Why Can't the Pro-Choice Crowd Be Honest?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Why Can't the Pro-Abortion Crowd Be Honest?

Why is it always men that start threads on abortion?

Why is it you're so interested in the OP's genitalia?

Maybe you'd like to contribute to the discussion? Or is the thought of my cock too arousing to get out of your mind?

WOW! I had no idea you were gay. I was contributing to the conversation noting that most anti abortion threads are started by someone that will never have to face such a decision.
 
An embryo is not a human being
Yes, it is. Biology outweighs your lies.
, it is a collection of cells without consciousness.


Consciousness has nothing to do with whether an organism is human
There are millions of frozen embryos in labs around the country.
And?
None of them are human beings.

Because you declare all science void? :cuckoo:
 
the-9-week-fetus-in-motion.jpg


doesn't look like a clump of cells to me.

The 9-Week Fetus in Motion

It doesn't look like a human being either.
All humans look like that at that age, barring severe developmental defects.


How can x not look like x?

Oh yeah, you're a dishonest sack of shit who can't admit what you advocate.

Why do you run away from debating the people who have stipulated that the embryo/fetuse is in fact human?
 
Has anyone actually defined what "pro abortion" is supposed to mean as far as this thread is concerned?
If you thought it was referring to you, it was.

I have never met anyone that was pro abortion and no one here has ever defined what that means.
Ever.

'Pro-abortion' has simply become a propaganda term used by the anti-choicers as part of their arsenal of fallacious arguments against abortion rights.

It's very hard to make a logical argument against offering women a legally protected reasonable window of opportunity to choose to terminate a pregnancy,

in fact, I've heard never one (take that as a challenge, folks). Thus, of course, the illogical arguments against that choice rule the debate,

from the anti-choice side.

This thread is a perfect example.
 
Last edited:
WOW! I had no idea you were gay.
Why are you so concerned with another man's sexuality?
mudwhistle said:
Hi, you have received -166 reputation points from mudwhistle.
Reputation was given for this post.

Comment:
He said he lied, so fuck you.

Regards,
mudwhistle

Note: This is an automated message.
He's obsessed with my cock because he's a liar and that makes you want to get in bed with me? :eusa_eh:
 
I see the utter HYPOCRISY of both sides of this issue. There are those who are pro abortion. To me that is abomination. On the other hand, there are those that are pro life - until the child is born. After that, the parent is on their own. Well if its a situation where things are tough, then use taxpayer dollars to help support the child. Pro life means promoting a normal life well after the child is born.
 
I see the utter HYPOCRISY of both sides of this issue. There are those who are pro abortion. To me that is abomination. On the other hand, there are those that are pro life - until the child is born. After that, the parent is on their own. Well if its a situation where things are tough, then use taxpayer dollars to help support the child. Pro life means promoting a normal life well after the child is born.

Who is pro abortion? I have never met anyone that is pro abortion.
Why do I have to raise a child with my tax dollars? If women have children they can not afford then they need to think twice about that. If they can not raise the child then their family should help her, not the taxpayers. That is the problem we have now. That mentality encourages women to have kids out of wedlock.
The fathers, NOT THE TAXPAYERS should be made to pay. Never the taxpayers.
 
I see the utter HYPOCRISY of both sides of this issue. There are those who are pro abortion. To me that is abomination. On the other hand, there are those that are pro life - until the child is born. After that, the parent is on their own. Well if its a situation where things are tough, then use taxpayer dollars to help support the child. Pro life means promoting a normal life well after the child is born.

Who is pro abortion? I have never met anyone that is pro abortion.
Why do I have to raise a child with my tax dollars? If women have children they can not afford then they need to think twice about that. If they can not raise the child then their family should help her, not the taxpayers. That is the problem we have now. That mentality encourages women to have kids out of wedlock.
The fathers, NOT THE TAXPAYERS should be made to pay. Never the taxpayers.

In a Utopian World that would be the case. But we are humans.
 
I see the utter HYPOCRISY of both sides of this issue. There are those who are pro abortion. To me that is abomination. On the other hand, there are those that are pro life - until the child is born. After that, the parent is on their own. Well if its a situation where things are tough, then use taxpayer dollars to help support the child. Pro life means promoting a normal life well after the child is born.

Who is pro abortion? I have never met anyone that is pro abortion.
Why do I have to raise a child with my tax dollars? If women have children they can not afford then they need to think twice about that. If they can not raise the child then their family should help her, not the taxpayers. That is the problem we have now. That mentality encourages women to have kids out of wedlock.
The fathers, NOT THE TAXPAYERS should be made to pay. Never the taxpayers.

In a Utopian World that would be the case. But we are humans.

And humans should be responsible and if they aren't then there should be consequences for the bad choices they make.
If not then we end up with what we have now. A failed system.
Taxpayers don't raise children and should never be forced to pay for someone else that is unqualified to do so. PARENTS do. If you are not mature enough to raise your own children then someone that is CAN.
 
Who is pro abortion? I have never met anyone that is pro abortion.
Why do I have to raise a child with my tax dollars? If women have children they can not afford then they need to think twice about that. If they can not raise the child then their family should help her, not the taxpayers. That is the problem we have now. That mentality encourages women to have kids out of wedlock.
The fathers, NOT THE TAXPAYERS should be made to pay. Never the taxpayers.

In a Utopian World that would be the case. But we are humans.

And humans should be responsible and if they aren't then there should be consequences for the bad choices they make.
If not then we end up with what we have now. A failed system.
Taxpayers don't raise children and should never be forced to pay for someone else that is unqualified to do so. PARENTS do. If you are not mature enough to raise your own children then someone that is CAN.

We shouldn't be forced to pay for bad decisions(criminal) bankers made either. But the question what do we do? And is helping a woman raise a child worth preventing an abortion?
 
In a Utopian World that would be the case. But we are humans.

And humans should be responsible and if they aren't then there should be consequences for the bad choices they make.
If not then we end up with what we have now. A failed system.
Taxpayers don't raise children and should never be forced to pay for someone else that is unqualified to do so. PARENTS do. If you are not mature enough to raise your own children then someone that is CAN.

We shouldn't be forced to pay for bad decisions(criminal) bankers made either. But the question what do we do? And is helping a woman raise a child worth preventing an abortion?

LOL, if a woman is dumb enough to have a child they can not afford how can she raise it?
Giving an 18 year old child cash, housing, food stamps, WIC, and other benefits helps raise a child?
You have lost your mind.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Forum List

Back
Top