Will Roe v Wade be overturned? We all know its headed there so what say you?

[HappyJoy]

Vote &/or offer your personal thoughts.

Keep in mind this poll isn't asking YOUR opinion on the law but rather how the Justices will come down on the subject.

I think it's the last thing the Justices want to muck around with. If they can manage to tiptoe around it and make no significant decision, the way they did in the bake the cake case, they will.

Remember that they decide whether to even take up a case. There are a dozen challenges to the decision already one step from sitting in the pile before the Supreme Court, without the recent flurry of cases and the legislation in Alabama and Georgia still making its slow way there.

Roe v. Wade was decided on the right to privacy. Yes, they could disagree with that. But the impact of what that would do to the women in this country is staggering. I don't think they will do it.

Staggering?

How bout the impact on the father or the unborn?

Not changing, more like clarifying and now that it's out there, why don't you answer it?

Bullshit.

No bullshit.

Do you save the two fetus or the 6 month old baby. It comes down to that. I can't help it if you're a coward and can't answer the question.

Now you're back to the original question.

are you going to change it again?

If not, I would save the 2 fetus.

because anyone without an agenda, would believe they are inside the womb.

you would be saving 2 fetus, and the women carrying them.

Already stated the mother is not in the room for the fetuses. You're getting caught up in unnecessary details because you can't answer the question and need an out. It's simple, either the 6 month old baby parishes or the two 6 week old fetuses do. Make your choice.

It's hilarious that anyone who is pro-life can't answer this question.

You set up an entrapment question by not making clear the circumstances, and you did it on purpose. You're driving yourself nuts for your own carelessness. You are a careless, conniving individual who thinks people are stupid enough to let you ensnare them while you furnish facts after the question was asked. And you get very upset and start a speil that is accusatory of everybody else whose answer you reject, pretending the question went unanswered. YOU DON'T LIKE CORRECT ANSWERS TO YOUR ENTRAPMENT QUESTIONS. it's that simple.

Do you save the two fetuses over the baby, it's as simple as that. Whimp.

 

[Silver Blooded]

Alright, you'd let a baby die to save two fetuses. That's pretty disgusting but there you go.

Nice jerking yourself off there, buddy. Do you understand biology? Those fetuses in the machines will, in 8 months, be babies of their own.

They will. However you've in the meantime cooked a baby who is definitely aware and can feel pain and has emotions in order two save two kidney beans that can't feel shit and if they were in the mother chances are she wouldn't even know it. Good on you.

You know, this shows how difficult of a job a firefighter's job actually is. They actually have to make the decisions on who to let burn to death in a fire while you're at home using it for moral grandstanding. You sure are one hell of a good person.

 

[HappyJoy]

Vote &/or offer your personal thoughts.

Keep in mind this poll isn't asking YOUR opinion on the law but rather how the Justices will come down on the subject.

I think it's the last thing the Justices want to muck around with. If they can manage to tiptoe around it and make no significant decision, the way they did in the bake the cake case, they will.

Remember that they decide whether to even take up a case. There are a dozen challenges to the decision already one step from sitting in the pile before the Supreme Court, without the recent flurry of cases and the legislation in Alabama and Georgia still making its slow way there.

Roe v. Wade was decided on the right to privacy. Yes, they could disagree with that. But the impact of what that would do to the women in this country is staggering. I don't think they will do it.

Staggering?

How bout the impact on the father or the unborn?

Not changing, more like clarifying and now that it's out there, why don't you answer it?

Bullshit.

No bullshit.

Do you save the two fetus or the 6 month old baby. It comes down to that. I can't help it if you're a coward and can't answer the question.

Now you're back to the original question.

are you going to change it again?

If not, I would save the 2 fetus.

because anyone without an agenda, would believe they are inside the womb.

you would be saving 2 fetus, and the women carrying them.

Already stated the mother is not in the room for the fetuses. You're getting caught up in unnecessary details because you can't answer the question and need an out. It's simple, either the 6 month old baby parishes or the two 6 week old fetuses do. Make your choice.

It's hilarious that anyone who is pro-life can't answer this question.

There is nothing funny about a baby's death.

Nobody is laughing at the death of a baby, freak.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Vote &/or offer your personal thoughts.

