Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
Trump at March for Life
Comments
-
No straw man. You want to choose for others. I don’t.DJDuck said:Still relying on the ol’ strawman gambit I see HUDS
-
Exactly. We need to make it as easy and cheap (free) as possible for people to choose to kill the pours and the browns.HHusky said:
Abortion isn’t mandatory, Mr. Liberty. If brown people choose it, what’s your beef with that?MikeDamone said:
That’s a good way to keep the population of the browns in check. Some even suggest that’s a primary reason.creepycoug said:
That's actually a fair point. I don't entirely disagree. Or really disagree at all.Sledog said:
But, to the extent one agrees, as Race put it, that it's good public policy, then it's probably smart to pay for it among the poors. I don't need the gov. If I need to get someone an abortion, it's going to happen, even if a plane is involved. But if we're going to have it, let's use it to limit the growth of the welfare state. Because if we're bitching about welfare babies now, just make abortion EITHER legally or financially hard to get, and then see what you get.
It’s best to kill people before they become an issue and costs people a bunch of money. -
Gosnell is in prison. A blithering idiot’s statement in an interview cannot change the fact that murder is still illegal in 50 states and the District of Columbia.DJDuck said: -
You’re conflating the issues. Assuming they pay for it, what is your beef with brown people choosing abortion?MikeDamone said:
Exactly. We need to make it as easy and cheap (free) as possible for people to choose to kill the pours and the browns.HHusky said:
Abortion isn’t mandatory, Mr. Liberty. If brown people choose it, what’s your beef with that?MikeDamone said:
That’s a good way to keep the population of the browns in check. Some even suggest that’s a primary reason.creepycoug said:
That's actually a fair point. I don't entirely disagree. Or really disagree at all.Sledog said:
But, to the extent one agrees, as Race put it, that it's good public policy, then it's probably smart to pay for it among the poors. I don't need the gov. If I need to get someone an abortion, it's going to happen, even if a plane is involved. But if we're going to have it, let's use it to limit the growth of the welfare state. Because if we're bitching about welfare babies now, just make abortion EITHER legally or financially hard to get, and then see what you get.
It’s best to kill people before they become an issue and costs people a bunch of money. -
Funny how this argument doesn't apply to your desire to raise income taxes. You're free to pay more taxes right now. But you don't do it. You want to "choose" for others and force them to pay taxes you're currently unwilling to pay.HHusky said:
No straw man. You want to choose for others. I don’t.DJDuck said:Still relying on the ol’ strawman gambit I see HUDS
-
Gosnell is in prison. A blithering idiot’s statement in an interview cannot change the fact that murder is still illegal in 50 states and the District of Columbia.
Another talking point O'Keefed has been rocking for years. What's he in prison for O'Keefed? I'll give you a fucking hint and it's the same hint I gave you when you first trotted out this red herring. It wasn't for providing late term abortions. Put please continue you fucking hack. -
-
When did I say I had a beef about it?HHusky said:
You’re conflating the issues. Assuming they pay for it, what is your beef with brown people choosing abortion?MikeDamone said:
Exactly. We need to make it as easy and cheap (free) as possible for people to choose to kill the pours and the browns.HHusky said:
Abortion isn’t mandatory, Mr. Liberty. If brown people choose it, what’s your beef with that?MikeDamone said:
That’s a good way to keep the population of the browns in check. Some even suggest that’s a primary reason.creepycoug said:
That's actually a fair point. I don't entirely disagree. Or really disagree at all.Sledog said:
But, to the extent one agrees, as Race put it, that it's good public policy, then it's probably smart to pay for it among the poors. I don't need the gov. If I need to get someone an abortion, it's going to happen, even if a plane is involved. But if we're going to have it, let's use it to limit the growth of the welfare state. Because if we're bitching about welfare babies now, just make abortion EITHER legally or financially hard to get, and then see what you get.
It’s best to kill people before they become an issue and costs people a bunch of money.
