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.
disturbAre you complaining about abortions because they disturb unborn children?
If by disturbed you mean intentionally killed, poisoned and or dismembered?
Yeah. . .
Pretty much.
disturbAre you complaining about abortions because they disturb unborn children?
If by disturbed you mean intentionally killed, poisoned and or dismembered?
Yeah. . .
Pretty much.
a: to interfere with : interrupt<disturbing the flow of traffic>b : to alter the position or arrangement of <the items on her desk had been disturbedc : to upset the natural and especially the ecological balance or relations of <wetlandsdisturbed by development>
____________________________________
Fortunately, we live in a country where disturbing unborn children is left to the discretion of the woman carrying the unborn child.
So? That's no different than feeding a new born drugs. It certainly has nothing to do with the Constitutional right for woman to lawfully terminate their pregnancy.disturbAre you complaining about abortions because they disturb unborn children?
If by disturbed you mean intentionally killed, poisoned and or dismembered?
Yeah. . .
Pretty much.
a: to interfere with : interrupt<disturbing the flow of traffic>b : to alter the position or arrangement of <the items on her desk had been disturbedc : to upset the natural and especially the ecological balance or relations of <wetlandsdisturbed by development>
____________________________________
Fortunately, we live in a country where disturbing unborn children is left to the discretion of the woman carrying the unborn child.
You seem unaware of women who have been charged with passing along drug addictions and such to their own prenatal child.
So? That's no different than feeding a new born drugs. It certainly has nothing to do with the Constitutional right for woman to lawfully terminate their pregnancy.disturbAre you complaining about abortions because they disturb unborn children?
If by disturbed you mean intentionally killed, poisoned and or dismembered?
Yeah. . .
Pretty much.
a: to interfere with : interrupt<disturbing the flow of traffic>b : to alter the position or arrangement of <the items on her desk had been disturbedc : to upset the natural and especially the ecological balance or relations of <wetlandsdisturbed by development>
____________________________________
Fortunately, we live in a country where disturbing unborn children is left to the discretion of the woman carrying the unborn child.
You seem unaware of women who have been charged with passing along drug addictions and such to their own prenatal child.
It's not my opinion that no state has any such fetal law assault law which challenges a woman's right to legally terminate her pregnancy.So? That's no different than feeding a new born drugs. It certainly has nothing to do with the Constitutional right for woman to lawfully terminate their pregnancy.disturbAre you complaining about abortions because they disturb unborn children?
If by disturbed you mean intentionally killed, poisoned and or dismembered?
Yeah. . .
Pretty much.
a: to interfere with : interrupt<disturbing the flow of traffic>b : to alter the position or arrangement of <the items on her desk had been disturbedc : to upset the natural and especially the ecological balance or relations of <wetlandsdisturbed by development>
____________________________________
Fortunately, we live in a country where disturbing unborn children is left to the discretion of the woman carrying the unborn child.
You seem unaware of women who have been charged with passing along drug addictions and such to their own prenatal child.
In
Your
Opinion.
It's not my opinion that no state has any such fetal law assault law which challenges a woman's right to legally terminate her pregnancy.So? That's no different than feeding a new born drugs. It certainly has nothing to do with the Constitutional right for woman to lawfully terminate their pregnancy.disturbIf by disturbed you mean intentionally killed, poisoned and or dismembered?
Yeah. . .
Pretty much.
a: to interfere with : interrupt<disturbing the flow of traffic>b : to alter the position or arrangement of <the items on her desk had been disturbedc : to upset the natural and especially the ecological balance or relations of <wetlandsdisturbed by development>
____________________________________
Fortunately, we live in a country where disturbing unborn children is left to the discretion of the woman carrying the unborn child.
You seem unaware of women who have been charged with passing along drug addictions and such to their own prenatal child.
In
Your
Opinion.
