Zone1 A question for the USMB left.

You cannot be pro choice on abortion unless you state right here and now that Roe vs Wade should have not been overturned and no government ever has a right to invade the privacy of a woman when she is pregnant in order to tell her what she can and cannot do about it
Your logic sucks, kid.
I have no problem with women killing their unborn offspring. I also have no problem with states deciding on whether or not it’s legal. The Constitution says nothing regarding abortion, so RvW should’ve been overturned to allow individual states decide, per 10A. That is my position on abortion.
 
Last edited:
Fact of the matter is, I’m pro-choice and have no qualms about stating so. You can continue to try your “gotcha” crap, but you are wrong.
I'm not the one who challenged a person to support an assertion by asking for a direct quote, with the caveat that being unable would brand them a liar. You did.

If you don't like "gotcha crap", maybe don't try to do "gotchas" on people.


Anyway. You have provided me some entertainment today.
 
I'm not the one who challenged a person to support an assertion by asking for a direct quote, with the caveat that being unable would brand them a liar. You did.
If you don't like "gotcha crap", maybe don't try to do "gotchas" on people.
Anyway. You have provided me some entertainment today.
I’m pro-choice. :itsok:
Get a life, kid.
 
Let's start with the fact that I'm not aware of a method of birth control beyond a vasectomy and abstinence that's a hundred percent effective.

As to your first paragraph. It's not a false equivalency. Simply because something has the possibility of occuring doesn't mean you consent to that thing happening and neither does it mean you forfeit the right to make decisions to remedy that thing. Smoking can cause lung-cancer. Would that mean the government can institute a law barring people from getting treatment for that cancer?

I could just as easily argue that bearing a child carries a risk that kid might get sick enough to need an organ from the mother. It still wouldn't mean that mother has an obligation to donate.
More false equivalencies being spewed or made up by you in order to sooth your fake narratives.
 
Your posts on record here say you are for states to have the choice to ban abortion as they see fit. That leaves women in anti-choice states with no choice.
My personal views do not override the 10th Amendment. You seem to have a difficult time grasping that fact. I’m also against income taxes, but accept the fact that they are currently the law.
 
I have a sincere question for the lefties here.
Why do you so many of you label disagreement as “hate”?
Example:
“I believe marriage is a religious institution, between a man and a woman.”
Lefty answer: “Why do you hate gays?”
Or:
“”I’m against abortion.”
Lefty answer: “Why do you hate women?”

Is it an Alinsky thing, painting your adversaries as extremist haters?
Something else?
You really should do your homework. As a lefty, myself, I've been hearing right wingers say I hate America, military, patriotism, free enterprise, yadda yadda, for some 60 years, and if I could make a list of every incidence of a right winger saying that libs/left/dems hate this, or hate that, it would fill up a book. But, a cursory search brought up these, and it's just scratching the surface, so this 'hate' business, well, no one has a monopoly on that one, you just haven't looked. in my view, the opposite of your claim is more true than your claim.






 
You really should do your homework. As a lefty, myself, I've been hearing right wingers say I hate America, military, patriotism, free enterprise, yadda yadda, for some 60 years, and if I could make a list of every incidence of a right winger saying that libs/left/dems hate this, or hate that, it would fill up a book. But, a cursory search brought up these, and it's just scratching the surface, so this 'hate' business, well, no one has a monopoly on that one, you just haven't looked. in my view, the opposite of your claim is more true than your claim.






Did I say it was only lefties? No, I didn’t. In my experience, it’s predominantly lefties. And that is true. It may be the polar opposite for you. Start a thread on it.
 
Did I say it was only lefties? No, I didn’t. In my experience, it’s predominantly lefties. And that is true. It may be the polar opposite for you. Start a thread on it.
The vast majority of Democrats do not support blocking bridges are traffic, and, in fact, it is illegal. No dem i know supports illegal activity of any kind.
 
The vast majority of Democrats do not support blocking bridges are traffic, and, in fact, it is illegal. No dem i know supports illegal activity of any kind.
Not sure what your clumsy response has to do with the discussion at hand.
Try to stay on topic, please.
 
I have a sincere question for the lefties here.
Why do you so many of you label disagreement as “hate”?
Example:
“I believe marriage is a religious institution, between a man and a woman.”
Lefty answer: “Why do you hate gays?”
Or:
“”I’m against abortion.”
Lefty answer: “Why do you hate women?”

Is it an Alinsky thing, painting your adversaries as extremist haters?
Something else?
Give me a fucking break! You got no room to talk. Especially when your dear leader is echoing the words of Adolph Hitler when he says people entering the country illegally are "vermin" and are "poisoning the fabric ofvthis countrt".
 
Give me a fucking break! You got no room to talk. Especially when your dear leader is echoing the words of Adolph Hitler when he says people entering the country illegally are "vermin" and are "poisoning the fabric ofvthis countrt".
^^^Triggered babbling.
 
Give me a fucking break! You got no room to talk. Especially when your dear leader is echoing the words of Adolph Hitler when he says people entering the country illegally are "vermin" and are "poisoning the fabric ofvthis countrt".
Focus on the word "illegally" dipstick, and then your post fails big time. Yes anyone allowing themselves to be used for political gains by another is a dipstick. Own it....
 
Focus on the word "illegally" dipstick, and then your post fails big time. Yes anyone allowing themselves to be used for political gains by another is a dipstick. Own it....
WTF are you talking about? Are you saying people coming into the country ARE vermin? AND poisoning the blood of our country?

Is that what you are saying?
 
WTF are you talking about? Are you saying people coming into the country ARE vermin? AND poisoning the blood of our country?

Is that what you are saying?
I'm saying that you trying to justify people entering the country illegally without knowing who they are or what diseases they might be carrying, definitely puts you in the vermin category along with you poisoning the blood of our citizen's with disease because of your recklessness behaviors for political gain and supporting it for a political agenda. You are basically in the category of being a traitor to your country.

The illegals are being used by forces outside and inside this country.
 

Forum List

Back
Top