Alfonzon Rachel on abortion

[Cecilie1200]

No, but you can't claim the baby on your taxes until it's born...because until then, it's not a person.

So once again the liberal left rejects science making the IRS, of all groups, the decider of who is or is not a person.

How about this for a thought, until born the unborn child is not considered being an expense that is why they are not a tax deduction before birth.

I had no idea that science had come up with the answer to, "When are you a person" because that seems much more like a philosophical question than a scientific one.

Of course it is an expense before birth. Do you know what a prenatal doctor visit costs?

It is a fact that you cannot claim that child as a person until its born and if the nutters ever do manage to pass a personhood bill, I want a ton of fucking back pay.

No, dumb twat, science hasn't come up with an answer to "When are you a person" . . because that's not a scientific question. That's a vague, touchy-feely question created by anti-science leftist freaks like you to avoid having to discuss the fact that you all lost the abortion debate BIG TIME on the science. It's a damned shame fools like you have been able to hijack the once-noble calling of philosophy to pervert it to your selfish, brain-damaged, navel-gazing, evil ends.

As I said before - and you were clearly too stupid, oblivious, and dogmatic to read and remember - science answers REAL questions, like "When is an organism formed?", "When are the criteria for life met?", and "What type of DNA is present?"

As to your "fact", you might want to try making up your own "mind" - for want of a better word - about what the facts are. First you say an unborn child IS an expense due to pre-natal care, but THEN you say he cannot be claimed on taxes. Perhaps you're not aware of this, being a leftist and therefore probably not among those who pay taxes, but pre-natal care is a claimable medical expense on one's taxes.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

So...you're only a person if you pay taxes?

No, but you can't claim the baby on your taxes until it's born...because until then, it's not a person.

So now we're letting the IRS decide science? I guess we can just fire all those medical researchers and biologists and whatever, then, and replace them with IRS auditors.

We’re not allowing politicians to decide, either.

 

[Freewill]

And democrats want us to believe that the unborn child is not people.

Because it isn't. Unless a fetus can pay taxes.

So the kidnapper who kidnapped those 3 girls are going to be tried for murder because he forced a miscarriage but that same woman can go out and murder her baby and not get in trouble. That is how ass back wards things are . Both should be considered MURDER ..

Does not matter, for the 10 years they were held captive they did not pay taxes, thus they were not persons.

 

[TemplarKormac]

No, but you can't claim the baby on your taxes until it's born...because until then, it's not a person.

So now we're letting the IRS decide science? I guess we can just fire all those medical researchers and biologists and whatever, then, and replace them with IRS auditors.

We’re not allowing politicians to decide, either.

That's a lie. Why are they so willing to beg them to condone their "choice"? Why is it a liberal needs to seek vindication for everything anyhow?

 

[Freewill]

No, but you can't claim the baby on your taxes until it's born...because until then, it's not a person.

So once again the liberal left rejects science making the IRS, of all groups, the decider of who is or is not a person.

How about this for a thought, until born the unborn child is not considered being an expense that is why they are not a tax deduction before birth.

And, of course, you CAN claim the pre-natal care on your taxes as a medical expense.

Only after a limit which is quite big for most people.

 

[Freewill]

So...you're only a person if you pay taxes?

No, but you can't claim the baby on your taxes until it's born...because until then, it's not a person.

So now we're letting the IRS decide science? I guess we can just fire all those medical researchers and biologists and whatever, then, and replace them with IRS auditors.

The IRS will be running the Obamacare death panels, bad time to be conservatives.

 

[Freewill]

"We believe, however, thatanyone responsible for permitting Gosnell to operate as he did should face strongdisciplinary action up to and including termination. This includes not only the peoplewho failed to do the inspecting, the prosecuting, and the protecting, but also
those at thetop
who obviously tolerated, or even encouraged, the inaction. The Department of State literally licensed Gosnell’s criminally dangerousbehavior. DOH gave its stamp of approval to his facility. These agencies do not deservethe public’s trust. "

Grand Jury Report Kermit Gosnell Womens Medical

It's not a referendum on abortion but a lack of oversight. Here's the inconvenient truth.