-
-
Bus Carrying Covington Catholic Students Leaving March for Life Involved in Deadly Crash
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/01/bus-carrying-covington-catholic-students-leaving-march-for-life-involved-in-deadly-crash/ -
Well I guess we disagree on this point.MikeDamone said:
That’s a good way to keep the population of the browns in check. Some even suggest that’s a primary reason.creepycoug said:
That's actually a fair point. I don't entirely disagree. Or really disagree at all.Sledog said:
But, to the extent one agrees, as Race put it, that it's good public policy, then it's probably smart to pay for it among the poors. I don't need the gov. If I need to get someone an abortion, it's going to happen, even if a plane is involved. But if we're going to have it, let's use it to limit the growth of the welfare state. Because if we're bitching about welfare babies now, just make abortion EITHER legally or financially hard to get, and then see what you get.
It’s best to kill people before they become an issue and costs people a bunch of money. We might want to extend this logic throughout people lives after they are born.
I didn't mean that I think it's good public policy so that we keep the Browns in check. OBK is your Huckleberry for reasonable amounts; not me.
But if there is a fundamental public interest in legal abortion, it should include the interest of the rest of society not having to support yet more and larger welfare families. Or we could cut welfare. I'd be down with that too.
The other argument is the black market theory, but apparently that one has been summarily rejected in the Tug.
Ultimately, it is a question of liberty and autonomy for me. With that said, there are a lot of philosophical issues with that justification. My right to liberty has limitations, namely that it does not trump another person's right to liberty, and life.
All of the "it's my body" and "it's my privacy" are just fundamentally flawed and terrible arguments. If we were talking about a wart, then sure, my body, my biz. But the whole point is that a fetus is a growing human being, and all the drawing of the lines along the process of gestation don't check out. This is even true in the case of rape/incest/health of the mother.
If the fetus is a person, nothing that happened, or will happen, to the mother constitutes any obvious basis on which to deny that person their fundamental rights.
Still, I want it legal in the first trimester. If you can't figure it out by then, you're stuck. -
Walking it back is wise. Good for you.MikeDamone said:
When did I say I had a beef about it?HHusky said:
You’re conflating the issues. Assuming they pay for it, what is your beef with brown people choosing abortion?MikeDamone said:
Exactly. We need to make it as easy and cheap (free) as possible for people to choose to kill the pours and the browns.HHusky said:
Abortion isn’t mandatory, Mr. Liberty. If brown people choose it, what’s your beef with that?MikeDamone said:
That’s a good way to keep the population of the browns in check. Some even suggest that’s a primary reason.creepycoug said:
That's actually a fair point. I don't entirely disagree. Or really disagree at all.Sledog said:
But, to the extent one agrees, as Race put it, that it's good public policy, then it's probably smart to pay for it among the poors. I don't need the gov. If I need to get someone an abortion, it's going to happen, even if a plane is involved. But if we're going to have it, let's use it to limit the growth of the welfare state. Because if we're bitching about welfare babies now, just make abortion EITHER legally or financially hard to get, and then see what you get.
It’s best to kill people before they become an issue and costs people a bunch of money. -
We agree. I was being sarkasticcreepycoug said:
Well I guess we disagree on this point.MikeDamone said:
That’s a good way to keep the population of the browns in check. Some even suggest that’s a primary reason.creepycoug said:
That's actually a fair point. I don't entirely disagree. Or really disagree at all.Sledog said:
But, to the extent one agrees, as Race put it, that it's good public policy, then it's probably smart to pay for it among the poors. I don't need the gov. If I need to get someone an abortion, it's going to happen, even if a plane is involved. But if we're going to have it, let's use it to limit the growth of the welfare state. Because if we're bitching about welfare babies now, just make abortion EITHER legally or financially hard to get, and then see what you get.
It’s best to kill people before they become an issue and costs people a bunch of money. We might want to extend this logic throughout people lives after they are born.
I didn't mean that I think it's good public policy so that we keep the Browns in check. OBK is your Huckleberry for reasonable amounts; not me.
But if there is a fundamental public interest in legal abortion, it should include the interest of the rest of society not having to support yet more and larger welfare families. Or we could cut welfare. I'd be down with that too.
The other argument is the black market theory, but apparently that one has been summarily rejected in the Tug.
