# GOP:  Women pregnant with Zika deformed fetus should not be allowed an Abortion.



## rdean (Aug 7, 2016)

Republicans in Congress Urge Women With Zika to Accept Microcephaly, Not Abortion

microcephaly, a rare birth defect that causes stunted brain and head development, plus associated problems with hearing, seizures, motor functions, and cognition. 

Marco Rubio: No abortions for Zika-infected women

SCHLITZIE THE PINHEAD

So if you knew you were going to have a pinhead, would you be happy about it?
What if the parents left it for the government to take care of.  Would you be willing to have your taxes raised so the government can take care of pinheads?


----------



## RodISHI (Aug 7, 2016)

Microcephaly is caused by pesticides. Studies by doctors in Brazil have already confirm that (no I ain't huntin' down the exact articles for you either).


----------



## Tank (Aug 7, 2016)

So what's a few more "pinheads", the government already takes care of liberals


----------



## The Great Goose (Aug 7, 2016)

very misleading title. what's wrong with impartial journalism?

What we should do, is execute everyone in the media, and then get some people who are very, very good at explaining stuff to write the articles.


----------



## the_human_being (Aug 7, 2016)

rdean said:


> Republicans in Congress Urge Women With Zika to Accept Microcephaly, Not Abortion
> 
> microcephaly, a rare birth defect that causes stunted brain and head development, plus associated problems with hearing, seizures, motor functions, and cognition.
> 
> ...



Was it the Republicans in Congress as your OP states said it or was it just Marco Rubio that said it?


----------



## RodISHI (Aug 7, 2016)

The Great Goose said:


> very misleading title. what's wrong with impartial journalism?
> 
> What we should do, is execute everyone in the media, and then get some people who are very, very good at explaining stuff to write the articles.


Journalism went the way of junk years ago.


----------



## depotoo (Aug 7, 2016)

Oh, wow-, look at this, Dems refusing money to help with this horrific virus, so they wouldn't be faced with such a choice-

In June, Senate Democrats blocked a bill that would have provided $1.1 billion toward Zika research and prevention. They objected to a provision that would have excluded Planned Parenthood from receiving funding to fight the virus.
Marco Rubio Opposes Abortions For Women With Zika


----------



## ChrisL (Aug 7, 2016)

rdean said:


> Republicans in Congress Urge Women With Zika to Accept Microcephaly, Not Abortion
> 
> microcephaly, a rare birth defect that causes stunted brain and head development, plus associated problems with hearing, seizures, motor functions, and cognition.
> 
> ...



Kind of mean, don't you think?  They are still human beings.


----------



## The Great Goose (Aug 7, 2016)

RodISHI said:


> The Great Goose said:
> 
> 
> > very misleading title. what's wrong with impartial journalism?
> ...


they must have a good old laugh when they are writing. I have to give them credit for their straight face.


----------



## DarkFury (Aug 7, 2016)

*rderp complaining about pin heads?

Note to rederp.....Post in front of your computer screen NOT a mirror.*


----------



## RodISHI (Aug 7, 2016)

The Great Goose said:


> RodISHI said:
> 
> 
> > The Great Goose said:
> ...


Some probably do but I am thinking some of these Libs are down right vicious and they believe their own shit.


----------



## Bob Blaylock (Aug 7, 2016)

rdean said:


> Republicans in Congress Urge Women With Zika to Accept Microcephaly, Not Abortion
> 
> microcephaly, a rare birth defect that causes stunted brain and head development, plus associated problems with hearing, seizures, motor functions, and cognition.



  Someone saying that handicapped people shouldn't be put to death just for being handicapped.

  How depraved does someone have to be to have a problem with that?


----------



## yiostheoy (Aug 7, 2016)

rdean said:


> Republicans in Congress Urge Women With Zika to Accept Microcephaly, Not Abortion
> 
> microcephaly, a rare birth defect that causes stunted brain and head development, plus associated problems with hearing, seizures, motor functions, and cognition.
> 
> ...


Disgusting.  Just get the abortion and start over but make sure you stay away from the Florida zika zone.


----------



## yiostheoy (Aug 7, 2016)

ChrisL said:


> rdean said:
> 
> 
> > Republicans in Congress Urge Women With Zika to Accept Microcephaly, Not Abortion
> ...


Get the abortion while there is still time.

We don't need more retards.


----------



## rdean (Aug 8, 2016)

What gets me is that Republicans want to force the woman to have a deformed baby and do nothing to her or the baby.

That's why I think the GOP have a lot in common with swine.


----------



## ChrisL (Aug 8, 2016)

yiostheoy said:


> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> > rdean said:
> ...



Is that how you would feel if it were your child?  I'm pro choice, but good grief, that is cold.


----------



## ChrisL (Aug 8, 2016)

rdean said:


> What gets me is that Republicans want to force the woman to have a deformed baby and do nothing to her or the baby.
> 
> That's why I think the GOP have a lot in common with swine.



You are right in that no one should be forced to keep a child that they do not want, but your OP is awful, sickening.


----------



## Sun Devil 92 (Aug 8, 2016)

yiostheoy said:


> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> > rdean said:
> ...



I can see your point.....the OP makes it only stronger.


----------



## Sun Devil 92 (Aug 8, 2016)

ChrisL said:


> yiostheoy said:
> 
> 
> > ChrisL said:
> ...



RDean is a jackass.....and so is Marco Rubio.


----------



## rdean (Aug 8, 2016)

RodISHI said:


> The Great Goose said:
> 
> 
> > RodISHI said:
> ...


That Republicans don't want a woman with a deformed fetus to have an abortion.

It's true.  It really is.


----------



## rdean (Aug 8, 2016)

RodISHI said:


> Microcephaly is caused by pesticides. Studies by doctors in Brazil have already confirm that (no I ain't huntin' down the exact articles for you either).


And Vaccines cause autism.  Yea, we know all about right wing medicine.


----------



## ChrisL (Aug 8, 2016)

rdean said:


> RodISHI said:
> 
> 
> > The Great Goose said:
> ...



I think there are some republican women who are in fact pro choice.  

http://takingnote.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/12/24/the-endangered-pro-choice-republican/?_r=0

Decrying the party’s increasingly extreme position on abortion rights, Graham said the G.O.P.’s future “will be about the nominee of the Republican Party, telling a woman who’s been raped: ‘You gotta carry the child of the rapist.’ Good luck with that.” He warned that Republicans would lose not only young women “in droves,” but also most of the rest of America if the party continued its hard-line approach.

He wasn’t wrong. An Associated Press-GfK poll found that at the end of 2015, national support for legal abortion rights was at its highest level in the past two years. Support for legal abortion in most or all cases has grown from 51 percent in January 2015 to 58 percent this month. Among Republicans, support for legal abortion rose from 35 to 40 percent in 2015. The G.O.P. is still deeply divided, the poll found: 7 in 10 conservative Republicans oppose abortion rights in most or all cases, yet 6 in 10 moderate and liberal Republicans support the right to choose.

Gallup polls reveal that Americans identifying as pro-choice outnumber those identifying as pro-life. More than half of Americans agree that women should have the legal right to choose under some circumstances, compared to only 19 percent who think abortion should be illegal in all circumstances.

