Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
wow. You are getting desperate. Tell you what? Ask a doctor is a c-section is equivalent to an abortion.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.
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.
Logic would dictate that if you're smelling it? It's yours.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 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.
wow. You are getting desperate. Tell you what? Ask a doctor is a c-section is equivalent to an abortion.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.
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.
Listen retard, when I said, try asking a doctor if an abortion is the same as a c-section, you posted your retarded videos, and said, "Let's ask these doctors", implying that the videos would demonstrate them supporting your retarded position that a c-section is just like an abortion.
They didn't.
Your post remains the day's most retarded post.
Now, why don't you go back into your corner, and wipe the drool off your face.
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.
Listen retard, when I said, try asking a doctor if an abortion is the same as a c-section, you posted your retarded videos, and said, "Let's ask these doctors", implying that the videos would demonstrate them supporting your retarded position that a c-section is just like an abortion.
They didn't.
Your post remains the day's most retarded post.
Now, why don't you go back into your corner, and wipe the drool off your face.
Your selective reading and comprehension explains why you have earned your favorite seat on the short bus.
The only implication was that thise two abortionists would likely agree with me that an abortion is comparable to a "birth" based on their brutal honesty about the fact that abortions do kill children and how they are performed.
The majority of the freeloaders in my red state come from the only blue district in it.
Sure they do.....the facts don't agree with your rhetoric. Quit fudging the truth and face the facts.
For years the Republican Party has been telling us that the welfare system in America is helping to make people lazy and making them too dependent on the federal government.
As it turns out, Red states are far more likely to depend on federal welfare than blue states, and they are also more likely to have a higher percentage of poor people in their states. A new report from the Tax Foundation shows that two of the most conservative states in America – Louisiana and Mississippi – rank in the top 3 recipients of federal handouts.
Both Louisiana and Mississippi are run by backwards-thinking Republican governors who feel like it’s their job to cut benefits for the needy while at the same time handing out welfare to wealthy corporations. They have both also allowed the energy industry to operate with few limitations in their states, further reducing the health of the overall state.
Republicans love to tell us that welfare recipients are lazy and shiftless and that an individual’s success or failure is the sole responsibility of the individual, but THEY are actually the ones who depend the most on government handouts.
Welfare Hypocrisy: Red States Are The Real Freeloaders - The Ring of Fire - The Ring of Fire Network
Interesting how you don't know the state where I live yet seem to know a lot about it. I live here, bitch, you don't.
I wondered why you appeared so stupid....now I know...you live in one of those backward states. Just because you live there doesn't mean you are aware of what is going on....do some research...find out that your state is one of the states that sucks the government dry.
I told you why the state looks bad. All the leeches in the blue district suck it dry. Look at the demographics of that district and you'll understand why they do.
The majority of the freeloaders in my red state come from the only blue district in it.
Sure they do.....the facts don't agree with your rhetoric. Quit fudging the truth and face the facts.
For years the Republican Party has been telling us that the welfare system in America is helping to make people lazy and making them too dependent on the federal government.
As it turns out, Red states are far more likely to depend on federal welfare than blue states, and they are also more likely to have a higher percentage of poor people in their states. A new report from the Tax Foundation shows that two of the most conservative states in America – Louisiana and Mississippi – rank in the top 3 recipients of federal handouts.
Both Louisiana and Mississippi are run by backwards-thinking Republican governors who feel like it’s their job to cut benefits for the needy while at the same time handing out welfare to wealthy corporations. They have both also allowed the energy industry to operate with few limitations in their states, further reducing the health of the overall state.
Republicans love to tell us that welfare recipients are lazy and shiftless and that an individual’s success or failure is the sole responsibility of the individual, but THEY are actually the ones who depend the most on government handouts.
Welfare Hypocrisy: Red States Are The Real Freeloaders - The Ring of Fire - The Ring of Fire Network
Interesting how you don't know the state where I live yet seem to know a lot about it. I live here, bitch, you don't.
