Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
My body MY CHOICE
Comments
-
Noted Baby Killer heard from.Fire_Marshall_Bill said:
You're unhinged. Again. Probably butt hurt because I didn't go to your wine and cheese bored after you begged me. Fuck off faggot.creepycoug said:
It’s unreasonable because the life of a 19 week old person is at least as morally significant as yours is you dumb box of rocks.Fire_Marshall_Bill said:I get tired of the media fueled abortion debate but how is limiting it to the first 20 weeks unreasonable?
Hope that was helpful.
The very idea that you think I actually wanted a retard like you swapping IQs with some of our finest thinkers here is Exhibit A-10,000 of your retardation.
If I asked you to join, and I don’t recall doing so, it was for traffic numbers and that is it. You’ve always struck me as quite poor anyway, so what could you have added other than how to scam welfare and social security bennies? Answer: nada. That’s Spanish for “nothing” you undereducated cretin. -
-
-
It’s sad to see how far Anarchists have fallen.hardhat said:
-
Although, and this will require some thought, with my new stance of zero tolerance for infringing on the inalienable rights of an innocent person, we have to think long and hard about the inherent tensions between true liberty and holding to account the cum dumpers themselves.MikeDamone said:
As a practical matter of gender roles, with which I agree btw, women wind up dealing with the kids. Good ones, bad ones, and everything in between. Men seldom get stuck, and as Bob and friends frequently remind us, the "cum and run" tendencies of some of our fellow men lead to great pressure on the welfare state, not to mention what it does to crime rates.
If we are to further our? shared interests in limiting (or, fuck, why not dream - eliminating) the welfare state and maybe do something about crime, seems to me we should apply at least as much pressure on dead beat baby daddies as we do on girls to remain chaste or use reliable birth control.
Boys, you gotta have some skin in the game besides the skin you have in the game. Do we, then, go after dead beat dads with full abandon and squeeze those reckless welfare-making mother fuckers to the bone until they at least financially support their kids? Or, instead, do we take a pure liberty approach and say to unwed and poor pregos, "hey, you could have kept your pants on."????
Interested in Mike's, Sleddy's and Roadtrip's take, and that of the others who have the right point of view on this issue. Not so much interested in the views of the morally compromised, like Preston and Fire Marshall. Still praying for Race. -
Sounds kinda racist.gifcreepycoug said:
Although, and this will require some thought, with my new stance of zero tolerance for infringing on the inalienable rights of an innocent person, we have to think long and hard about the inherent tensions between true liberty and holding to account the cum dumpers themselves.MikeDamone said:
As a practical matter of gender roles, with which I agree btw, women wind up dealing with the kids. Good ones, bad ones, and everything in between. Men seldom get stuck, and as Bob and friends frequently remind us, the "cum and run" tendencies of some of our fellow men lead to great pressure on the welfare state, not to mention what it does to crime rates.
If we are to further our? shared interests in limiting (or, fuck, why not dream - eliminating) the welfare state and maybe do something about crime, seems to me we should apply at least as much pressure on dead beat baby daddies as we do on girls to remain chaste or use reliable birth control.
Boys, you gotta have some skin in the game besides the skin you have in the game. Do we, then, go after dead beat dads with full abandon and squeeze those reckless welfare-making mother fuckers to the bone until they at least financially support their kids? Or, instead, do we take a pure liberty approach and say to unwed and poor pregos, "hey, you could have kept your pants on."????
Interested in Mike's, Sleddy's and Roadtrip's take, and that of the others who have the right point of view on this issue. Not so much interested in the views of the morally compromised, like Preston and Fire Marshall. Still praying for Race. -
You must have "convenient" amnesia.creepycoug said:
Noted Baby Killer heard from.Fire_Marshall_Bill said:
You're unhinged. Again. Probably butt hurt because I didn't go to your wine and cheese bored after you begged me. Fuck off faggot.creepycoug said:
It’s unreasonable because the life of a 19 week old person is at least as morally significant as yours is you dumb box of rocks.Fire_Marshall_Bill said:I get tired of the media fueled abortion debate but how is limiting it to the first 20 weeks unreasonable?
Hope that was helpful.
The very idea that you think I actually wanted a retard like you swapping IQs with some of our finest thinkers here is Exhibit A-10,000 of your retardation.
If I asked you to join, and I don’t recall doing so, it was for traffic numbers and that is it. You’ve always struck me as quite poor anyway, so what could you have added other than how to scam welfare and social security bennies? Answer: nada. That’s Spanish for “nothing” you undereducated cretin.
Yeah, finest thinkers...like the crypto scam guys? LOL. I'll pass pal. I don't even get why you're here so much. My guess is it's to stroke your fragile ego. Go to a Hurricane bored.