It's not my opinion that no state has any such fetal law assault law which challenges a woman's right to legally terminate her pregnancy.So? That's no different than feeding a new born drugs. It certainly has nothing to do with the Constitutional right for woman to lawfully terminate their pregnancy.disturb
a: to interfere with : interrupt<disturbing the flow of traffic>b : to alter the position or arrangement of <the items on her desk had been disturbedc : to upset the natural and especially the ecological balance or relations of <wetlandsdisturbed by development>
____________________________________
Fortunately, we live in a country where disturbing unborn children is left to the discretion of the woman carrying the unborn child.
You seem unaware of women who have been charged with passing along drug addictions and such to their own prenatal child.
In
Your
Opinion.
Nor is it opinion that the federal 'fetal protection laws' don't apply to abortion. None of it. Not its definitions, not its restrictions, its penalties, anything.
It's not my opinion that no state has any such fetal law assault law which challenges a woman's right to legally terminate her pregnancy.So? That's no different than feeding a new born drugs. It certainly has nothing to do with the Constitutional right for woman to lawfully terminate their pregnancy.You seem unaware of women who have been charged with passing along drug addictions and such to their own prenatal child.
In
Your
Opinion.
Nor is it opinion that the federal 'fetal protection laws' don't apply to abortion. None of it. Not its definitions, not its restrictions, its penalties, anything.
Are you guys idiots or what?
How many times does the point have to be made that just because our fetal homicide laws Do (for now) make exceptions to keep abortions legal. . . That doesn't mean that they SHOULD make exceptions to keep abortions legal.
Logic is definitely not your strongest suit. Is it.
It's not my opinion that no state has any such fetal law assault law which challenges a woman's right to legally terminate her pregnancy.So? That's no different than feeding a new born drugs. It certainly has nothing to do with the Constitutional right for woman to lawfully terminate their pregnancy.
In
Your
Opinion.
Nor is it opinion that the federal 'fetal protection laws' don't apply to abortion. None of it. Not its definitions, not its restrictions, its penalties, anything.
Are you guys idiots or what?
How many times does the point have to be made that just because our fetal homicide laws Do (for now) make exceptions to keep abortions legal. . . That doesn't mean that they SHOULD make exceptions to keep abortions legal.
Logic is definitely not your strongest suit. Is it.
Simple: because you're citing these laws as the basis of your argument supporting the criminalization of abortion. And these laws exclude abortion explicitly and completely.
You literally have to cite and ignore the very same law on the same topic.
That's not a legal argument. Which might explain the perfect record of failure of your ilk in court on this issue.
It's not my opinion that no state has any such fetal law assault law which challenges a woman's right to legally terminate her pregnancy.In
Your
Opinion.
Nor is it opinion that the federal 'fetal protection laws' don't apply to abortion. None of it. Not its definitions, not its restrictions, its penalties, anything.
Are you guys idiots or what?
How many times does the point have to be made that just because our fetal homicide laws Do (for now) make exceptions to keep abortions legal. . . That doesn't mean that they SHOULD make exceptions to keep abortions legal.
Logic is definitely not your strongest suit. Is it.
Simple: because you're citing these laws as the basis of your argument supporting the criminalization of abortion. And these laws exclude abortion explicitly and completely.
You literally have to cite and ignore the very same law on the same topic.
That's not a legal argument. Which might explain the perfect record of failure of your ilk in court on this issue.
Yeah, thanks for the affirmation of my earlier conclusion.
It's not my opinion that no state has any such fetal law assault law which challenges a woman's right to legally terminate her pregnancy.
Nor is it opinion that the federal 'fetal protection laws' don't apply to abortion. None of it. Not its definitions, not its restrictions, its penalties, anything.
Are you guys idiots or what?
How many times does the point have to be made that just because our fetal homicide laws Do (for now) make exceptions to keep abortions legal. . . That doesn't mean that they SHOULD make exceptions to keep abortions legal.
Logic is definitely not your strongest suit. Is it.
Simple: because you're citing these laws as the basis of your argument supporting the criminalization of abortion. And these laws exclude abortion explicitly and completely.
You literally have to cite and ignore the very same law on the same topic.
That's not a legal argument. Which might explain the perfect record of failure of your ilk in court on this issue.
Yeah, thanks for the affirmation of my earlier conclusion.