I wondered why you appeared so stupid....now I know...you live in one of those backward states. Just because you live there doesn't mean you are aware of what is going on....do some research...find out that your state is one of the states that sucks the government dry.
I told you why the state looks bad. All the leeches in the blue district suck it dry. Look at the demographics of that district and you'll understand why they do.
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.
Listen retard, when I said, try asking a doctor if an abortion is the same as a c-section, you posted your retarded videos, and said, "Let's ask these doctors", implying that the videos would demonstrate them supporting your retarded position that a c-section is just like an abortion.
They didn't.
Your post remains the day's most retarded post.
Now, why don't you go back into your corner, and wipe the drool off your face.
Your selective reading and comprehension explains why you have earned your favorite seat on the short bus.
The only implication was that thise two abortionists would likely agree with me that an abortion is comparable to a "birth" based on their brutal honesty about the fact that abortions do kill children and how they are performed.
Well, congratulations on continuing to be a presumptive retard, since there was noting in that video to suggest that either of those doctors was as retarded as you, and do not understand that a c-section, and an abortion are entirely different procedures.
So, yes, you could ask those doctors if a c-section is the same as an abortion, and they would ell you that your question is retarded.
Now, crawl back into your corner, and clean the drool off your face.
I'll take that bet, because the medical definition of an abortion is not "the surgical delivery of a child from the womb"Well, congratulations on continuing to be a presumptive retard, since there was noting in that video to suggest that either of those doctors was as retarded as you, and do not understand that a c-section, and an abortion are entirely different procedures.Listen retard, when I said, try asking a doctor if an abortion is the same as a c-section, you posted your retarded videos, and said, "Let's ask these doctors", implying that the videos would demonstrate them supporting your retarded position that a c-section is just like an abortion.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.
They didn't.
Your post remains the day's most retarded post.
Now, why don't you go back into your corner, and wipe the drool off your face.
Your selective reading and comprehension explains why you have earned your favorite seat on the short bus.
The only implication was that thise two abortionists would likely agree with me that an abortion is comparable to a "birth" based on their brutal honesty about the fact that abortions do kill children and how they are performed.
So, yes, you could ask those doctors if a c-section is the same as an abortion, and they would ell you that your question is retarded.
Now, crawl back into your corner, and clean the drool off your face.
I'll take the bet on any given day that any doctor worth their salt will agree that the surgical delivery of a child from a womb (in an abortion) is comparable to any other surgical removal of a child from a womb (birth).
In either case, the woman could be the same, the child yhe same and the doctor doing the procedure could be the same.
The only real difference is the intended outcome.
An aborted child is just as born as is any other. They are simply "born" into the hands of their killers.
An aborted child is just as born as is any other. They are simply "born" into the hands of their killers.
You ignoring the source doesn't mean it hasn't been provided. The blue district in my state is the only one where more than 20% of the residents get food stamps. The other 6 red districts, while there are those that receive them, are less than that.The majority of the freeloaders in my red state come from the only blue district in it.
Sure they do.....the facts don't agree with your rhetoric. Quit fudging the truth and face the facts.
For years the Republican Party has been telling us that the welfare system in America is helping to make people lazy and making them too dependent on the federal government.
As it turns out, Red states are far more likely to depend on federal welfare than blue states, and they are also more likely to have a higher percentage of poor people in their states. A new report from the Tax Foundation shows that two of the most conservative states in America – Louisiana and Mississippi – rank in the top 3 recipients of federal handouts.
Both Louisiana and Mississippi are run by backwards-thinking Republican governors who feel like it’s their job to cut benefits for the needy while at the same time handing out welfare to wealthy corporations. They have both also allowed the energy industry to operate with few limitations in their states, further reducing the health of the overall state.
Republicans love to tell us that welfare recipients are lazy and shiftless and that an individual’s success or failure is the sole responsibility of the individual, but THEY are actually the ones who depend the most on government handouts.
Welfare Hypocrisy: Red States Are The Real Freeloaders - The Ring of Fire - The Ring of Fire Network
Interesting how you don't know the state where I live yet seem to know a lot about it. I live here, bitch, you don't.