Keep in mind this poll isn't asking YOUR opinion on the law but rather how the Justices will come down on the subject.

I think it's the last thing the Justices want to muck around with. If they can manage to tiptoe around it and make no significant decision, the way they did in the bake the cake case, they will.

Remember that they decide whether to even take up a case. There are a dozen challenges to the decision already one step from sitting in the pile before the Supreme Court, without the recent flurry of cases and the legislation in Alabama and Georgia still making its slow way there.

Roe v. Wade was decided on the right to privacy. Yes, they could disagree with that. But the impact of what that would do to the women in this country is staggering. I don't think they will do it.

Staggering?

How bout the impact on the father or the unborn?

Bullshit.

No bullshit.

Do you save the two fetus or the 6 month old baby. It comes down to that. I can't help it if you're a coward and can't answer the question.

Now you're back to the original question.

are you going to change it again?

If not, I would save the 2 fetus.

because anyone without an agenda, would believe they are inside the womb.

you would be saving 2 fetus, and the women carrying them.

Already stated the mother is not in the room for the fetuses. You're getting caught up in unnecessary details because you can't answer the question and need an out. It's simple, either the 6 month old baby parishes or the two 6 week old fetuses do. Make your choice.

It's hilarious that anyone who is pro-life can't answer this question.

You set up an entrapment question by not making clear the circumstances, and you did it on purpose. You're driving yourself nuts for your own carelessness. You are a careless, conniving individual who thinks people are stupid enough to let you ensnare them while you furnish facts after the question was asked. And you get very upset and start a speil that is accusatory of everybody else whose answer you reject, pretending the question went unanswered. YOU DON'T LIKE CORRECT ANSWERS TO YOUR ENTRAPMENT QUESTIONS. it's that simple.

Do you save the two fetuses over the baby, it's as simple as that. Whimp.

Let's take your hypothetical BULLSHIT and roll with it.
You do the greater good in a no win situation. It's not about abortion rights it's about saving lives

 

[Wyatt earp]

I have never been pregnant & will never be pregnant because I am male.

Having said that I agree with a woman's right to choice in the US under the 46 year old SCOTUS ruling Roe v Wade.

America is supposed to be about freedom for the people aka citizens, and a woman's right to choose is certainly one of many freedoms within our nation.

IMO it is asking for a 'Pandora's box' to approach a 46 year old SCOTUS precedent such as Roe v Wade.

If the GOP are successful in having Roe v Wade overturned then get ready for legal chaos in this nation of rule of law, which would result in the rule of chaos.

Be careful what you wish for

So you agree that it is a woman's right to kill her own unborn child. I'm gonna faint.

I don't believe the 'state' has the authority to determine what a woman can, or cannot do with her own body, in a nation that claims it is for freedom, and particularly considering a 46 year SCOUT precedent.

This nation is a nation where we have freedom of religion but we also have freedom from religion.

If you desire The AmeriKKKan Taliban then you are for the GOP with their agenda to relegate women & women's right into the 17th century.

Good luck wit dat

you have no freedom from religion, it is freedom of Religion






.


.

The Bible definition of Religion is this:



James 1:27

• Religion that is pure and undefiled before God, the Father, is this: to visit orphans and widows in their affliction, and to keep oneself unstained from the world.

.

the last time Republicans did that Jesus wasn't even around; LOFL ..................

so where are all these atheist food banks and missions at child?



.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Vote &/or offer your personal thoughts.

Keep in mind this poll isn't asking YOUR opinion on the law but rather how the Justices will come down on the subject.

I think it's the last thing the Justices want to muck around with. If they can manage to tiptoe around it and make no significant decision, the way they did in the bake the cake case, they will.

Remember that they decide whether to even take up a case. There are a dozen challenges to the decision already one step from sitting in the pile before the Supreme Court, without the recent flurry of cases and the legislation in Alabama and Georgia still making its slow way there.

Roe v. Wade was decided on the right to privacy. Yes, they could disagree with that. But the impact of what that would do to the women in this country is staggering. I don't think they will do it.

Staggering?

How bout the impact on the father or the unborn?

Bullshit.

No bullshit.

Do you save the two fetus or the 6 month old baby. It comes down to that. I can't help it if you're a coward and can't answer the question.

