Laws are up to interpretation

Left Seater · Post by **Left Seater** » Fri Jul 24, 2015 8:10 pm

Jsc810 wrote:I'm not referring to abortion at that point. I'm talking about euthanasia of an infant.

Right, and where do you draw the line?

Down syndrome? Conjoined twins? Severe Heart murmur? Cleft lip?

mvscal · Post by **mvscal** » Fri Jul 24, 2015 8:18 pm

Left Seater wrote:
Jsc810 wrote:I'm not referring to abortion at that point. I'm talking about euthanasia of an infant.
Right, and where do you draw the line?

Down syndrome? Conjoined twins? Severe Heart murmur? Cleft lip?

Gay or transgender?

R-Jack · Post by **R-Jack** » Fri Jul 24, 2015 8:18 pm

Left Seater wrote:
Jsc810 wrote:I'm not referring to abortion at that point. I'm talking about euthanasia of an infant.
Right, and where do you draw the line?

Down syndrome? Conjoined twins? Severe Heart murmur? Cleft lip?

Not sliding cleats up.

Schmick

poptart · Post by **poptart** » Sat Jul 25, 2015 12:01 am

Scott wrote:I'm telling you it's none of your fucking business - you don't have a right to have an opinion unless it directly relates to you

We don't have a right to an opinion?

Roger_the_Shrubber · Post by **Roger_the_Shrubber** » Sat Jul 25, 2015 3:45 am

So....

Jsc is going with the "self deluded piece of shit" option here.

Scenario:

Doc - Mr and Mrs. Jsc, we have, through testing, discovered that your son will suffer from sever gastrointestinal disease, and will have to go through MANY operations to keep him alive, even well into his adult years. So we have some options.

The Jsc's - And they are?

Doc - Well...three options. Option A: We can let it( yes, an 'it') live and have these problems which is tremendous pain and suffering, not to mention the costs. Option B: Abort now with a D and C(dilatation and curettage). Option C: Let it develop to a viable level, where we can then force labor, strangle it, and use it's pieces and parts to help others at a cost, just not for it.

The Jsc's - How much cayshe are we talking?

Just quit it JC. Don't bury yourself any further and btw, in your responses you brought up about 6 different ancillary topics, not answering anything about what I actually said, and yes, partial birth abortion is done exactly as I described.

And unlike others here, i KNOW you are a better person than this.

poptart · Post by **poptart** » Sat Jul 25, 2015 4:40 am

Scott wrote:Hey dumbfuck - if it's not your family then its not your business

shut the fuck up

KC Scott is very illogical

Beating victims, rape victims, child abuse victims, robbery victims, murder victims... are most often not in our family.

The LIFE (you do acknowledge that it is a LIFE, yes)? which is snuffed out in the womb is among THE most helpless and vulnerable on our soil.

It is frankly an unimaginable horror that this goes on with government support.

Don't expect clear-headed people to -- not have an opinion -- on the ongoing atrocities, just because you yourself are lacking a soul.

poptart · Post by **poptart** » Sat Jul 25, 2015 1:48 pm

You are sadly mistaken.

It is the woman who is dictating her grotesque opinion onto a completely helpless and vulnerable LIFE.

Yes, the very same woman who MADE HER CHOICE to let that LIFE begin.

This is not the removal of a cyst.
It is a little human being -- and if you don't believe it, wait for some months and see what comes out of the womb.

It is the killing of some of the most helpless life among us, and it is entirely reprehensible.

The State · Post by **The State** » Sat Jul 25, 2015 1:58 pm

poptart wrote:You are sadly mistaken.

It is the woman who is dictating her grotesque opinion onto a completely helpless and vulnerable LIFE.

Yes, the very same woman who MADE HER CHOICE to let that LIFE begin.

This is not the removal of a cyst.
It is a little human being -- and if you don't believe it, wait for some months and see what comes out of the womb.

It is the killing of some of the most helpless life among us, and it is entirely reprehensible.

You're still not coming back to America.

MgoBlue-LightSpecial · Sat Jul 25, 2015 4:43 pm

Left Seater wrote:
Jsc810 wrote:I'm not referring to abortion at that point. I'm talking about euthanasia of an infant.
Right, and where do you draw the line?

Roger_the_Shrubber.

Shlomart Ben Yisrael · Sat Jul 25, 2015 6:09 pm

War Wagon · Post by **War Wagon** » Sat Jul 25, 2015 10:49 pm

Jsc810 wrote:
poptart wrote:(you do acknowledge that it is a LIFE, yes)?
No, I don't acknowledge it is a life. Because it isn't. It is a potential life.

You do understand the difference between life and potential life, don't you? An egg, even a fertilized egg, still is not a chicken.

This is not a difficult concept.

You are a self serving delusional fool.

That concept has been abundantly clear for years and need not be rehashed.