I wondered why you appeared so stupid....now I know...you live in one of those backward states. Just because you live there doesn't mean you are aware of what is going on....do some research...find out that your state is one of the states that sucks the government dry.
I told you why the state looks bad. All the leeches in the blue district suck it dry. Look at the demographics of that district and you'll understand why they do.
You still haven't pr
The majority of the freeloaders in my red state come from the only blue district in it.
Sure they do.....the facts don't agree with your rhetoric. Quit fudging the truth and face the facts.
For years the Republican Party has been telling us that the welfare system in America is helping to make people lazy and making them too dependent on the federal government.
As it turns out, Red states are far more likely to depend on federal welfare than blue states, and they are also more likely to have a higher percentage of poor people in their states. A new report from the Tax Foundation shows that two of the most conservative states in America – Louisiana and Mississippi – rank in the top 3 recipients of federal handouts.
Both Louisiana and Mississippi are run by backwards-thinking Republican governors who feel like it’s their job to cut benefits for the needy while at the same time handing out welfare to wealthy corporations. They have both also allowed the energy industry to operate with few limitations in their states, further reducing the health of the overall state.
Republicans love to tell us that welfare recipients are lazy and shiftless and that an individual’s success or failure is the sole responsibility of the individual, but THEY are actually the ones who depend the most on government handouts.
Welfare Hypocrisy: Red States Are The Real Freeloaders - The Ring of Fire - The Ring of Fire Network
Interesting how you don't know the state where I live yet seem to know a lot about it. I live here, bitch, you don't.
I wondered why you appeared so stupid....now I know...you live in one of those backward states. Just because you live there doesn't mean you are aware of what is going on....do some research...find out that your state is one of the states that sucks the government dry.
I told you why the state looks bad. All the leeches in the blue district suck it dry. Look at the demographics of that district and you'll understand why they do.
And, you still haven't shown any proof of that.
Southern parts of Appalachia are "red, Republican, Christian" and are the highest percentage of "welfare recipients" - so how do you explain that?
Sooo...you're saying you live in south Carolina? See how much time could have been saved if you had just told us that to begin with?You ignoring the source doesn't mean it hasn't been provided. The blue district in my state is the only one where more than 20% of the residents get food stamps. The other 6 red districts, while there are those that receive them, are less than that.Sure they do.....the facts don't agree with your rhetoric. Quit fudging the truth and face the facts.
For years the Republican Party has been telling us that the welfare system in America is helping to make people lazy and making them too dependent on the federal government.
As it turns out, Red states are far more likely to depend on federal welfare than blue states, and they are also more likely to have a higher percentage of poor people in their states. A new report from the Tax Foundation shows that two of the most conservative states in America – Louisiana and Mississippi – rank in the top 3 recipients of federal handouts.
Both Louisiana and Mississippi are run by backwards-thinking Republican governors who feel like it’s their job to cut benefits for the needy while at the same time handing out welfare to wealthy corporations. They have both also allowed the energy industry to operate with few limitations in their states, further reducing the health of the overall state.
Republicans love to tell us that welfare recipients are lazy and shiftless and that an individual’s success or failure is the sole responsibility of the individual, but THEY are actually the ones who depend the most on government handouts.
Welfare Hypocrisy: Red States Are The Real Freeloaders - The Ring of Fire - The Ring of Fire Network
Interesting how you don't know the state where I live yet seem to know a lot about it. I live here, bitch, you don't.
I wondered why you appeared so stupid....now I know...you live in one of those backward states. Just because you live there doesn't mean you are aware of what is going on....do some research...find out that your state is one of the states that sucks the government dry.
I told you why the state looks bad. All the leeches in the blue district suck it dry. Look at the demographics of that district and you'll understand why they do.
You still haven't pr
Sure they do.....the facts don't agree with your rhetoric. Quit fudging the truth and face the facts.
For years the Republican Party has been telling us that the welfare system in America is helping to make people lazy and making them too dependent on the federal government.