Now you're back to the original question.

are you going to change it again?

If not, I would save the 2 fetus.

because anyone without an agenda, would believe they are inside the womb.

you would be saving 2 fetus, and the women carrying them.

Already stated the mother is not in the room for the fetuses. You're getting caught up in unnecessary details because you can't answer the question and need an out. It's simple, either the 6 month old baby parishes or the two 6 week old fetuses do. Make your choice.

It's hilarious that anyone who is pro-life can't answer this question.

There is nothing funny about a baby's death.

Nobody is laughing at the death of a baby, freak.

I stand corrected

 

[HappyJoy]

Alright, you'd let a baby die to save two fetuses. That's pretty disgusting but there you go.

Nice jerking yourself off there, buddy. Do you understand biology? Those fetuses in the machines will, in 8 months, be babies of their own.

They will. However you've in the meantime cooked a baby who is definitely aware and can feel pain and has emotions in order two save two kidney beans that can't feel shit and if they were in the mother chances are she wouldn't even know it. Good on you.

You know, this shows how difficult of a job a firefighter's job actually is. They actually have to make the decisions on who to let burn to death in a fire while you're at home using it for moral grandstanding. You sure are one hell of a good person.

Yes, but not in this case. The correct answer is save the baby since it's you know....alive, breathing on it's own, has feelings, emotions, needs, presumably came out of someone's body and I'm sure that wasn't easy vs. something that most women wouldn't even know they have at 6 weeks/

Save the baby, dude.

EDIT: I have to give you credit, at least you answered it which is way better than what's her name and giggleshits.

 

[Wyatt earp]

I don't believe the state should charge me for females who kill their own babies by listening to the lies of smoothe talkers who tell them how good their decision for themselves was, when in fact, it's a soul-kiliing thing to do to oneself, to kill one's unborn child. Those 600 million dead fetuses? There was a price to pay, and taxpayers have been taxed to death for a stupid Roe v. Wade footshoot decision against all unborn childrenin this nation. I'm sorry to tell you, but women are nothing like men. We are the givers of life, we need partners, but we don't need yo bull. And it's on you if you rattle some poor girl's hormones.

Can i ask you my fetus vs. baby question and you actually answer it?

Yes.

Cool.

A burning house has two rooms, one has two 6 week old fetuses and the other a 6 month old baby. You only have time to go into one room before the house collapses, which one do you save?

I'm not qualified to be a fireman, but if he has a room with two expectant mothers carrying fetuses, or one 6-month old baby, he will have to make a decision. My decision would be to call other firemen to the scene to improve the chances of all of them, saving all 5. I know fireman. They've pulled out dead bodies from many fires over a long career. I pray for and bless the firemen to have the strength to make the best decision. Prayer works, in case you are wondering.

First off, let's admire that fail of your convictions as you worm your coward ass out of an answer. So. I will make this clearer for you.

There is no time for the firemen to arrive, you go to one of the rooms, grab the occupant(s) and leave, that's all the time there is.

Secondly, the fetuses are not with their mothers. They are being kept in a machine, nice and healthy and perfectly viable. Your sort would actually call them 'babies' or 'children', but they are fetuses.

So, which do you save or do you let all three parish in the fire?

Now would be a good time to answer the question.

Secondly, the fetuses are not with their mothers. They are being kept in a machine, nice and healthy and perfectly viable.

say what?????????????????????????????



what kind of an idiot are you?

 

[Wyatt earp]

Yes.

Cool.

A burning house has two rooms, one has two 6 week old fetuses and the other a 6 month old baby. You only have time to go into one room before the house collapses, which one do you save?

I'm not qualified to be a fireman, but if he has a room with two expectant mothers carrying fetuses, or one 6-month old baby, he will have to make a decision. My decision would be to call other firemen to the scene to improve the chances of all of them, saving all 5. I know fireman. They've pulled out dead bodies from many fires over a long career. I pray for and bless the firemen to have the strength to make the best decision. Prayer works, in case you are wondering.

First off, let's admire that fail of your convictions as you worm your coward ass out of an answer. So. I will make this clearer for you.

There is no time for the firemen to arrive, you go to one of the rooms, grab the occupant(s) and leave, that's all the time there is.