Yeah, the poor thing. Nice try. I've dealt with other prick ambulance chasers like you on the boards. Most of you are the same -
Hey, don't lay that shit in my lap. My proposed policy would apply to all who cum and run, with equal force.PurpleThrobber said:
Sounds kinda racist.gifcreepycoug said:
Although, and this will require some thought, with my new stance of zero tolerance for infringing on the inalienable rights of an innocent person, we have to think long and hard about the inherent tensions between true liberty and holding to account the cum dumpers themselves.MikeDamone said:
As a practical matter of gender roles, with which I agree btw, women wind up dealing with the kids. Good ones, bad ones, and everything in between. Men seldom get stuck, and as Bob and friends frequently remind us, the "cum and run" tendencies of some of our fellow men lead to great pressure on the welfare state, not to mention what it does to crime rates.
If we are to further our? shared interests in limiting (or, fuck, why not dream - eliminating) the welfare state and maybe do something about crime, seems to me we should apply at least as much pressure on dead beat baby daddies as we do on girls to remain chaste or use reliable birth control.
Boys, you gotta have some skin in the game besides the skin you have in the game. Do we, then, go after dead beat dads with full abandon and squeeze those reckless welfare-making mother fuckers to the bone until they at least financially support their kids? Or, instead, do we take a pure liberty approach and say to unwed and poor pregos, "hey, you could have kept your pants on."????
Interested in Mike's, Sleddy's and Roadtrip's take, and that of the others who have the right point of view on this issue. Not so much interested in the views of the morally compromised, like Preston and Fire Marshall. Still praying for Race. -
creepycoug said:
Although, and this will require some thought, with my new stance of zero tolerance for infringing on the inalienable rights of an innocent person, we have to think long and hard about the inherent tensions between true liberty and holding to account the cum dumpers themselves.MikeDamone said:
As a practical matter of gender roles, with which I agree btw, women wind up dealing with the kids. Good ones, bad ones, and everything in between. Men seldom get stuck, and as Bob and friends frequently remind us, the "cum and run" tendencies of some of our fellow men lead to great pressure on the welfare state, not to mention what it does to crime rates.
If we are to further our? shared interests in limiting (or, fuck, why not dream - eliminating) the welfare state and maybe do something about crime, seems to me we should apply at least as much pressure on dead beat baby daddies as we do on girls to remain chaste or use reliable birth control.
Boys, you gotta have some skin in the game besides the skin you have in the game. Do we, then, go after dead beat dads with full abandon and squeeze those reckless welfare-making mother fuckers to the bone until they at least financially support their kids? Or, instead, do we take a pure liberty approach and say to unwed and poor pregos, "hey, you could have kept your pants on."????
Interested in Mike's, Sleddy's and Roadtrip's take, and that of the others who have the right point of view on this issue. Not so much interested in the views of the morally compromised, like Preston and Fire Marshall. Still praying for Race.
In no way, shape, or form, should the State be involved to influence a doctor-patient consult or a subsequent medical procedure. Not for physician assisted euthanasia; not for an abortion; not for a fucking jab.
It's a principled position for individual sovereignty and ultimately a free society. Almost like attorney-client privilege.
An unfortunate necessity to be sure.
-
I'm not your pal, Cletus. Sorry you don't "get" it; seems to be a frequent state of consciousness for you.Fire_Marshall_Bill said:
You must have "convenient" amnesia.creepycoug said:
Noted Baby Killer heard from.Fire_Marshall_Bill said:
You're unhinged. Again. Probably butt hurt because I didn't go to your wine and cheese bored after you begged me. Fuck off faggot.creepycoug said:
It’s unreasonable because the life of a 19 week old person is at least as morally significant as yours is you dumb box of rocks.Fire_Marshall_Bill said:I get tired of the media fueled abortion debate but how is limiting it to the first 20 weeks unreasonable?
Hope that was helpful.
The very idea that you think I actually wanted a retard like you swapping IQs with some of our finest thinkers here is Exhibit A-10,000 of your retardation.
If I asked you to join, and I don’t recall doing so, it was for traffic numbers and that is it. You’ve always struck me as quite poor anyway, so what could you have added other than how to scam welfare and social security bennies? Answer: nada. That’s Spanish for “nothing” you undereducated cretin.
Yeah, finest thinkers...like the crypto scam guys? LOL. I'll pass pal. I don't even get why you're here so much. My guess is it's to stroke your fragile ego. Go to a Hurricane bored.
Yeah, the poor thing. Nice try. I've dealt with other prick ambulance chasers like you on the boards. Most of you are the same
And don't tell me what to do, baby killer.
