Liberalism: "It's All About Me"

[NYcarbineer]

I suppose the good news is that Liberalism is a self-defeating trap.
Conservatives and traditionalists have lots of children,but for Liberals, having children is a bad idea.

Of course it gets worse than that, as Leftists are all about abortion and eugenics, too.

Sooo....there should be fewer and fewer of them in the long run.




Check this out:
"Liberal columnist Jill Filipovic says having lots of kids is immoral
Jill Filipovic
✔@JillFilipovic
Having children is one of the worst things you can do for the planet. Have one less and conserve resources. https://twitter.com/guardian/status/885021119652220930 …
2:26 AM - 12 Jul 2017


That tweet isn't just a suggestion, it's an order: at the margins, having children makes you a bad person.

But sidelining the moral argument for a second, Filipovic's claim is also remarkable for its idiocy.

After all, the premise of Filipovic's argument — that Earth cannot co-exist with a growing human population — rests on the Guardian article that her tweet links to. That article references researchers who have listed all the things that produce carbon emissions."
Liberal columnist Jill Filipovic says having lots of kids is immoral


Since the view that the earth can't sustain 7 or 8 billion folks has been debunked numerous times, my presumption about the self-centeredness of Leftisim must be the case.



In fact one of the godfathers of Leftism put it this way:
"We must rid ourselves once and for all of the Quaker-Papist babble about the sanctity of human life."
Leon Trotsky

I have known this for quite a while now, as I see planned parenthood as the primary source of the upcoming extinction of liberals. 33,000 unborn and born babies from liberal parents are executed under the doctors scissors. Also they love to do drugs which also is having a devastating effect on their older and sometimes younger children, and instead of letting the government continue the war against drugs, the liberals are out their touting "let them be, stop the war on drugs". When all liberals are finally gone, then the world will be a better, happier place.

NWO Plans To Depopulate The Earth

There are many means and methods of depopulation that are being employed today, the 3 primary of which include; unsustainable/exploitative international development, which leads to massive hunger, starvation and famine worldwide (at least 40 million deaths annually), the fomentation of war, hatred and military procurements throughout the nations leading to millions of deaths worldwide, and finially, the creation and spread of infectious diseases leading to global pandemic, plague and pestilence on an unprecedented scale.

See? What conservatives really want is to outlaw abortion AND birth control.

I could care less if a liberal wants to execute their unborn child, I just don't want to be the one having to foot the bill, just like I don't like footing the bill for your sorry ass to eat. Get off your lazy fucking ass and get a job, you know , from that Obama economic recovery, where the stock market soared, the rich got richer and the most in poverty. Yeah that one pea brain. Liberals please keep aborting your children, and soon there wont be any more liberals, and the world would be a better place.

Are you aware that the most intelligent women in America have the lowest birth rate, i.e., number of children?

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

I suppose the good news is that Liberalism is a self-defeating trap.
Conservatives and traditionalists have lots of children,but for Liberals, having children is a bad idea.

Of course it gets worse than that, as Leftists are all about abortion and eugenics, too.

Sooo....there should be fewer and fewer of them in the long run.




Check this out:
"Liberal columnist Jill Filipovic says having lots of kids is immoral
Jill Filipovic
✔@JillFilipovic
Having children is one of the worst things you can do for the planet. Have one less and conserve resources. https://twitter.com/guardian/status/885021119652220930 …
2:26 AM - 12 Jul 2017


That tweet isn't just a suggestion, it's an order: at the margins, having children makes you a bad person.

But sidelining the moral argument for a second, Filipovic's claim is also remarkable for its idiocy.

After all, the premise of Filipovic's argument — that Earth cannot co-exist with a growing human population — rests on the Guardian article that her tweet links to. That article references researchers who have listed all the things that produce carbon emissions."
Liberal columnist Jill Filipovic says having lots of kids is immoral


Since the view that the earth can't sustain 7 or 8 billion folks has been debunked numerous times, my presumption about the self-centeredness of Leftisim must be the case.