Ultimately, it is a question of liberty and autonomy for me. With that said, there are a lot of philosophical issues with that justification. My right to liberty has limitations, namely that it does not trump another person's right to liberty, and life.
All of the "it's my body" and "it's my privacy" are just fundamentally flawed and terrible arguments. If we were talking about a wart, then sure, my body, my biz. But the whole point is that a fetus is a growing human being, and all the drawing of the lines along the process of gestation don't check out. This is even true in the case of rape/incest/health of the mother.
If the fetus is a person, nothing that happened, or will happen, to the mother constitutes any obvious basis on which to deny that person their fundamental rights.
Still, I want it legal in the first trimester. If you can't figure it out by then, you're stuck. -
Got it.MikeDamone said:
We agree. I was being sarkasticcreepycoug said:
Well I guess we disagree on this point.MikeDamone said:
That’s a good way to keep the population of the browns in check. Some even suggest that’s a primary reason.creepycoug said:
That's actually a fair point. I don't entirely disagree. Or really disagree at all.Sledog said:
But, to the extent one agrees, as Race put it, that it's good public policy, then it's probably smart to pay for it among the poors. I don't need the gov. If I need to get someone an abortion, it's going to happen, even if a plane is involved. But if we're going to have it, let's use it to limit the growth of the welfare state. Because if we're bitching about welfare babies now, just make abortion EITHER legally or financially hard to get, and then see what you get.
It’s best to kill people before they become an issue and costs people a bunch of money. We might want to extend this logic throughout people lives after they are born.
I didn't mean that I think it's good public policy so that we keep the Browns in check. OBK is your Huckleberry for reasonable amounts; not me.
But if there is a fundamental public interest in legal abortion, it should include the interest of the rest of society not having to support yet more and larger welfare families. Or we could cut welfare. I'd be down with that too.
The other argument is the black market theory, but apparently that one has been summarily rejected in the Tug.
Ultimately, it is a question of liberty and autonomy for me. With that said, there are a lot of philosophical issues with that justification. My right to liberty has limitations, namely that it does not trump another person's right to liberty, and life.
All of the "it's my body" and "it's my privacy" are just fundamentally flawed and terrible arguments. If we were talking about a wart, then sure, my body, my biz. But the whole point is that a fetus is a growing human being, and all the drawing of the lines along the process of gestation don't check out. This is even true in the case of rape/incest/health of the mother.
If the fetus is a person, nothing that happened, or will happen, to the mother constitutes any obvious basis on which to deny that person their fundamental rights.
Still, I want it legal in the first trimester. If you can't figure it out by then, you're stuck. -
That’s what I thought.creepycoug said:
Got it.MikeDamone said:
We agree. I was being sarkasticcreepycoug said:
Well I guess we disagree on this point.MikeDamone said:
That’s a good way to keep the population of the browns in check. Some even suggest that’s a primary reason.creepycoug said:
That's actually a fair point. I don't entirely disagree. Or really disagree at all.Sledog said:
But, to the extent one agrees, as Race put it, that it's good public policy, then it's probably smart to pay for it among the poors. I don't need the gov. If I need to get someone an abortion, it's going to happen, even if a plane is involved. But if we're going to have it, let's use it to limit the growth of the welfare state. Because if we're bitching about welfare babies now, just make abortion EITHER legally or financially hard to get, and then see what you get.
It’s best to kill people before they become an issue and costs people a bunch of money. We might want to extend this logic throughout people lives after they are born.
I didn't mean that I think it's good public policy so that we keep the Browns in check. OBK is your Huckleberry for reasonable amounts; not me.
But if there is a fundamental public interest in legal abortion, it should include the interest of the rest of society not having to support yet more and larger welfare families. Or we could cut welfare. I'd be down with that too.
The other argument is the black market theory, but apparently that one has been summarily rejected in the Tug.
Ultimately, it is a question of liberty and autonomy for me. With that said, there are a lot of philosophical issues with that justification. My right to liberty has limitations, namely that it does not trump another person's right to liberty, and life.
All of the "it's my body" and "it's my privacy" are just fundamentally flawed and terrible arguments. If we were talking about a wart, then sure, my body, my biz. But the whole point is that a fetus is a growing human being, and all the drawing of the lines along the process of gestation don't check out. This is even true in the case of rape/incest/health of the mother.
