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.
You didn't answer my question.
Yes, I did. That you were too stupid to understand the answer isn't my problem.
Stop ducking the question, coward.
Hey everybody, we failed to make our point in the previous thread on this subject...
So let's pretend it never happened, and start a whole new thread with the same old talking points!
Oh, and add on some BS about homosexuality to make it seem like it's a new subject.
I've never argued for biblical law. The assumption that everybody who argues for babies is doing so out of religious fervor is your own thing. It has nothing to do with reality. You have to make up arguments that are different than the ones being made to distract from the appalling nature of your own.
Well, gee, then why is always the religious wingnuts like yourself that get all worked up about it if it isn't a religous issue, then?
I've never argued for biblical law. The assumption that everybody who argues for babies is doing so out of religious fervor is your own thing. It has nothing to do with reality. You have to make up arguments that are different than the ones being made to distract from the appalling nature of your own.
Well, gee, then why is always the religious wingnuts like yourself that get all worked up about it if it isn't a religous issue, then?
What is the opposite of a 'religious wingnut'? A Godless fool? Just askin'.
Joe's not interested in reducing the number of abortions. If he was, he wouldn't so fervently cling to the myth that there were more abortions before abortion was legal, than after.
These people want more babies dead, not fewer. That's why they keep promoting abortion.
I don't consider fetuses to be babies. Neither does the law. Neither does medical science. Neither does the Bible. Sorry.
Even when abortion was illegal, not one person was charged with murder for killing a fetus.
Fact is, after abortion was legalized, there was not a drop in the birth rate. Which means that before Roe, just as many women were finding ways to get rid of their "little problem" as after.
Well, gee, then why is always the religious wingnuts like yourself that get all worked up about it if it isn't a religous issue, then?
What is the opposite of a 'religious wingnut'? A Godless fool? Just askin'.
How about a "rational person".
Religious Wingnuts spend an awful lot of time wanting to change the law because their sky pixie says so...
But they have yet to prove there's a sky pixie.
Which brings me back to my religion test. We throw you off the top of the Sears Tower. If God catches you on the way down, I will totally convert to your religion and sign over all my worldly goods.
If you go splat, we all admit your religion is bunk and we sell off all your Church's assets to do something useful like feed poor people or something.
I mean, that sounds completely reasonable to me. Any takers? Anyone? Buehler? Buehler?
Joe's not interested in reducing the number of abortions. If he was, he wouldn't so fervently cling to the myth that there were more abortions before abortion was legal, than after.
These people want more babies dead, not fewer. That's why they keep promoting abortion.
I don't consider fetuses to be babies. Neither does the law. Neither does medical science. Neither does the Bible. Sorry.
Even when abortion was illegal, not one person was charged with murder for killing a fetus.
Fact is, after abortion was legalized, there was not a drop in the birth rate. Which means that before Roe, just as many women were finding ways to get rid of their "little problem" as after.
At what stage of pregnancy can a fetus' gender or homosexual gene be determined? You have argued this subject and pretend to be an expert on abortion, hence my question.
Answer my question, and I will tell you what my position is on the subject if you are interested. And, you may be surprised.
What is the opposite of a 'religious wingnut'? A Godless fool? Just askin'.
How about a "rational person".
Religious Wingnuts spend an awful lot of time wanting to change the law because their sky pixie says so...
But they have yet to prove there's a sky pixie.
Which brings me back to my religion test. We throw you off the top of the Sears Tower. If God catches you on the way down, I will totally convert to your religion and sign over all my worldly goods.
If you go splat, we all admit your religion is bunk and we sell off all your Church's assets to do something useful like feed poor people or something.
I mean, that sounds completely reasonable to me. Any takers? Anyone? Buehler? Buehler?
Thanks for proving beyond a doubt that you are a Godless fool. A rational person does not commit murder in an attempt to prove a point.
I think I pointed out the fallacies of your argument in full living color, and really, going on when you can't even process simple logic like only 1% of abortions occur before gender can be determined, really doesn't make it worth my time.