In fact one of the godfathers of Leftism put it this way:
"We must rid ourselves once and for all of the Quaker-Papist babble about the sanctity of human life."
Leon Trotsky

I have known this for quite a while now, as I see planned parenthood as the primary source of the upcoming extinction of liberals. 33,000 unborn and born babies from liberal parents are executed under the doctors scissors. Also they love to do drugs which also is having a devastating effect on their older and sometimes younger children, and instead of letting the government continue the war against drugs, the liberals are out their touting "let them be, stop the war on drugs". When all liberals are finally gone, then the world will be a better, happier place.

NWO Plans To Depopulate The Earth

There are many means and methods of depopulation that are being employed today, the 3 primary of which include; unsustainable/exploitative international development, which leads to massive hunger, starvation and famine worldwide (at least 40 million deaths annually), the fomentation of war, hatred and military procurements throughout the nations leading to millions of deaths worldwide, and finially, the creation and spread of infectious diseases leading to global pandemic, plague and pestilence on an unprecedented scale.

See? What conservatives really want is to outlaw abortion AND birth control.

I could care less if a liberal wants to execute their unborn child, I just don't want to be the one having to foot the bill, just like I don't like footing the bill for your sorry ass to eat. Get off your lazy fucking ass and get a job, you know , from that Obama economic recovery, where the stock market soared, the rich got richer and the most in poverty. Yeah that one pea brain. Liberals please keep aborting your children, and soon there wont be any more liberals, and the world would be a better place.

Are you aware that the most intelligent women in America have the lowest birth rate, i.e., number of children?

Only in your minds eye do you think liberal women are intelligent.
Hillary Rotten Clinton - "Supposedly smartest woman" - Had no clue her husband was cheating on her ass. Clean a hard drive with a cloth. Didn't know how to use a blackberry.

Debbie WasAmanSnitch - Rigged the 2016 elections for said Rotten one, so Bernie (the Socialist) Sanders wouldn't win.

Both Butt ugly women, which is why they either have 1 child or no child, as no man would want to touch them with a ten foot pole.

 

[P@triot]

You nailed it PoliticalChic. Here is another self-absorbed, do-as-I-say-not-as-I-do, limousine liberal. He kicks out all of the homeless so his ride can be vagrant free and so that he can give the illusion that his city isn't a progressive shit-hole of poverty and misery.

NYC Mayor de Blasio boots homeless from the subway system — the reason has people furious

 

[BasicHumanUnit]

This is a joke right . Everyone know that liberals are for helping those in need , helping those who are routinely targetd by the majority. . While cons are selfish opportunists .

Throw out any issue and you'll see this is true .

This one statement deserves a thread all it's own. I say it's the Left that has caused most of the nations problems with it's over controlling in-your-face interference......ESPECIALLY with the family.

 

[PoliticalChic]

I suppose the good news is that Liberalism is a self-defeating trap.
Conservatives and traditionalists have lots of children,but for Liberals, having children is a bad idea.

Of course it gets worse than that, as Leftists are all about abortion and eugenics, too.

Sooo....there should be fewer and fewer of them in the long run.




Check this out:
"Liberal columnist Jill Filipovic says having lots of kids is immoral
Jill Filipovic
✔@JillFilipovic
Having children is one of the worst things you can do for the planet. Have one less and conserve resources. https://twitter.com/guardian/status/885021119652220930 …
2:26 AM - 12 Jul 2017


That tweet isn't just a suggestion, it's an order: at the margins, having children makes you a bad person.

But sidelining the moral argument for a second, Filipovic's claim is also remarkable for its idiocy.

After all, the premise of Filipovic's argument — that Earth cannot co-exist with a growing human population — rests on the Guardian article that her tweet links to. That article references researchers who have listed all the things that produce carbon emissions."
Liberal columnist Jill Filipovic says having lots of kids is immoral


Since the view that the earth can't sustain 7 or 8 billion folks has been debunked numerous times, my presumption about the self-centeredness of Leftisim must be the case.



In fact one of the godfathers of Leftism put it this way:
"We must rid ourselves once and for all of the Quaker-Papist babble about the sanctity of human life."
Leon Trotsky

I have known this for quite a while now, as I see planned parenthood as the primary source of the upcoming extinction of liberals. 33,000 unborn and born babies from liberal parents are executed under the doctors scissors. Also they love to do drugs which also is having a devastating effect on their older and sometimes younger children, and instead of letting the government continue the war against drugs, the liberals are out their touting "let them be, stop the war on drugs". When all liberals are finally gone, then the world will be a better, happier place.