MgoBlue-LightSpecial · Sat Jul 25, 2015 11:14 pm

What do you fucks gain from arguing this shit for the 9 millionth time? Minds are not going to be changed. The only time anybody's mind is changed on abortion is when a pro-lifer is suddenly faced with a potential baby they do not want/cannot have.

Shlomart Ben Yisrael · Sat Jul 25, 2015 11:15 pm

The State wrote:
You're still not coming back to America.

Shlomart Ben Yisrael · Sat Jul 25, 2015 11:23 pm

War Wagon · Post by **War Wagon** » Sat Jul 25, 2015 11:34 pm

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:What do you fucks gain from arguing...

That's pretty much the sole purpose of being here, is it not?

Why do dogs bark when they hear a neighbor dog bark?

To make them aware of their presence.

Mikey · Post by **Mikey** » Sun Jul 26, 2015 1:06 am

War Wagon wrote:
MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:What do you fucks gain from arguing...
That's pretty much the sole purpose of being here, is it not?

Why do dogs bark when they hear a neighbor dog bark?

To make them aware of their presence.

poptart · Post by **poptart** » Sun Jul 26, 2015 2:19 am

Jsc wrote:a potential life

This is a term you use to try to rationalize barbarism.

Everyone knows some life dies in the womb.
Only a very warped mind takes this information and then leaps to the wack conclusion that a human should then have a green light to go in and play terminator on that life if she/he wants to.

A mother's role and instinct is to protect and nurture the life within her body which she has chosen to begin.
Reaching in with a pair of pliers to crush the head of that life is not part of that program.

poptart · Post by **poptart** » Sun Jul 26, 2015 6:01 am

Scott wrote:It's not your problem to worry about douchebag

In effort to rationalize your blood-thirsty lusts, you are flailing badly.

Most Americans can have reason to worry about fetal safety.

At least 38 states have fetal homicide laws, and 23 have laws which apply to the earliest stages of pregnancy.
http://www.ncsl.org/research/health/fet ... -laws.aspx

States clearly recognize fetal safety as something of public interest.

My state, Tejas, has such laws.

"The robes" spoke in '73, but it does not erase the clear-headed thinking of folks around America who don't share the same callous view of life that those degenerates showed.

Is KC Scott really...

Scott wrote:smart enough

Diego in Seattle · Post by **Diego in Seattle** » Sun Jul 26, 2015 7:35 am

poptart wrote:
Scott wrote:It's not your problem to worry about douchebag
In effort to rationalize your blood-thirsty lusts, you are flailing badly.

Most Americans can have reason to worry about fetal safety.

At least 38 states have fetal homicide laws, and 23 have laws which apply to the earliest stages of pregnancy.
http://www.ncsl.org/research/health/fet ... -laws.aspx

States clearly recognize fetal safety as something of public interest.

My state, Tejas, has such laws.

"The robes" spoke in '73, but it does not erase the clear-headed thinking of folks around America who don't share the same callous view of life that those degenerates showed.

Is KC Scott really...

Scott wrote:smart enough

Did you even bother to read what what in your link? The first paragraph reads:

The debate over fetal rights is not new to the legislative arena. Every year pro-life and pro-choice advocates vie for the upper hand in this contentious issue. In recent years, states have expanded this debate to include the issue of fetuses killed by violent acts against pregnant women. In some states, legislation has increased the criminal penalties for crimes involving pregnant women. These laws have focused on the harm done to a pregnant woman and the subsequent loss of her pregnancy, but not on the rights of the fetus.

So again, the primary importance is what the choice of the mother is. Not on what some emotionally weak thumpers claim their sky fairy says.

Deal with it!

poptart · Post by **poptart** » Sun Jul 26, 2015 8:14 am

You are not making any sense, and unfortunately, we've seen that far too often from you.

FACT is, 38 states have laws punishing someone for killing a fetus.

I have Texas residence.

Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 1.07 relates to the death of or injury to an unborn child and provides penalties. The law defines an individual as a human being who is alive, including an unborn child at every stage of gestation from fertilization until birth.

The fetus is defined as a human being, and in Tejas, even from the point of fertilization.

Read through other states and you'll also see fetuses defined as human beings, and punishment dished out on those who kill them.

If a stranger kills a fetus, or a mother kills a fetus, it's the same result for the fetus.
It knows no difference.

Hence, we have a massive contradiction in America.

We have law saying it is not legal for someone to kill a fetus, yet we allow a mother to wack one, even though the end result is the very same for the fetus (a human being by law in many states) who is violated in the worst way possible.

Bottom line point is -----> Scott is full of hot air.

Anyone and everyone can be very concerned when violations of this magnitude are on-going.

poptart · Post by **poptart** » Sun Jul 26, 2015 2:27 pm

Scott wrote:Then explain who pays for that baby that the mother doesn't want - because you don't want your taxes going for welfare, subsidized housing or medicaid

The U.S. national debt was less than a half-a-trillion dollars in 1973.

