A question for the anti-choice crowd.

[Boss]

I agree with much of your statement and think you have a reasonable solution... A bit stricter than I'd propose but in the ballpark. I don't agree with your opening statement about the "organism"... it IS part of the woman's body. It is made up of her DNA, it is feeding and developing off of her body. The idea Of making this a "person" is a social construct that varies depending on or personal, religious, and cultural beliefs. While this makes it a relevant arguement and discussion it does not make it fact.

No it's NOT made up of her DNA. It has it's own unique DNA. It has half of her genes and half of the father's genes. It is deriving nutrition from the mother but that's how all humans (and mammals) begin life.

I don't subscribe to the "personhood" thing because that is semantics. Biologically, at point of conception, it becomes a living human organism in the state of being... aka: a human being. It hasn't fully developed and it won't fully develop for about another 18-20 years or more. That doesn't change what it already is and has been.

I don't have a religious objection to a mature discussion on when it's appropriate to terminate a human life. I know some people do but I don't. However, I do think it is an ethical thing and at some point in fetal development, the fetus should be protected by basic human rights. Certainly, after the 1st trimester.

 

[Boss]

So if you all expect to actually be taken seriously, advocate for men to be prosecuted right along with women for abortions...

Prosecution? I don't want people to be prosecuted for pregnancy. I am ALL in favor of any measures we can take to hold the male equally responsible in all pregnancies. We have the technological advancements that should be able to let us determine who the father is if there is a question. But yeah... they should be responsible as well.

 

[Faun]

It's confirmed based on the data. That you choose not to accept it proves my claim that you simply don't want to believe it.

You mean the data that you provided, and we're just supposed to accept is accurate, and comes directly from the census bureau, based on nothing but your word, since you won't even tell us what state you reside in, so we can verify your claims? You mean that data?


Yeah...whatever, liar.


Sent from my 5054N using Tapatalk

That's how Liberals work. You mean you don't apply the same concept when you disagree with what you're told? Typical double standard.

Yes, this is how liberals work: if you expect liberals to take you seriously, you need to be able to support your claims with verifiable facts. The key to that phrase being verifiable. You see, if it can't be verified, then it's not a fact, it is a claim. Claims are not evidence of anything.


Thanks for playing, Liar.

He won't tell you because he wants to create the impression that the money is being used for welfare and other related programs; when in fact...


Federal Assistance to Recipients in South Carolina 6 (James E. Clyburn) Congressional District, FY 2011, summary

www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/snap-participation-by-congressional-district/

Seems SC 6 is one of those that has SNAP participation above 20%. Notice none of the other red districts do.

What does that have to do with their district getting more federal funding, most of which went towards medical, education, and transportation services; and you tried to paint them as "freeloaders?"

 

[Conservative65]

You mean the data that you provided, and we're just supposed to accept is accurate, and comes directly from the census bureau, based on nothing but your word, since you won't even tell us what state you reside in, so we can verify your claims? You mean that data?


Yeah...whatever, liar.


Sent from my 5054N using Tapatalk

That's how Liberals work. You mean you don't apply the same concept when you disagree with what you're told? Typical double standard.

Yes, this is how liberals work: if you expect liberals to take you seriously, you need to be able to support your claims with verifiable facts. The key to that phrase being verifiable. You see, if it can't be verified, then it's not a fact, it is a claim. Claims are not evidence of anything.


Thanks for playing, Liar.

He won't tell you because he wants to create the impression that the money is being used for welfare and other related programs; when in fact...


Federal Assistance to Recipients in South Carolina 6 (James E. Clyburn) Congressional District, FY 2011, summary

www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/snap-participation-by-congressional-district/

Seems SC 6 is one of those that has SNAP participation above 20%. Notice none of the other red districts do.

What does that have to do with their district getting more federal funding, most of which went towards medical, education, and transportation services; and you tried to paint them as "freeloaders?"

My statement dealt with the amount of money that goes toward that district related to social welfare not anything else. You brought in things I didn't mention. I provided a source showing that more than 20% of that district, the only blue one in the State, gets SNAP (food stamps benefits) while NONE of the red ones get it. That means they are freeloaders in the sense and topic to which my statement applied. Not my fault you want to include things outside the freeloading claim I made and PROVED.

Do you deny the source I provided is true? You asked for one and I provided it. That leaves you two option. Admit you're wrong or STFU, liar.

 

[Faun]

That's how Liberals work. You mean you don't apply the same concept when you disagree with what you're told? Typical double standard.