NWO Plans To Depopulate The Earth

There are many means and methods of depopulation that are being employed today, the 3 primary of which include; unsustainable/exploitative international development, which leads to massive hunger, starvation and famine worldwide (at least 40 million deaths annually), the fomentation of war, hatred and military procurements throughout the nations leading to millions of deaths worldwide, and finially, the creation and spread of infectious diseases leading to global pandemic, plague and pestilence on an unprecedented scale.

See? What conservatives really want is to outlaw abortion AND birth control.

I could care less if a liberal wants to execute their unborn child, I just don't want to be the one having to foot the bill, just like I don't like footing the bill for your sorry ass to eat. Get off your lazy fucking ass and get a job, you know , from that Obama economic recovery, where the stock market soared, the rich got richer and the most in poverty. Yeah that one pea brain. Liberals please keep aborting your children, and soon there wont be any more liberals, and the world would be a better place.

Are you aware that the most intelligent women in America have the lowest birth rate, i.e., number of children?

Only in your minds eye do you think liberal women are intelligent.
Hillary Rotten Clinton - "Supposedly smartest woman" - Had no clue her husband was cheating on her ass. Clean a hard drive with a cloth. Didn't know how to use a blackberry.

Debbie WasAmanSnitch - Rigged the 2016 elections for said Rotten one, so Bernie (the Socialist) Sanders wouldn't win.

Both Butt ugly women, which is why they either have 1 child or no child, as no man would want to touch them with a ten foot pole.

View attachment 139246 View attachment 139247

I can't resist reminding of this:

" Hillary Clinton, to note: is more of a coattail celebrity name, in vogue at the moment; intellectually, she failed the DC bar exam three times; and had to retake it in Arkansas to pass."
IQ: 150+ | Smartest woman ever - Hmolpedia




BTW....the 150 IQ title of the article doesn't refer to the career criminal and congenital liar.

 

[washamericom]

This is a joke right . Everyone know that liberals are for helping those in need , helping those who are routinely targetd by the majority. . While cons are selfish opportunists .

Throw out any issue and you'll see this is true .

chicago murderville.

 

[WallWest]

All About Me must be why the foundational document says - We The People. Learn what liberalism is you fucking gook.

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

All About Me must be why the foundational document says - We The People. Learn what liberalism is you fucking gook.

Classical Liberalism is all about "We the People" to self govern.
New Age Liberalism(Socialism) is all about "Fuck the People" as the liberal elites are all about governing the stupid fuckers who vote Dumbocrat.

Classical liberalism
Classical liberalism is a political ideology and a branch of liberalism which advocates civil liberties and political freedom with representative democracy under the rule of law and emphasizes economic freedom.
Classical liberalism - Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_liberalism

Radical liberalism is dividing America

But they grow in poverty, poor education, hopelessness and dependency. They cannot grow with strong families; they require dysfunctional families needing government help.

Typical Liberal Voter

 

[P@triot]

And to think....daddy was almost Vice President of the United States of America. Look at the difference - Republicans (like Donald Trump) raise bright, articulate, successful, law abiding citizens. Dumbocrats (like Tim Kaine) raise filthy, anti-social, anti-American, criminals who refuse to hold jobs or otherwise be productive members of society.

The chaos that some counter-protesters brought into the Minnesota Capitol in March during a rally in support of President Donald Trump included smoke bombs, Mace in people's faces and fireworks, prosecutors said Friday as they announced charges against eight people.

Among those charged was Linwood "Woody" Kaine, a son of U.S. Sen. Tim Kaine, who was Hillary Clinton's running mate in 2016. The 24-year-old Minneapolis man is accused of fleeing police on foot and concealing his identity in a public place, both misdemeanors, and obstructing legal process, a gross misdemeanor.

This typical filthy progressive is a self-absorbed dirt-bag. It's all about him in his little mind. And if he can't have his way, he will engage in criminal behavior to make everyone else suffer for not giving him what he wanted.

Tim Kaine's son Woody Kaine charged in Trump rally protest

 

[P@triot]

Well....at least the left is now embracing their fascism and actually dressing like the Nazi's that they are! Admitting you have a problem is the first step.

