LESBIANS: What Will They Think of Next?

[aris2chat]

Hmmmm....should I believe a half-literate message board troll, or the Supreme Court?

Perhaps you can show me in the Constitution where the word abortion is written.

That's now how you decide what is or is not constitutional.

It's how the Constitution decides. Try reading the 10th Amendment.

LMAO, try reading a Supreme Court opinion. I know, I know, it's WAY harder than your trusty pocket constitution you got at a Ron Paul rally, but it's ACTUAL law.

Hint: Three-Fifths clause is out.

Try reading the Constitution. You've admitted the word abortion is not there.

start with the life liberty and pursuit of happiness of the woman who does not want or is not ready to be a mother yet, not the life that has not developed or been born yet.

Childbirth is risky and not all women are willing to take the time or the risk to have a child. In a choice, I married my spouse, not some future infant, spouse over fetus, nearly came to that twice. In an ER, the woman's life is priority over fetus. If the fetus is not at least 7mo there is little chance of healthy survival. yes there have been a few cases but far from the norm.

For the christians............an infant has to be a month after birth before it is of value. Even today infants die for many nearly unpreventable reasons, if they make it past childbirth. Having an abortions were not illegal till the 16th C. Performing them in some cases was seen by "radicals" as witchcraft. For those of other faiths most allow or have no view on abortions.

This objection on religious or moral grounds is bunk. It is men's ways of enslaving women and having superiority over them. Choice does not mean a woman must have an abortion, it just says they have the freedom to make that decision if it is right for them. Early home abortions, naturally or chemically should be a first options and clinical/surgical only if the first attempts fail or the woman's life is at risk.

Anyway you look at it, it is none of your damn business unless you are the woman making the choice.

Life style, sexual orientation, who someone falls in love with or has sex with is not either as long as it is consensual

The only sex life you control is your own, keep you big nose to yourself

 

[esthermoon]

If police will catch her I hope Canadian laws will be tough and inflexible

 

[aris2chat]

So the idea of strapping a pregnant woman and enslaving her to 9 months of carrying a child to term is appealing to you, from a socio-political standpoint?

Check this map of countries where abortion is legal/illegal, and tell me what you see:

SHE made the choice to do what it takes to get pregnant yet you want to blame the rest of us for EXPECTING her to accept the responsibility for having done so.

What you're proposing would be like someone taking out a loan at a bank then expecting the person to make the monthly payments associated with doing so.

Except the man, too, took out the loan.

Where are his payments?

The man is told what the woman does with her body is her choice and no one else's business.

When the sperm donor doesn't pay and the mother can't pay, why are the payments to support someone else's kid placed on the backs of those that didn't take out the loan? In other words, why is the responsibility of supporting the kids of a woman who says what she does with her body placed on those unassociated with the situation when she can't pay?

Sperm banks are not free, they cost around $1000. Some get a friend to donate sperm, in a cup instead.

Eggs can cost well in the $10-20,000 range

Adoptions can cost $25-50,000 after a back ground and financial check

Parents should be ready to be parents not just by accident.

I wasn't referring to a sperm bank. The use of "sperm donor" refers to the male half of the two that created a child then runs away from his responsibility to support that child. In many of those cases, the ONLY association the baby daddy has with the child is during conception.

one man, one shot, millions of sperm, only one needed. If not for the pleasure of sex, 90% of the males could be gelded on a practical level and woman can choose when she is ready.

Now if he male pill was mandatory and both had to sign a contract before a woman permits the man's dose to be withheld................... Power to the women

 

[JimBowie1958]

Darwin hard at work in our time.

Man Gets Vibrator Stuck in Large Intestine On 'Sex Sent Me To The E.R.' (NSFW) | Huffington Post

Doctors Shocked by Size of Sex Toy Stuck Inside Man's Intestines for Days

Crazy Things Stuck In Rectum (NSFW) | Huffington Post

Chinese Man Requires Emergency Surgery After the Swamp Eel He Stuck Up His Butt Gnaws Through His Colon

 

[aris2chat]

Really, you wanted to adopt them ALL?

I think his point is all of them can be adopted.

But Leftists like you think in static terms when it comes to abortion....and everything else. 50 million abortions doesn't translate into 50 million surplus babies if abortion becomes illegal. It also doesn't translate into 50 million back ally abortions. Making something illegal and removing social acceptance eliminates that something from the list of options that socially conscious, law abiding people will consider. Most people will decide between adoption or finding a way to be responsible for the life they brought into the world; the latter choice holding sway in most cases. People abort because they can. Remove the option and people will either try harder to not make babies or failing at that, raise the child or put it up for adoption.