Sticks and stones, my friend.
Name calling doesn't remedy the ludicrous contradictions of your 'legal argument'. Or make your record of failure in court any less perfect.
Your argument, as always, relies on an ignorant audience. Which judges generally aren't.
Nor is it opinion that the federal 'fetal protection laws' don't apply to abortion. None of it. Not its definitions, not its restrictions, its penalties, anything.
Are you guys idiots or what?
How many times does the point have to be made that just because our fetal homicide laws Do (for now) make exceptions to keep abortions legal. . . That doesn't mean that they SHOULD make exceptions to keep abortions legal.
Logic is definitely not your strongest suit. Is it.
Simple: because you're citing these laws as the basis of your argument supporting the criminalization of abortion. And these laws exclude abortion explicitly and completely.
You literally have to cite and ignore the very same law on the same topic.
That's not a legal argument. Which might explain the perfect record of failure of your ilk in court on this issue.
Yeah, thanks for the affirmation of my earlier conclusion.
Sticks and stones, my friend.
Name calling doesn't remedy the ludicrous contradictions of your 'legal argument'. Or make your record of failure in court any less perfect.
Your argument, as always, relies on an ignorant audience. Which judges generally aren't.
Your lack of reading comprehension and your inability to show any consideration for anything that challenges your views is a boring waste of my time.
For that reason, I'm adding you to my ignore list.
Thankfully there are several here who do show the consideration and insight to these issues that you don't.
Hopefully I can have some more interactions with them.
Of course that's exactly what it means. Women in this country have the Constitutional right to terminate their own pregnancy. Fetal protection laws are careful not to encroach on that right.It's not my opinion that no state has any such fetal law assault law which challenges a woman's right to legally terminate her pregnancy.So? That's no different than feeding a new born drugs. It certainly has nothing to do with the Constitutional right for woman to lawfully terminate their pregnancy.You seem unaware of women who have been charged with passing along drug addictions and such to their own prenatal child.
In
Your
Opinion.
Nor is it opinion that the federal 'fetal protection laws' don't apply to abortion. None of it. Not its definitions, not its restrictions, its penalties, anything.
Are you guys idiots or what?
How many times does the point have to be made that just because our fetal homicide laws Do (for now) make exceptions to keep abortions legal. . . That doesn't mean that they SHOULD make exceptions to keep abortions legal.
Logic is definitely not your strongest suit. Is it.
Dayam, Skylar smoked you.Nor is it opinion that the federal 'fetal protection laws' don't apply to abortion. None of it. Not its definitions, not its restrictions, its penalties, anything.
Are you guys idiots or what?
How many times does the point have to be made that just because our fetal homicide laws Do (for now) make exceptions to keep abortions legal. . . That doesn't mean that they SHOULD make exceptions to keep abortions legal.
Logic is definitely not your strongest suit. Is it.
Simple: because you're citing these laws as the basis of your argument supporting the criminalization of abortion. And these laws exclude abortion explicitly and completely.
You literally have to cite and ignore the very same law on the same topic.
That's not a legal argument. Which might explain the perfect record of failure of your ilk in court on this issue.
Yeah, thanks for the affirmation of my earlier conclusion.
Sticks and stones, my friend.
Name calling doesn't remedy the ludicrous contradictions of your 'legal argument'. Or make your record of failure in court any less perfect.
Your argument, as always, relies on an ignorant audience. Which judges generally aren't.
Your lack of reading comprehension and your inability to show any consideration for anything that challenges your views is a boring waste of my time.
For that reason, I'm adding you to my ignore list.
Thankfully there are several here who do show the consideration and insight to these issues that you don't.
Hopefully I can have some more interactions with them.
Not everyone is responsible and we don't let children starve just because they may have irresponsible parents.More evidence that if left up to you and your ilk, kids would be starving in the street, wasn't really necessary. But thanks anyway.I choose to not let kids starve, regardless of their parents' decisions. If left to you, there would be homeless kids starving on the streets.Then you support some freeloading mother telling you to butt out then making you look like a dumbass by having you pay for a choice she said was none of your business. I choose not to be an idiot. You do.
