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.
I don't see how making the tax payer support thier behavior helps in any wayI have frequently pointed out that half of all abortions are the result of no birth control being used, and another 19 percent are the result of the improper or inconsistent use of birth control. So nice straw man, try again.If you are truly Pro-Life, there are no exceptions. Stop worrying about people having sex and start worrying about making sure it doesn't make unwanted babies, and most of these elective abortions will go away.
In the meantime, stop using rape and incest victims as human shields. Pass it on.
That's perhaps the best argument today for fully funding Planned Parenthood. In the meantime, no one would be discussing rape and incest if Mike Huckabee hadn't brought it front and center in a national interview.
No it's not. You can get birth control shots from your OBGYN paid in full by Medicaid.
Don't even need Medicare in most major cities, ours has eleven clinics you can walk in and get it free or at a reduced price
It's sick to subject her to the added risk of abortion to protect and enrich her abusers.It's sick to insist a ten year old should go to an abortionist instead of a real doctor. In this case a back alley abortionist. Though all pp abortionists are unqualified, un monitored back alley abortionists.You are sick.This thread could care less about the Little Girl. for one it would be doubtful a 10 year old can get knocked up and for TWO. they are only USING her for their warped agenda for the butchers of abortion
It is sick to insist a 10 yr old little girl MUST have a baby.
It's not added, dolt. She's already pregnant. The added risk is the abortion.It's sick to subject her to the added risk of abortion to protect and enrich her abusers.It's sick to insist a ten year old should go to an abortionist instead of a real doctor. In this case a back alley abortionist. Though all pp abortionists are unqualified, un monitored back alley abortionists.You are sick.This thread could care less about the Little Girl. for one it would be doubtful a 10 year old can get knocked up and for TWO. they are only USING her for their warped agenda for the butchers of abortion
It is sick to insist a 10 yr old little girl MUST have a baby.
But it's ok to expose her to the added risk of giving birth. You make no sense.
You mean the ones who might have cured cancer or create millions of jobs? Not all those baby would have been useless progressivesI don't see how making the tax payer support thier behavior helps in any wayI have frequently pointed out that half of all abortions are the result of no birth control being used, and another 19 percent are the result of the improper or inconsistent use of birth control. So nice straw man, try again.
In the meantime, stop using rape and incest victims as human shields. Pass it on.
That's perhaps the best argument today for fully funding Planned Parenthood. In the meantime, no one would be discussing rape and incest if Mike Huckabee hadn't brought it front and center in a national interview.
No it's not. You can get birth control shots from your OBGYN paid in full by Medicaid.
Don't even need Medicare in most major cities, ours has eleven clinics you can walk in and get it free or at a reduced price
Can you imagine what 60 million babies would do to our economy? If you support pro life, then you must see that pre natal care, birthing facilities, WIC and whatever else is needed to support those children including education, is a huge hit on your tax bill.
You mean the ones who might have cured cancer or create millions of jobs? Not all those baby would have been useless progressivesI don't see how making the tax payer support thier behavior helps in any wayThat's perhaps the best argument today for fully funding Planned Parenthood. In the meantime, no one would be discussing rape and incest if Mike Huckabee hadn't brought it front and center in a national interview.
No it's not. You can get birth control shots from your OBGYN paid in full by Medicaid.
Don't even need Medicare in most major cities, ours has eleven clinics you can walk in and get it free or at a reduced price
Can you imagine what 60 million babies would do to our economy? If you support pro life, then you must see that pre natal care, birthing facilities, WIC and whatever else is needed to support those children including education, is a huge hit on your tax bill.
Sent from my SM-G386T1 using Tapatalk
Jillian proposes those who abuse the HARLOTS...her word for kids who are impregnated by dad, apparently...be protected and shielded.Carrying the fetus to term was the risk, and it wasn't full-term because of the risk, just as she was too little to give birth without a C-section. That alone could have killed her but you don't seem to care about that or her health, just abortion.It's sick to subject her to the added risk of abortion to protect and enrich her abusers.It is sick to insist a 10 yr old little girl MUST have a baby.
And come on there Kosher, is there any abortion that you approve of?
the wackos aren't pro life... they're pro birth.
and then they think the moms should be screwed and starved and their kids live in poverty. that way the harlots are punished.
cause that's how they roll.
Lying troll.