Oh and I'm sure you use this same argument when it comes to gun control.

Shut the fuck up. You're completely full of shit.

There's no constitutional right to an abortion, killer.

No constitutional right to prevent an abortion at home or in a clinic. Public has no right to have access to or interfere in a woman's medical records without her permission.

Maybe more should do it at home with a coat hanger. The smart ones would learn not to and the dumb ones wouldn't be around to have the chance to produce more that they would conveniently kill.

Safe no/low cost birth control and non invasive methods of home abortions without a doctor or prescription, but such things are not commonly passed down the way personal care during menses or 'how to use a tampon or alternatives' is taught to young girls. With education, coat hangers are not necessary, even without easy access to clinics. Girls are not taught the early signs of pregnancy or how to home test with ph paper or the smell of their urine. They aren't taught when they are fertile either and when they can have safe sex.

 

[QuickHitCurepon]

Couple that gives birth still break up for many reasons and someone has to get the kids, in part or whole

It's a convoluted way of thinking to suggest that the failure of normal marriages somehow justifies creating something designed to fail. Even a broken family in which a child has a mother and a father is superior to a gay "marriage" that deliberately deprives them of one or the other.

Many of those children would disagree. Love is what is important not the sex of a parent.

"They had a child together".

Impossible.

OK - I'll reword. By whatever means they chose, they acquired a child that they were raising together.

Couple that gives birth still break up for many reasons and someone has to get the kids, in part or whole

Difference is regardless of which parent the child goes with, it's a biological parent.

Are you a birther, a mind reader or the IRS? Were you a witness to the birth, serious question?

Don't have to be any of those or have witnessed it to know what I said is true based on the statement to which I responded. I'll explain but you'll need to pay attention.

When a couple gives birth to a child and that couple is male/female, the child is biologically both of theirs. If they split up for whatever reason and the child goes with one of those two, that child is with a biological parent. If it's a lesbian couple, ONLY one of them can actually be the biological parent although they may call the child theirs. That's simple biology that most people learn at a young age.

Have you ever heard of paternity suits or claims, retard?

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

I met a transman who came between a man and the pregnant mother of his child. He spent seven years with the woman and the child.

Eventually the guy managed to save the woman. The transman wanted custody of the child. The court ended up giving him a two week block every year. The child calls him dad apparently.

He also killed his cat and blamed the neighbour's dog. So chased that neighbour away. They had to sell up and leave, eventually. Obviously he had divided the community against them.

To give a small example, once he offered me a potato scallop. He knew I couldn't eat chicken salt. After I ate it, he casually said, "oh that had chicken salt"

I said, " now I'll be sick for 3 days". He just looked at be with a bitchy nonchalant, complacent face and shrugged.

So anyone who thinks transmen and lesbians aren't dangerous, have conversation with the poor chap who lost his baby through the formative years. So pointless, such a waste.

I've had friends in similar fashion fall victim to the maliciousness of a tranny. These people are mentally imbalanced, which should be an obvious take on anyone who wants to wear a dress and mutilate appendages. It's best to stay away from them. They're treacherous and looking for prey.

 

[The Great Goose]

I met a transman who came between a man and the pregnant mother of his child. He spent seven years with the woman and the child.

Eventually the guy managed to save the woman. The transman wanted custody of the child. The court ended up giving him a two week block every year. The child calls him dad apparently.

He also killed his cat and blamed the neighbour's dog. So chased that neighbour away. They had to sell up and leave, eventually. Obviously he had divided the community against them.

To give a small example, once he offered me a potato scallop. He knew I couldn't eat chicken salt. After I ate it, he casually said, "oh that had chicken salt"

I said, " now I'll be sick for 3 days". He just looked at be with a bitchy nonchalant, complacent face and shrugged.

So anyone who thinks transmen and lesbians aren't dangerous, have conversation with the poor chap who lost his baby through the formative years. So pointless, such a waste.

I've had friends in similar fashion fall victim to the maliciousness of a tranny. These people are mentally imbalanced, which should be an obvious take on anyone who wants to wear a dress and mutilate appendages. It's best to stay away from them. They're treacherous and looking for prey.

I was talking about lesbians and transmen. Did you even read my post? I never mentioned male to female trannies.