The Christian research group LifeWay Research recently found that 7 in 10 abortion recipients identify as Christian, and 43 percent of women who had abortions attended church during the time they decided abortion was the right choice for their unwanted pregnancy.

Yet the presidential candidates left standing proved this year that they are not interested in reaching these potential supporters. Marco Rubio said contemporary Americans would be remembered as “barbarians” who murdered “millions of babies,” and Ben Carson compared women seeking abortions to slaveholders. Carly Fiorina’s rhetoric of “butchering babies for body parts” was echoed by the suspect in the Planned Parenthood shooting that left three dead.


----------



## RodISHI (Aug 8, 2016)

ChrisL said:


> rdean said:
> 
> 
> > RodISHI said:
> ...


This is not convenient for Redean as he/she prefers to make up whatever is on his/her mind to group together people under one name, etc....



rdean said:


> RodISHI said:
> 
> 
> > Microcephaly is caused by pesticides. Studies by doctors in Brazil have already confirm that (no I ain't huntin' down the exact articles for you either).
> ...



Is the eugenics crowd right wing? Last I heard the Gates were pushing the leftist agendas. 

*FYI, Larvicide Manufactured By Sumitomo, Not Zika Virus, True Cause Of Brazil's Microcephaly Outbreak: Doctors

Not A Coincidence?*
According to the Physicians in Crop-Sprayed Towns (PCST), a chemical larvicide that produces malformations in mosquitoes was injected into Brazil's water supplies in 2014 in order to stop the development of mosquito larvae in drinking water tanks.
The chemical, which is known as Pyriproxyfen, was used in a massive government-run program tasked to control the mosquito population in the country. Pyriproxyfen is a larvicide manufactured by Sumitomo Chemical, a company associated [PDF] with Monsanto. However, PCST has referred to Sumitomo as a subsidiary of Monsanto.
"Malformations detected in thousands of children from pregnant women living in areas where the Brazilian state added pyriproxyfen to drinking water is not a coincidence," the PCST wrote [pdf] in the report.


----------



## The Great Goose (Aug 8, 2016)

rdean said:


> RodISHI said:
> 
> 
> > The Great Goose said:
> ...


Well probably should vote for Trump then, since he's a RINO.


----------



## Bob Blaylock (Aug 8, 2016)

rdean said:


> RodISHI said:
> 
> 
> > The Great Goose said:
> ...


  At the risk of running afoul of Godwin's Law, I feel compelled to mention that a particular regime in the early 20th century, that has come to be widely regarded as one of the most evil regimes in history, was particularly infamous for mass-murduring those of its own people deemed _“undesirable”_, including those with physical or mental handicaps.  It seems, rdean, that that is the company in which you are choosing to put yourself.


----------



## mamooth (Aug 8, 2016)

To continue your Godwin, the Nazis also banned abortion for Aryan women, though they also mandated it for undesirables. The commonality they have with conservatives is that nobody gets a choice.

Oh, fetuses aren't people, so your example fails in that way as well.

And you look depraved for demanding that women carry to term, for example, a brainless fetus with zero hope of survival.

Also, 90+% of detected Downs Syndrome pregnancies are aborted. That means all the conservatives are doing it too. It may not be PC to say so, but society as a whole has decided, through actions, that it is desirable to avoid creating such people.


----------



## ChrisL (Aug 8, 2016)

It also is quite depraved to say that because a child might be retarded, that they SHOULD be aborted.  That is a very personal decision that only the parents should make.


----------



## Bob Blaylock (Aug 8, 2016)

mamooth said:


> Oh, fetuses aren't people, so your example fails in that way as well.



  That's pretty much the standard claim made by every genocidal or otherwise mass-murderous movement, about its victims—to deny the humanity of the victims.  Perhaps it helps to soothe your conscience—telling yourself this lie and convincing yourself to believe it—but it does not negate the evil that you openly represent.  You cannot hide from the fact that you openly defend the cold-blooded slaughter of innocent human beings.


----------



## Bob Blaylock (Aug 8, 2016)

ChrisL said:


> It also is quite depraved to say that because a child might be retarded, that they SHOULD be aborted.  That is a very personal decision that only the parents should make.



  Nobody should make the decision to needlessly kill an innocent human being in cold blood.


----------



## ChrisL (Aug 8, 2016)

Bob Blaylock said:


> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> > It also is quite depraved to say that because a child might be retarded, that they SHOULD be aborted.  That is a very personal decision that only the parents should make.
> ...



That is not any of your business.  It is the parents decision.  Women have been aborting unwanted pregnancies since ancient times.


----------



## Bob Blaylock (Aug 8, 2016)

Bob Blaylock said:


> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> > It also is quite depraved to say that because a child might be retarded, that they SHOULD be aborted.  That is a very personal decision that only the parents should make.
> ...



  Where do you think the line is between the depravity of rdean's position, and your own?  It's not there.  Regardless of who you think should be able to make that _“choice”_, and for what reason, killing an innocent human being is still killing an innocent human being.


----------



## ChrisL (Aug 8, 2016)

Mind your business, worry about yourself, and you will find your life is much more serene.


----------



## ChrisL (Aug 8, 2016)

Bob Blaylock said:


> Bob Blaylock said:
> 
> 
> > ChrisL said:
> ...



You really need to mind your business.  Another woman's embryo or fetus is not any of your business.


----------



## Bob Blaylock (Aug 8, 2016)

ChrisL said:


> Bob Blaylock said:
> 
> 
> > ChrisL said:
> ...



  It is not any less depraved for parents to murder their own child in cold blood, than for that action or choice to be made by anyone else.  If anything, it is more so, given that parents inherently are responsible for the well-being of their children.


----------



## Bob Blaylock (Aug 8, 2016)

ChrisL said:


> You really need to mind your business.  Another woman's embryo or fetus *child* is not any of your business.



  As Einstein observed, it is not those who actively do evil who are the greatest danger, but those who passively allow it to happen.  Those who will see another human being being abused, and do nothing, because it's _“none of my business”_.


----------



## Bob Blaylock (Aug 8, 2016)

ChrisL said:


> You really need to mind your business.  Another woman's embryo or fetus *child* is not any of your business.



  If it was you that was being violently attacked, and you who was very likely to be murdered if nobody intervened, and I happened to pass by at that time, would you want me to intervene, or would you prefer that I just _“mind my own business“_?


----------



## ChrisL (Aug 8, 2016)

Bob Blaylock said:


> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> > Bob Blaylock said:
> ...



You can think whatever you want about it, but it is not any of your business.


----------



## ChrisL (Aug 8, 2016)

Bob Blaylock said:


> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> > You really need to mind your business.  Another woman's embryo or fetus *child* is not any of your business.
> ...



I hopefully would not have to rely upon YOU of all people.


----------



## ChrisL (Aug 8, 2016)

Bob Blaylock said:


> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> > You really need to mind your business.  Another woman's embryo or fetus *child* is not any of your business.
> ...



Mind your business.  Women have been self aborting unwanted pregnancies since time immemorial.  It's not a "child."  It is merely a clump of cells with no consciousness.


----------



## Bob Blaylock (Aug 8, 2016)

ChrisL said:


> It's not a "child."  It is merely a clump of cells with no consciousness.