Yes, this is how liberals work: if you expect liberals to take you seriously, you need to be able to support your claims with verifiable facts. The key to that phrase being verifiable. You see, if it can't be verified, then it's not a fact, it is a claim. Claims are not evidence of anything.


Thanks for playing, Liar.

He won't tell you because he wants to create the impression that the money is being used for welfare and other related programs; when in fact...


Federal Assistance to Recipients in South Carolina 6 (James E. Clyburn) Congressional District, FY 2011, summary

www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/snap-participation-by-congressional-district/

Seems SC 6 is one of those that has SNAP participation above 20%. Notice none of the other red districts do.

What does that have to do with their district getting more federal funding, most of which went towards medical, education, and transportation services; and you tried to paint them as "freeloaders?"

My statement dealt with the amount of money that goes toward that district related to social welfare not anything else. You brought in things I didn't mention. I provided a source showing that more than 20% of that district, the only blue one in the State, gets SNAP (food stamps benefits) while NONE of the red ones get it. That means they are freeloaders in the sense and topic to which my statement applied. Not my fault you want to include things outside the freeloading claim I made and PROVED.

Do you deny the source I provided is true? You asked for one and I provided it. That leaves you two option. Admit you're wrong or STFU, liar.

Now you're lying to cover your previous lying. I got the link I posted from you. So you're lying by saying I'm mentioning things you didn't mention. You lied by portraying funds going for things like medical, education and transportation, as though they went for welfare.

 

[Chuz Life]

The ruling yesterday reaffirmed the fact that government has no authority to compel a woman to give birth against her will.

If a woman is pregnant, there is only one way for her to become Un-pregnant. If a c-section or drug induced procedure is legitimately recognized as a live "birth" then any abortion procedure to remove a child from the womb is a birth as well.

The only real difference is whether the child is to be born alive or intentionally killed in the birthing procedure that is taken.

 

[Slade3200]

The ruling yesterday reaffirmed the fact that government has no authority to compel a woman to give birth against her will.

If a woman is pregnant, there is only one way for her to become Un-pregnant. If a c-section or drug induced procedure is legitimately recognized as a live "birth" then any abortion procedure to remove a child from the womb is a birth as well.

The only real difference is whether the child is to be born alive or intentionally killed in the birthing procedure that is taken.

Birth:
the emergence of a baby or other young from the body of its mother; the start of life as a physically separate being.
"he was blind from birth"
synonyms: childbirth, delivery, nativity, birthing;More

 

[Conservative65]

You mean the data that you provided, and we're just supposed to accept is accurate, and comes directly from the census bureau, based on nothing but your word, since you won't even tell us what state you reside in, so we can verify your claims? You mean that data?


Yeah...whatever, liar.


Sent from my 5054N using Tapatalk

That's how Liberals work. You mean you don't apply the same concept when you disagree with what you're told? Typical double standard.

Yes, this is how liberals work: if you expect liberals to take you seriously, you need to be able to support your claims with verifiable facts. The key to that phrase being verifiable. You see, if it can't be verified, then it's not a fact, it is a claim. Claims are not evidence of anything.


Thanks for playing, Liar.

He won't tell you because he wants to create the impression that the money is being used for welfare and other related programs; when in fact...


Federal Assistance to Recipients in South Carolina 6 (James E. Clyburn) Congressional District, FY 2011, summary

www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/snap-participation-by-congressional-district/

Seems SC 6 is one of those that has SNAP participation above 20%. Notice none of the other red districts do.

What does that have to do with their district getting more federal funding, most of which went towards medical, education, and transportation services; and you tried to paint them as "freeloaders?"

All of the funding for the source I showed went for food stamps benefits. What do you not get about that, bitch?

You're one of the dumbasses like Czernobog that thinks it's OK for a woman to tell you to butt out of her choices related to her body then support that same woman being able to tell you to support the kids that she had as a result of that choice. Only an idiot would let someone tell them to stay out then be willing to fund the choice when the one making it can't.

 

[Czernobog]

The ruling yesterday reaffirmed the fact that government has no authority to compel a woman to give birth against her will.

If a woman is pregnant, there is only one way for her to become Un-pregnant. If a c-section or drug induced procedure is legitimately recognized as a live "birth" then any abortion procedure to remove a child from the womb is a birth as well.

The only real difference is whether the child is to be born alive or intentionally killed in the birthing procedure that is taken.

wow. You are getting desperate. Tell you what? Ask a doctor is a c-section is equivalent to an abortion.

Congratulations. You have won the award for the most retarded post of the day.