As it turns out, Red states are far more likely to depend on federal welfare than blue states, and they are also more likely to have a higher percentage of poor people in their states. A new report from the Tax Foundation shows that two of the most conservative states in America – Louisiana and Mississippi – rank in the top 3 recipients of federal handouts.
Both Louisiana and Mississippi are run by backwards-thinking Republican governors who feel like it’s their job to cut benefits for the needy while at the same time handing out welfare to wealthy corporations. They have both also allowed the energy industry to operate with few limitations in their states, further reducing the health of the overall state.
Republicans love to tell us that welfare recipients are lazy and shiftless and that an individual’s success or failure is the sole responsibility of the individual, but THEY are actually the ones who depend the most on government handouts.
Welfare Hypocrisy: Red States Are The Real Freeloaders - The Ring of Fire - The Ring of Fire Network
Interesting how you don't know the state where I live yet seem to know a lot about it. I live here, bitch, you don't.
I wondered why you appeared so stupid....now I know...you live in one of those backward states. Just because you live there doesn't mean you are aware of what is going on....do some research...find out that your state is one of the states that sucks the government dry.
I told you why the state looks bad. All the leeches in the blue district suck it dry. Look at the demographics of that district and you'll understand why they do.
And, you still haven't shown any proof of that.
Southern parts of Appalachia are "red, Republican, Christian" and are the highest percentage of "welfare recipients" - so how do you explain that?
Sooo...you're saying you live in south Carolina? See how much time could have been saved if you had just told us that to begin with?You ignoring the source doesn't mean it hasn't been provided. The blue district in my state is the only one where more than 20% of the residents get food stamps. The other 6 red districts, while there are those that receive them, are less than that.Interesting how you don't know the state where I live yet seem to know a lot about it. I live here, bitch, you don't.
I wondered why you appeared so stupid....now I know...you live in one of those backward states. Just because you live there doesn't mean you are aware of what is going on....do some research...find out that your state is one of the states that sucks the government dry.
I told you why the state looks bad. All the leeches in the blue district suck it dry. Look at the demographics of that district and you'll understand why they do.
You still haven't pr
Interesting how you don't know the state where I live yet seem to know a lot about it. I live here, bitch, you don't.
I wondered why you appeared so stupid....now I know...you live in one of those backward states. Just because you live there doesn't mean you are aware of what is going on....do some research...find out that your state is one of the states that sucks the government dry.
I told you why the state looks bad. All the leeches in the blue district suck it dry. Look at the demographics of that district and you'll understand why they do.
And, you still haven't shown any proof of that.
Southern parts of Appalachia are "red, Republican, Christian" and are the highest percentage of "welfare recipients" - so how do you explain that?
Oh. Which makes you still a liar. Just because it may happen in one state, does not make it true in all states. You know it's not true in your state, that's why you keep trying to deflect to anything other than your state.Sooo...you're saying you live in south Carolina? See how much time could have been saved if you had just told us that to begin with?You ignoring the source doesn't mean it hasn't been provided. The blue district in my state is the only one where more than 20% of the residents get food stamps. The other 6 red districts, while there are those that receive them, are less than that.I wondered why you appeared so stupid....now I know...you live in one of those backward states. Just because you live there doesn't mean you are aware of what is going on....do some research...find out that your state is one of the states that sucks the government dry.
I told you why the state looks bad. All the leeches in the blue district suck it dry. Look at the demographics of that district and you'll understand why they do.
You still haven't pr
I wondered why you appeared so stupid....now I know...you live in one of those backward states. Just because you live there doesn't mean you are aware of what is going on....do some research...find out that your state is one of the states that sucks the government dry.
I told you why the state looks bad. All the leeches in the blue district suck it dry. Look at the demographics of that district and you'll understand why they do.
And, you still haven't shown any proof of that.
Southern parts of Appalachia are "red, Republican, Christian" and are the highest percentage of "welfare recipients" - so how do you explain that?
I'm saying that it occurs in SC. I provided the source that you retards ignore. I posted that the only blue district gets far more in food stamps than any other red district. One of you idiots brought in things related to topics never mentioned trying to say I included them.
