A question for the pro-abortion aka pro-choice crowd

[Gadawg73]

Just because YOU aren't man enough to handle strong, intelligent women, don't assume ALL men have that deficiency.

I can handle strong, intelligent women. That describes every girlfriend I've ever had.

I can also handle obnoxious, insufferable, irrational bitches with a propensity to violence. That describes my ex-wife. (If you're wondering, the preferred method goes something like, "The door's right there.")

And I can also tell the difference.

FYI, being stronger and smarter than you does not necessarily make one a "strong, intelligent woman". That isn't exactly a high hurdle to clear.

You can not even answer a direct question ASKING FOR YOUR alternative to the current law and you call others unintelligent.

 

[Dr Grump]

Obfuscate much?

Make shit up, much?

 

[JohnA]

You have a link of course.

of course unlike you i back up what I post as facts by researching the source .


Abortion: A right or an outrage? - - ModernMedicine

 

[Dragon]

FYI, being stronger and smarter than you does not necessarily make one a "strong, intelligent woman". That isn't exactly a high hurdle to clear.

And THAT conclusively identifies which category you belong in. FYI, being a strong, intelligent women is not demonstrated by a complete lack of compassion or empathy.

The door's right there. Don't let it whack your fanny on the way out.

 

[JohnA]

Actually, the pro-life side is appalled the government stepped in to say some murder is okay. When the government decided that it was okay to kill some children, that's when we started having an issue with it.

You folks are about as dumb as a box of rocks.
When abortion was illegal women were not prosecuted for having them.
Dumb asses.

i have some rocks in my yard that have a higher IQ than some of the prolife crowd .

 

[Cecilie1200]

Actually, the pro-life side is appalled the government stepped in to say some murder is okay. When the government decided that it was okay to kill some children, that's when we started having an issue with it.

You folks are about as dumb as a box of rocks.
When abortion was illegal women were not prosecuted for having them.
Dumb asses.

i have some rocks in my yard that have a higher IQ than some of the prolife crowd .

And yet it's the pro-abortion side of the argument that keeps making arguments in direct conflict with basic biological science. At least the pro-lifers were paying attention in school.

 

[Dr.Drock]

You folks are about as dumb as a box of rocks.
When abortion was illegal women were not prosecuted for having them.
Dumb asses.

i have some rocks in my yard that have a higher IQ than some of the prolife crowd .

And yet it's the pro-abortion side of the argument that keeps making arguments in direct conflict with basic biological science. At least the pro-lifers were paying attention in school.

There's pro-lifers on this very thread who are on other threads in this religion section speaking out against basic bioligical science. So I'm not sure I'd stick to that stance.

 

[Cecilie1200]

i have some rocks in my yard that have a higher IQ than some of the prolife crowd .

And yet it's the pro-abortion side of the argument that keeps making arguments in direct conflict with basic biological science. At least the pro-lifers were paying attention in school.

There's pro-lifers on this very thread who are on other threads in this religion section speaking out against basic bioligical science. So I'm not sure I'd stick to that stance.

By all means, share with me any pro-life argument that violates basic biological science. I'd be fascinated to hear it.

Meanwhile, I think any side that includes people saying, "You should stop killing cancer cells, then. They're human life, too" should absolutely avoid denigrating ANYONE else's intelligence, or even mentioning the word "intelligence".

I don't believe I need any advice from the likes of THAT on what stance I should take.

 

[koshergrl]

He's lying.

 

[Dr.Drock]

And yet it's the pro-abortion side of the argument that keeps making arguments in direct conflict with basic biological science. At least the pro-lifers were paying attention in school.

There's pro-lifers on this very thread who are on other threads in this religion section speaking out against basic bioligical science. So I'm not sure I'd stick to that stance.

By all means, share with me any pro-life argument that violates basic biological science. I'd be fascinated to hear it.

Meanwhile, I think any side that includes people saying, "You should stop killing cancer cells, then. They're human life, too" should absolutely avoid denigrating ANYONE else's intelligence, or even mentioning the word "intelligence".

I don't believe I need any advice from the likes of THAT on what stance I should take.

A good try at sneaking a goalpost move in there, but I must admit it didn't slip passed me.

I didn't say anything remotely similar to "a pro-life argument violates basic biological science." I'll give you another shot and repeat what I said and give you a 2nd chance to respond to what I actually said.

There's pro-lifers on this very thread who are on other threads in this religion section speaking out against basic bioligical science. So I'm not sure I'd stick to that stance.

 

[koshergrl]

So go ahead and elucidate. Because it sounds a lot like you're lying, and moving the goal posts yourself.

 

[Dr.Drock]

So go ahead and elucidate. Because it sounds a lot like you're lying, and moving the goal posts yourself.

Evolution is basic, middle school level biology. You yourself deny this early level biology, along with other pro-lifers on this thread.



Never moved the goal posts even an inch, that was your teammate.

 

[Cecilie1200]

He's lying.

To me, or to himself?

 

[Cecilie1200]

There's pro-lifers on this very thread who are on other threads in this religion section speaking out against basic bioligical science. So I'm not sure I'd stick to that stance.