I choose not to be an idiot and let someone tell me what they do is their business then support the choices they made. Apparently you do.
If they are, it's your fault. You think it's OK for someone to tell you to butt out then you're willing to pay for a choice you were told is none of your business. If you think that's OK, prove it by finding all those in that situation and paying them with YOUR money. I don't think it's OK. I, unlike you, am not stupid.
Take responsibility for your decisions in life. It's not everyone else's fault. Think very deeply and intelligently before shitting out 5-6 kids. And don't demand Taxpayers pay for you killing your babies. Most Americans don't wanna be forced to pay for dumb sluts being dumb sluts. Being a dumb slut is a choice. But I'll mind my own business if you allow me to.
Conservatives sure are heartless, I'll grant you that.
Of course that's exactly what it means. Women in this country have the Constitutional right to terminate their own pregnancy. Fetal protection laws are careful not to encroach on that right.It's not my opinion that no state has any such fetal law assault law which challenges a woman's right to legally terminate her pregnancy.So? That's no different than feeding a new born drugs. It certainly has nothing to do with the Constitutional right for woman to lawfully terminate their pregnancy.
In
Your
Opinion.
Nor is it opinion that the federal 'fetal protection laws' don't apply to abortion. None of it. Not its definitions, not its restrictions, its penalties, anything.
Are you guys idiots or what?
How many times does the point have to be made that just because our fetal homicide laws Do (for now) make exceptions to keep abortions legal. . . That doesn't mean that they SHOULD make exceptions to keep abortions legal.
Logic is definitely not your strongest suit. Is it.
They're not gonna listen to you. How fucking retarded are you? They don't give two shits about you. So rant away, you'll feel better.Like I said, you have the right to speak up.I choose to not let kids starve, regardless of their parents' decisions. If left to you, there would be homeless kids starving on the streets.Then you support some freeloading mother telling you to butt out then making you look like a dumbass by having you pay for a choice she said was none of your business. I choose not to be an idiot. You do.
I didn't say that. I said i have the right to speak up. The moment you demand i pay for your children and you killing your babies, your life became my business. You forced it on me. Therefore i do have a say. I won't mind my business.
I will tell you to make better decisions and keep your damn legs closed. And i will push for more requirements of you for you receiving Tax Dollars. It's not a free-for-all. I will demand such things as Community Service and so on. You don't like that, too bad. Don't take the money. I'm not just gonna shut up and pay up. I'll be in your business. Deal with it.
No one has to listen to you.
But rant away anyway, if it makes ya feel better.
Oh they'll listen. Because now we're in their business. It's what they demanded. We'll work tirelessly to add restrictions and requirements for their Entitlement mooching. It won't be a free-for-all anymore.
Women have the Constitutional right to terminate their pregnancy.
Before or after there is a heartbeat?
Who cares? A heartbeat is just a biological function, like cell division, or nutrient absorption, or waste expulsion.
There's nothing magical about the heartbeat.
More evidence that if left up to you and your ilk, kids would be starving in the street, wasn't really necessary. But thanks anyway.I choose to not let kids starve, regardless of their parents' decisions. If left to you, there would be homeless kids starving on the streets.You can speak up all ya want. Tax dollars are still going to feed kids. We don't let kids starve in America.If you damand others pay for your decisions, then yes, those others do have the right to scream 'Baby Killers, Baby Killers', and demand women 'keep their legs closed.' This ain't no free-for-all. You force your life on others, they do have the right to speak up.
Then you support some freeloading mother telling you to butt out then making you look like a dumbass by having you pay for a choice she said was none of your business. I choose not to be an idiot. You do.
I choose not to be an idiot and let someone tell me what they do is their business then support the choices they made. Apparently you do.
If they are, it's your fault. You think it's OK for someone to tell you to butt out then you're willing to pay for a choice you were told is none of your business. If you think that's OK, prove it by finding all those in that situation and paying them with YOUR money. I don't think it's OK. I, unlike you, am not stupid.