If the fetus is a person, nothing that happened, or will happen, to the mother constitutes any obvious basis on which to deny that person their fundamental rights.
Still, I want it legal in the first trimester. If you can't figure it out by then, you're stuck. -
No, I mean, I really got it. No [sarcasm.gif] intended.MikeDamone said:
That’s what I thought.creepycoug said:
Got it.MikeDamone said:
We agree. I was being sarkasticcreepycoug said:
Well I guess we disagree on this point.MikeDamone said:
That’s a good way to keep the population of the browns in check. Some even suggest that’s a primary reason.creepycoug said:
That's actually a fair point. I don't entirely disagree. Or really disagree at all.Sledog said:
But, to the extent one agrees, as Race put it, that it's good public policy, then it's probably smart to pay for it among the poors. I don't need the gov. If I need to get someone an abortion, it's going to happen, even if a plane is involved. But if we're going to have it, let's use it to limit the growth of the welfare state. Because if we're bitching about welfare babies now, just make abortion EITHER legally or financially hard to get, and then see what you get.
It’s best to kill people before they become an issue and costs people a bunch of money. We might want to extend this logic throughout people lives after they are born.
I didn't mean that I think it's good public policy so that we keep the Browns in check. OBK is your Huckleberry for reasonable amounts; not me.
But if there is a fundamental public interest in legal abortion, it should include the interest of the rest of society not having to support yet more and larger welfare families. Or we could cut welfare. I'd be down with that too.
The other argument is the black market theory, but apparently that one has been summarily rejected in the Tug.
Ultimately, it is a question of liberty and autonomy for me. With that said, there are a lot of philosophical issues with that justification. My right to liberty has limitations, namely that it does not trump another person's right to liberty, and life.
All of the "it's my body" and "it's my privacy" are just fundamentally flawed and terrible arguments. If we were talking about a wart, then sure, my body, my biz. But the whole point is that a fetus is a growing human being, and all the drawing of the lines along the process of gestation don't check out. This is even true in the case of rape/incest/health of the mother.
If the fetus is a person, nothing that happened, or will happen, to the mother constitutes any obvious basis on which to deny that person their fundamental rights.
Still, I want it legal in the first trimester. If you can't figure it out by then, you're stuck.
Creep's turned over a new leaf. All my posts are henceforth genuine and true expressions of my true thoughts and ... dare I say ... feelings. -
That's what abortion was for. Ask Margret. Keep the black population down and get rid of retards.creepycoug said:
That's actually a fair point. I don't entirely disagree. Or really disagree at all.Sledog said:
But, to the extent one agrees, as Race put it, that it's good public policy, then it's probably smart to pay for it among the poors. I don't need the gov. If I need to get someone an abortion, it's going to happen, even if a plane is involved. But if we're going to have it, let's use it to limit the growth of the welfare state. Because if we're bitching about welfare babies now, just make abortion EITHER legally or financially hard to get, and then see what you get. -
Pressing. Badly.SFGbob said:
Funny how this argument doesn't apply to your desire to raise income taxes. You're free to pay more taxes right now. But you don't do it. You want to "choose" for others and force them to pay taxes you're currently unwilling to pay.HHusky said:
No straw man. You want to choose for others. I don’t.DJDuck said:Still relying on the ol’ strawman gambit I see HUDS
-
I really don't care what Margaret did or didn't think about anything. I have my own point of view and my own basis for it, and thus don't need to point to some dead person to justify it or change it. It's rhetoric - anything she did or didn't think or say - at this point. I think it's good policy that abortion be legal and available during the first trimester and part of why is that I'm confident the welfare state would explode without it. That I think that, and that it might disproportionately affect a minority group doesn't mean I believe in eugenics.Sledog said:
That's what abortion was for. Ask Margret. Keep the black population down and get rid of retards.creepycoug said:
That's actually a fair point. I don't entirely disagree. Or really disagree at all.Sledog said:
But, to the extent one agrees, as Race put it, that it's good public policy, then it's probably smart to pay for it among the poors. I don't need the gov. If I need to get someone an abortion, it's going to happen, even if a plane is involved. But if we're going to have it, let's use it to limit the growth of the welfare state. Because if we're bitching about welfare babies now, just make abortion EITHER legally or financially hard to get, and then see what you get.