Nazi-clad protesters try shouting down Ann Coulter at free-speech panel — and are badly outnumbered

 

[PoliticalChic]

I suppose the good news is that Liberalism is a self-defeating trap.
Conservatives and traditionalists have lots of children,but for Liberals, having children is a bad idea.

Of course it gets worse than that, as Leftists are all about abortion and eugenics, too.

Sooo....there should be fewer and fewer of them in the long run.




Check this out:
"Liberal columnist Jill Filipovic says having lots of kids is immoral
Jill Filipovic
https://twitter.com/JillFilipovic
✔@JillFilipovic
Having children is one of the worst things you can do for the planet. Have one less and conserve resources. https://twitter.com/guardian/status/885021119652220930 …
2:26 AM - 12 Jul 2017


That tweet isn't just a suggestion, it's an order: at the margins, having children makes you a bad person.

But sidelining the moral argument for a second, Filipovic's claim is also remarkable for its idiocy.

After all, the premise of Filipovic's argument — that Earth cannot co-exist with a growing human population — rests on the Guardian article that her tweet links to. That article references researchers who have listed all the things that produce carbon emissions."
Liberal columnist Jill Filipovic says having lots of kids is immoral


Since the view that the earth can't sustain 7 or 8 billion folks has been debunked numerous times, my presumption about the self-centeredness of Leftisim must be the case.



In fact one of the godfathers of Leftism put it this way:
"We must rid ourselves once and for all of the Quaker-Papist babble about the sanctity of human life."
Leon Trotsky

Liberalism is so sick that it denies the humanity of having children.

Really.


"Having children is one of the most destructive things you can to do the environment, say researchers
One fewer child per family can save 'average of 58.6 tonnes of CO2-equivalent emissions per year'"
Having children is bad for the environment, say researchers




They hate children
They hate western civilization
And, most prominently.....they hate themselves.


I could get behind that last one.....

 

[PoliticalChic]

I suppose the good news is that Liberalism is a self-defeating trap.
Conservatives and traditionalists have lots of children,but for Liberals, having children is a bad idea.

Of course it gets worse than that, as Leftists are all about abortion and eugenics, too.

Sooo....there should be fewer and fewer of them in the long run.




Check this out:
"Liberal columnist Jill Filipovic says having lots of kids is immoral
Jill Filipovic
https://twitter.com/JillFilipovic
✔@JillFilipovic
Having children is one of the worst things you can do for the planet. Have one less and conserve resources. https://twitter.com/guardian/status/885021119652220930 …
2:26 AM - 12 Jul 2017


That tweet isn't just a suggestion, it's an order: at the margins, having children makes you a bad person.

But sidelining the moral argument for a second, Filipovic's claim is also remarkable for its idiocy.

After all, the premise of Filipovic's argument — that Earth cannot co-exist with a growing human population — rests on the Guardian article that her tweet links to. That article references researchers who have listed all the things that produce carbon emissions."
Liberal columnist Jill Filipovic says having lots of kids is immoral


Since the view that the earth can't sustain 7 or 8 billion folks has been debunked numerous times, my presumption about the self-centeredness of Leftisim must be the case.



In fact one of the godfathers of Leftism put it this way:
"We must rid ourselves once and for all of the Quaker-Papist babble about the sanctity of human life."
Leon Trotsky

 

[Questioner]

As long as people are having children relative to their means, I don't care.

That argument related to "the planet having too many children" is based on a lot of inconsistent axioms and philosophy. And in practice, even if theoretically "the planet has too many cars", that doesn't mean that the proponents of that faith-based assertion aren't eliminating their own cars.

Regardless, population control relative to one's means or personal responsibility - isn't a "NWO conspiracy" - in the Biblical Old Testament, and other ancient texts, punishments such as death penalty for adultery served as a primitive measure of population control.

So no, every society has had a vested interest in ensuring that men or women aren't having 10 children with 10 different partners and refusing to support them - that's not a "conspiracy", that's just reality.

Realistically, most people have fewer children today than they did in past eras, and practical factors have played a role in this, such as infant mortality being less likely, which is why arguments which only take into account "numbers of children" are ones which I find unhelpful.

 

[PoliticalChic]

As long as people are having children relative to their means, I don't care.

That argument related to "the planet having too many children" is based on a lot of inconsistent axioms and philosophy. And in practice, even if theoretically "the planet has too many cars", that doesn't mean that the proponents of that faith-based assertion aren't eliminating their own cars.