Secondly, the fetuses are not with their mothers. They are being kept in a machine, nice and healthy and perfectly viable. Your sort would actually call them 'babies' or 'children', but they are fetuses.

So, which do you save or do you let all three parish in the fire?

Now would be a good time to answer the question.

Your profanity against another debater means only that you do not have a case, only evil anger inside of you. Buh-bye.

Because I said ass you are not willing to answer a question that we both know you are incapable of answering and still have some semblance of righteousness in our anti-choice stance?

You're a hypocrite, nothing more.

a fetus in a machine??????????????

 

[HappyJoy]

I think it's the last thing the Justices want to muck around with. If they can manage to tiptoe around it and make no significant decision, the way they did in the bake the cake case, they will.

Remember that they decide whether to even take up a case. There are a dozen challenges to the decision already one step from sitting in the pile before the Supreme Court, without the recent flurry of cases and the legislation in Alabama and Georgia still making its slow way there.

Roe v. Wade was decided on the right to privacy. Yes, they could disagree with that. But the impact of what that would do to the women in this country is staggering. I don't think they will do it.

Staggering?

How bout the impact on the father or the unborn?

No bullshit.

Do you save the two fetus or the 6 month old baby. It comes down to that. I can't help it if you're a coward and can't answer the question.

Now you're back to the original question.

are you going to change it again?

If not, I would save the 2 fetus.

because anyone without an agenda, would believe they are inside the womb.

you would be saving 2 fetus, and the women carrying them.

Already stated the mother is not in the room for the fetuses. You're getting caught up in unnecessary details because you can't answer the question and need an out. It's simple, either the 6 month old baby parishes or the two 6 week old fetuses do. Make your choice.

It's hilarious that anyone who is pro-life can't answer this question.

You set up an entrapment question by not making clear the circumstances, and you did it on purpose. You're driving yourself nuts for your own carelessness. You are a careless, conniving individual who thinks people are stupid enough to let you ensnare them while you furnish facts after the question was asked. And you get very upset and start a speil that is accusatory of everybody else whose answer you reject, pretending the question went unanswered. YOU DON'T LIKE CORRECT ANSWERS TO YOUR ENTRAPMENT QUESTIONS. it's that simple.

Do you save the two fetuses over the baby, it's as simple as that. Whimp.

Let's take your hypothetical BULLSHIT and roll with it.
You do the greater good in a no win situation. It's not about abortion rights it's about saving lives

Yes, that would be the thing to do. So a couple of kidney beans with human DNA or a fucking human?

 

[beautress]

Vote &/or offer your personal thoughts.

Keep in mind this poll isn't asking YOUR opinion on the law but rather how the Justices will come down on the subject.

I think it's the last thing the Justices want to muck around with. If they can manage to tiptoe around it and make no significant decision, the way they did in the bake the cake case, they will.

Remember that they decide whether to even take up a case. There are a dozen challenges to the decision already one step from sitting in the pile before the Supreme Court, without the recent flurry of cases and the legislation in Alabama and Georgia still making its slow way there.

Roe v. Wade was decided on the right to privacy. Yes, they could disagree with that. But the impact of what that would do to the women in this country is staggering. I don't think they will do it.

Staggering?

How bout the impact on the father or the unborn?

Bullshit.

No bullshit.

Do you save the two fetus or the 6 month old baby. It comes down to that. I can't help it if you're a coward and can't answer the question.

Now you're back to the original question.

are you going to change it again?

If not, I would save the 2 fetus.

because anyone without an agenda, would believe they are inside the womb.

you would be saving 2 fetus, and the women carrying them.

Already stated the mother is not in the room for the fetuses. You're getting caught up in unnecessary details because you can't answer the question and need an out. It's simple, either the 6 month old baby parishes or the two 6 week old fetuses do. Make your choice.

It's hilarious that anyone who is pro-life can't answer this question.

You set up an entrapment question by not making clear the circumstances, and you did it on purpose. You're driving yourself nuts for your own carelessness. You are a careless, conniving individual who thinks people are stupid enough to let you ensnare them while you furnish facts after the question was asked. And you get very upset and start a speil that is accusatory of everybody else whose answer you reject, pretending the question went unanswered. YOU DON'T LIKE CORRECT ANSWERS TO YOUR ENTRAPMENT QUESTIONS. it's that simple.