By all means, share with me any pro-life argument that violates basic biological science. I'd be fascinated to hear it.

Meanwhile, I think any side that includes people saying, "You should stop killing cancer cells, then. They're human life, too" should absolutely avoid denigrating ANYONE else's intelligence, or even mentioning the word "intelligence".

I don't believe I need any advice from the likes of THAT on what stance I should take.

A good try at sneaking a goalpost move in there, but I must admit it didn't slip passed me.

I didn't say anything remotely similar to "a pro-life argument violates basic biological science." I'll give you another shot and repeat what I said and give you a 2nd chance to respond to what I actually said.

There's pro-lifers on this very thread who are on other threads in this religion section speaking out against basic bioligical science. So I'm not sure I'd stick to that stance.

I haven't moved shit, asshat. We're on THIS thread, and we're talking about abortion. The fact that YOU tried to move the goalposts to talk about other threads and other topics and got stopped cold is YOUR problem to deal with, not mine.

Get back on topic, or admit that your side of the abortion argument is peopled by dumbasses who know less about biology than the average middle-schooler. Your choice.

 

[Cecilie1200]

So go ahead and elucidate. Because it sounds a lot like you're lying, and moving the goal posts yourself.

Evolution is basic, middle school level biology. You yourself deny this early level biology, along with other pro-lifers on this thread.



Never moved the goal posts even an inch, that was your teammate.

Is this a thread discussing evolution, fucktard? No? Then you're moving the goalposts. The topic at the moment, specifically, is whether or not shitstains who argue in favor of abortion by saying things like "cancer cells are human life, too" have any business calling pro-lifers stupid. It is not, and never has been, about evolution or whether or not you have singlehandedly declared evolution to be settled scientific law, never again to be questioned. Although while we're on the subject, anyone who makes statements like that is proving himself just as scientifically ignorant as someone who doesn't know the difference between cells and organisms.

So who moved the goalposts? The person who was and is talking about abortion (the official topic of this thread and the issue upon which the question of intelligence was based) or the drooling fool who tried to drag in a completely different thread involving evolution?

Get back on topic, or stop sucking up screenspace, flatliner.

 

[koshergrl]

I couldn't have said it better myself, Cecilie!

 

[Dr.Drock]

By all means, share with me any pro-life argument that violates basic biological science. I'd be fascinated to hear it.

Meanwhile, I think any side that includes people saying, "You should stop killing cancer cells, then. They're human life, too" should absolutely avoid denigrating ANYONE else's intelligence, or even mentioning the word "intelligence".

I don't believe I need any advice from the likes of THAT on what stance I should take.

A good try at sneaking a goalpost move in there, but I must admit it didn't slip passed me.

I didn't say anything remotely similar to "a pro-life argument violates basic biological science." I'll give you another shot and repeat what I said and give you a 2nd chance to respond to what I actually said.

There's pro-lifers on this very thread who are on other threads in this religion section speaking out against basic bioligical science. So I'm not sure I'd stick to that stance.

I haven't moved shit, asshat. We're on THIS thread, and we're talking about abortion. The fact that YOU tried to move the goalposts to talk about other threads and other topics and got stopped cold is YOUR problem to deal with, not mine.

Get back on topic, or admit that your side of the abortion argument is peopled by dumbasses who know less about biology than the average middle-schooler. Your choice.

"And yet it's the pro-abortion side of the argument that keeps making arguments in direct conflict with basic biological science"

You hold pro-lifers accountable to going against biology, but not pro-lifers, that's my point.

And I see you're still perfectly incapable of posting without emotional diatribe.

I would have nothing but confidence in a large sample size IQ test between pro-lifers and pro-choicers.

 

[Cecilie1200]

I couldn't have said it better myself, Cecilie!

I do so try to be eloquent.

 

[koshergrl]

Good grief, you're an idiot, "Dr."

Go back and edit your post. It doesn't even make sense.

 

[Cecilie1200]

A good try at sneaking a goalpost move in there, but I must admit it didn't slip passed me.

I didn't say anything remotely similar to "a pro-life argument violates basic biological science." I'll give you another shot and repeat what I said and give you a 2nd chance to respond to what I actually said.

There's pro-lifers on this very thread who are on other threads in this religion section speaking out against basic bioligical science. So I'm not sure I'd stick to that stance.

I haven't moved shit, asshat. We're on THIS thread, and we're talking about abortion. The fact that YOU tried to move the goalposts to talk about other threads and other topics and got stopped cold is YOUR problem to deal with, not mine.

Get back on topic, or admit that your side of the abortion argument is peopled by dumbasses who know less about biology than the average middle-schooler. Your choice.

"And yet it's the pro-abortion side of the argument that keeps making arguments in direct conflict with basic biological science"

You hold pro-lifers accountable to going against biology, but not pro-lifers, that's my point.

And I see you're still perfectly incapable of posting without emotional diatribe.

I would have nothing but confidence in a large sample size IQ test between pro-lifers and pro-choicers.

Thank you. Your incoherent surrender is duly noted. You may now stop waving your white flag and move along.