🌟 Exclusive 2024 Prime Day Deals! 🌟

Unlock unbeatable offers today. Shop here: https://amzn.to/4cEkqYs 🎁

What Would Be So Awful About Overturning Roe v. Wade & Saving Unborn Children's Lives?

So a 14 year old girl on life support has no “right to life”?
When it depends on the life of another? What do you think?
I think you’re a special sort of bat-shit crazy when you believe the extermination of humans is the perfect solution to anyone who finds that life to be a mild inconvenience.
You thought a fetus was an adult female too so no one really takes what you think seriously.
 
I think you’re a special sort of bat-shit crazy when you believe the extermination of humans is the perfect solution to anyone who finds that life to be a mild inconvenience.
And, I think you are quite inconsistent in your convictions.

Does one person have the right to the free, involuntary labor and services of another? Does one have the right to use the body of another?
 
Correct?!? You believe a newborn has no right to life?!?
I believe no human has the right to depend on another against the other's will.

:dunno:

That's called involuntary servitude.

So parents can kill their toddlers because their toddlers are enslaving them? :laugh: Even though it was the parents who brought that child into the world. :laugh2:

Thank you, now I know you're just playing games here.
False equivalence yet again. No one said parents can kill toddlers. .
 
Absolutely. Just like the man who shoots himself when he’s not carrying another human, so can a woman.

If a man didn’t that with another person between him and the gun - it would be called what it is: murder.
The inconsistency and lack of principle is GLARING!
 
Absolutely. Just like the man who shoots himself when he’s not carrying another human, so can a woman.

If a man didn’t that with another person between him and the gun - it would be called what it is: murder.
The inconsistency and lack of principle is GLARING!
So is you’re inability to make a coherent argument. A woman has every right to take her own life just as a man. She doesn’t have the right to take someone’s else’s life, snowflake. And a baby is a completely and separate life. DNA proves it.
 
Correct?!? You believe a newborn has no right to life?!?
I believe no human has the right to depend on another against the other's will.

:dunno:

That's called involuntary servitude.

So parents can kill their toddlers because their toddlers are enslaving them? :laugh: Even though it was the parents who brought that child into the world. :laugh2:

Thank you, now I know you're just playing games here.
False equivalence yet again. No one said parents can kill toddlers. .

You're clearly not following this conversation. He claimed that no human being has a right to be dependent on another.
 
Sadly, I’m the only one between us who is consistent.
Really?

You seem to be quite statist in demanding that government has such extreme power over a woman. In other areas, you seem libertarian.

I suspect that you pick and choose when it comes to liberty.

I do not.

Why do you give a fuck about some unborn kid that you will never see, but may be forced to support (which is also wrong) when the idiot birthing that bastard is yet another worthless human being incapable of her own survival?
 
Correct?!? You believe a newborn has no right to life?!?
I believe no human has the right to depend on another against the other's will.

:dunno:

That's called involuntary servitude.

So parents can kill their toddlers because their toddlers are enslaving them? :laugh: Even though it was the parents who brought that child into the world. :laugh2:

Thank you, now I know you're just playing games here.
False equivalence yet again. No one said parents can kill toddlers. .

You're clearly not following this conversation. He claimed that no human being has a right to be dependent on another.
Youre clearly not understanding english. Being dependent has nothing to do with killing.
 
I asked you a question in post 164. Evidently you don't have the cojones to answer it.
Your opinion is not a question. Its simply a misguided opinion I have already shown you was wrong.

It absolutely was a question in post 164, liar. You just don't want to answer it because you know you'll get caught in your BS.
Go back to sleep or get a better point. Claiming a woman shouldnt have control over own fucking body is pretty stupid.

For the umpteenth time, there are TWO bodies, Einstein. Repeating your lies doesn't make them any more true.

Screen-_Shot-2018-07-06-at-10b.png
One of the bodies is inside the body of the woman and its unwanted. The woman has the right to get it out.
Pretty good view
If I though it was alive (which to me is survival outside the woman) then I would be against it. With the laws as to time frame I am less clear but a month or two just isn’t going to make it.
It’s a potential future baby and living thing but not a current one.
Repeat abortions are not common but I dont have the stats. So maybe for now and future one within X months is allowed but any 2nd or 3rd request could be entirely different?
 
Last edited:

Forum List

Back
Top