Oh. Which makes you still a liar. Just because it may happen in one state, does not make it true in all states. You know it's not true in your state, that's why you keep trying to deflect to anything other than your state.Sooo...you're saying you live in south Carolina? See how much time could have been saved if you had just told us that to begin with?You ignoring the source doesn't mean it hasn't been provided. The blue district in my state is the only one where more than 20% of the residents get food stamps. The other 6 red districts, while there are those that receive them, are less than that.I told you why the state looks bad. All the leeches in the blue district suck it dry. Look at the demographics of that district and you'll understand why they do.
You still haven't pr
I told you why the state looks bad. All the leeches in the blue district suck it dry. Look at the demographics of that district and you'll understand why they do.
And, you still haven't shown any proof of that.
Southern parts of Appalachia are "red, Republican, Christian" and are the highest percentage of "welfare recipients" - so how do you explain that?
I'm saying that it occurs in SC. I provided the source that you retards ignore. I posted that the only blue district gets far more in food stamps than any other red district. One of you idiots brought in things related to topics never mentioned trying to say I included them.
Never mind. I thought you had quit lying. I was wrong.
And you're still lying. I asked for proof that this is true in. Your. State - which is what you keep insisting. But, you won't even tell us which state you live in, so we can verify your lies that you insist are "fact". The only liar here is still you.Oh. Which makes you still a liar. Just because it may happen in one state, does not make it true in all states. You know it's not true in your state, that's why you keep trying to deflect to anything other than your state.Sooo...you're saying you live in south Carolina? See how much time could have been saved if you had just told us that to begin with?You ignoring the source doesn't mean it hasn't been provided. The blue district in my state is the only one where more than 20% of the residents get food stamps. The other 6 red districts, while there are those that receive them, are less than that.You still haven't pr
And, you still haven't shown any proof of that.
Southern parts of Appalachia are "red, Republican, Christian" and are the highest percentage of "welfare recipients" - so how do you explain that?
I'm saying that it occurs in SC. I provided the source that you retards ignore. I posted that the only blue district gets far more in food stamps than any other red district. One of you idiots brought in things related to topics never mentioned trying to say I included them.
Never mind. I thought you had quit lying. I was wrong.
Never said it was true in all states. I did prove it was true is SC. I suppose I could check the others but you'd ignore the proof just like you did for the proof in SC.
You lied. You asked for proof so you could verify. When it was provided, you ignored.
And you're still lying. I asked for proof that this is true in. Your. State - which is what you keep insisting. But, you won't even tell us which state you live in, so we can verify your lies that you insist are "fact". The only liar here is still you.Oh. Which makes you still a liar. Just because it may happen in one state, does not make it true in all states. You know it's not true in your state, that's why you keep trying to deflect to anything other than your state.Sooo...you're saying you live in south Carolina? See how much time could have been saved if you had just told us that to begin with?You ignoring the source doesn't mean it hasn't been provided. The blue district in my state is the only one where more than 20% of the residents get food stamps. The other 6 red districts, while there are those that receive them, are less than that.
I'm saying that it occurs in SC. I provided the source that you retards ignore. I posted that the only blue district gets far more in food stamps than any other red district. One of you idiots brought in things related to topics never mentioned trying to say I included them.
Never mind. I thought you had quit lying. I was wrong.
Never said it was true in all states. I did prove it was true is SC. I suppose I could check the others but you'd ignore the proof just like you did for the proof in SC.
You lied. You asked for proof so you could verify. When it was provided, you ignored.
Dismissed. Again.
You're the liar. You said, repeatedly, In. My. State, and then started typing numbers out of your ass. I asked repeatedly what state you lived in, and you refused to say, all while insisting that we accept that the numbers you spewed out were accurate, even though you refused to allow us to verify them.And you're still lying. I asked for proof that this is true in. Your. State - which is what you keep insisting. But, you won't even tell us which state you live in, so we can verify your lies that you insist are "fact". The only liar here is still you.Oh. Which makes you still a liar. Just because it may happen in one state, does not make it true in all states. You know it's not true in your state, that's why you keep trying to deflect to anything other than your state.Sooo...you're saying you live in south Carolina? See how much time could have been saved if you had just told us that to begin with?