Sent from my 5054N using Tapatalk

 

[Conservative65]

Yes, this is how liberals work: if you expect liberals to take you seriously, you need to be able to support your claims with verifiable facts. The key to that phrase being verifiable. You see, if it can't be verified, then it's not a fact, it is a claim. Claims are not evidence of anything.


Thanks for playing, Liar.

He won't tell you because he wants to create the impression that the money is being used for welfare and other related programs; when in fact...


Federal Assistance to Recipients in South Carolina 6 (James E. Clyburn) Congressional District, FY 2011, summary

www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/snap-participation-by-congressional-district/

Seems SC 6 is one of those that has SNAP participation above 20%. Notice none of the other red districts do.

What does that have to do with their district getting more federal funding, most of which went towards medical, education, and transportation services; and you tried to paint them as "freeloaders?"

My statement dealt with the amount of money that goes toward that district related to social welfare not anything else. You brought in things I didn't mention. I provided a source showing that more than 20% of that district, the only blue one in the State, gets SNAP (food stamps benefits) while NONE of the red ones get it. That means they are freeloaders in the sense and topic to which my statement applied. Not my fault you want to include things outside the freeloading claim I made and PROVED.

Do you deny the source I provided is true? You asked for one and I provided it. That leaves you two option. Admit you're wrong or STFU, liar.

Now you're lying to cover your previous lying. I got the link I posted from you. So you're lying by saying I'm mentioning things you didn't mention. You lied by portraying funds going for things like medical, education and transportation, as though they went for welfare.

Hey, you dumb piece of shit, SNAP funds food for people unwilling to provide for themselves. The line I posted was entirely about SNAP and not about education, transportation, or medical. I'm saying you lied when you claimed my posts have been about anything but social welfare. You lie when you say I mentioned those other things. SNAP is a welfare program and those on it are freeloaders. The 6th district, which is the ONLY blue one in the state, is also the only one in the state where more than 20% of the residents receive it.

 

[Chuz Life]

My claim is based on the evidence.

So you claim. But, since you won't tell anyone what state you live in, that's all you have - unconfirmed, unreliable claims from a liar.

It's confirmed based on the data. That you choose not to accept it proves my claim that you simply don't want to believe it.

You mean the data that you provided, and we're just supposed to accept is accurate, and comes directly from the census bureau, based on nothing but your word, since you won't even tell us what state you reside in, so we can verify your claims? You mean that data?

Yeah...whatever, liar.

Sent from my 5054N using Tapatalk

That's how Liberals work. You mean you don't apply the same concept when you disagree with what you're told? Typical double standard.

Yes, this is how liberals work: if you expect liberals to take you seriously, you need to be able to support your claims with verifiable facts. The key to that phrase being verifiable. You see, if it can't be verified, then it's not a fact, it is a claim. Claims are not evidence of anything.

Thanks for playing, Liar.

The ruling yesterday reaffirmed the fact that government has no authority to compel a woman to give birth against her will.

If a woman is pregnant, there is only one way for her to become Un-pregnant. If a c-section or drug induced procedure is legitimately recognized as a live "birth" then any abortion procedure to remove a child from the womb is a birth as well.

The only real difference is whether the child is to be born alive or intentionally killed in the birthing procedure that is taken.

Birth:
the emergence of a baby or other young from the body of its mother; the start of life as a physically separate being.
"he was blind from birth"
synonyms: childbirth, delivery, nativity, birthing;More

Annnnnd?

Under the 14th Amendment, what do you call a child that survives and abortion attempt?

Hint: It starts with a C

 

[Chuz Life]

The ruling yesterday reaffirmed the fact that government has no authority to compel a woman to give birth against her will.

If a woman is pregnant, there is only one way for her to become Un-pregnant. If a c-section or drug induced procedure is legitimately recognized as a live "birth" then any abortion procedure to remove a child from the womb is a birth as well.

The only real difference is whether the child is to be born alive or intentionally killed in the birthing procedure that is taken.

wow. You are getting desperate. Tell you what? Ask a doctor is a c-section is equivalent to an abortion.

Congratulations. You have won the award for the most retarded post of the day.

Sent from my 5054N using Tapatalk

Ok, How about we ask This doctor:



Or this one:

 

[Faun]

That's how Liberals work. You mean you don't apply the same concept when you disagree with what you're told? Typical double standard.

Yes, this is how liberals work: if you expect liberals to take you seriously, you need to be able to support your claims with verifiable facts. The key to that phrase being verifiable. You see, if it can't be verified, then it's not a fact, it is a claim. Claims are not evidence of anything.


Thanks for playing, Liar.