50% of abortions are had by poor people for economic reasons, but you aren't about to go out and try to fix economic inequality in this country. You are going to go on about the third world immigrant who might be having a sex selection abortion.
Again. The statistics are not reliable, as all the pro-abortion statiticians admit. Stop prating the numbers as if anyone even knows the reality. They don't, they admit they don't, and you certainly don't.
These were statistics provided by a pro-Life Website, that admitted both that 50% of abortions are had by poor women, and only 1% occur after the fetus' gender can even be determined.
Even in cases in third world countries where sex selection abortions happen, we are talking economics again. A boy can support you in your old age. A girl can't. When you are talking a country like China which has by necessity limited births, that becomes an important issue.
And who keeps moving the good paying jobs to China? Yup. Plutocrats like Mitt Romney, who you will happily support in November.
Again. The statistics are not reliable, as all the pro-abortion statiticians admit. Stop prating the numbers as if anyone even knows the reality. They don't, they admit they don't, and you certainly don't.
These were statistics provided by a pro-Life Website, that admitted both that 50% of abortions are had by poor women, and only 1% occur after the fetus' gender can even be determined.
Even in cases in third world countries where sex selection abortions happen, we are talking economics again. A boy can support you in your old age. A girl can't. When you are talking a country like China which has by necessity limited births, that becomes an important issue.
And who keeps moving the good paying jobs to China? Yup. Plutocrats like Mitt Romney, who you will happily support in November.
You are not only a Godless fool, you are a sexist pig as well.
How about a "rational person".
Religious Wingnuts spend an awful lot of time wanting to change the law because their sky pixie says so...
But they have yet to prove there's a sky pixie.
Which brings me back to my religion test. We throw you off the top of the Sears Tower. If God catches you on the way down, I will totally convert to your religion and sign over all my worldly goods.
If you go splat, we all admit your religion is bunk and we sell off all your Church's assets to do something useful like feed poor people or something.
I mean, that sounds completely reasonable to me. Any takers? Anyone? Buehler? Buehler?
Thanks for proving beyond a doubt that you are a Godless fool. A rational person does not commit murder in an attempt to prove a point.
Well, it wouldn't be murder if there was a God, would it? Because God would catch you.
It would only be murder if everyone knew there wasn't a God. Proving that God doesn't exist.
Because you know he isn't going to be there to catch you if I throw you off that building.
So the only thing that keeps you from being thrown off the building is that I'm not a sociopath. Not that there's a magic sky man dictating morality.
[
The 'magic sky man' promises everlasting life if you accept Jesus Christ as your savior. So a Christian would merely be leaving one life for a far better one. You, on the other hand, will be charged with murder and have a finite period of time on this earth.
Wait, you really wouldn't do your 'religion test'? Afraid God might catch me? What is your next realistic 'religion test'?
These were statistics provided by a pro-Life Website, that admitted both that 50% of abortions are had by poor women, and only 1% occur after the fetus' gender can even be determined.
Even in cases in third world countries where sex selection abortions happen, we are talking economics again. A boy can support you in your old age. A girl can't. When you are talking a country like China which has by necessity limited births, that becomes an important issue.
And who keeps moving the good paying jobs to China? Yup. Plutocrats like Mitt Romney, who you will happily support in November.
You are not only a Godless fool, you are a sexist pig as well.
No, just pointing out those societies are, and why they have gender selective abortions.
When you marry off a daugther in those societies, her obligation is to take care of his parrents, not her own. Sorry, just the way it is. Oh, they are modernizing a bit, but by fits and starts.
The notion of the "Career Woman" is still not common in those societies. When it is, they will probably have more abortions, not less.
