Roe v. Wade getting overturned!!

[Frankeneinstein]

You FRANK need to take responsibility for what you write / atheist clown!

it’s all the extreme white right wing Christian minority sympathizers wanting laws, passed that make the choice to have an abortion, a crime of murder. That includes you, Frankz

Do you see how you run from pillar to post? your argument changes every time you get caught in a lie, in one post you call me an "atheist clown" in another you call me a Christian...you must see that as even the socially educated can see it.

00,030 18SEP06 @C_Clayton_Jones #20 Most states will continue to recognize a woman’s right to privacy. •••• In states that don’t continue to recognize that right and enact measures which compel a woman to give birth against her will through force of law, the issue will move to the political realm, where advocates of privacy rights will work to remove from office state lawmakers hostile to privacy rights. •••• Indeed, Republican state lawmakers will be exposed to a political backlash should they support measures compelling women to give birth against their will. •••• In 40 or 50 years the right to privacy will likely be again recognized in all 50 states, the consequence of either Republican lawmakers voted out of office with measures hostile to privacy rights repealed, or by a future Supreme Court with a majority of justices appointed by Democratic presidents. •••• Yes, authoritarian conservatives will succeed in denying women their right to privacy – allowing for more government and bigger government to interfere in citizens’ personal lives – but ultimately conservatives will fail, defeated by the American people and their desire to possess their comprehensive rights and protected liberties.

...your argument has taken on water so fast that you are now trying to make it by proxy in the hopes you can put some distance between your debacle of an opinion that you tried to incorporate it into another posters assertions...
What your proxy argued has already happened to the white liberal crowd with roe v wade, the only difference is that it can be proven that roe v wade has suffered the defeat in the scenario offered by you through proxy while the jury is still out on the prediction that it will also happen to the right.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

you call me a Christian...

You are a liar. I didn’t call you a Christian. You are associated with white MAGA Christians Who are in a crusade with the republican party against all abortions harm to women in this country if they end up pregnant, but did not want to be

 

[NotfooledbyW]

your argument has taken on water so fast that you are now trying to make it by proxy in the hopes you can put some distance between your debacle of an opinion that you tried to incorporate it into another posters assertions...
What your proxy argued has already happened to the white liberal crowd with roe v wade, the only difference is that it can be proven that roe v wade has suffered the defeat in the scenario offered by you through proxy while the jury is still out on the prediction that it will also happen to the right.

So I see you are no longer denying what you wrote in 2018 that you hoped Roe v. wade would not be over turned because it was no concern to you.

 

[Frankeneinstein]

23MAY03 NFBW: you can’t get away with lying your way out of this one, Frank. It is technologically impossible for anyone to change a quote you posted in 2018

or as in this case you type it yourself today and then change/add the preposition 'because' in place of "but" [so as to change the dynamic of the claim through preposition] and then add quote marks around it and then attribute it to me from 2018, and then add the transparent semantical argument of "I can't change a post from 2018"...it is easily done...
...so what you claim today is a lie concerning what I said in 2018...minus the socially educated we already knew that didn't we?
...now I am sure you know that I am not being fooled by any of this so the only reason for you trying to get away from/with it is in the hope the socially educated stay on the hook.

unless you’re accusing me of having access that only a moderator may have.

Lame as well as transparent

So take it up with them if you think you didn’t say that it is quite evident that as what you wrote,

NO NO, I got the right culprit

you know you’re allowed to change your mind on a subject -

You know you've turned it into an art form and inexact science.

that’s all I have to admit to

says you.

 

[Frankeneinstein]

So I see you are no longer denying what you wrote in 2018 that you hoped Roe v. wade would not be over turned because it was no concern to you.

AAhhhh more word games...
It's what you claimed I wrote in 2018 that's being denied, that you intentionally misquoted me by preposition [so as to change the dynamic of my claim] and then attributed to me was, and is what's still in denial...by you
...now with this bogus argument you have put more distance between yourself and the previous bogus argument that was embarrassing you.

 

[Frankeneinstein]

You are a liar.

Did you just swallow some toothpaste?

I didn’t call you a Christian. You are associated with white MAGA Christians

Well why didn't ya say so?...where else would a well intentioned and understanding atheist go to make friends.

Who are in a crusade with the republican party against all abortions harm to women in this country if they end up pregnant, but did not want to be

OK, we can chalk this up to the jibber-jabber portion of your post.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

or as in this case you type it yourself today and then change/add the preposition 'because' in place of "but"

AAhhhh more word games...