Do you save the two fetuses over the baby, it's as simple as that. Whimp.

Knock yerself out, madam.

 

[Carl in Michigan]

I did answer your direct question. You hated the answer and are making a specious fool of yourself.

Nah…you posted a 70 word run-on-sentence that made no sense at all.

God kills babies in utero every year (or at least doesn’t save them).
This is the same God you worship to.
How can you do that?

So your position is that God (if He exists and he does should FORCE everyone to bend to His will)?

No.

I was taught that God is in control. If so, he’s allowing babies to die in utero. And mothers to die in childbirth. Mom wasn’t trying to abort anyone…she was trying to have a baby.

Yet…somehow….He is supposed to be in control.

Oh He IS in control, He just doesn't force anyone to do anything, He allows you/me to choose our own paths.

And he allows kids to die in utero. I’m wondering how you guys worship the God who lets babies die in the womb.

Yep. No hate for God and His People from the tard left

 

[HappyJoy]

Can i ask you my fetus vs. baby question and you actually answer it?

Yes.

Cool.

A burning house has two rooms, one has two 6 week old fetuses and the other a 6 month old baby. You only have time to go into one room before the house collapses, which one do you save?

I'm not qualified to be a fireman, but if he has a room with two expectant mothers carrying fetuses, or one 6-month old baby, he will have to make a decision. My decision would be to call other firemen to the scene to improve the chances of all of them, saving all 5. I know fireman. They've pulled out dead bodies from many fires over a long career. I pray for and bless the firemen to have the strength to make the best decision. Prayer works, in case you are wondering.

First off, let's admire that fail of your convictions as you worm your coward ass out of an answer. So. I will make this clearer for you.

There is no time for the firemen to arrive, you go to one of the rooms, grab the occupant(s) and leave, that's all the time there is.

Secondly, the fetuses are not with their mothers. They are being kept in a machine, nice and healthy and perfectly viable. Your sort would actually call them 'babies' or 'children', but they are fetuses.

So, which do you save or do you let all three parish in the fire?

Now would be a good time to answer the question.

Secondly, the fetuses are not with their mothers. They are being kept in a machine, nice and healthy and perfectly viable.

say what?????????????????????????????



what kind of an idiot are you?

It's about morality and the value of a fetus vs. an actual baby. Whether a fetus can survive outside of the mother or not is irrelevant to the question and really just an excuse not to have to answer it.

 

[Ambivalent1]

Yes.

Cool.

A burning house has two rooms, one has two 6 week old fetuses and the other a 6 month old baby. You only have time to go into one room before the house collapses, which one do you save?

I'm not qualified to be a fireman, but if he has a room with two expectant mothers carrying fetuses, or one 6-month old baby, he will have to make a decision. My decision would be to call other firemen to the scene to improve the chances of all of them, saving all 5. I know fireman. They've pulled out dead bodies from many fires over a long career. I pray for and bless the firemen to have the strength to make the best decision. Prayer works, in case you are wondering.

First off, let's admire that fail of your convictions as you worm your coward ass out of an answer. So. I will make this clearer for you.

There is no time for the firemen to arrive, you go to one of the rooms, grab the occupant(s) and leave, that's all the time there is.

Secondly, the fetuses are not with their mothers. They are being kept in a machine, nice and healthy and perfectly viable. Your sort would actually call them 'babies' or 'children', but they are fetuses.

So, which do you save or do you let all three parish in the fire?

Now would be a good time to answer the question.

Secondly, the fetuses are not with their mothers. They are being kept in a machine, nice and healthy and perfectly viable.

say what?????????????????????????????



what kind of an idiot are you?

It's about morality and the value of a fetus vs. an actual baby. Whether a fetus can survive outside of the mother or not is irrelevant to the question and really just an excuse not to have to answer it.

Whose morality?

 

[toomuchtime_]

Staggering?

How bout the impact on the father or the unborn?

Now you're back to the original question.

are you going to change it again?

If not, I would save the 2 fetus.

because anyone without an agenda, would believe they are inside the womb.

you would be saving 2 fetus, and the women carrying them.