I'm saying that it occurs in SC. I provided the source that you retards ignore. I posted that the only blue district gets far more in food stamps than any other red district. One of you idiots brought in things related to topics never mentioned trying to say I included them.
Never mind. I thought you had quit lying. I was wrong.
Never said it was true in all states. I did prove it was true is SC. I suppose I could check the others but you'd ignore the proof just like you did for the proof in SC.
You lied. You asked for proof so you could verify. When it was provided, you ignored.
Dismissed. Again.
Liar. You asked for proof not knowing the State.
You're the liar. You said, repeatedly, In. My. State, and then started typing numbers out of your ass. I asked repeatedly what state you lived in, and you refused to say, all while insisting that we accept that the numbers you spewed out were accurate, even though you refused to allow us to verify them.And you're still lying. I asked for proof that this is true in. Your. State - which is what you keep insisting. But, you won't even tell us which state you live in, so we can verify your lies that you insist are "fact". The only liar here is still you.Oh. Which makes you still a liar. Just because it may happen in one state, does not make it true in all states. You know it's not true in your state, that's why you keep trying to deflect to anything other than your state.I'm saying that it occurs in SC. I provided the source that you retards ignore. I posted that the only blue district gets far more in food stamps than any other red district. One of you idiots brought in things related to topics never mentioned trying to say I included them.
Never mind. I thought you had quit lying. I was wrong.
Never said it was true in all states. I did prove it was true is SC. I suppose I could check the others but you'd ignore the proof just like you did for the proof in SC.
You lied. You asked for proof so you could verify. When it was provided, you ignored.
Dismissed. Again.
Liar. You asked for proof not knowing the State.
I have not lied, or changed my position one little bit, liar.
You, on the other hand, have done everything you can to deflect, change the subject, and attack me, all so that you do not have to provide any actual proof that anything you have said about your state is actually true.
Now, you are pointing to South Carolina, screaming, "See?!?! It's a true there!!!" as if that somehow vindicates the lies you have told about your state.
But, that's okay. You have been exposed as a liar, and a hack. So, you blather on about whatever you'd like. No one is taking you seriously.
You have already been dismissed as a joke.
Oh, but I can dismiss you. Dismissing you doesn't mean that you have to leave. It just means that I don't have to bother taking anything you blather about seriously, because you are a liar, a hack, and a joke. Your blathering is dismissed as irrelevant.You're the liar. You said, repeatedly, In. My. State, and then started typing numbers out of your ass. I asked repeatedly what state you lived in, and you refused to say, all while insisting that we accept that the numbers you spewed out were accurate, even though you refused to allow us to verify them.And you're still lying. I asked for proof that this is true in. Your. State - which is what you keep insisting. But, you won't even tell us which state you live in, so we can verify your lies that you insist are "fact". The only liar here is still you.Oh. Which makes you still a liar. Just because it may happen in one state, does not make it true in all states. You know it's not true in your state, that's why you keep trying to deflect to anything other than your state.
Never mind. I thought you had quit lying. I was wrong.
Never said it was true in all states. I did prove it was true is SC. I suppose I could check the others but you'd ignore the proof just like you did for the proof in SC.
You lied. You asked for proof so you could verify. When it was provided, you ignored.
Dismissed. Again.
Liar. You asked for proof not knowing the State.
I have not lied, or changed my position one little bit, liar.
You, on the other hand, have done everything you can to deflect, change the subject, and attack me, all so that you do not have to provide any actual proof that anything you have said about your state is actually true.
Now, you are pointing to South Carolina, screaming, "See?!?! It's a true there!!!" as if that somehow vindicates the lies you have told about your state.
But, that's okay. You have been exposed as a liar, and a hack. So, you blather on about whatever you'd like. No one is taking you seriously.
You have already been dismissed as a joke.