 

[QuickHitCurepon]

Are you against adoption? People like you are exactly why there are so many abortions every year. If the red tape that comes with adoption were eliminated, women would have their children, instead of aborting them. They would know there IS a place ready to go for their child.

People that have abortions because they don't like the results of having spread their legs is why there are so many abortions every year. If, as you lefties say, the choice is the woman's to make, you can't pin the responsibility when it happens on anyone but the person making the choice.

When I said there are "so many" abortions, I referred to an indeterminate number. If you had the least amount of reading comprehension, you would have realized that, instead of making yourself look like a dumb fool, using a cliché generalization such as this.

 

[QuickHitCurepon]

Are you against adoption? People like you are exactly why there are so many abortions every year. If the red tape that comes with adoption were eliminated, women would have their children, instead of aborting them. They would know there IS a place ready to go for their child.

"If the red tape that comes with adoption were eliminated, women would have their children instead of abortion them"

Prove it with objective, verifiable data.

After going through nine months of pregnancy, the last thing most women want is a hassle with an adoption agency. If the rules were slackened dramatically, very many women would keep their babies and give birth. Then they could decide if they want to keep it or give it up for adoption. But again, if the woman is undecided and, as most do, knows adoption is a very difficult process, she is extremely likely to follow her base instincts and abort her baby, if she has a strong inclination to do that.

If you want numbers of how many women abort their babies for the reason I just stated, you cannot have them. There are no statistics available anywhere for that, especially when Planned Parenthood operates in almost total secrecy.

 

[QuickHitCurepon]

Childbirth is risky and not all women are willing to take the time or the risk to have a child. In a choice, I married my spouse, not some future infant, spouse over fetus, nearly came to that twice. In an ER, the woman's life is priority over fetus. If the fetus is not at least 7mo there is little chance of healthy survival. yes there have been a few cases but far from the norm.

That is because while doctors will always give the mother the utmost of good treatment, they usually do not give even the slightest effort to save the baby in that situation, when the seven month or more fetus will ALWAYS have a chance to survive with proper care.


A Physician Speaks About Abortion

A Physician Speaks About Abortion

This chapter was written by the former Surgeon General of the United States, Dr. C. Everett Koop.

It simply isn't true. Abortions in the United States for rape, incest, to protect the life of the mother, or to void a defective fetus comprise less than five percent of all abortions. The rest are performed just for convenience. And we're talking about one million abortions a year. ...

Most people do not know that the younger the mother is the more likely she will suffer sterility later if she has an abortion. Studies in Canada indicate that sterility is as high as thirty percent among women fifteen to seventeen years old who have had abortions . .

Protection of the life of the mother as an excuse for an abortion is a smoke screen. In my thirty-six years in pediatric surgery I have never known of one instance where the child had to be be aborted to save the mother's life.

 

[GLASNOST]

Homosexuality is simply a delusion, one that I do not participate in.

All humans are, by biological default, Heterosexual. That is a biological fact. Choosing to "opt out", is the delusion that one can, in and by themselves, change biology.

Impossible.

I think 'inherent' has just become an ambiguous expression ..... and needs to be re-defined. If you call Heterosexuality a biological default then you must agree that anything other than heterosexuality is a biological option ...... not necessarily a conscious, social choice or delusion.

I can't agree as to biology giving options.

Biological logic would make the default, a "being" that replicates itself to move the species forward. To think otherwise would require some kind of an objective test that doesn't seem to exist.

Biology is at work with a myriad of optional traits. I am surprised you do not already realize this.

 

[Conservative65]

Perhaps you can show me in the Constitution where the word abortion is written.

That's now how you decide what is or is not constitutional.

It's how the Constitution decides. Try reading the 10th Amendment.

LMAO, try reading a Supreme Court opinion. I know, I know, it's WAY harder than your trusty pocket constitution you got at a Ron Paul rally, but it's ACTUAL law.

Hint: Three-Fifths clause is out.

Try reading the Constitution. You've admitted the word abortion is not there.

start with the life liberty and pursuit of happiness of the woman who does not want or is not ready to be a mother yet, not the life that has not developed or been born yet.

Childbirth is risky and not all women are willing to take the time or the risk to have a child. In a choice, I married my spouse, not some future infant, spouse over fetus, nearly came to that twice. In an ER, the woman's life is priority over fetus. If the fetus is not at least 7mo there is little chance of healthy survival. yes there have been a few cases but far from the norm.