Already stated the mother is not in the room for the fetuses. You're getting caught up in unnecessary details because you can't answer the question and need an out. It's simple, either the 6 month old baby parishes or the two 6 week old fetuses do. Make your choice.

It's hilarious that anyone who is pro-life can't answer this question.

You set up an entrapment question by not making clear the circumstances, and you did it on purpose. You're driving yourself nuts for your own carelessness. You are a careless, conniving individual who thinks people are stupid enough to let you ensnare them while you furnish facts after the question was asked. And you get very upset and start a speil that is accusatory of everybody else whose answer you reject, pretending the question went unanswered. YOU DON'T LIKE CORRECT ANSWERS TO YOUR ENTRAPMENT QUESTIONS. it's that simple.

Do you save the two fetuses over the baby, it's as simple as that. Whimp.

Let's take your hypothetical BULLSHIT and roll with it.
You do the greater good in a no win situation. It's not about abortion rights it's about saving lives

Yes, that would be the thing to do. So a couple of kidney beans with human DNA or a fucking human?

We all know it's a baby. When your friend is pregnant you don't ask how the fetus is doing, you ask how the baby is doing. The only time you call it a fetus is when you want to kill it.

 

[HappyJoy]

Cool.

A burning house has two rooms, one has two 6 week old fetuses and the other a 6 month old baby. You only have time to go into one room before the house collapses, which one do you save?

I'm not qualified to be a fireman, but if he has a room with two expectant mothers carrying fetuses, or one 6-month old baby, he will have to make a decision. My decision would be to call other firemen to the scene to improve the chances of all of them, saving all 5. I know fireman. They've pulled out dead bodies from many fires over a long career. I pray for and bless the firemen to have the strength to make the best decision. Prayer works, in case you are wondering.

First off, let's admire that fail of your convictions as you worm your coward ass out of an answer. So. I will make this clearer for you.

There is no time for the firemen to arrive, you go to one of the rooms, grab the occupant(s) and leave, that's all the time there is.

Secondly, the fetuses are not with their mothers. They are being kept in a machine, nice and healthy and perfectly viable. Your sort would actually call them 'babies' or 'children', but they are fetuses.

So, which do you save or do you let all three parish in the fire?

Now would be a good time to answer the question.

Your profanity against another debater means only that you do not have a case, only evil anger inside of you. Buh-bye.

Because I said ass you are not willing to answer a question that we both know you are incapable of answering and still have some semblance of righteousness in our anti-choice stance?

You're a hypocrite, nothing more.

a fetus in a machine??????????????

View attachment 261637

You can say a fetus on a cloud of cotton candy, it makes no difference. I'm asking you if you had to save the life of either a 6 month old baby vs two 6 week old fetuses and whoever you don't save dies then which do you choose?

 

[Carl in Michigan]

Yes.

Cool.

A burning house has two rooms, one has two 6 week old fetuses and the other a 6 month old baby. You only have time to go into one room before the house collapses, which one do you save?

I'm not qualified to be a fireman, but if he has a room with two expectant mothers carrying fetuses, or one 6-month old baby, he will have to make a decision. My decision would be to call other firemen to the scene to improve the chances of all of them, saving all 5. I know fireman. They've pulled out dead bodies from many fires over a long career. I pray for and bless the firemen to have the strength to make the best decision. Prayer works, in case you are wondering.

First off, let's admire that fail of your convictions as you worm your coward ass out of an answer. So. I will make this clearer for you.

There is no time for the firemen to arrive, you go to one of the rooms, grab the occupant(s) and leave, that's all the time there is.

Secondly, the fetuses are not with their mothers. They are being kept in a machine, nice and healthy and perfectly viable. Your sort would actually call them 'babies' or 'children', but they are fetuses.

So, which do you save or do you let all three parish in the fire?

Now would be a good time to answer the question.

Secondly, the fetuses are not with their mothers. They are being kept in a machine, nice and healthy and perfectly viable.

say what?????????????????????????????



what kind of an idiot are you?

It's about morality and the value of a fetus vs. an actual baby. Whether a fetus can survive outside of the mother or not is irrelevant to the question and really just an excuse not to have to answer it.

YOU are an outstanding example of God's mercy and patience. I only see you and your ilk as a plague on the land.