You're lying now, asshole and aren't man enough to admit it.
You can't dismiss me. If you could, I wouldn't be here. Since I am, your dismissal amounts to as much as your existence. NOTHING.
I'll take that bet, because the medical definition of an abortion is not "the surgical delivery of a child from the womb"Well, congratulations on continuing to be a presumptive retard, since there was noting in that video to suggest that either of those doctors was as retarded as you, and do not understand that a c-section, and an abortion are entirely different procedures.Listen retard, when I said, try asking a doctor if an abortion is the same as a c-section, you posted your retarded videos, and said, "Let's ask these doctors", implying that the videos would demonstrate them supporting your retarded position that a c-section is just like an abortion.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.
They didn't.
Your post remains the day's most retarded post.
Now, why don't you go back into your corner, and wipe the drool off your face.
Your selective reading and comprehension explains why you have earned your favorite seat on the short bus.
The only implication was that thise two abortionists would likely agree with me that an abortion is comparable to a "birth" based on their brutal honesty about the fact that abortions do kill children and how they are performed.
So, yes, you could ask those doctors if a c-section is the same as an abortion, and they would ell you that your question is retarded.
Now, crawl back into your corner, and clean the drool off your face.
I'll take the bet on any given day that any doctor worth their salt will agree that the surgical delivery of a child from a womb (in an abortion) is comparable to any other surgical removal of a child from a womb (birth).
In either case, the woman could be the same, the child yhe same and the doctor doing the procedure could be the same.
The only real difference is the intended outcome.
An aborted child is just as born as is any other. They are simply "born" into the hands of their killers.
Abortion: In medicine, an abortion is the premature exit of the products of conception (the fetus, fetal membranes, and placenta) from the uterus.
Abortion has nothing to do with birth - via caesarian section, or otherwise.
Feel free to go back to your corner, and continue drooling on yourself.
Oh what a crock of shit! Sometimes things really do mean what they mean. When you try to call a duck a dog, and someone gives you the definition of a dog, that isn't because they are trying to "appeal to definition". it's because you are trying to redefine reality to fit your agenda!I'll take that bet, because the medical definition of an abortion is not "the surgical delivery of a child from the womb"Well, congratulations on continuing to be a presumptive retard, since there was noting in that video to suggest that either of those doctors was as retarded as you, and do not understand that a c-section, and an abortion are entirely different procedures.Listen retard, when I said, try asking a doctor if an abortion is the same as a c-section, you posted your retarded videos, and said, "Let's ask these doctors", implying that the videos would demonstrate them supporting your retarded position that a c-section is just like an abortion.
They didn't.
Your post remains the day's most retarded post.
Now, why don't you go back into your corner, and wipe the drool off your face.
Your selective reading and comprehension explains why you have earned your favorite seat on the short bus.
The only implication was that thise two abortionists would likely agree with me that an abortion is comparable to a "birth" based on their brutal honesty about the fact that abortions do kill children and how they are performed.
So, yes, you could ask those doctors if a c-section is the same as an abortion, and they would ell you that your question is retarded.
Now, crawl back into your corner, and clean the drool off your face.
I'll take the bet on any given day that any doctor worth their salt will agree that the surgical delivery of a child from a womb (in an abortion) is comparable to any other surgical removal of a child from a womb (birth).
In either case, the woman could be the same, the child yhe same and the doctor doing the procedure could be the same.
The only real difference is the intended outcome.
An aborted child is just as born as is any other. They are simply "born" into the hands of their killers.
Abortion: In medicine, an abortion is the premature exit of the products of conception (the fetus, fetal membranes, and placenta) from the uterus.
Abortion has nothing to do with birth - via caesarian section, or otherwise.
Feel free to go back to your corner, and continue drooling on yourself.
Bwahahaha!
Here again you try your appeal to definition fallacy even as you accuse others of doing the same.
Its hilarious how quick you are to embrace and cite definitions that you THINK support your denials but you completely disregard the ones that prove against your denials.
We dont need to look it up to know how that makes you a hypocrite.