00,018 18SEP06 ¥frnknvstn¥ #18 “ … women will have complete 100% control over their bodies if roe v wade were overturned [I hope it is not but really no concern of mine], “

AH, the PC looking glass logic, women will have complete 100% control over their bodies if roe v wade were overturned [I hope it is not but really no concern of mine], the only time old white men have control over a womens body is when the abortionist is removing her child, the rest of the time she decides what her body is doing...as for the pretend concern for "what will happen if roe v. wade is overturned?" there will be an increase in the American population if women want it or nothing will change if the word "responsibility" is actually something they really want.

Both of those quotes are from 2018 and are what you wrote and only you could modify. No one has the ability to modify your quote or insert anything other than a moderator. So if you didn’t write that who did. It’s absurd that you’re blaming me for changing a quote and it’s been sitting there since 2018 and it’s even more absurd that you keep claiming that you did not write it. Did you let someone else have access to your computer? you need to find out who that is?

 

[NotfooledbyW]

It's what you claimed I wrote in 2018 that's being denied,

23MAY03 NFBW: I am not claiming you, wrote it. I have provided an actual link to the original post that you wrote.

AH, the PC looking glass logic, women will have complete 100% control over their bodies if roe v wade were overturned [I hope it is not but really no concern of mine], the only time old white men have control over a womens body is when the abortionist is removing her child, the rest of the time she decides what her body is doing...as for the pretend concern for "what will happen if roe v. wade is overturned?" there will be an increase in the American population if women want it or nothing will change if the word "responsibility" is actually something they really want.

Click on the link

• Sep 6, 2018

• #18

If you do not know how to click on a link find a young white liberal to show you how.

 

[Frankeneinstein]

Both of those quotes are from 2018 and are what you wrote and only you could modify.

but anyone can retype...where is the preposition "because" in that quote?
here it is in your quote.

you wrote in 2018 that you hoped Roe v. wade would not be over turned because it was no concern to you.

how did that happen?

No one has the ability to modify your quote or insert anything other than a moderator.

that's why you had to retype it and attribute it to me.

So if you didn’t write that who did.

Which one? my quote or the one you pretend is mine? two different answers.

It’s absurd that you’re blaming me for changing a quote

More like quoting the absurd^

and it’s been sitting there since 2018 and it’s even more absurd that you keep claiming that you did not write it.

this is why your arguments keep tanking [not just this one] even you don't believe that^

Did you let someone else have access to your computer? you need to find out who that is?

Who would say something as transparently desperate as this^ except someone trying to wiggle out of being caught.

 

[Frankeneinstein]

Click on the link

• Sep 6, 2018
• #18

I notice there is no link to your post.
v Your quote in question v which for obvious reasons you did not link to.

And now there’s ¥frnknvnstn¥ who wrote 00,018 way before Dobbs (see above)

that he “hoped” never to see roe v wade overturned because that issue was really no concern of his.

and v my quote v from your link.

women will have complete 100% control over their bodies if ...

roe v wade were overturned [I hope it is not but really no concern of mine],

as you can see the wording of preposition is different between the two posts [which was the accusation I made] meaning it was intentionally done...by you

If you do not know how to click on a link find a young white liberal to show you how.

Good advice, the white lib found your bogus post even without the link that you intentionally didn't post.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

I notice there is no link to your post.
v Your quote in question v which for obvious reasons you did not link to.

HERE IS THE LINK.

23MAY03 NFBW #8,629
And now there’s ¥frnknvnstn¥ who wrote 00,018 way before Dobbs (see above) that he “hoped” never to see roe v wade overturned “because” that issue was really no concern of his.

I wrote (see above) and this was shown above.

00,018 18SEP06 ¥frnknvstn¥ #18 “ … women will have complete 100% control over their bodies if roe v wade were overturned [I hope it is not but really no concern of mine], “

My point to ¥ @beagle ¥ was that you wrote in 2018 that you “hoped” never to see roe v wade overturned and that the issue was no concern of yours.

The point to ¥bgl9¥ was as expressed above. I can substitute my use of “because” with “but” in response to your complaints

And now there’s ¥frnknvnstn¥ who wrote 00,018 way before Dobbs (see above) that he “hoped” never to see roe v wade overturned “but he says” that issue was really no concern of his.