 

[HappyJoy]

Already stated the mother is not in the room for the fetuses. You're getting caught up in unnecessary details because you can't answer the question and need an out. It's simple, either the 6 month old baby parishes or the two 6 week old fetuses do. Make your choice.

It's hilarious that anyone who is pro-life can't answer this question.

You set up an entrapment question by not making clear the circumstances, and you did it on purpose. You're driving yourself nuts for your own carelessness. You are a careless, conniving individual who thinks people are stupid enough to let you ensnare them while you furnish facts after the question was asked. And you get very upset and start a speil that is accusatory of everybody else whose answer you reject, pretending the question went unanswered. YOU DON'T LIKE CORRECT ANSWERS TO YOUR ENTRAPMENT QUESTIONS. it's that simple.

Do you save the two fetuses over the baby, it's as simple as that. Whimp.

Let's take your hypothetical BULLSHIT and roll with it.
You do the greater good in a no win situation. It's not about abortion rights it's about saving lives

Yes, that would be the thing to do. So a couple of kidney beans with human DNA or a fucking human?

We all know it's a baby. When your friend is pregnant you don't ask how the fetus is doing, you ask how the baby is doing. The only time you call it a fetus is when you want to kill it.

You call it a baby when you create an emotional attachment to what it (emphasis on "it") will become. Are you saying fetuses don't exist? Are you mentally well?

 

[beautress]

Can i ask you my fetus vs. baby question and you actually answer it?

Yes.

Cool.

A burning house has two rooms, one has two 6 week old fetuses and the other a 6 month old baby. You only have time to go into one room before the house collapses, which one do you save?

I'm not qualified to be a fireman, but if he has a room with two expectant mothers carrying fetuses, or one 6-month old baby, he will have to make a decision. My decision would be to call other firemen to the scene to improve the chances of all of them, saving all 5. I know fireman. They've pulled out dead bodies from many fires over a long career. I pray for and bless the firemen to have the strength to make the best decision. Prayer works, in case you are wondering.

First off, let's admire that fail of your convictions as you worm your coward ass out of an answer. So. I will make this clearer for you.

There is no time for the firemen to arrive, you go to one of the rooms, grab the occupant(s) and leave, that's all the time there is.

Secondly, the fetuses are not with their mothers. They are being kept in a machine, nice and healthy and perfectly viable. Your sort would actually call them 'babies' or 'children', but they are fetuses.

So, which do you save or do you let all three parish in the fire?

Now would be a good time to answer the question.

Secondly, the fetuses are not with their mothers. They are being kept in a machine, nice and healthy and perfectly viable.

say what?????????????????????????????

what kind of an idiot are you?

She a create-a-false-scenario disciple with a dab of self-righteous indignation when her control-the-conversation indoctrination failed. It's a rude awakening for a brainwashee of sordid human beings, poor thing.

 

[Carl in Michigan]

I'm not qualified to be a fireman, but if he has a room with two expectant mothers carrying fetuses, or one 6-month old baby, he will have to make a decision. My decision would be to call other firemen to the scene to improve the chances of all of them, saving all 5. I know fireman. They've pulled out dead bodies from many fires over a long career. I pray for and bless the firemen to have the strength to make the best decision. Prayer works, in case you are wondering.

First off, let's admire that fail of your convictions as you worm your coward ass out of an answer. So. I will make this clearer for you.

There is no time for the firemen to arrive, you go to one of the rooms, grab the occupant(s) and leave, that's all the time there is.

Secondly, the fetuses are not with their mothers. They are being kept in a machine, nice and healthy and perfectly viable. Your sort would actually call them 'babies' or 'children', but they are fetuses.

So, which do you save or do you let all three parish in the fire?

Now would be a good time to answer the question.

Your profanity against another debater means only that you do not have a case, only evil anger inside of you. Buh-bye.

Because I said ass you are not willing to answer a question that we both know you are incapable of answering and still have some semblance of righteousness in our anti-choice stance?

You're a hypocrite, nothing more.

a fetus in a machine??????????????

View attachment 261637

You can say a fetus on a cloud of cotton candy, it makes no difference. I'm asking you if you had to save the life of either a 6 month old baby vs two 6 week old fetuses and whoever you don't save dies then which do you choose?

Will the "fetus" grow up to be a humanity hating tard like yourself?