Today it's over 18 trillion dollars.
That's more than 36 times what it was when Roe v. Wade was passed.

Good thing we slaughtered those 50+ million young ones or we'd really be screwed.
lol

Scott wrote:smart enough

We've got problems, major problems, Scott -- but I'm afraid I don't agree that mass genocide of innocent life in the womb is the best idea we can come up with.

As for the hypocrite charge, look up Ron Paul's take on abortion.
Give it a read.

He is as PURE a libertarian as you'll find in this era, yet he is unabashedly pro-life.
Would have it no other way.

You don't have much of a society or culture if you're callously disposing of truly innocent life as we've done since '73.
Look where our society and culture has gone since the early '70s.

Toilet.

The two are related.

Diego in Seattle · Post by **Diego in Seattle** » Sun Jul 26, 2015 5:45 pm

poptart wrote:
Scott wrote:Then explain who pays for that baby that the mother doesn't want - because you don't want your taxes going for welfare, subsidized housing or medicaid
The U.S. national debt was less than a half-a-trillion dollars in 1973.

Today it's over 18 trillion dollars.

I believe in 1973 when I was growing up in San Diego gas was going for like around 75¢/gal.; today it's going for $4.35. Your point?

War Wagon · Post by **War Wagon** » Sun Jul 26, 2015 6:57 pm

Diego in Seattle wrote: I believe in 1973 when I was growing up in San Diego gas was going for like around 75¢/gal.; today it's going for $4.35. Your point?

There isn't any correlation between inflation and debt.

The "point" is that you're not only a twat, but a twit as well.

poptart · Post by **poptart** » Mon Jul 27, 2015 1:33 am

You are claiming that unwanted kids will be a burden on our economy, yet the evidence we can clearly see is that the OPPOSITE has been true.
And dramatically so.

Prior to massive genocide, we were over-extended by a nation by less than half-a-trillion dollars.
Since genocide became our policy, we have become finanically over-extended -----> MASSIVELY.

We've done what you have wanted for 40 years.
And we've become financially corkscrewed into the ground over that period of time.

Prior to your policy, we were doing relatively okay.

And you're really asking ME to answer?

YOU answer how your policy has been working financially for us.

KC Scott wrote:smart enough

We're not going to prosper as a nation until this genocide is reversed.

"We" are at war with God.

Sorry to have to inform you.

mvscal · Post by **mvscal** » Mon Jul 27, 2015 2:28 pm

KC Scott wrote: Then explain who pays for that baby that the mother doesn't want - because you don't want your taxes going for welfare, subsidized housing or medicaid

Good job kicking your own ass, dumbfuck.

mvscal · Post by **mvscal** » Mon Jul 27, 2015 3:40 pm

It's comprehensible...and irrelevant.

mvscal · Post by **mvscal** » Mon Jul 27, 2015 6:13 pm

Yes, it's totally irrelevant unless we're supposed to start killing people who might end up on welfare.

You remain an idiot.

Goober McTuber · Post by **Goober McTuber** » Mon Jul 27, 2015 6:19 pm

mvscal wrote:Yes, it's totally irrelevant unless we're supposed to start killing people who might end up on welfare.

I thought we were talking about aborting fetuses. Not killing people.

Bucmonkey · Post by **Bucmonkey** » Mon Jul 27, 2015 8:25 pm

Goober McTuber wrote:
mvscal wrote:Yes, it's totally irrelevant unless we're supposed to start killing people who might end up on welfare.
I thought we were talking about aborting fetuses. Not killing people.

You forget Goobs, MV is in favor of killing adult humans, somehow this subject bothers him.

Mikey · Post by **Mikey** » Mon Jul 27, 2015 8:44 pm

Bucmonkey wrote:
Goober McTuber wrote:
mvscal wrote:Yes, it's totally irrelevant unless we're supposed to start killing people who might end up on welfare.
I thought we were talking about aborting fetuses. Not killing people.
You forget Goobs, MV is in favor of killing adult humans, somehow this subject bothers him.

Babies are cuter.

mvscal · Post by **mvscal** » Mon Jul 27, 2015 9:04 pm

Bucmonkey wrote:
Goober McTuber wrote:
mvscal wrote:Yes, it's totally irrelevant unless we're supposed to start killing people who might end up on welfare.
I thought we were talking about aborting fetuses. Not killing people.
You forget Goobs, MV is in favor of killing adult humans,

Yes, those duly convicted of capital crimes in a court of law, you leg-humping skidmark.

poptart · Post by **poptart** » Mon Jul 27, 2015 10:05 pm

Scott wrote:Explain how you don't want Govt in your life but you're all for it if it's someone else you sanctimonious twit

Then explain who pays for that baby that the mother doesn't want - because you don't want your taxes going for welfare, subsidized housing or medicaid

1) It is a LIFE in the mother's womb, Scott. It's not a cyst. It's not a limb which unfortunately must be removed. It is a HUMAN LIFE. As I linked, most states have laws regarding it as a human being, if it is killed. If you don't see it as a LIFE, I'm sorry. We just don't agree.