The point remains the same:

You hoped in September 2018 that Roe would not be overturned but it’s of no concern to you.

Your reaction therefore is admission that I directly attributed a quote to you and posted it verbatim and directed the readers to (see above)

You did write this did you not Frank?

women will have complete 100% control over their bodies if roe v wade were overturned [I hope it is not but really no concern of mine],

And do you stand by your exact words?

 

[Frankeneinstein]

The point to ¥bgl9¥ was as expressed above. I can substitute my use of “because” with “but” in response to your complaints

But what you tried to do was claim I said it and then went to great lengths to pretend it was impossible for you to add the word "because"...tell me now how it would be possible for you to do that after claiming it was impossible.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Which one?

The direct quote posted above and directed readers to see above. I was not quoting you when I was explaining what you said to ¥ beagle9 ¥ but vs because changes no meaning.

Do you know what (see above) means?

THAT’s where I directed ¥bgl9¥ to see the actual quote via link

as you can see the wording of preposition is different between the two posts [which was the accusation I made] meaning it was intentionally done...by you

Exactly as written to ¥bgl9¥

“And now there’s ¥frnknvnstn¥ who wrote 00,018 way before Dobbs (see above) that he “hoped” never to see roe v wade overturned because that issue was really no concern of his.”

Do you see the only word I put in quotes attributable to you was “hoped” , I did not attribute “because” to you because to you because what was attributed to you was very clearly referenced to (see above).

 

[NotfooledbyW]

But what you tried to do was claim I said it and then went to great lengths to pretend it was impossible for you to add the word "because"...te

I said it was impossible to change your post back in 2018 not my post.

When I write (see above) and post an actual quote it is for a reason . You said you “hoped” that ROE would NOT be overturned. So back then you didn’t think government should deprive women of the right to privacy concerning abortion within up to 28 weeks.

Do you still agree with yourself today.

 

[Frankeneinstein]

You did write this did you not Frank?

women will have complete 100% control over their bodies if roe v wade were overturned [I hope it is not but really no concern of mine],

Of course I wrote it, that is the quote I have spent the better part of this argument claiming I said while you have denied that is what I said. do you now admit your quote was bogus and not mine? and that you said it and not me?...you will notice that my quote does not have the words "issue" or "because" in it, any that do have them is a bogus quote.

And do you stand by your exact words?

Depends which words you are attributing to me of course, but yeah, I back that quote 100% [just with quite a bit more trepidation than in 2018]...If I were you I would avoid standing by your bogus quote.

 

[Frankeneinstein]

Do you know what (see above) means?

Until now yes.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

But what you tried to do was claim I said it and then went to great lengths to pretend it was impossible for you to add the word "because"...tell me now how it would be possible for you to do that after claiming it was impossible.

I did not add the word “because” to your quote. I never attributed the word ‘because’ to you. I never wrote it or inferred that you wrote “because” instead of “but”. I was describing your actual direct quote in my words to ¥bhl9¥ and I still think you hoped Roe v. Wade would not be overturned because the issue was a little concern to you.

If you think my interpretation was incorrect and I should’ve said I still think you hoped Roe v. Wade would not be overturned but the issue was of little concern to you.

The difference is insignificant to the revelation that you hoped Roe v. Wade would not be overturned in the context of my conversation I was having with ¥bgl9¥


You need to quit lying. And then I’ll be in the comment on the significance of what you said.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Of course I wrote it, that is the quote I have spent the better part of this argument claiming I said while you have denied that is what I said

You are a liar. I have never denied that’s what you said. I quoted you directly in my comment. I advised the Readers to (see above) and I made a comment about it in my own words.

How in the hell can I be the one who found the quote, provided a link, and said (see above) and then be denying that you said it. YOU are one irrational atheist Frank.

 

[Frankeneinstein]

I was not quoting you when I was explaining what you said to ¥ @beagle9 ¥

so far you have made all my points for me

but vs because changes no meaning.

it changes the dynamic of the meaning..."but" that isn't at issue "because" the admission that you did in fact change the quote from "but" to "because" means you did in fact alter my quote and then tried to claim that that is not possible.

 

[Frankeneinstein]

I was describing your actual direct quote in my words

Which is what I was accusing you of and you then claimed was impossible...tell us again how you could not do that with a post from 2018...all you are doing now is adopting my points to give your argument an air of legitimacy it is sorely lacking.