Americans' Abortion Views Steady Amid Gosnell Trial

72 percent disagree with you why in the hell would you post such a graph? Only 26 percent think abortion without limit, ghouls.

 

[Borillar]

"We believe, however, thatanyone responsible for permitting Gosnell to operate as he did should face strongdisciplinary action up to and including termination. This includes not only the peoplewho failed to do the inspecting, the prosecuting, and the protecting, but also
those at thetop
who obviously tolerated, or even encouraged, the inaction. The Department of State literally licensed Gosnell’s criminally dangerousbehavior. DOH gave its stamp of approval to his facility. These agencies do not deservethe public’s trust. "

Grand Jury Report Kermit Gosnell Womens Medical

It's not a referendum on abortion but a lack of oversight. Here's the inconvenient truth.

Americans' Abortion Views Steady Amid Gosnell Trial

72 percent disagree with you why in the hell would you post such a graph? Only 26 percent think abortion without limit, ghouls.

Looks more like 78% disagree with you "no abortion for any reason" zealots.

 

[koshergrl]

I'm not sure all of wytch's brain works. I can't follow her incredible stupidity. What can you do with that? I've noticed that most people who receive benefits have difficulty reading, let alone use powers of logical deduction...and that is exactly what I see in her. She appears not to read...at all...even when stuff is right in front of her. And she'll comment nonsensically about stuff that she actually is quoting...make statements that fly in the face of whatever it is that she's commenting on.

It's bizarre, and depressing. Someone like that can't learn.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

And again we have those opposed to privacy rights, and advocating for greater government authority, lacking the courage to explain exactly how they’re going to make criminals out of women and their doctors.

 

[JustSomeGuy]

I answered your question like eight times.

 

[Seawytch]

"We believe, however, thatanyone responsible for permitting Gosnell to operate as he did should face strongdisciplinary action up to and including termination. This includes not only the peoplewho failed to do the inspecting, the prosecuting, and the protecting, but also
those at thetop
who obviously tolerated, or even encouraged, the inaction. The Department of State literally licensed Gosnell’s criminally dangerousbehavior. DOH gave its stamp of approval to his facility. These agencies do not deservethe public’s trust. "

Grand Jury Report Kermit Gosnell Womens Medical

It's not a referendum on abortion but a lack of oversight. Here's the inconvenient truth.

Americans' Abortion Views Steady Amid Gosnell Trial

72 percent disagree with you why in the hell would you post such a graph? Only 26 percent think abortion without limit, ghouls.

Um, no...I don't believe in abortion without restriction.

The graph shows that the Gosnell trial has had no effect on people's view of abortion...because the trial is not a referendum on abortion as some here have claimed.

 

[Seawytch]

I'm not sure all of wytch's brain works. I can't follow her incredible stupidity. What can you do with that? I've noticed that most people who receive benefits have difficulty reading, let alone use powers of logical deduction...and that is exactly what I see in her. She appears not to read...at all...even when stuff is right in front of her. And she'll comment nonsensically about stuff that she actually is quoting...make statements that fly in the face of whatever it is that she's commenting on.

It's bizarre, and depressing. Someone like that can't learn.

What are you ranting about now?

Perhaps you need medication if you get depressed about your inability to understand plain English.

What "benefits" are you talking about? The only benefits I get, darlin', are my veterans ones. You wouldn't know about those I suppose...

 

[koshergrl]

My point is that I have seen up close and impersonal their inability to actually understand the written language, and I see it in you, too.

 

[koshergrl]

People who you tell the same thing to fifteen times and they still get it wrong....or who can read the application, but still don't understand what they're supposed to write. They don't make the connection between what they are reading, and what they are supposed to do...even though what they are reading very specifically tells them what to do.

So do they just not read it and pretend they did? Or do they read it and not understand?

I haven't figured it out yet.

 

[Cecilie1200]

You might want to check with your tax preparer because you can deduct from taxable income any money you spend on health care. Tips for Taking Health Care Tax Deductions

You didn't answer the question. When did science answer the "When is a person a person" question because that doesn't sound anything like a scientific question.

I only use "nutter" when it's appropriate...like personhood bills.

You maintain that the IRS determines personhood...and we're the nutters?