_“It's not a human being; it's just a niggеr.”_

_“It's not a human being; it's just a Jew.”_

_“It's not a human being; it's just a Muslim.”_

_“It's not a human being; it's just a fetus.”_

  That's the company in which your hateful, bigoted, murderous attitude puts you.


----------



## ChrisL (Aug 8, 2016)

Bob Blaylock said:


> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> > It's not a "child."  It is merely a clump of cells with no consciousness.
> ...



You're an idiot.  Lol.  It is a POTENTIAL human being.  It is not yet a child in any way, shape or form.  Learn biology.


----------



## ChrisL (Aug 8, 2016)

An *embryo* is an early stage of development of a multicellular diploid eukaryotic organism. In general, inorganisms that reproduce sexually, an embryo develops from a zygote, the single cell resulting from thefertilization of the female egg cell by the male sperm cell. The zygote possesses half the DNA of each of its two parents. In plants, animals, and some protists, the zygote will begin to divide by mitosis to produce a multicellular organism. The result of this process is an embryo.

In humans, a pregnancy is generally considered to be in the embryonic stage of development between the fifth and the eleventh weeks after fertilization,[1] and is considered a fetus from the twelfth week on.


----------



## Bob Blaylock (Aug 8, 2016)

ChrisL said:


> Bob Blaylock said:
> 
> 
> > ChrisL said:
> ...



  Biology backs me up, and does not support you at all.  What we are talking about is undeniably a unique living organism, of the species _Homo sapiens_—in other words, a human being.  It's not a dog, or a cat, or a rotifer, or an elephant or a paramecium; it's a human.  No different than you or me, other than being at an earlier stage of development.


----------



## ChrisL (Aug 8, 2016)

Bob Blaylock said:


> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> > Bob Blaylock said:
> ...



It is a human life form, no doubt.  It is not a baby or a child YET though.  It is basically a clump of cells with no consciousness.  AND it's not your business if a couple decides they don't want a pregnancy.  That is a personal choice that has nothing to do with some strange old man on the internet.


----------



## ScienceRocks (Aug 9, 2016)

I am sorry, but this is a health of the child/women issue and free abortions should be provided.


----------



## Conservative65 (Aug 9, 2016)

ChrisL said:


> Bob Blaylock said:
> 
> 
> > ChrisL said:
> ...



If what  a woman does with her body is a personal choice that has nothing to do with anyone else, why do the rest of us forced to support a woman and the children she has that she can't afford?  


Tell you what, when the women that expect others to pay for the choices they make with their bodies stop asking for someone else to fund things from contraceptives to food stamps depending on the situation, I'll stop saying what I think they should do.


----------



## bodecea (Aug 9, 2016)

yiostheoy said:


> rdean said:
> 
> 
> > Republicans in Congress Urge Women With Zika to Accept Microcephaly, Not Abortion
> ...


Staying away from Florida is a good start.


----------



## Arianrhod (Aug 9, 2016)

bodecea said:


> yiostheoy said:
> 
> 
> > rdean said:
> ...



Because mosquitoes don't cross state lines, only George Zimmerman does.

These unfortunate infants should be left on the doorsteps of GOP legislators to raise.


----------



## mamooth (Aug 9, 2016)

Bob Blaylock said:


> That's pretty much the standard claim made by every genocidal or otherwise mass-murderous movement, about its victims—to deny the humanity of the victims.



And it's the argument PETA uses against you. So, by your own standards, you're a genocidal bad, bad, person.



> Perhaps it helps to soothe your conscience—telling yourself this lie and convincing yourself to believe it—but it does not negate the evil that you openly represent.  You cannot hide from the fact that you openly defend the cold-blooded slaughter of innocent human beings.



Perhaps it helps to soothe your conscience—telling yourself this lie and convincing yourself to believe it—but it does not negate the evil that you openly represent. You cannot hide from the fact that you openly defend the cold-blooded slaughter of innocent animal persons.

PETA/prolife arguements are so similar, I have trouble telling them apart, which is why I refer to them together as PETA/prolife. I don't pay attention to either group, being both groups are liars who are fabricating their own bizarre redefinitions of what "person" means, solely so they can justify forcing their weirdass religious beliefs on to normal people.


----------



## mamooth (Aug 9, 2016)

Oops, duplicate post.


----------



## anotherlife (Aug 9, 2016)

rdean said:


> Republicans in Congress Urge Women With Zika to Accept Microcephaly, Not Abortion
> 
> microcephaly, a rare birth defect that causes stunted brain and head development, plus associated problems with hearing, seizures, motor functions, and cognition.
> 
> ...


Marco Rubio?  Was he the one who texted pictures of his dick to his female stuffers? There is nothing above politics for a politician, and if they shov rat poison down your baby's throat they will explain that too.  It is interesting that this tests how far the mindless bureaucratic machinery will go to execute political laws such as anti abortion and such.


----------



## Sun Devil 92 (Aug 10, 2016)

Conservative65 said:


> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> > Bob Blaylock said:
> ...



Nailed it !

Funny how that works.

Why does the left not FORCE women who are not able to support their children to have abortions ?


----------



## Conservative65 (Aug 10, 2016)

Sun Devil 92 said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > ChrisL said:
> ...



Exactly.  The people that say what a woman does with her body is her choice and the government and/or other people should butt out.  However, when a woman makes a choice with her body that she can't afford, those same people are the first to want the government they told to butt out to force the others they told to butt out to pay for the results.  The way I look at it, if you want me to butt out, that means entirely and includes the funding of a choice I didn't make and was told was none of my business.  As long as those telling me to stay out of the choice demand I help pay for it when the one making it can't afford it, I'll have a say.


----------



## Arianrhod (Aug 10, 2016)

Sun Devil 92 said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > ChrisL said:
> ...



Because only a RWNJ would think this was consistent with democracy.  Oh, and the People's Republic of China:

Forced abortion - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Shall we call you Chairman Mao from now on?


----------



## Conservative65 (Aug 10, 2016)

Arianrhod said:


> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> > Conservative65 said:
> ...



Yet you bleeding hearts don't have a problem forcing the rest of us to fund  the results of a choice you said was none of our business when it was made.  

Interesting how you oppose force in some situations and applaud it in others.


----------



## Arianrhod (Aug 10, 2016)

Conservative65 said:


> Arianrhod said:
> 
> 
> > Sun Devil 92 said:
> ...



Interesting how, in the absence of facts, you just Make Shit Up.

Well, not interesting, actually, just typical.


----------



## Conservative65 (Aug 10, 2016)

Arianrhod said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > Arianrhod said:
> ...



The facts are there.  People that won't do for themselves are supported through mandates the rest of us pay for.


----------



## Arianrhod (Aug 10, 2016)

Conservative65 said:


> Arianrhod said:
> 
> 
> > Conservative65 said:
> ...



So you'd pay to force women to have abortions?


----------



## Sun Devil 92 (Aug 10, 2016)

Conservative65 said:


> Arianrhod said:
> 
> 
> > Sun Devil 92 said:
> ...



They really are not bleeding hearts (guessing you are responding to some AirInHead stupidity).  This is all a matter of self interest.  As long as they can get people to pay their way...they will.