Regardless, population control relative to one's means or personal responsibility - isn't a "NWO conspiracy" - in the Biblical Old Testament, and other ancient texts, punishments such as death penalty for adultery served as a primitive measure of population control.

So no, every society has had a vested interest in ensuring that men or women aren't having 10 children with 10 different partners and refusing to support them - that's not a "conspiracy", that's just reality.

Realistically, most people have fewer children today than they did in past eras, and practical factors have played a role in this, such as infant mortality being less likely, which is why arguments which only take into account "numbers of children" are ones which I find unhelpful.

a. The more religious a society is.....that's the Judeo-Christian faith.....the more children.
b. There is no population....or 'overpopulation' problem... in the world.


The entire current population of the world today could comfortably fit in the state of Texas.

c. There is a morality problem....a particular political view encourages it.

 

[Questioner]

As long as people are having children relative to their means, I don't care.

That argument related to "the planet having too many children" is based on a lot of inconsistent axioms and philosophy. And in practice, even if theoretically "the planet has too many cars", that doesn't mean that the proponents of that faith-based assertion aren't eliminating their own cars.

Regardless, population control relative to one's means or personal responsibility - isn't a "NWO conspiracy" - in the Biblical Old Testament, and other ancient texts, punishments such as death penalty for adultery served as a primitive measure of population control.

So no, every society has had a vested interest in ensuring that men or women aren't having 10 children with 10 different partners and refusing to support them - that's not a "conspiracy", that's just reality.

Realistically, most people have fewer children today than they did in past eras, and practical factors have played a role in this, such as infant mortality being less likely, which is why arguments which only take into account "numbers of children" are ones which I find unhelpful.

a. The more religious a society is.....that's the Judeo-Christian faith.....the more children.
b. There is no population....or 'overpopulation' problem in the world.


The entire current population of the world today could comfortably fit in the state of Texas.

c. There is a morality problem....a particular political view encourages it.

That's irrelevant to the point - for example:

FL Mom of 17 Kids Back in Court; Demands once again 'Somebody Needs to Pay'

As far as society is concerned, individuals who have many kids which they have no means of supporting are a problem.

Overall, people in 1st world countries have less kids than in 3rd world countries - and emphasis is more on quality of parenting than on "number of children", part of this has to do with better living conditions, such as infant morality being less likely.

I don't care to address arguments on a "global" scale, nor the axioms or myths which they are based on.

Even in the Bible, the notions of children, marriage, parenting and so forth are a complicated subject - Paul, for example said that some men should not marry (I believe this was used as the basis of Priesthood celibacies in the Catholic faith, regardless this is in the Bible).

 

[PoliticalChic]

As long as people are having children relative to their means, I don't care.

That argument related to "the planet having too many children" is based on a lot of inconsistent axioms and philosophy. And in practice, even if theoretically "the planet has too many cars", that doesn't mean that the proponents of that faith-based assertion aren't eliminating their own cars.

Regardless, population control relative to one's means or personal responsibility - isn't a "NWO conspiracy" - in the Biblical Old Testament, and other ancient texts, punishments such as death penalty for adultery served as a primitive measure of population control.

So no, every society has had a vested interest in ensuring that men or women aren't having 10 children with 10 different partners and refusing to support them - that's not a "conspiracy", that's just reality.

Realistically, most people have fewer children today than they did in past eras, and practical factors have played a role in this, such as infant mortality being less likely, which is why arguments which only take into account "numbers of children" are ones which I find unhelpful.

a. The more religious a society is.....that's the Judeo-Christian faith.....the more children.
b. There is no population....or 'overpopulation' problem in the world.


The entire current population of the world today could comfortably fit in the state of Texas.

c. There is a morality problem....a particular political view encourages it.

That's irrelevant to the point - for example:

FL Mom of 17 Kids Back in Court; Demands once again 'Somebody Needs to Pay'

As far as society is concerned, individuals who have many kids which they have no means of supporting are a problem.

Overall, people in 1st world countries have less kids than in 3rd world countries - and emphasis is more on quality of parenting than on "number of children", part of this has to do with better living conditions, such as infant morality being less likely.