2) We've gone down your road for 40 years. With all the money we've saved by killing off all of these "welfare" kids, we should be in good shape. But as I've pointed out, the very opposite is the case. We've ruined out economy in that time span.

55+ million lives snuffed out.
Accounting for reproduction, we've (conservatively estimating) wiped away 100 million people from our tax base.
Maybe more.

Is a light coming on yet?

:idea:

Bucmonkey · Post by **Bucmonkey** » Mon Jul 27, 2015 10:07 pm

I recall Senators and Representatives on that list too...you (leg-humping skidmark?) Did I say that correctly MV?

Sirfindafold · Post by **Sirfindafold** » Mon Jul 27, 2015 10:40 pm

KC Scott wrote:You OK with using Your Tax dollars to pay WIC, Food Stamps Section 8 and medicaid to take care of it?

No.

If liberals would quit handing that shit out like McGoober hands out his ass at a Village People concert, maybe these lowlifes would think twice before getting knocked up.

War Wagon · Post by **War Wagon** » Tue Jul 28, 2015 12:15 am

Sirfindafold wrote:If liberals would quit handing that shit out like McGoober hands out his ass at a Village People concert...

mvscal · Post by **mvscal** » Tue Jul 28, 2015 1:17 am

poptart wrote: Is KC Scott really...

Scott wrote:smart enough

Survey....SAYS!!!

KC Scott wrote:Not what the Question was Bitch

I'll type it again because you obviously have a dick in your mouth

You OK with using Your Tax dollars to pay WIC, Food Stamps Section 8 and medicaid to take care of it?

Fuck You Faggot - I already know the answer

Hypocrite

MgoBlue-LightSpecial · Tue Jul 28, 2015 1:50 am

poptart wrote:55+ million lives snuffed out.
Accounting for reproduction, we've (conservatively estimating) wiped away 100 million people from our tax base.

Good. Traffic is already terrible everywhere without an extra 100 million dipshits going 65 in the fast lane cramming Burger King down their holes, the majority of whom would have likely been receiving from and not paying into the system.

Diego in Seattle · Post by **Diego in Seattle** » Tue Jul 28, 2015 6:05 am

KC Scott wrote:"No Scott, I don't want my tax dollars going to support babies I've forced the mothers to have since abortion offends my feminine mothering instincts"

poptart · Post by **poptart** » Tue Jul 28, 2015 10:34 am

Jsc wrote:Your boy Pat Robinson isn't sure why God didn’t smite Supreme Court justices for legalizing abortion.

Some people would explain to him that his god doesn't exist.

Other people would point out Romans 13:1-6 and Matthew 22:17-22, and urge him to understand that Jesus himself agreed with Thomas Jefferson regarding the separation of church and state. Amazing what is in the Bible when you actually read it.

Pat Robinson?
lol

It's Pat Robertson -- and no, he's not my "boy."
Very far from it.

Neither Romans 13:1-6 or Matthew 22:17-22 have Jesus talking about separation of Church and state.
lol

Whoever informed you that those two passages have Jesus teaching that is either loony toon or he has an agenda.
Maybe both.

In both passages, Jesus is clearly saying that governing authorities are in place by God's sovereignty, and we ought to obey the laws.

poptart · Post by **poptart** » Tue Jul 28, 2015 10:59 am

Scott wrote:You OK with using Your Tax dollars to pay WIC, Food Stamps Section 8 and medicaid to take care of it?

Fuck You Faggot - I already know the answer

Hypocrite

As I have noted, we've wiped away a very large part of our tax base with your policy.
THAT was very dumb.
We've done what you've wanted for 40 years -- and it's screwed us.
It's pretty hilarious how you are begging me to explain how we would handle things economically if abortion was outlawed, when the data clearly shows that the U.S. economic situation has PLUMMETED since we went down the mass genocide path that you applaud.

Solution: Look at how it was prior to Roe v. Wade.

Prior to '73, we promoted sexual responsibility.
Knocking someone up was much more serious business.
So people showed more restraint.

And when an "oops" pregnancy happened, an extended family had to step up and provide for the child -- if a mother and father could not handle it on their own.

YOUR people created this culture of carelessness, debauchery, destruction and death.
Did you really think economic problems would not also arise?
You've killed off a big chunk of your tax base.

Promote sexual and family responsibility and stop killing off future taxpayers in huge numbers.

Duh.