The question, of course, is why the left isn't pushing this idea.  They are the ones who tend to like to solve everything with government.


----------



## Arianrhod (Aug 10, 2016)

If silence betokens consent, we apparently have two Maoists in this thread who believe poor women should be forced to have abortions.

That improved access to and education on contraception might solve the problem never occurs to either of them.

Or maybe they just don't understand how those things work.


----------



## Sun Devil 92 (Aug 10, 2016)

Conservative65 said:


> The facts are there.  People that won't do for themselves are supported through mandates the rest of us pay for.



 Not really a fact.  

More a probability.  There are always those who scam the system.

But if someone offered to pay my way without anything in return, I could apply myself in other ways.  I'd probably take it.


----------



## ChrisL (Aug 10, 2016)

Conservatives.  They want to force women to go through unwanted pregnancies, have unwanted babies, and then want to starve these women and babies to death.  

Basically, you all want to punish women for having sex, isn't that right?  

Well guess what?  Too bad.  Women do NOT have to go through an unwanted pregnancy or have an unwanted child.  You should be happy.  Saves you a shit ton of $$ if the woman has an abortion, cheap skates.


----------



## ChrisL (Aug 10, 2016)

Conservative65 said:


> Arianrhod said:
> 
> 
> > Sun Devil 92 said:
> ...



Who is forcing you to fund anything?  Why don't you explain this comment.


----------



## ChrisL (Aug 10, 2016)

Sun Devil 92 said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > Arianrhod said:
> ...



Who is "they?"


----------



## ChrisL (Aug 10, 2016)

Well, anyways, it's not any of your business if a woman decides to have a baby or not have a baby.  Mind your business!


----------



## Katzndogz (Aug 10, 2016)

Liberal women and minority women should be encouraged to abort their children.


----------



## Conservative65 (Aug 10, 2016)

Arianrhod said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > Arianrhod said:
> ...



That would be up to you.


----------



## Conservative65 (Aug 10, 2016)

ChrisL said:


> Well, anyways, it's not any of your business if a woman decides to have a baby or not have a baby.  Mind your business!



That depends.  If a woman that will support her children wants to have 20, that's her business.  When a woman that tells others what she does with her body isn't any of our business then demands we pay for the result of her choice when she can't, it becomes my business.  I'm not making it mine.  She is when she demands others be forced to support her choices.

Don't want me saying anything, don't ask for my help when you make a choice you can't afford.


----------



## Conservative65 (Aug 10, 2016)

ChrisL said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > Arianrhod said:
> ...



Taxes are voluntary?  Funding social welfare to pay for some woman's kids she can't afford to have is voluntary?

I don't give a shit how many kids she has as long as she supports them.  However, if she can't and tells me her choice isn't my business, I don't give a shit what happens to her.


----------



## ChrisL (Aug 10, 2016)

Conservative65 said:


> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> > Well, anyways, it's not any of your business if a woman decides to have a baby or not have a baby.  Mind your business!
> ...



It isn't your business.  You aren't paying for anything.  Once those tax $$ leave your hands, they no longer belong to you.


----------



## Conservative65 (Aug 10, 2016)

ChrisL said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > ChrisL said:
> ...



Since I'm the one that earned the money and the only way the bitch and her little bastards can get it is because of people like me, it's still my money.  That is was taken is irrelevant.  

I don't give a fuck what happens to someone like her.  She deserves nothing except what she can afford to pay by what she earned.  If she can't, tough shit.


----------



## ChrisL (Aug 10, 2016)

Conservative65 said:


> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> > Conservative65 said:
> ...



It's not your money.  You are wrong.  Then I guess you should be pro choice.


----------



## ChrisL (Aug 10, 2016)

Conservative65 said:


> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> > Conservative65 said:
> ...



Who is "her?"  You're nuttier than squirrel poop.


----------



## Conservative65 (Aug 10, 2016)

ChrisL said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > ChrisL said:
> ...



I earned it, bitch.  It's mine.  

I am pro choice.  If a woman wants to have sex with any number of men, go for it.  If she gets pregnant despite not intending to, I become pro personal responsibility and expect her to take it based on her choice to give it up and aborting it isn't being responsible.  If she chooses to have it, a choice I support, I expect her to pay for it and living off someone else's money is being responsible.  Never has been and never will be.


----------



## Conservative65 (Aug 10, 2016)

ChrisL said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > ChrisL said:
> ...



Someone that makes a choice with her body then demands those she told to butt out to pay for it when she can't.  If she can't pay for her choices and has to live in a cardboard box, I'm OK with that.  It was her choice that produced the results.


----------



## ChrisL (Aug 10, 2016)

Conservative65 said:


> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> > Conservative65 said:
> ...



Sorry, it's not yours once it leaves your hands in the form of taxes.  Then it becomes the collective "ours."  

Doesn't matter what you think about it.  We are going to keep using tax money to help the poor.


----------



## ChrisL (Aug 10, 2016)

Conservative65 said:


> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> > Conservative65 said:
> ...



That's why some women probably have abortions.  Because they can't afford to have a kid.  Most pregnancies, especially ones where abortion is playing a role, are not planned and not choices.


----------



## ChrisL (Aug 10, 2016)

Choosing to have sex is not choosing to have a baby.  Lol.  Big difference there.


----------



## ChrisL (Aug 10, 2016)

Conservative65 said:


> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> > Conservative65 said:
> ...



Oh, I know who YOU are now.  You changed your avatar, but you can't change your rotten demeanor.  You suck.


----------



## Conservative65 (Aug 10, 2016)

ChrisL said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > ChrisL said:
> ...



Funny thing is pieces of shit like you that say you care for the poor are liars.  If you did, you'd realize that the government doesn't have to be involved at all.  The only thing that needs to happen is for liars like you to help them on your own.  Since you won't, your claims of compassion are dismissed.

If you care so much for someone that doesn't have, why do you have to be told to help.  Why don't you help on your own?

As for supporting helping someone that told you to butt out of a choice that demands you fund it when they can't, it makes you stupid.  You're willing to stay out of what happens then are willing to let them play you like a fiddle.  Idiot.


----------



## ChrisL (Aug 10, 2016)

Conservative65 said:


> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> > Conservative65 said:
> ...



I do care for the poor.  Yes, the government does have to be involved, as evidenced by our empty food pantries.  Charitable donations are not nearly enough to help the poor and they never have been.  

Yes, I say you butt out of other people's lives.


----------



## Conservative65 (Aug 10, 2016)

ChrisL said:


> Choosing to have sex is not choosing to have a baby.  Lol.  Big difference there.



Choosing to have sex knowing that one can be created means there is no difference.

If you think someone that has sex knowing what could happen is OK to have an abortion, do you also believe it's OK for someone taking on a house payment they know could be one they can't afford to burn down the house if it comes to where they can't pay for it?


----------



## Conservative65 (Aug 10, 2016)

ChrisL said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > ChrisL said:
> ...



So your argument is because people don't do with what they earned to the level you think  they should, it's OK to take it from them?  I bet you're stupid enough to believe that your support of higher taxes makes you compassionate and charitable.  

The government does not have to be involved.  If the food pantries are empty, it's because people like you aren't doing enough.  That means you don't care enough to do more.