I agreed with your point that, if the basis for the freedom to abort is a general concept of liberty and freedom from government interference, then asking the government to pay for it, while not technically a contradiction, does smack of hypocrisy on some level.
-
Yeah, that's why you won't touch your Gosnell talking point bullshit. Because I'm "pressing."HHusky said:
Pressing. Badly.SFGbob said:
Funny how this argument doesn't apply to your desire to raise income taxes. You're free to pay more taxes right now. But you don't do it. You want to "choose" for others and force them to pay taxes you're currently unwilling to pay.HHusky said:
No straw man. You want to choose for others. I don’t.DJDuck said:Still relying on the ol’ strawman gambit I see HUDS
-
Pro-Life NFL Star Matt Birk: ‘Greatest Act of Love’ Giving Child for Adoption
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/01/25/pro-life-nfl-star-matt-birk-greatest-act-of-love-giving-child-for-adoption/ -
Not that it matters, it’s just interesting that you’re rarely right about anything. Sanger was all about contraception, not abortion.Sledog said:
That's what abortion was for. Ask Margret. Keep the black population down and get rid of retards.creepycoug said:
That's actually a fair point. I don't entirely disagree. Or really disagree at all.Sledog said:
But, to the extent one agrees, as Race put it, that it's good public policy, then it's probably smart to pay for it among the poors. I don't need the gov. If I need to get someone an abortion, it's going to happen, even if a plane is involved. But if we're going to have it, let's use it to limit the growth of the welfare state. Because if we're bitching about welfare babies now, just make abortion EITHER legally or financially hard to get, and then see what you get. -
That's gotta sting coming from the dumb Kunt who still pushes the hands up don't shoot lie and who claimed Mike Brown was shot in the back while running away.HHusky said:
Not that it matters, it’s just interesting that you’re rarely right about anything. Sanger was all about contraception, not abortion.Sledog said:
That's what abortion was for. Ask Margret. Keep the black population down and get rid of retards.creepycoug said:
That's actually a fair point. I don't entirely disagree. Or really disagree at all.Sledog said:
But, to the extent one agrees, as Race put it, that it's good public policy, then it's probably smart to pay for it among the poors. I don't need the gov. If I need to get someone an abortion, it's going to happen, even if a plane is involved. But if we're going to have it, let's use it to limit the growth of the welfare state. Because if we're bitching about welfare babies now, just make abortion EITHER legally or financially hard to get, and then see what you get.
Tell the folks how you got your nickname O'Keefed. -
You didn’t lay a glove on my comment about Gosnell. But feel free to declare victory if you wish.SFGbob said:
Yeah, that's why you won't touch your Gosnell talking point bullshit. Because I'm "pressing."HHusky said:
Pressing. Badly.SFGbob said:
Funny how this argument doesn't apply to your desire to raise income taxes. You're free to pay more taxes right now. But you don't do it. You want to "choose" for others and force them to pay taxes you're currently unwilling to pay.HHusky said:
No straw man. You want to choose for others. I don’t.DJDuck said:Still relying on the ol’ strawman gambit I see HUDS
-
Was it $1.5 million?SFGbob said:
That's gotta sting coming from the dumb Kunt who still pushes the hands up don't shoot lie and who claimed Mike Brown was shot in the back while running away.HHusky said:
Not that it matters, it’s just interesting that you’re rarely right about anything. Sanger was all about contraception, not abortion.Sledog said:
That's what abortion was for. Ask Margret. Keep the black population down and get rid of retards.creepycoug said:
That's actually a fair point. I don't entirely disagree. Or really disagree at all.Sledog said:
But, to the extent one agrees, as Race put it, that it's good public policy, then it's probably smart to pay for it among the poors. I don't need the gov. If I need to get someone an abortion, it's going to happen, even if a plane is involved. But if we're going to have it, let's use it to limit the growth of the welfare state. Because if we're bitching about welfare babies now, just make abortion EITHER legally or financially hard to get, and then see what you get.