You mean the ones who might have cured cancer or create millions of jobs? Not all those baby would have been useless progressivesI don't see how making the tax payer support thier behavior helps in any wayThat's perhaps the best argument today for fully funding Planned Parenthood. In the meantime, no one would be discussing rape and incest if Mike Huckabee hadn't brought it front and center in a national interview.
No it's not. You can get birth control shots from your OBGYN paid in full by Medicaid.
Don't even need Medicare in most major cities, ours has eleven clinics you can walk in and get it free or at a reduced price
Can you imagine what 60 million babies would do to our economy? If you support pro life, then you must see that pre natal care, birthing facilities, WIC and whatever else is needed to support those children including education, is a huge hit on your tax bill.
Sent from my SM-G386T1 using Tapatalk
It's not added, dolt. She's already pregnant. The added risk is the abortion.It's sick to subject her to the added risk of abortion to protect and enrich her abusers.It's sick to insist a ten year old should go to an abortionist instead of a real doctor. In this case a back alley abortionist. Though all pp abortionists are unqualified, un monitored back alley abortionists.You are sick.
It is sick to insist a 10 yr old little girl MUST have a baby.
But it's ok to expose her to the added risk of giving birth. You make no sense.
It's me who insists a tortured girl not be tortured further by a risky abortion. You'd rather she died in a chop shop...
Jillian proposes those who abuse the HARLOTS...her word for kids who are impregnated by dad, apparently...be protected and shielded.Carrying the fetus to term was the risk, and it wasn't full-term because of the risk, just as she was too little to give birth without a C-section. That alone could have killed her but you don't seem to care about that or her health, just abortion.It's sick to subject her to the added risk of abortion to protect and enrich her abusers.
And come on there Kosher, is there any abortion that you approve of?
the wackos aren't pro life... they're pro birth.
and then they think the moms should be screwed and starved and their kids live in poverty. that way the harlots are punished.
cause that's how they roll.
Lying troll.
No she doesn't - she never said anything remotely like that. It's *you* who insists that a ten year old girl, impregnated through rape, be forced to give birth.
Shoving a vacuum up her and sucking out a baby is safer to you ?It's sick to subject her to the added risk of abortion to protect and enrich her abusers.It's sick to insist a ten year old should go to an abortionist instead of a real doctor. In this case a back alley abortionist. Though all pp abortionists are unqualified, un monitored back alley abortionists.You are sick.This thread could care less about the Little Girl. for one it would be doubtful a 10 year old can get knocked up and for TWO. they are only USING her for their warped agenda for the butchers of abortion
It is sick to insist a 10 yr old little girl MUST have a baby.
But it's ok to expose her to the added risk of giving birth. You make no sense.
It's me who insists a tortured girl not be tortured further by a risky abortion. You'd rather she died in a chop shop...
Jillian proposes those who abuse the HARLOTS...her word for kids who are impregnated by dad, apparently...be protected and shielded.Carrying the fetus to term was the risk, and it wasn't full-term because of the risk, just as she was too little to give birth without a C-section. That alone could have killed her but you don't seem to care about that or her health, just abortion.
And come on there Kosher, is there any abortion that you approve of?
the wackos aren't pro life... they're pro birth.
and then they think the moms should be screwed and starved and their kids live in poverty. that way the harlots are punished.
cause that's how they roll.
Lying troll.
No she doesn't - she never said anything remotely like that. It's *you* who insists that a ten year old girl, impregnated through rape, be forced to give birth.
It's not ADDED if she's already pregnant. The ADDED risk and the greater risk is abortion that isn't medically necessary, and increases her trauma and risk of a horrible death.It's not added, dolt. She's already pregnant. The added risk is the abortion.It's sick to subject her to the added risk of abortion to protect and enrich her abusers.It's sick to insist a ten year old should go to an abortionist instead of a real doctor. In this case a back alley abortionist. Though all pp abortionists are unqualified, un monitored back alley abortionists.
It is sick to insist a 10 yr old little girl MUST have a baby.
But it's ok to expose her to the added risk of giving birth. You make no sense.
The added risk of GIVING BIRTH, dolt.
Shoving a vacuum up her and sucking out a baby is safer to you ?It's sick to subject her to the added risk of abortion to protect and enrich her abusers.It's sick to insist a ten year old should go to an abortionist instead of a real doctor. In this case a back alley abortionist. Though all pp abortionists are unqualified, un monitored back alley abortionists.You are sick.
It is sick to insist a 10 yr old little girl MUST have a baby.
But it's ok to expose her to the added risk of giving birth. You make no sense.