For the christians............an infant has to be a month after birth before it is of value. Even today infants die for many nearly unpreventable reasons, if they make it past childbirth. Having an abortions were not illegal till the 16th C. Performing them in some cases was seen by "radicals" as witchcraft. For those of other faiths most allow or have no view on abortions.

This objection on religious or moral grounds is bunk. It is men's ways of enslaving women and having superiority over them. Choice does not mean a woman must have an abortion, it just says they have the freedom to make that decision if it is right for them. Early home abortions, naturally or chemically should be a first options and clinical/surgical only if the first attempts fail or the woman's life is at risk.

Anyway you look at it, it is none of your damn business unless you are the woman making the choice.

Life style, sexual orientation, who someone falls in love with or has sex with is not either as long as it is consensual

The only sex life you control is your own, keep you big nose to yourself

"For the Christians . . . an infant has to be a month after birth before it is of value"

That is an absolutely retarded statement.

When a woman makes the choice to have a child that she then can't support, why does it become the responsibility of those she told to butt out of her choice to support that child for her financially? If the choice is her, the responsibility is hers, as well. If she can't support the choice she made, tough shit. When you "it's her body" people start abiding by that mindset, tell me.

 

[Conservative65]

SHE made the choice to do what it takes to get pregnant yet you want to blame the rest of us for EXPECTING her to accept the responsibility for having done so.

What you're proposing would be like someone taking out a loan at a bank then expecting the person to make the monthly payments associated with doing so.

Except the man, too, took out the loan.

Where are his payments?

The man is told what the woman does with her body is her choice and no one else's business.

When the sperm donor doesn't pay and the mother can't pay, why are the payments to support someone else's kid placed on the backs of those that didn't take out the loan? In other words, why is the responsibility of supporting the kids of a woman who says what she does with her body placed on those unassociated with the situation when she can't pay?

Sperm banks are not free, they cost around $1000. Some get a friend to donate sperm, in a cup instead.

Eggs can cost well in the $10-20,000 range

Adoptions can cost $25-50,000 after a back ground and financial check

Parents should be ready to be parents not just by accident.

I wasn't referring to a sperm bank. The use of "sperm donor" refers to the male half of the two that created a child then runs away from his responsibility to support that child. In many of those cases, the ONLY association the baby daddy has with the child is during conception.

one man, one shot, millions of sperm, only one needed. If not for the pleasure of sex, 90% of the males could be gelded on a practical level and woman can choose when she is ready.

Now if he male pill was mandatory and both had to sign a contract before a woman permits the man's dose to be withheld................... Power to the women

If she chooses to do what it takes to get pregnant, she's saying she is ready.

 

[Conservative65]

I think his point is all of them can be adopted.

But Leftists like you think in static terms when it comes to abortion....and everything else. 50 million abortions doesn't translate into 50 million surplus babies if abortion becomes illegal. It also doesn't translate into 50 million back ally abortions. Making something illegal and removing social acceptance eliminates that something from the list of options that socially conscious, law abiding people will consider. Most people will decide between adoption or finding a way to be responsible for the life they brought into the world; the latter choice holding sway in most cases. People abort because they can. Remove the option and people will either try harder to not make babies or failing at that, raise the child or put it up for adoption.

Oh and I'm sure you use this same argument when it comes to gun control.

Shut the fuck up. You're completely full of shit.

There's no constitutional right to an abortion, killer.

No constitutional right to prevent an abortion at home or in a clinic. Public has no right to have access to or interfere in a woman's medical records without her permission.

Maybe more should do it at home with a coat hanger. The smart ones would learn not to and the dumb ones wouldn't be around to have the chance to produce more that they would conveniently kill.

Safe no/low cost birth control and non invasive methods of home abortions without a doctor or prescription, but such things are not commonly passed down the way personal care during menses or 'how to use a tampon or alternatives' is taught to young girls. With education, coat hangers are not necessary, even without easy access to clinics. Girls are not taught the early signs of pregnancy or how to home test with ph paper or the smell of their urine. They aren't taught when they are fertile either and when they can have safe sex.

Oh, you're one of those that wants birth control for nothing?

 

[Conservative65]

It's a convoluted way of thinking to suggest that the failure of normal marriages somehow justifies creating something designed to fail. Even a broken family in which a child has a mother and a father is superior to a gay "marriage" that deliberately deprives them of one or the other.

