Zone1 A Question For Pro-Choicers

Goodby worthless DICTATOR.

Go Dictate your beliefs to those in your family and see what happens.

You are a Laugh a Letter
There is no right to kill dependent offspring. Pregnancy is not a crime, and women are not being assaulted by their own unborn offspring.
 
I more than answered it. You simply cannot mind other people's lives and think you can tell them what to do with their bodies, pregnancies, etc.

You are a RELIGIOUS DICTATOR.

MIND your own body and your own life, since beyond sure you do not give a darn about those women and girl's lives and the lives of the babies who are born AFTERWARDS.

You do not care about their health, their lives, their present and their future.


AM I CLEAR NOW. !!!!!!
Frigid Fetus-Fetish Fascists

They are control-freak Puritans who can't stand thinking about a couple having a little fun without paying dearly for it.
 
There is no right to kill dependent offspring. Pregnancy is not a crime, and women are not being assaulted by their own unborn offspring.
More insane nonsense from someone who has no experience in life and insists in dictating to others what to do with THEIR lives.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_5969.png
    IMG_5969.png
    32.3 KB · Views: 9
  • IMG_5970.png
    IMG_5970.png
    45.8 KB · Views: 8
Your religious extremism has gotten most of what is left of your brain.

Women and children MUST give birth to ALL children regardless of what their rights are.

You are NOT going to gain any more IQ than what you have by daring people.

Again, YOU DO NOT CARE about the women, the children or the babies. You do not care about their history, their health, or anything else.

YOU are a totally UNCARING person who wants to DICTATE a Religious piece of garbage on others.


And garbage is what you have become.
The extremists are the anti human rights baby killers who try to coerce vulnerable women into abortion.
 
IMG_5969.png

So much for your knowledge of Jewish Laws about abortion "Kosher" girl
Once again you gaslight without actually saying anything.
So I’ll ignore your gibbering and just platform the fact that abortion is harmful to women, and a crime against humanity. Human rights are for all humans, PARTICULARLY those who are dependent. There is no right to kill dependent offspring.
The whole baby killing mantra is anti female, anti human rights. Pro death acolytes target vulnerable and victimized women, who they gaslight, shame and lie to in order to trick them into butchering their own children. It’s reproduction coercion of the most disgusting type.
 
View attachment 838314

Once again you gaslight without actually saying anything.
So I’ll ignore your gibbering and just platform the fact that abortion is harmful to women, and a crime against humanity. Human rights are for all humans, PARTICULARLY those who are dependent. There is no right to kill dependent offspring.
The whole baby killing mantra is anti female, anti human rights. Pro death acolytes target vulnerable and victimized women, who they gaslight, shame and lie to in order to trick them into butchering their own children. It’s reproduction coercion of the most disgusting type.
Very few people are ever coerced to have an abortion. In fact. since the right to choose an abortion is with the female. Legally nobody can coerce a woman to have an abortion.

The whole premise of being pro-choice is exactly that. The right for a woman to control what happens to her body. This means no coercion to have an abortion but also no coercion to carry a fetus to term.

I find it interesting that you seemingly recognize the fundamental human right to live, but not the fundamental right to control what a person does with their body. Including the right to not want to expose that body to the discomfort and inherent risk of pregnancy. Let alone the consequences of caring for a child that you might not be able to.
 
Very few people are ever coerced to have an abortion. In fact. since the right to choose an abortion is with the female. Legally nobody can coerce a woman to have an abortion.

The whole premise of being pro-choice is exactly that. The right for a woman to control what happens to her body. This means no coercion to have an abortion but also no coercion to carry a fetus to term.

I find it interesting that you seemingly recognize the fundamental human right to live, but not the fundamental right to control what a person does with their body. Including the right to not want to expose that body to the discomfort and inherent risk of pregnancy. Let alone the consequences of caring for a child that you might not be able to.
Actually, it has become quite clear that anywhere from half to 60 percent of abortions are coerced. In the cases of LATE TERM ABORTION thd coercion rate is upwards of 80 percent.

Stop lying to women about abortion.
 
Actually, it has become quite clear that anywhere from half to 60 percent of abortions are coerced. In the cases of LATE TERM ABORTION thd coercion rate is upwards of 80 percent.

Stop lying to women about abortion.
All allegations and no evidence to show for it.

Keep alleging, or rather telling these GROSS lies about abortions and women being "forced" to have abortions.

To you, too many women simply have no brains.

One cannot imagine where you would have gotten such an idea. Hummmm
 
Actually, it has become quite clear that anywhere from half to 60 percent of abortions are coerced. In the cases of LATE TERM ABORTION thd coercion rate is upwards of 80 percent.

Stop lying to women about abortion.
Late term abortion is exceedingly rare. As for your percentages. First, how do you define coercion? Is the husband expressing a preference "coercion" for instance?
And source those percentages please.

And again. I'm pro-choice. Meaning I'm not in favor of coercion either way. Discussion within a family about the impact of another human being in the household doesn't qualify, if that's how you define it in my opinion.

I also see you didn't engage my premise. How do you reject the rights of the women to control her body with "human rights"
 
Au contraire. She has the opportunity to mitigate the risk and discomfort by taking the proper precautions to include abstention. If you drink to much, you'll have a hangover. Consequences.
Ah, so now the position becomes a person doesn't have the right to have sex. And if you do have sex, you lose the rights to your body.

You simply end up in the same place. Only now you have taken away the right to a pleasurable and basic need for a lot of people.
 
Please stop with the strawman bs. No one said you can't have sex. You have to be prepared to accept the consequences--not murder them. I'll bet you don't believe students should be forced to pay their student loans either---I suppose you'll say they were coerced as well.
If you are naming abstention you are talking about not having sex right?
 
Please stop with the strawman bs. No one said you can't have sex. You have to be prepared to accept the consequences--not murder them. I'll bet you don't believe students should be forced to pay their student loans either---I suppose you'll say they were coerced as well.
I have to say by the way that it's pretty ironic that you call me out for "strawman bs" for understanding that abstention means no sex, while a sentence later you are putting me on a position about student loans I never even got close to mentioning.
 

Forum List

Back
Top