Page 12 of 12
Re: Jsc, serious question about homosexuals
Posted: Sun Aug 05, 2012 9:39 pm
by Shlomart Ben Yisrael
mvscal wrote:KC Scott wrote:Roe v. Wade is Law -
For the time being.
Public stonings and beheadings can't be far off.
Wait...
:)
Re: Jsc, serious question about homosexuals
Posted: Sun Aug 05, 2012 10:18 pm
by M2
Re: Jsc, serious question about homosexuals
Posted: Sun Aug 05, 2012 11:18 pm
by lovebuzz
i heart you, milton.
Re: Jsc, serious question about homosexuals
Posted: Sun Aug 05, 2012 11:42 pm
by Van
Jesus facepalms are always money.
Re: Jsc, serious question about homosexuals
Posted: Sun Aug 05, 2012 11:46 pm
by trev
Those stretch marks fade to where you can barely see them. Plus, nowadays, I am sure there is laser surgery to make them even less seen.
Queen of Page 16!
Re: Jsc, serious question about homosexuals
Posted: Mon Aug 06, 2012 4:56 am
by poptart
Van wrote:I'm speaking of the poptarts and War Wagons of the world who are so ready to drop "a lifetime of shame and regret" on a woman lest she do their misogynistic bidding.
Van, you understand that someone could post some mutilated fetus pictures in here if they wanted to.
If a woman decides to abort a fetus, oh well.
Things happen.
I just happen to be of the opinion that the state ought not sanction these killings.
Nobody makes a woman create a new life, Van... unless she's raped.
You'll have to pardon Wagon and I if we're disturbed to see life snuffed out as
routinely as it is today.
Re: Jsc, serious question about homosexuals
Posted: Mon Aug 06, 2012 5:41 am
by Van
No, I don't have to pardon you. Because you have no qualms about passing judgment on women, and because you don't give the slightest fuck about them, I think I'll just go ahead and condemn you as the misogynistic dinosaur you clearly are.
And I notice that not once have you addressed that most basic point about how men would never allow themselves to be compelled by others into doing the things to their bodies that you feel perfectly comfortable in compelling women to do.
The reason you have remained silent on that point is that you know you're completely full of shit, and a total hypocrite. You have zero problem pontificating on morality, but the moment that same choice is laid in your lap you collapse like a Raider defense in the fourth quarter.
Re: Jsc, serious question about homosexuals
Posted: Sat Aug 11, 2012 5:01 am
by Truman
Wrong. Neuhaus's license got the hook for rubber-stamping George Tiller's criminal diagnoses. Had she done her due diligence (not to mention followed her Oath) she would still be practicing today.
From a reputable news source:
TOPEKA, Kansas (AP) - Kansas regulators have revoked the medical license of a doctor accused of performing inadequate mental health exams on young patients she then referred to the late Dr. George Tiller for late-term abortions.
The State Board of Healing Arts on Friday ratified an administrative judge's earlier decision to revoke Dr. Ann Kristin Neuhaus's license.
The judge concluded in February that the Nortonville doctor's 2003 examinations of 11 patients ages 10 to 18 were insufficient. Neuhaus provided the second medical opinions Tiller needed by law to perform the late-term abortions at his Wichita clinic.
Neuhaus argued that her exams met accepted standards of care.
Groups that oppose abortion rights have criticized Neuhaus for years and are sure to welcome Friday's decision.
Read more:
http://www.kshb.com/dpp/news/state/kans ... z23D46oCFX
For your clients' sake, here's hoping that you are a better litigator than you are a message board poster...
Re: Jsc, serious question about homosexuals
Posted: Sat Aug 11, 2012 9:02 am
by poptart
Jsc wrote:Fuck you, you anti-abortion freaks.
FUCK YOU
You can stop wetting yourself anytime, you stupid twat.
Who in here is advocating that 10 year old rape victims must give birth?
MELT.
DOWN.
Re: Jsc, serious question about homosexuals
Posted: Sat Aug 11, 2012 9:49 pm
by Screw_Michigan
Jsc810 wrote:
Re: Jsc, serious question about homosexuals
Posted: Sat Aug 11, 2012 10:41 pm
by Van
poptart wrote:Who in here is advocating that 10 year old rape victims must give birth?
Maybe no one in here is, but apparently Mitt Romney's choice for running mate is advocating exactly that.
Paul Ryan’s Extreme Abortion Views
Any Republican vice-presidential candidate is going to be broadly anti-abortion, but Ryan goes much further. He believes ending a pregnancy should be illegal even when it results from rape or incest, or endangers a woman’s health. He was a cosponsor of the Sanctity of Human Life Act, a federal bill defining fertilized eggs as human beings, which, if passed, would criminalize some forms of birth control and in vitro fertilization. The National Right to Life Committee has scored his voting record 100 percent every year since he entered the House in 1999. “I’m as pro-life as a person gets,” he told The Weekly Standard’s John McCormack in 2010. “You’re not going to have a truce.”
Re: Jsc, serious question about homosexuals
Posted: Mon Aug 13, 2012 1:03 pm
by Goober McTuber
Van wrote:poptart wrote:Who in here is advocating that 10 year old rape victims must give birth?
Maybe no one in here is, but apparently Mitt Romney's choice for running mate is advocating exactly that.
Paul Ryan’s Extreme Abortion Views
Any Republican vice-presidential candidate is going to be broadly anti-abortion, but Ryan goes much further. He believes ending a pregnancy should be illegal even when it results from rape or incest, or endangers a woman’s health. He was a cosponsor of the Sanctity of Human Life Act, a federal bill defining fertilized eggs as human beings, which, if passed, would criminalize some forms of birth control and in vitro fertilization. The National Right to Life Committee has scored his voting record 100 percent every year since he entered the House in 1999. “I’m as pro-life as a person gets,” he told The Weekly Standard’s John McCormack in 2010. “You’re not going to have a truce.”
That should work out pretty nicely.