----------



## ChrisL (Aug 10, 2016)

Conservative65 said:


> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> > Conservative65 said:
> ...



It's called taxes, dummy.  Nope, the reason why food pantries are empty is because of rotten human beings like you.


----------



## Conservative65 (Aug 10, 2016)

ChrisL said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > ChrisL said:
> ...



Since when is practicing personal responsibility  and expecting others to do the same a rotten demeanor?  That's honorable.  That you don't expect others to do it is dishonorable.


----------



## Conservative65 (Aug 10, 2016)

ChrisL said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > ChrisL said:
> ...



The reason they're empty is because people like you don't do enough.  If people like you that claimed you cared actually did to the level of your claims, those pantries would be full.  It's your fault and the only thing you can come up with to make yourself feel better for being a slack ass is forcing someone else to pick up that slack.


----------



## ChrisL (Aug 10, 2016)

Conservative65 said:


> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> > Conservative65 said:
> ...



Mistakes happen.  NOBODY is perfect.  Some mistakes are worse than others.  Nothing wrong with helping people who need the help, and that is especially true when children are involved.  

Sorry, but most people (you not included) would be heartbroken to see mothers with children living in the streets.  Nobody cares about your personal judgments on these people or their lives or their mistakes.


----------



## ChrisL (Aug 10, 2016)

Conservative65 said:


> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> > Conservative65 said:
> ...



More bullshit.  It's because of greedy people like you, Scrooge.  I give what I can when I can.


----------



## ChrisL (Aug 10, 2016)

Conservative65 said:


> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> > Conservative65 said:
> ...



The average worker (making $50,000 a year) pays approximately 35 dollars a year to help feed and clothe the needy through their taxpayer dollars.  Boo hoo for you that you are upset about that 35 dollars.  Be a man.


----------



## Conservative65 (Aug 10, 2016)

ChrisL said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > ChrisL said:
> ...



No one is saying mistakes don't happen.  However, a mistake on your part does not constitute an emergency on mine nor does it make it my responsibility to offset it because you can't.  That's what you saying in this situation.  Person A, despite their best efforts to prevent pregnancy, got pregnant knowing that it was a possibility.  When Person A can't afford the result of that choice, you believe Persons B - Z should be forced to pay for it.  

There is absolutely nothing wrong with helping someone in need as long as the one doing the helping makes the choice to help.  You making that choice on behalf of anyone but yourself isn't your business.  If her body is her choice, my money is my choice.  

I support my children.  Not my responsibility to support anyone else's.  I didn't get the piece and create the child, not my job to take care of them when the one that did give it up can't afford the choice she made and the sperm donor for which she spread her legs isn't doing his job.  

Why is whether she lives in the streets my concern.  You said the choices she made with her body were none of my business.  Which one is it.  Should I leave her alone and ignore what she does or pay attention to it?  You give mixed signals.  You want me to butt out then you want me to be involved.

Those getting what I earned should care.  Without people like me, they wouldn't have a pot to piss in or a window to throw it out of.


----------



## Conservative65 (Aug 10, 2016)

ChrisL said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > ChrisL said:
> ...



I am a man.  I support my kids and don't demand someone else do it.  That's what a man does.

You act as if the amount is relevant.  I don't give a damn if it's a penny.  If it's one penny being forced to go to someone that told me to butt out of her choice that caused her to need that one penny, it's one cent too much.


----------



## ChrisL (Aug 10, 2016)

Conservative65 said:


> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> > Conservative65 said:
> ...



That's because your a cheap and rotten human being who only cares about himself.


----------



## ChrisL (Aug 10, 2016)

Conservative65 said:


> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> > Conservative65 said:
> ...



Look pal, I am NEVER going to agree with your awful conservative ideology.  It is terrible and the United States would be a horrible place if any of your ideas were allowed to become reality.  So we are NEVER going to agree on anything.  Therefore, this conversation is useless and a waste of time, so see ya, wouldn't want to be ya!


----------



## Arianrhod (Aug 10, 2016)

ChrisL said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > ChrisL said:
> ...



But he doesn't mind paying $870 a year in corporate welfare.


----------



## Bob Blaylock (Aug 10, 2016)

Conservative65 said:


> Interesting how you oppose force in some situations and applaud it in others.



  Look up up the concept of _“doublethink”_, as defined and described by George Orwell.  To understand that is an important key to understanding wrong-wing ideology.


----------



## Sun Devil 92 (Aug 10, 2016)

ChrisL said:


> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> > Conservative65 said:
> ...



The left.


----------



## Sun Devil 92 (Aug 10, 2016)

ChrisL said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > ChrisL said:
> ...



"Help" the poor ?

Now, that's funny.

Help the poor create more poor.....that's what you are doing.

He pays taxes on income, so it was his before it became the governments.

How much of it do intend to confiscate ?


----------



## Bob Blaylock (Aug 10, 2016)

Sun Devil 92 said:


> "Help" the poor ?
> 
> Now, that's funny.
> 
> ...



  Hearing a leftist *wrongist* speak of _“helping the poor”_ always makes me think of John 12:4-6.

  Those of us on the right believe that charity toward the poor is only fulfilled by giving what is rightfully our own to give.  Those on the wrong seem to think that they can claim credit for _“charity”_, not by giving anything that is their own to give, but on the basis of getting government to take it from someone else.


----------



## Conservative65 (Aug 11, 2016)

ChrisL said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > ChrisL said:
> ...



No, it's because it's none of YOUR fucking who I help with what I earned.  

If you cared so much, those of us you'd have forced to do it the way you want wouldn't be forced to do it.  You and those like you would take care of it.  Since you don't, YOU don't care.


----------



## Conservative65 (Aug 11, 2016)

Sun Devil 92 said:


> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> > Conservative65 said:
> ...



Chris says it's not the money of the one that earned it yet indicates it has to be taken from the earned to give to the non earner.  She also goes on about how it's only x amount.  Like most self proclaimed compassionate do nothings, she assumes it's about the amount.


----------



## Conservative65 (Aug 11, 2016)

Arianrhod said:


> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> > Conservative65 said:
> ...



No such thing.  

However, given a choice, I prefer it go to someone/something that actually does something from which I benefit rather than to someone/something that provides ZERO return.


----------



## Conservative65 (Aug 11, 2016)

ChrisL said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > ChrisL said:
> ...



What's wrong with providing for oneself, providing for one's children, and supporting one's family.  Damn, that's horrible.  The U.S. would be a much better place if all those freeloaders you would have get what I earned for doing nothing but being a freeloader would do what I do for myself, my children, and my family.  

You won't ever agree that how I do things when it comes to the ONLY ones for which I'm responsible is the correct way.  You think getting something for nothing is the way people should do it and supporting those types of things makes you a good person.  Neither the recipients nor those that support it are good for anything.


----------



## Conservative65 (Aug 11, 2016)

ChrisL said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > ChrisL said:
> ...



If they're empty, you're not giving enough.    Since you, not me, are claiming that something that should be done a certain way isn't being done that way, it's you, not me, that's at fault when it doesn't happen.  It's not my place to be forced to offset something you think should occur.  If you think it should happen and it's not, you're not doing enough.