Young Chinese women have been moving away from the countryside in droves and piling into the electronics factories in the booming coastal belt, leading dreary lives but earning more money than their parents ever dreamed of. Others have been pouring into universities, at home and abroad, and graduating in almost the same numbers as men. And once they have negotiated China’s highly competitive education system, they want to get on a career ladder and start climbing. The opportunities are there. Avivah Wittenberg-Cox, who runs a consultancy, 20-first, that helps companies improve the balance between the sexes in senior jobs, points out that China already has a higher proportion of women in the top layers of management than many Western countries
Had an interesting lunchtime discussion the other day with two very dynamic international entrepreneurs on global prejudices. Both told me of how they “take advantage” of it. These two take advantage of it by hiring women, the disabled, and ethnic minorities in countries where other businesses are either reluctant or refuse to hire these people. And let’s face it, these prejudices exist, at least to some degree, in every country.
“Look at the foreign SMEs in China,” he said, “I think about 75% of them that are run by local Chinese are run by women. There’s a reason for that. Chinese women know that American companies are less likely to engage in sexism than Chinese companies and so they choose to work for us. As long as Chinese companies discriminate against women, I am going to be scooping them up.” He then referred me to an Economist article that backed up what he was saying about how foreign companies in China prefer women due to “sexism in China.”
Yes, I did. That you were too stupid to understand the answer isn't my problem.
Stop ducking the question, coward.
Actually, I did give a pretty good explanation in the previous post, but you are so slack jawed and dumb you probably still won't understand after reading it.
And this is why arguing with you is kind of pointless. YOu are all emotion and no reason.
Which brings me back to my religion test. We throw you off the top of the Sears Tower. If God catches you on the way down, I will totally convert to your religion and sign over all my worldly goods.
If you go splat, we all admit your religion is bunk and we sell off all your Church's assets to do something useful like feed poor people or something.
I mean, that sounds completely reasonable to me. Any takers? Anyone? Buehler? Buehler?
Stop ducking the question, coward.
Actually, I did give a pretty good explanation in the previous post, but you are so slack jawed and dumb you probably still won't understand after reading it.
And this is why arguing with you is kind of pointless. YOu are all emotion and no reason.
You ducked the question and still refuse to answer it because you are a gutless coward who knows his position is morally indefensible. Hide behind your nihilistic atheism and bigotry, but the fact remains.
[
The 'magic sky man' promises everlasting life if you accept Jesus Christ as your savior. So a Christian would merely be leaving one life for a far better one. You, on the other hand, will be charged with murder and have a finite period of time on this earth.
Wait, you really wouldn't do your 'religion test'? Afraid God might catch me? What is your next realistic 'religion test'?
Oh, I have absolutely no fear that God would catch you. No more than he kept the lions from eating Christians in the Roman Colluseum. (Ah, that sounds like an afternoon of fun.)
But to the point, yeah, I guess there are "Christians" who really think that leaving this life for a better one is acceptable.
They drank the Koolaid at Jonestown and burned down their own compound at Waco.
Which brings me back to my religion test. We throw you off the top of the Sears Tower. If God catches you on the way down, I will totally convert to your religion and sign over all my worldly goods.
If you go splat, we all admit your religion is bunk and we sell off all your Church's assets to do something useful like feed poor people or something.
I mean, that sounds completely reasonable to me. Any takers? Anyone? Buehler? Buehler?
We know you're stupid. The thing is, deep down you know it too.
[
The 'magic sky man' promises everlasting life if you accept Jesus Christ as your savior. So a Christian would merely be leaving one life for a far better one. You, on the other hand, will be charged with murder and have a finite period of time on this earth.
Wait, you really wouldn't do your 'religion test'? Afraid God might catch me? What is your next realistic 'religion test'?
Oh, I have absolutely no fear that God would catch you. No more than he kept the lions from eating Christians in the Roman Colluseum. (Ah, that sounds like an afternoon of fun.)
But to the point, yeah, I guess there are "Christians" who really think that leaving this life for a better one is acceptable.
They drank the Koolaid at Jonestown and burned down their own compound at Waco.
These were CULTS that used Christianity as an excuse.