I don't care to address arguments on a "global" scale, nor the axioms or myths which they are based on.

Even in the Bible, the notions of children, marriage, parenting and so forth are a complicated subject - Paul, for example said that some men should not marry (I believe this was used as the basis of Priesthood celibacies in the Catholic faith, regardless this is in the Bible).

The truth is that you are never able to 'address' facts.

 

[miketx]

As long as people are having children relative to their means, I don't care.

That argument related to "the planet having too many children" is based on a lot of inconsistent axioms and philosophy. And in practice, even if theoretically "the planet has too many cars", that doesn't mean that the proponents of that faith-based assertion aren't eliminating their own cars.

Regardless, population control relative to one's means or personal responsibility - isn't a "NWO conspiracy" - in the Biblical Old Testament, and other ancient texts, punishments such as death penalty for adultery served as a primitive measure of population control.

So no, every society has had a vested interest in ensuring that men or women aren't having 10 children with 10 different partners and refusing to support them - that's not a "conspiracy", that's just reality.

Realistically, most people have fewer children today than they did in past eras, and practical factors have played a role in this, such as infant mortality being less likely, which is why arguments which only take into account "numbers of children" are ones which I find unhelpful.

a. The more religious a society is.....that's the Judeo-Christian faith.....the more children.
b. There is no population....or 'overpopulation' problem in the world.


The entire current population of the world today could comfortably fit in the state of Texas.

c. There is a morality problem....a particular political view encourages it.

That's irrelevant to the point - for example:

FL Mom of 17 Kids Back in Court; Demands once again 'Somebody Needs to Pay'

As far as society is concerned, individuals who have many kids which they have no means of supporting are a problem.

Overall, people in 1st world countries have less kids than in 3rd world countries - and emphasis is more on quality of parenting than on "number of children", part of this has to do with better living conditions, such as infant morality being less likely.

I don't care to address arguments on a "global" scale, nor the axioms or myths which they are based on.

Even in the Bible, the notions of children, marriage, parenting and so forth are a complicated subject - Paul, for example said that some men should not marry (I believe this was used as the basis of Priesthood celibacies in the Catholic faith, regardless this is in the Bible).

The truth is that you are never able to 'address' facts.

Never seen a progressive that could or would.

 

[anynameyouwish]

I suppose the good news is that Liberalism is a self-defeating trap.
Conservatives and traditionalists have lots of children,but for Liberals, having children is a bad idea.

Of course it gets worse than that, as Leftists are all about abortion and eugenics, too.

Sooo....there should be fewer and fewer of them in the long run.




Check this out:
"Liberal columnist Jill Filipovic says having lots of kids is immoral
Jill Filipovic
https://twitter.com/JillFilipovic
✔@JillFilipovic
Having children is one of the worst things you can do for the planet. Have one less and conserve resources. https://twitter.com/guardian/status/885021119652220930 …
2:26 AM - 12 Jul 2017


That tweet isn't just a suggestion, it's an order: at the margins, having children makes you a bad person.

But sidelining the moral argument for a second, Filipovic's claim is also remarkable for its idiocy.

After all, the premise of Filipovic's argument — that Earth cannot co-exist with a growing human population — rests on the Guardian article that her tweet links to. That article references researchers who have listed all the things that produce carbon emissions."
Liberal columnist Jill Filipovic says having lots of kids is immoral


Since the view that the earth can't sustain 7 or 8 billion folks has been debunked numerous times, my presumption about the self-centeredness of Leftisim must be the case.



In fact one of the godfathers of Leftism put it this way:
"We must rid ourselves once and for all of the Quaker-Papist babble about the sanctity of human life."
Leon Trotsky

conservatism = my way or get out of MY country

 

[PoliticalChic]

I suppose the good news is that Liberalism is a self-defeating trap.
Conservatives and traditionalists have lots of children,but for Liberals, having children is a bad idea.

Of course it gets worse than that, as Leftists are all about abortion and eugenics, too.

Sooo....there should be fewer and fewer of them in the long run.




Check this out:
"Liberal columnist Jill Filipovic says having lots of kids is immoral
Jill Filipovic
✔@JillFilipovic
Having children is one of the worst things you can do for the planet. Have one less and conserve resources. https://twitter.com/guardian/status/885021119652220930 …
2:26 AM - 12 Jul 2017


That tweet isn't just a suggestion, it's an order: at the margins, having children makes you a bad person.