Many of those children would disagree. Love is what is important not the sex of a parent.

OK - I'll reword. By whatever means they chose, they acquired a child that they were raising together.

Couple that gives birth still break up for many reasons and someone has to get the kids, in part or whole

Difference is regardless of which parent the child goes with, it's a biological parent.

Are you a birther, a mind reader or the IRS? Were you a witness to the birth, serious question?

Don't have to be any of those or have witnessed it to know what I said is true based on the statement to which I responded. I'll explain but you'll need to pay attention.

When a couple gives birth to a child and that couple is male/female, the child is biologically both of theirs. If they split up for whatever reason and the child goes with one of those two, that child is with a biological parent. If it's a lesbian couple, ONLY one of them can actually be the biological parent although they may call the child theirs. That's simple biology that most people learn at a young age.

Have you ever heard of paternity suits or claims, retard?

There isn't a male in the a lesbian couple, retard.

 

[Conservative65]

Are you against adoption? People like you are exactly why there are so many abortions every year. If the red tape that comes with adoption were eliminated, women would have their children, instead of aborting them. They would know there IS a place ready to go for their child.

People that have abortions because they don't like the results of having spread their legs is why there are so many abortions every year. If, as you lefties say, the choice is the woman's to make, you can't pin the responsibility when it happens on anyone but the person making the choice.

When I said there are "so many" abortions, I referred to an indeterminate number. If you had the least amount of reading comprehension, you would have realized that, instead of making yourself look like a dumb fool, using a cliché generalization such as this.

The number is easy to determine. As of today, while I don't have the exact number in front of me, it's over 50 million since 1973.

 

[Conservative65]

Are you against adoption? People like you are exactly why there are so many abortions every year. If the red tape that comes with adoption were eliminated, women would have their children, instead of aborting them. They would know there IS a place ready to go for their child.

"If the red tape that comes with adoption were eliminated, women would have their children instead of abortion them"

Prove it with objective, verifiable data.

After going through nine months of pregnancy, the last thing most women want is a hassle with an adoption agency. If the rules were slackened dramatically, very many women would keep their babies and give birth. Then they could decide if they want to keep it or give it up for adoption. But again, if the woman is undecided and, as most do, knows adoption is a very difficult process, she is extremely likely to follow her base instincts and abort her baby, if she has a strong inclination to do that.

If you want numbers of how many women abort their babies for the reason I just stated, you cannot have them. There are no statistics available anywhere for that, especially when Planned Parenthood operates in almost total secrecy.

"many women would keep their babies and give birth"

Prove it.

If these women are so proud of what they do when they abort, why the secrecy. Shouldn't they be shouting off the rooftops about what they did.

 

[Pop23]

Homosexuality is simply a delusion, one that I do not participate in.

All humans are, by biological default, Heterosexual. That is a biological fact. Choosing to "opt out", is the delusion that one can, in and by themselves, change biology.

Impossible.

I think 'inherent' has just become an ambiguous expression ..... and needs to be re-defined. If you call Heterosexuality a biological default then you must agree that anything other than heterosexuality is a biological option ...... not necessarily a conscious, social choice or delusion.

I can't agree as to biology giving options.

Biological logic would make the default, a "being" that replicates itself to move the species forward. To think otherwise would require some kind of an objective test that doesn't seem to exist.

Biology is at work with a myriad of optional traits. I am surprised you do not already realize this.

Please, tell me those that biology demands.

 

[Coloradomtnman]

What is very funny is that the runaway lesbian says that she should keep child because she gave birth to it. But according to the courts the other lesbian has equal rights to the child by law. Now the runaway claims that's all "politically correct" talk and shouldn't be respected. But for Christ's sake, her marriage to another woman and the child being legally both of theirs' is all due to politically correct laws on same sex marriages in the first place! In other words, if not for politically correct laws she would never have been allowed to marry another woman anyway!

I think true adoptions and blended families are exceptionally rare. Nobody loves a kid that didn't come from their loins and when the shit hits the fan, everyone retreats to biological relations only. Everything else is a fantasy

I grew up in a really dysfunctional family with lots of alcohol, drugs, divorce, abuse, and probably a personality disorder or two. It has taken me many years to work my way from the traumas and distorted understanding of relationships that resulted from such an upbringing.

Your worldview is just as distorted as mine was a teenager. I hope Christ can help you see the world in a better, more humane, and loving way.