Human life at conception, period. No ifs, ands or butts. Are you allowed to kill an innocent bystander to save yourself? Or because the bystander has inconvenienced you? Did the fetus rape you? Is the fetus responsible for threatening your life? No, no, no and no.
States rights is perhaps the most retarded of arguments. We don't leave it to state legislatures to define what life is and where it begins, and we certainly don't leave it to the voters to decide that it's ok to just randomly kill somebody. "Watch out on your vacation to Glacier Sammy! The voters in Montana have approved the right of citizens to randomly kill people that they view as inconvenient." Please. Stop with this business.
Roe v. Wade should be overturned, and abortion should be ruled unconstitutional throughout the land.
So, no abortion, ever, in any circumstances. That's the right answer. I can draw no other conclusion. -
Oh yeah man. It's quite common and rusty wire hangers are used. And then the woman dies. It happens all the time because I hear angry white women say it routinely on CNN and FOX and a lot of them are CEOs of this activist group or that so they must be really smart and telling the truth.MikeDamone said:
Has there every been an abortion performed in and alley? Front alley or back alley?creepycoug said:
People still murder people but we keep it illegal.RaceBannon said:We're not a theocracy
Trite but true
I would be crushed if I got a gal preggers and she got an abortion. Against everything I believe in
Prohibition was also good. Before it Americans were basically drunk if they were awake
Drugs are bad for you and the country
But back ally abortion would return and that's bad secular policy
Prohibition doesn't work. Not even in Iran
Back alleys will back alley. It’s a person or it’s not. No line? Then it is. Can’t kill it. Period. No circumstances. The Catholics nailed this one.
I doubt it. -
Here's the thing, I agree with 81% of @creepycoug reasoning.
I am still very fucking worried about where repealing the right to privacy leads.
Vax mandates were just the start. Don't forget ABC supported them in principle if not in letter.
The right to actual property is never coming back and the right to privacy is one of the last bullworks we have left that has bipartisan support. -
Hmm, hard to argue with that take but murder is still against the law. The states should allow their voters to decide whether it should be legal. As a people, we desperately need the states to start taking hard stands. If a minority of states along with the federal government want to trample the rights of the majority, then we're heading for civil war.TurdBomber said:Adding to Creepy's logic-based explanation is the fact that premature babies commonly survive at ever more shorter gestation periods than in 1973, so this problem of when the state's interest overrides the mother's has been bearing down upon the Roe standards and time periods for at least 3 decades now. Lefty-Libs have satisfied themselves for decades by distinguishing between a baby and a fetus. Well, if it can survive outside the womb, then it's a baby folks. A viable, living, human baby. So abortion at that point is, to me, taking a life, and I don't see how any thoughtful person can argue otherwise.
That said, I think it's a woman's right to choose and if they choose to kill their unborn child, that's up to them. But killing is killing, and there's no way around it IMO. -
Something a lot of beta males say because they think it will get them laid. I'm amazed what these fucking freaks will say and do to garner any attention from a girl.Prestonluv said:Listen. I'm pro choice.
But all these women are insistent that this is about controlling women instead of just not wanting to abort a heart beat.
It's actually pissing me off. I realize there is a chunk of men who want to control women. There is also a chunk who want the baby to be born and don't want to hold women back.
do they not realize that many of these aborted babies are females? Wouldn’t saving these potential females be considered pro women? -
I'm old enough to remember 3 weeks ago when Creep argued abortion was an 'unfortunate necessity of the modern world' (or something to that effect).RaceBannon said:
It is a good thread and creepy is presenting the lock them up no abortion ever side quite nicelydnc said:I remember arguing with creep about this before and I'm not sure if I'm being parodied or I have a new ally but so far I've enjoyed this thread.
It's just not a realistic option for a secular society
People also forget - rather they didn't read the ruling - that Roe v. Wade is actually about the State's obligation to protect the life of the mother. Not the unborn. People forget that.
Irregardless, the State shouldn't be involved with the medical decisions of an individual. My body MY choice.
And on that point, fuck the hypocrite leftist faggots who spent the last two years arguing against body autonomy. You worthless bags of shit, stealing oxygen from the rest of us, abdicated your right to an opinion with that flip flop bullshit. Have some fucking principals.