He won't tell you because he wants to create the impression that the money is being used for welfare and other related programs; when in fact...


Federal Assistance to Recipients in South Carolina 6 (James E. Clyburn) Congressional District, FY 2011, summary

www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/snap-participation-by-congressional-district/

Seems SC 6 is one of those that has SNAP participation above 20%. Notice none of the other red districts do.

What does that have to do with their district getting more federal funding, most of which went towards medical, education, and transportation services; and you tried to paint them as "freeloaders?"

All of the funding for the source I showed went for food stamps benefits. What do you not get about that, bitch?

You're one of the dumbasses like Czernobog that thinks it's OK for a woman to tell you to butt out of her choices related to her body then support that same woman being able to tell you to support the kids that she had as a result of that choice. Only an idiot would let someone tell them to stay out then be willing to fund the choice when the one making it can't.

Again... your link.... your misrepresentation.

 

[Czernobog]

The ruling yesterday reaffirmed the fact that government has no authority to compel a woman to give birth against her will.

If a woman is pregnant, there is only one way for her to become Un-pregnant. If a c-section or drug induced procedure is legitimately recognized as a live "birth" then any abortion procedure to remove a child from the womb is a birth as well.

The only real difference is whether the child is to be born alive or intentionally killed in the birthing procedure that is taken.

wow. You are getting desperate. Tell you what? Ask a doctor is a c-section is equivalent to an abortion.

Congratulations. You have won the award for the most retarded post of the day.

Sent from my 5054N using Tapatalk

Ok, How about we ask This doctor:



Or this one:

Yeah. Watched your stupid videos. Neither of those doctors said anything about abortion being no different than a c-section.

Your post remains today's most retarded post.

Congratulations.

Sent from my 5054N using Tapatalk

 

[Chuz Life]

The ruling yesterday reaffirmed the fact that government has no authority to compel a woman to give birth against her will.

If a woman is pregnant, there is only one way for her to become Un-pregnant. If a c-section or drug induced procedure is legitimately recognized as a live "birth" then any abortion procedure to remove a child from the womb is a birth as well.

The only real difference is whether the child is to be born alive or intentionally killed in the birthing procedure that is taken.

wow. You are getting desperate. Tell you what? Ask a doctor is a c-section is equivalent to an abortion.

Congratulations. You have won the award for the most retarded post of the day.

Sent from my 5054N using Tapatalk

Ok, How about we ask This doctor:



Or this one:

Yeah. Watched your stupid videos. Neither of those doctors said anything about abortion being no different than a c-section.

Your post remains today's most retarded post.

Congratulations.

Sent from my 5054N using Tapatalk

Listen, dullard, I never claimed that they were already making a comparison between a live delivery and an abortion. Did I.

You said I should "ask a Dr." and I said "let's ask these guys." Given they are / were BOTH abortionists and given what they do say in their videos. . . I have every reason to conclude that they would have no problem noting the many things that an abortion and a live birth have in common.

 

[Witchit]

Fortunately, over many forums and likely hundreds of thousands of posts Chuz Life has yet to have a pregnant woman give a shit what he thinks, or how he feels.

Ramen.

 

[Chuz Life]

Fortunately, over many forums and likely hundreds of thousands of posts Chuz Life has yet to have a pregnant woman give a shit what he thinks, or how he feels.

Ramen.

I smell some very old butthurt.

[emoji447]

P.S. It is very telling that you used the word "fortunately" in your unfounded claim above. That was very PROABORTION of you.

 

[Witchit]

Fortunately, over many forums and likely hundreds of thousands of posts Chuz Life has yet to have a pregnant woman give a shit what he thinks, or how he feels.

Ramen.

I smell some very old butthurt.

[emoji447]

Logic would dictate that if you're smelling it? It's yours.

 

[Chuz Life]

Fortunately, over many forums and likely hundreds of thousands of posts Chuz Life has yet to have a pregnant woman give a shit what he thinks, or how he feels.

Ramen.

I smell some very old butthurt.

[emoji447]

Logic would dictate that if you're smelling it? It's yours.

Logic tells me that it came from your direction as there was no sign of it prior to your whiny ass post.

 

[Witchit]

Fortunately, over many forums and likely hundreds of thousands of posts Chuz Life has yet to have a pregnant woman give a shit what he thinks, or how he feels.

Ramen.

I smell some very old butthurt.

[emoji447]

Logic would dictate that if you're smelling it? It's yours.

Logic tells me that it came from your direction as there was no sign of it prior to your whiny ass post.

Awww. I'm sorry I hurt your itto tater peelings. Please stop crying.