Tell the folks how you got your nickname O'Keefed. -
Yeah, other than refuting your fucking lie that Gosnell was sent to prison for providing late term abortions I didn't touch it.HHusky said:
You didn’t lay a glove on my comment about Gosnell. But feel free to declare victory if you wish.SFGbob said:
Yeah, that's why you won't touch your Gosnell talking point bullshit. Because I'm "pressing."HHusky said:
Pressing. Badly.SFGbob said:
Funny how this argument doesn't apply to your desire to raise income taxes. You're free to pay more taxes right now. But you don't do it. You want to "choose" for others and force them to pay taxes you're currently unwilling to pay.HHusky said:
No straw man. You want to choose for others. I don’t.DJDuck said:Still relying on the ol’ strawman gambit I see HUDS
-
That's it, the city settling with Brown's family proves he really was shot in the back while running away. What a fucking Kunt your are O'Keefed,HHusky said:
Was it $1.5 million?SFGbob said:
That's gotta sting coming from the dumb Kunt who still pushes the hands up don't shoot lie and who claimed Mike Brown was shot in the back while running away.HHusky said:
Not that it matters, it’s just interesting that you’re rarely right about anything. Sanger was all about contraception, not abortion.Sledog said:
That's what abortion was for. Ask Margret. Keep the black population down and get rid of retards.creepycoug said:
That's actually a fair point. I don't entirely disagree. Or really disagree at all.Sledog said:
But, to the extent one agrees, as Race put it, that it's good public policy, then it's probably smart to pay for it among the poors. I don't need the gov. If I need to get someone an abortion, it's going to happen, even if a plane is involved. But if we're going to have it, let's use it to limit the growth of the welfare state. Because if we're bitching about welfare babies now, just make abortion EITHER legally or financially hard to get, and then see what you get.
Tell the folks how you got your nickname O'Keefed. -
You obviously weren’t tracking the exchanges. We can’t all age well.SFGbob said:
Yeah, other than refuting your fucking lie that Gosnell was sent to prison for providing late term abortions I didn't touch it.HHusky said:
You didn’t lay a glove on my comment about Gosnell. But feel free to declare victory if you wish.SFGbob said:
Yeah, that's why you won't touch your Gosnell talking point bullshit. Because I'm "pressing."HHusky said:
Pressing. Badly.SFGbob said:
Funny how this argument doesn't apply to your desire to raise income taxes. You're free to pay more taxes right now. But you don't do it. You want to "choose" for others and force them to pay taxes you're currently unwilling to pay.HHusky said:
No straw man. You want to choose for others. I don’t.DJDuck said:Still relying on the ol’ strawman gambit I see HUDS
-
Didn't say you did just pointing out the crackpot in the history of the subject at hand.creepycoug said:
I really don't care what Margaret did or didn't think about anything. I have my own point of view and my own basis for it, and thus don't need to point to some dead person to justify it or change it. It's rhetoric - anything she did or didn't think or say - at this point. I think it's good policy that abortion be legal and available during the first trimester and part of why is that I'm confident the welfare state would explode without it. That I think that, and that it might disproportionately affect a minority group doesn't mean I believe in eugenics.Sledog said:
That's what abortion was for. Ask Margret. Keep the black population down and get rid of retards.creepycoug said:
That's actually a fair point. I don't entirely disagree. Or really disagree at all.Sledog said:
But, to the extent one agrees, as Race put it, that it's good public policy, then it's probably smart to pay for it among the poors. I don't need the gov. If I need to get someone an abortion, it's going to happen, even if a plane is involved. But if we're going to have it, let's use it to limit the growth of the welfare state. Because if we're bitching about welfare babies now, just make abortion EITHER legally or financially hard to get, and then see what you get.
I agreed with your point that, if the basis for the freedom to abort is a general concept of liberty and freedom from government interference, then asking the government to pay for it, while not technically a contradiction, does smack of hypocrisy on some level.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=SkTopSKo1xs
https://youtu.be/GpVZuJXxztM
https://youtu.be/20mxoigI0cc