----------



## Conservative65 (Aug 11, 2016)

ChrisL said:


> Conservatives.  They want to force women to go through unwanted pregnancies, have unwanted babies, and then want to starve these women and babies to death.
> 
> Basically, you all want to punish women for having sex, isn't that right?
> 
> Well guess what?  Too bad.  Women do NOT have to go through an unwanted pregnancy or have an unwanted child.  You should be happy.  Saves you a shit ton of $$ if the woman has an abortion, cheap skates.



I don't care how many men she wants to be with.  However, when it comes to anything (birth control, abortions, social welfare) related to her choice, if she can't pay, she can do without.   Everything involved at any of those levels are her choice and her responsibility.  Her kids are not my responsibility.  I didn't create them and didn't make the choice for her to have them.  She did.


----------



## Bob Blaylock (Aug 11, 2016)

Conservative65 said:


> Chris says it's not the money of the one that earned it yet indicates it has to be taken from the earned to give to the non earner.  She also goes on about how it's only x amount.  Like most self proclaimed compassionate do nothings, she assumes it's about the amount.



  It's about the wrong-wing notion of _“charity”_, by which she believes she can claim credit for being charitable by advocating that money be taken from someone else, and given to those that she thinks need it, rather than by willingly giving what is rightfully her own to give, in support of those she thinks in need of it.


----------



## ChrisL (Aug 11, 2016)

Conservative65 said:


> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> > Conservatives.  They want to force women to go through unwanted pregnancies, have unwanted babies, and then want to starve these women and babies to death.
> ...



The good of our country is everyone's responsibility.


----------



## Conservative65 (Aug 11, 2016)

Bob Blaylock said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > Chris says it's not the money of the one that earned it yet indicates it has to be taken from the earned to give to the non earner.  She also goes on about how it's only x amount.  Like most self proclaimed compassionate do nothings, she assumes it's about the amount.
> ...



She needs to read the definition of "charity".  The key word in the definition is VOLUNTARY.  Charity and compassion come from the willingness of the giver not supporting a mandate by the taker.  

She seems to think that because something she supports isn't up to a certain level, those that don't support that particular things are at fault for not doing enough but those that do have no responsibility for not doing enough for what THEY support.  She says that she helps when she can and how she can.  Sounds like another that can't do things herself to the level she thinks they need to be done then believes supporting others to do what she can't do makes her compassionate.


----------



## ChrisL (Aug 11, 2016)

Conservative65 said:


> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> > Conservative65 said:
> ...



Lol!  Well, that's not the way it works now, is it?  Keep on throwing a temper tantrum though.  It's funny.


----------



## Conservative65 (Aug 11, 2016)

ChrisL said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > ChrisL said:
> ...



The only thing you're doing by forcing one group to fund the choices of another group, especially when that other group said butt out when the choices were being made, is enabling that other group to continue to make choices they can't afford.  

You don't believe it's everyone's responsibility.  If you did, you wouldn't expect those of us not making the choices to pay for those making them.


----------



## ChrisL (Aug 11, 2016)

Conservative65 said:


> Bob Blaylock said:
> 
> 
> > Conservative65 said:
> ...



I already said charitable donations are not enough.  You must be a complete moron if you think charitable donations would support people and keep them off the streets.  

What about a teen girl who gets pregnant, gets kicked out by her "Christian" parents, and because of your stupid policies, she can't get an abortion, she can't get healthcare, she can't get daycare vouchers, she is now homeless with a child.  You people are sick.  There's no getting around that fact.


----------



## jillian (Aug 11, 2016)

rdean said:


> Republicans in Congress Urge Women With Zika to Accept Microcephaly, Not Abortion
> 
> microcephaly, a rare birth defect that causes stunted brain and head development, plus associated problems with hearing, seizures, motor functions, and cognition.
> 
> ...



Luckily no one cares what the radical rightwingnut theocrats say. After the last court decision they're nothing more than angry white male noise


----------



## ChrisL (Aug 11, 2016)

You people are stupid morons who don't know what the real world is like.  Go back to watching your Matlock and leave the important things to people who have experienced life.  Thanks.


----------



## Conservative65 (Aug 11, 2016)

ChrisL said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > ChrisL said:
> ...



Thanks for admitting you don't care.


----------



## Conservative65 (Aug 11, 2016)

ChrisL said:


> You people are stupid morons who don't know what the real world is like.  Go back to watching your Matlock and leave the important things to people who have experienced life.  Thanks.



I've experienced life.  That's why I support myself, my children, and my family.  That's what honorable people do.  Honorable people don't make choices in life, tell someone to butt out of them, then demand those told to butt out pay when the one choosing can't do it themselves.  They're leeches and worthless.


----------



## jillian (Aug 11, 2016)

RodISHI said:


> The Great Goose said:
> 
> 
> > very misleading title. what's wrong with impartial journalism?
> ...



I suppose conspiracy theorists would see it that way. Now please go watch some more faux news


----------



## ChrisL (Aug 11, 2016)

Conservative65 said:


> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> > You people are stupid morons who don't know what the real world is like.  Go back to watching your Matlock and leave the important things to people who have experienced life.  Thanks.
> ...



Obviously you haven't.  If you had, then you would realize that people are not perfect, never will be.  You are not honorable.  You're a greedy jerk and nothing more.  Now, I believe I already told you that talking about this is useless.  You are out of touch with the realities of the world around you.


----------



## Conservative65 (Aug 11, 2016)

ChrisL said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > Bob Blaylock said:
> ...



I've already said that if you don't think they are, you're not doing enough.  By you saying they're not enough and supporting mandates to make up the difference you don't like, you're saying that if someone doesn't do with what they've earned, it's OK to take it and make them.  If someone that you think deserves something but I don't can't get it, it's not my fault they don't.  It's yours.  YOU think they deserve it.  

I have an easy solution for your scenario.  Let the sperm donor that got her pregnant support her and her child.  You don't have a problem demanding people like me that didn't get her pregnant do something you won't force the one that did to do.  That it's not my kid and someone else's is the only fact that matters.  If the sperm donor can't and the girl is a minor, force her parents to do it.  She's their child not mine.  Here's the hierarchy for who should pay:  1)  The girls and the sperm donor;  2)  HER parents or the sperm donor's parents if he's a minor;  3)  All you bleeding hearts, and somewhere way, way, way down the line so far it doesn't matter, the rest of us.


----------



## ChrisL (Aug 11, 2016)

Conservative65 said:


> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> > Conservative65 said:
> ...



Look, that is not how things work in the real world all the time.


----------



## ChrisL (Aug 11, 2016)

Conservative65 said:


> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> > You people are stupid morons who don't know what the real world is like.  Go back to watching your Matlock and leave the important things to people who have experienced life.  Thanks.
> ...



So, you never had sex until you were married and planned the birth of your children?  You were probably just a dork that nobody wanted to have sex with.  Lol.


----------



## Conservative65 (Aug 11, 2016)

ChrisL said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > ChrisL said:
> ...



I never said anyone was perfect.  What I said is their imperfections aren't my responsibility and never will be.  

I support myself, my children, my family, pay my bills, pay for my mistakes, and so on.  Are you saying that's not honorable?