Go back to masturbating to the descriptions of gosnell's charnel house.

No, I believe personhood occurs when you leave the womb alive. I was merely pointing out that Noomi, I believe, wasn't far off with her offhand tax comment.

Gosnell is a criminal who will be punished as one. He is immaterial to the abortion debate.

Ahh, yes. The party of "science and knowledge" lectures us once again about their "feelings" and "beliefs", as though this is their therapist's office or their church, and as though anyone gives a tin shit.

Tell us something that's relevant, because your "belief" isn't.

 

[Cecilie1200]

You might want to check with your tax preparer because you can deduct from taxable income any money you spend on health care. Tips for Taking Health Care Tax Deductions

You didn't answer the question. When did science answer the "When is a person a person" question because that doesn't sound anything like a scientific question.

I only use "nutter" when it's appropriate...like personhood bills.

Ever heard of the study human embryology? Yeah, that's the science of human development. Textbooks on the subject clearly state that an embryo and resulting fetus is an immaturely developed human being. That is science.

The law, as evidenced in Ohio, with Ariel Castro and Amanda Berry, says that unborn children are indeed human beings, insomuch as they warrant a count of murder. Five counts of it.

It's only natural for lefties like you to ignore the law and science itself. You want homosexual men and women to have children, but you still wish to dehumanize them. How utterly barbarous can you be?

If YOU bust the window of my car, you pay for it or go to jail. If I bust my own window I pay for it and I don't go to jail no matter what. Get the distinction?

None of which has anything to do with "personhood" or when does a fetus/embryo/baby etc become a "person". Science hasn't determined that. Hell, religion hasn't even determined that.

You keep saying, "Science hasn't determined when personhood begins" like it's some big flaming trump card. Science also hasn't determined what the sound of one hand clapping is. Know why? BECAUSE NEITHER QUESTION HAS FUCK-ALL TO DO WITH SCIENCE.

Naught but what I would expect from a leftist cum stain who wouldn't know science if he fell over it.

By the way, Mensa Boy, you're wrong on your other point, too. EVERY religion has determined when personhood begins. They don't all agree about it, but then, we're not talking about verifiable FACT, because leftists never do. We're talking about fuzzy-wuzzy feeling and opinion, and the high sacrament of the leftist religion, infant sacrifice.

 

[Cecilie1200]

That's because it's a brand new term, thought up by the abortion acolytes, to hide the fact that yes, the babies being killed are humans.

So they had to come up with yet another shade of humanity that would allow them to butcher babies (and ultimately, a lot of other people). Hence...'personhood".

Well, yeah, because rapidly-advancing medical science turned their previous "winning" argument of "unviable tissue mass" and "blob of cells" into the laughingstock it so rightfully deserved to be. The only choice left to them was to get as far the hell away from science as they could.

Funny how often that is the case for leftists.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Not according to the Grand Jury that indicted him.

They didn't call him a criminal? I'm not understanding your post. Not as if that is surprising. Few of your posts make a lick of sense.

Not to you, because you have the functional brain power of a 4 year old.

Read again. Slowly. The Grand Jury maintained that Gosnell was material to the abortion debate in the sense that professionals over 40 years were perfectly aware of the state of things and failed to report him, and continued to refer women to him. Which is material to the abortion debate because it shows that the health profession and the abortion industry do NOT provide any oversight over abortion clinics or look out for the well being of women.

I can remember a medium-size scandal a while back when it was revealed that abortion clinics not only were not required to meet the same health and safety standards as other freestanding medical clinics, but "pro-choice" activists were OUTRAGED at the suggestion that they ought to, and insisted that attempting to ensure the health and safety of their female patients was merely an attempt to make abortions less available by making them more expensive to encompass basic safety.

 

[Cecilie1200]

That's because it's a brand new term, thought up by the abortion acolytes, to hide the fact that yes, the babies being killed are humans.

So they had to come up with yet another shade of humanity that would allow them to butcher babies (and ultimately, a lot of other people). Hence...'personhood".

Now the unborn child is compared to a car window, where in the hell is the liberal mind?

In truth, the car window is worth more to a leftist than nascent human life is.