Sent from my SM-G386T1 using Tapatalk
If it keeps her nasty condition out of sight, baby killers will walk over hot coals to force her into the stirrups.Shoving a vacuum up her and sucking out a baby is safer to you ?It's sick to subject her to the added risk of abortion to protect and enrich her abusers.It's sick to insist a ten year old should go to an abortionist instead of a real doctor. In this case a back alley abortionist. Though all pp abortionists are unqualified, un monitored back alley abortionists.You are sick.
It is sick to insist a 10 yr old little girl MUST have a baby.
But it's ok to expose her to the added risk of giving birth. You make no sense.
Sent from my SM-G386T1 using Tapatalk
And wha are the chances of the baby dying as a result? Yeah, 100%.Shoving a vacuum up her and sucking out a baby is safer to you ?It's sick to subject her to the added risk of abortion to protect and enrich her abusers.It's sick to insist a ten year old should go to an abortionist instead of a real doctor. In this case a back alley abortionist. Though all pp abortionists are unqualified, un monitored back alley abortionists.
It is sick to insist a 10 yr old little girl MUST have a baby.
But it's ok to expose her to the added risk of giving birth. You make no sense.
Sent from my SM-G386T1 using Tapatalk
We're talking about a 10 yr old child - a CHILD - forceably made pregnant. And you loons can't even see the wrong in that? The chances of her dying or being permanently affected by giving birth (especially in a country like that) are huge.
It's not ADDED if she's already pregnant. The ADDED risk and the greater risk is abortion that isn't medically necessary, and increases her trauma and risk of a horrible death.It's not added, dolt. She's already pregnant. The added risk is the abortion.It's sick to subject her to the added risk of abortion to protect and enrich her abusers.It is sick to insist a 10 yr old little girl MUST have a baby.
But it's ok to expose her to the added risk of giving birth. You make no sense.
The added risk of GIVING BIRTH, dolt.
Not as huge as they are if she lets one of those but her friends if yours between her legs.Shoving a vacuum up her and sucking out a baby is safer to you ?It's sick to subject her to the added risk of abortion to protect and enrich her abusers.It's sick to insist a ten year old should go to an abortionist instead of a real doctor. In this case a back alley abortionist. Though all pp abortionists are unqualified, un monitored back alley abortionists.
It is sick to insist a 10 yr old little girl MUST have a baby.
But it's ok to expose her to the added risk of giving birth. You make no sense.
Sent from my SM-G386T1 using Tapatalk
We're talking about a 10 yr old child - a CHILD - forceably made pregnant. And you loons can't even see the wrong in that? The chances of her dying or being permanently affected by giving birth (especially in a country like that) are huge.
And wha are the chances of the baby dying as a result? Yeah, 100%.Shoving a vacuum up her and sucking out a baby is safer to you ?It's sick to subject her to the added risk of abortion to protect and enrich her abusers.It is sick to insist a 10 yr old little girl MUST have a baby.
But it's ok to expose her to the added risk of giving birth. You make no sense.
Sent from my SM-G386T1 using Tapatalk
We're talking about a 10 yr old child - a CHILD - forceably made pregnant. And you loons can't even see the wrong in that? The chances of her dying or being permanently affected by giving birth (especially in a country like that) are huge.
Not as huge as they are if she lets one of those but her friends if yours between her legs.Shoving a vacuum up her and sucking out a baby is safer to you ?It's sick to subject her to the added risk of abortion to protect and enrich her abusers.It is sick to insist a 10 yr old little girl MUST have a baby.
But it's ok to expose her to the added risk of giving birth. You make no sense.
Sent from my SM-G386T1 using Tapatalk
We're talking about a 10 yr old child - a CHILD - forceably made pregnant. And you loons can't even see the wrong in that? The chances of her dying or being permanently affected by giving birth (especially in a country like that) are huge.
And wha are the chances of the baby dying as a result? Yeah, 100%.Shoving a vacuum up her and sucking out a baby is safer to you ?It's sick to subject her to the added risk of abortion to protect and enrich her abusers.
But it's ok to expose her to the added risk of giving birth. You make no sense.
Sent from my SM-G386T1 using Tapatalk
We're talking about a 10 yr old child - a CHILD - forceably made pregnant. And you loons can't even see the wrong in that? The chances of her dying or being permanently affected by giving birth (especially in a country like that) are huge.
So it's life is more important than the mother's. Thanks for finally being honest.