I can't be greedy.  The only thing I'm asking is to keep what I earned.  The greedy ones are those that make choices they tell others to butt out of then demand those being told to butt out pay when they can't. They're demanding something they didn't earn.  I'm only wanting to keep what I did.  Greedy never has been nor ever will be defined as someone not doing with what they earned in a manner you don't like.


----------



## Conservative65 (Aug 11, 2016)

ChrisL said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > ChrisL said:
> ...



So that makes it right because you support doing the wrong thing?


----------



## ChrisL (Aug 11, 2016)

Conservative65 said:


> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> > Conservative65 said:
> ...



Your arguments were defeated a long time ago.  Yup, OUR tax money goes to help the poor.  Deal with it.


----------



## ChrisL (Aug 11, 2016)

Conservative65 said:


> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> > Conservative65 said:
> ...



Helping the poor is ALWAYS the right thing to do.


----------



## ChrisL (Aug 11, 2016)

Well, since we are now living in a corporotacracy, and our wages have been stagnant since the 1970s, a lot of us don't have as much to give as we would like, and certainly not enough to help everyone, so this is how we do it.  Stop whining.  You look pathetic.


----------



## ChrisL (Aug 11, 2016)

This is NOT the 1950s or the 1960s.  Things have changed a lot.  If you were born poor, the cards are stacked AGAINST you.


----------



## Conservative65 (Aug 11, 2016)

ChrisL said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > ChrisL said:
> ...



As far as the first part, no.  However, like I said, I don't care about how many people a girl has sex with.  What I said is if she does, it's her responsibility for whatever happens since she made the choice.

As far as planning the birth of my children, ABSOLUTELY.  Responsible people do that.  That's not to say those that didn't plan them yet had them are irresponsible.  If those that didn't plan them support them, they're being responsible by doing so.  It becomes irresponsible when those making the choice to do what it takes to have kids refuse to take care of their own when something they didn't intend happens.  Irresponsibility doesn't simply due to the result itself but an unwillingness to be responsible when those unintended results occur.


----------



## ChrisL (Aug 11, 2016)

Conservative65 said:


> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> > Conservative65 said:
> ...



Not everyone was raised in a nice home.  Some people are abused physically, sexually, emotionally.  Some people may just not be that smart.  Those are facts.


----------



## Conservative65 (Aug 11, 2016)

ChrisL said:


> Well, since we are now living in a corporotacracy, and our wages have been stagnant since the 1970s, a lot of us don't have as much to give as we would like, and certainly not enough to help everyone, so this is how we do it.  Stop whining.  You look pathetic.



My wages haven't been stagnant.  

The pathetic one is you.  You're the one that says I CAN'T do what I think needs to be done so others should be forced to do so.  If you CAN'T, you're the last one that should be saying someone else you think has too much money should be doing it.

Since I support me, my children, and my family, I CAN say that I believe others should be doing it.  I CAN say it with validity for one reason and one reason only.  It's because I do exactly that and expect nothing more of anyone else than I do myself.  You're demanding others be forced to do something because YOU can't.  I'm expecting others to do something I already do.  There is a big difference.


----------



## RodISHI (Aug 11, 2016)

jillian said:


> RodISHI said:
> 
> 
> > The Great Goose said:
> ...


You are an awesome shadow troll Jillian. We don't have tv haven't had for years. There is however a lot of actual studies and information on the Internet for those who take the time to actually do the research.


----------



## ChrisL (Aug 11, 2016)

Conservative65 said:


> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> > Well, since we are now living in a corporotacracy, and our wages have been stagnant since the 1970s, a lot of us don't have as much to give as we would like, and certainly not enough to help everyone, so this is how we do it.  Stop whining.  You look pathetic.
> ...



You're such a dishonest POS.  Yeah, I'm sure you've never made mistakes.  The only way you would be able to talk about other people making mistakes and looking down on them because of it is if you've never made any.  We all know that isn't the case.  Your anecdotes may or may not be true, but if they are you are LUCKY and nothing more.  

The FACT of the matter is that there are more poor people than rich or even middle class.


----------



## ChrisL (Aug 11, 2016)

Now, if you'll excuse me, I'm trying to have some fun here today and I would prefer not to talk with stuffy old dudes who don't know which way is up.  So, bye-bye now.


----------



## Conservative65 (Aug 11, 2016)

ChrisL said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > ChrisL said:
> ...



Not my problem.  People like you say I and those like me that meet their responsibilities  should stay out of the personal lives of other people.   What you're really saying by what you support is we should stay out of the choices but it's OK to be a part of it when those choices don't work out for the ones making it.  If they are the PERSONAL choices of those making them, the results are the PERSONAL responsibility of the ones making it.

Which one do you want?  Do you want us to stay out of it or be a part of it?  If you choose be a part, that includes the choice if it includes the responsibility.  If you say stay out of it, that include the choice and being required to fund the choice when the one making it can't do it.

Maybe you haven't figured it out or you simply don't care.  If you constantly cover for people making choices, mistakes, etc., there is no reason for them to make better choices and stop making mistakes.  There is no accountability for them.  Why would do better.  It would costs them then where, with what you support, it costs them nothing to continue being irresponsible leeches.


----------



## Conservative65 (Aug 11, 2016)

ChrisL said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > ChrisL said:
> ...



Never said I haven't made mistakes.  What I have said is that I don't expect you or anyone else to be forced to offset the results.  I don't look down on people for making mistakes.  I have a problem when the person making it demands I pay for it when they won't.  There is a difference.  I don't care if you only make 1 mistake or you make 1 million mistakes as long as I'm not one of those expected to pay for it.  

It's not a matter of luck.  Luck is defined as success/failure brought on by chance rather than one's own actions.  To be where I am involved effort, education, making good choices, overcoming bad ones, and so on.  Those things are considered actions not chance.  

Try, again, freeloader enabler.


----------



## ChrisL (Aug 11, 2016)

Conservative65 said:


> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> > Conservative65 said:
> ...



We all pitch in to help.  End of story.


----------



## Conservative65 (Aug 11, 2016)

ChrisL said:


> Now, if you'll excuse me, I'm trying to have some fun here today and I would prefer not to talk with stuffy old dudes who don't know which way is up.  So, bye-bye now.



Enabling freeloaders doesn't mean you know which way is up.  It's means your an idiot.  

That I don't have to do what you support forcing me to do for others that won't do for themselves means I not only know which way is up but I live that way.  You don't.


----------



## Conservative65 (Aug 11, 2016)

ChrisL said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > ChrisL said:
> ...



That's a false statement and a lie.  Half the people in this country, many of whom have what they have because someone else was forced to give it to them, don't pitch in.  They receive things funded by the very taxes they don't pay and for which you think people like me already paying should pay more.  

If you believe those freeloaders pitch in, you're either one of them or an idiot that allows them to continue being drains on society.


----------



## ChrisL (Aug 11, 2016)

Conservative65 said:


> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> > Conservative65 said:
> ...



You aren't going to change people's choices.  People are going to make bad choices.  That doesn't mean they deserve to starve or be homeless.


----------



## ChrisL (Aug 11, 2016)

Conservative65 said:


> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> > Conservative65 said:
> ...