But sidelining the moral argument for a second, Filipovic's claim is also remarkable for its idiocy.

After all, the premise of Filipovic's argument — that Earth cannot co-exist with a growing human population — rests on the Guardian article that her tweet links to. That article references researchers who have listed all the things that produce carbon emissions."
Liberal columnist Jill Filipovic says having lots of kids is immoral


Since the view that the earth can't sustain 7 or 8 billion folks has been debunked numerous times, my presumption about the self-centeredness of Leftisim must be the case.



In fact one of the godfathers of Leftism put it this way:
"We must rid ourselves once and for all of the Quaker-Papist babble about the sanctity of human life."
Leon Trotsky

conservatism = my way or get out of MY country

Link or lie?




You really make this far too easy.


Do you know which is the only party that put American citizens in concentration camps.


Here's your remedial:

1. The Democrats are, and have always been, the party of slavery, segregation, and second-class citizenship, the party that stood in schoolhouse doors to block black school children….until Republicans sent in the 101st airborne

2. It is the party of Jefferson Davis, the KKK, Planned Parenthood, concentration camps for American citizens, and restrictions on free speech.

3. It is the party of Mao ornaments on the White House Christmas tree, and of James Hodgkinson, and of Communist Bernie Sanders, of pretend genders.

4. The Democrat Party is the oldest racist organization in America, the trail of tears, the author of Jim Crow and the bigotry of low expectations, filibustered against women getting the vote and killed every anti-lynching bill to get to Congress

5. The Democrat Party is the number one funder of the Islamic Revolution in Tehran….to the tune of $100 billion to the Ayatollahs….and gave Hezbollah the go-ahead to sell cocaine in America.

6. It is the party of anti-Semitism and Louis Farrakhan, and of the first Cabinet member ever to be held in contempt of Congress.

7. It is the party that admits its future depends on flooding the country with illegal aliens, and telling them to vote.

8. It is the party that couldn't suck up to the Castro Brothers enough, and treats the Bill of Rights like a Chinese menu..

9. The Democrats got us into the Civil War…Jefferson Davis .... Woodrow Wilson, WWI….FDR, WWII……Truman, Korean War….VietNam, JFK and LBJ…..yet they want to weaken our military.

10. The Democrats are the party that looks at the mayhem their gun laws have produced in Chicago, ……and this is their model for the nation.

11. I should mention that the Democrat Party was used as a model by Adolph Hitler and the Nazi Party….another ‘feather’ in the party’s cap?

12. The Democrat Party is now running on full-blown anti-white racism.

13. It's the party of felons over law-abiding actual citizens

 

[francoHFW]

I suppose the good news is that Liberalism is a self-defeating trap.
Conservatives and traditionalists have lots of children,but for Liberals, having children is a bad idea.

Of course it gets worse than that, as Leftists are all about abortion and eugenics, too.

Sooo....there should be fewer and fewer of them in the long run.




Check this out:
"Liberal columnist Jill Filipovic says having lots of kids is immoral
Jill Filipovic
✔@JillFilipovic
Having children is one of the worst things you can do for the planet. Have one less and conserve resources. https://twitter.com/guardian/status/885021119652220930 …
2:26 AM - 12 Jul 2017


That tweet isn't just a suggestion, it's an order: at the margins, having children makes you a bad person.

But sidelining the moral argument for a second, Filipovic's claim is also remarkable for its idiocy.

After all, the premise of Filipovic's argument — that Earth cannot co-exist with a growing human population — rests on the Guardian article that her tweet links to. That article references researchers who have listed all the things that produce carbon emissions."
Liberal columnist Jill Filipovic says having lots of kids is immoral


Since the view that the earth can't sustain 7 or 8 billion folks has been debunked numerous times, my presumption about the self-centeredness of Leftisim must be the case.



In fact one of the godfathers of Leftism put it this way:
"We must rid ourselves once and for all of the Quaker-Papist babble about the sanctity of human life."
Leon Trotsky

Too darn many people around. Thank God for free birth control under Obamacare, it should be available everywhere. Meanwhile the GOP blocks that kind of stuff. Sheer idiocy and pandering to morons. Actually much better than free considering the savings.....