Too bad for you, I suppose.  Go cry to someone else.  My sympathies lie with the poor people, not with you.


----------



## rdean (Aug 11, 2016)

ChrisL said:


> rdean said:
> 
> 
> > Republicans in Congress Urge Women With Zika to Accept Microcephaly, Not Abortion
> ...


Mean is putting them into a life of institutional care.


----------



## Conservative65 (Aug 11, 2016)

ChrisL said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > ChrisL said:
> ...



Never said I wanted to change what they chose to do.  You're not paying attention.  What I said is that it's not my responsibility to pay for the result of the choices they made.  If someone wants to have sex with 1000 men between now and the end of the years, I've said that's her choice.  If she can't afford the birth control to prevent pregnancy and the 1000 men for whom she's spreading her legs won't do it, it doesn't by default, make it anyone else's responsibility to do so for her unless they're one of those 1000 men.

I agree people are going to make bad choices.   When they do, it doesn't mean the rest of us are responsible for it.  As far as deserve, I don't know if I would use that word.  However, if the result is something for which the person doesn't like or isn't favorable, that's not my fault nor my place to make it better for them.  I'm not, nor anyone else is, their ATM.  People have to accept responsibility for the choices they make.  What you're demanding is those of us that didn't make them take responsibility and those that did have none of it placed on them.  How is that a good idea?


----------



## Conservative65 (Aug 11, 2016)

ChrisL said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > ChrisL said:
> ...



Your sympathies lie with freeloaders, many of whom caused their own situation.  So sad you hold those of us that do the right thing in such low regard while placing the irresponsible ones on a pedestal.


----------



## Conservative65 (Aug 11, 2016)

ChrisL said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > ChrisL said:
> ...



Untrue.


----------



## ChrisL (Aug 11, 2016)

Conservative65 said:


> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> > Conservative65 said:
> ...



Who said anything about a pedestal?  I only put MYSELF on a pedestal.


----------



## Conservative65 (Aug 11, 2016)

ChrisL said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > ChrisL said:
> ...



Figure of speech but didn't think you would understand the meaning.  

You hold those of us not making the bad choices for which someone else is expected to pay to a higher requirement than you do those making the choices for which they demand help.  It's like the Olympic medal podium.  Those doing the best are placed on a higher level than the person finishing second or third.  In fact, those finishing below third don't get a place on the podium.  Are you saying they didn't train as hard?  The difference is you place those that aren't doing their job of funding their own choices on a higher level than those that do by having those that do pay for those that don't.  In a way, you are putting the irresponsible on a pedestal, at least in a figurative manner.


----------



## Arianrhod (Aug 11, 2016)

Conservative65 said:


> Arianrhod said:
> 
> 
> > ChrisL said:
> ...



So you'll happily contribute your share to those companies that have been sending jobs overseas since the 90s.  You're a "proud American."  

How do you feel about you and your children paying off your share of the War to Invade the Wrong Country?


----------



## Conservative65 (Aug 11, 2016)

Arianrhod said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > Arianrhod said:
> ...



I contribute to those that provide something to me in return.   Last time I looked, businesses do and poor people don't.

You mean the War that Democrats Voted to Wage and the War Doing Things Democrats Said Needed to Be Done?  Well, that is until someone actually did it.


----------



## ChrisL (Aug 11, 2016)

Conservative65 said:


> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> > Conservative65 said:
> ...



There is no better way to spend tax money than to help other American citizens with it.  Again, you are out of touch with the reality of the world.  Go back to watching Matlock and your other old man shows and leave the decision making to those who know better.


----------



## ChrisL (Aug 11, 2016)

Conservative65 said:


> Arianrhod said:
> 
> 
> > Conservative65 said:
> ...



Ahh.  Some honesty.  You want to get something in return.  Lol.  What a loser.


----------



## ChrisL (Aug 11, 2016)

Well, I don't make a whole lot of money, but I certainly don't complain about some of my tax dollars going to help people are poor and struggling to survive.  That would make me a greedy asshole.


----------



## Conservative65 (Aug 11, 2016)

ChrisL said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > ChrisL said:
> ...



Since you believe that the person making the decision shouldn't be responsible for the results but someone that didn't should, go back to watching your cartoons.  

There are better ways and the Constitution spells it out.  Social welfare isn't one of those ways.


----------



## Conservative65 (Aug 11, 2016)

ChrisL said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > Arianrhod said:
> ...



Why would I invest and put my money somewhere that isn't going to provide a return?


----------



## Conservative65 (Aug 11, 2016)

ChrisL said:


> Well, I don't make a whole lot of money, but I certainly don't complain about some of my tax dollars going to help people are poor and struggling to survive.  That would make me a greedy asshole.



You're a greedy asshole for supporting that other greedy asshole leeches get a dime of something they didn't earn.  

You have yet to explain why someone that made a choice shouldn't be responsible for the results but someone that didn't make it should.  Why shouldn't the person making the choice pay for the results?


----------



## Conservative65 (Aug 11, 2016)

ChrisL said:


> Well, I don't make a whole lot of money, but I certainly don't complain about some of my tax dollars going to help people are poor and struggling to survive.  That would make me a greedy asshole.



If you can't do on your own what you expect the rest of us to be forced to do, your entire argument is invalid.


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Aug 11, 2016)

rdean said:


> Republicans in Congress Urge Women With Zika to Accept Microcephaly, Not Abortion
> 
> microcephaly, a rare birth defect that causes stunted brain and head development, plus associated problems with hearing, seizures, motor functions, and cognition.
> 
> ...



Urge is the same as "not allowed?"

You lying little fuck you...


----------



## The Great Goose (Aug 11, 2016)

jillian said:


> RodISHI said:
> 
> 
> > The Great Goose said:
> ...


You are ridiculous. I remember when i was a kid, i asked my dad why he only read one newspaper. He said the rest had turned into tabloids. Then he said the one he did read wasn't much good either.

I always thought the newspaper made him unhapppy. I realize now it was just that he had to go to work, not the newspaper. lol


----------



## Arianrhod (Aug 11, 2016)

Conservative65 said:


> Arianrhod said:
> 
> 
> > Conservative65 said:
> ...



Such as businesses that overcharge you for gas and manufactured goods while sending jobs overseas, leading to unemployment for which you're paying?  Yep, you're getting "provided" at both ends.


----------



## Conservative65 (Aug 11, 2016)

Arianrhod said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > Arianrhod said:
> ...



Not one business can overcharge you without you consent.


----------



## Arianrhod (Aug 11, 2016)

Conservative65 said:


> Arianrhod said:
> 
> 
> > Conservative65 said:
> ...



You consent every time you pay a disproportionate amount of tax compared to corporate tax rates.  That you don't even realize this makes it that much more amusing.


----------



## Conservative65 (Aug 11, 2016)

Arianrhod said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > Arianrhod said:
> ...



That you think paying taxes is the same as buying a good is the same, you're an idiot.  That you think you're being overcharged and it's a business's fault proves you are.  

Can you explain why your example is apples and oranges?


----------



## Sun Devil 92 (Aug 11, 2016)

Bob Blaylock said:


> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> > "Help" the poor ?
> ...



Again, the hallmark of the left is the use of government to enforce their morality.


----------

