Discussion:
"In states, tide turning against abortion rights"
(too old to reply)
Adam A. Wanderer
2017-04-15 18:58:20 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
http://www.journalgazette.net/news/us/20170415/in-states-tide-turni
ng-
a
gainst
So abortion is "settled" law?
Perhaps it isn't as "settled" as the left would like us to think.
It's settled.
Not settled, W.T.S., you stupid lying shitbag.
You don't think so???
Guaranteed, stupid shitbag.
Remember, abortion is good, a baby is bad!!!
No, W.T.S, you dumb mackerel cunt.
You didn't really think you'd get away with the stupid nymshift, did
you, W.T.S., you stupid mackerel cunt?
You really are about to get a shovel in your face, bitch.
Go ahead, try it.
In the meantime, I have a young teen to drive to New York to
have her fetus filth removed. It's a long drive, but worth
it to get her out of a "christian" state to a normal, decent
state where they understand how important abortion is to the
future of all women.
I'll buy her ice cream afterwards. What flavor ice cream
goes best for a post abortion experience?
Adam A. Wanderer
2017-04-15 21:19:35 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
http://www.journalgazette.net/news/us/20170415/in-states-tide-tur
ni ng-
a
gainst
So abortion is "settled" law?
Perhaps it isn't as "settled" as the left would like us to think.
It's settled.
Not settled, W.T.S., you stupid lying shitbag.
You don't think so???
Guaranteed, stupid shitbag.
Remember, abortion is good, a baby is bad!!!
No, W.T.S, you dumb mackerel cunt.
You didn't really think you'd get away with the stupid nymshift, did
you, W.T.S., you stupid mackerel cunt?
You really are about to get a shovel in your face, bitch.
Go ahead, try it.
Look for it, bitch.
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
In the meantime, I have a young teen to drive to New York to
have her fetus filth removed.
Bullshit. You're doing no such thing.
Thanks for the confirmation of your identity.
Oh, yes I am! I've done it in the past, I enjoyed it, and I
continue to do it every chance I get.
Adam A. Wanderer
2017-04-15 23:54:17 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
http://www.journalgazette.net/news/us/20170415/in-states-tide-turning
-a gainst
So abortion is "settled" law?
Perhaps it isn't as "settled" as the left would like us to think.
It's settled. Not only is it settled by law, the Constitution and
basic human rights and decency, but by technology.
So human rights and decency make it acceptable to kill children?
No child is involved in any abortion. I know, I've seen many
abortions.
Ted
2017-04-16 00:15:09 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
http://www.journalgazette.net/news/us/20170415/in-states-tide-turning
-a gainst
So abortion is "settled" law?
Perhaps it isn't as "settled" as the left would like us to think.
It's settled. Not only is it settled by law, the Constitution and
basic human rights and decency, but by technology.
So human rights and decency make it acceptable to kill children?
No child is involved in any abortion. I know, I've seen many
abortions.
Rudy makes a very good argument against abortion. It changed my mind, and
I've not yet read an adequate counter. Up until I read it, I was as much in
favor of abortion as you are.
Rudy Canoza
2017-04-16 00:31:50 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ted
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
http://www.journalgazette.net/news/us/20170415/in-states-tide-turning
-a gainst
So abortion is "settled" law?
Perhaps it isn't as "settled" as the left would like us to think.
It's settled. Not only is it settled by law, the Constitution and
basic human rights and decency, but by technology.
So human rights and decency make it acceptable to kill children?
No child is involved in any abortion. I know, I've seen many
abortions.
Rudy makes a very good argument against abortion. It changed my mind, and
I've not yet read an adequate counter. Up until I read it, I was as much in
favor of abortion as you are.
The pro-abortion mob have to lie to themselves, and to others, about the
moral and physical status of the entity they wish to kill. They claim
it isn't human, or isn't "a" human, but it clearly is. They claim it
isn't a person, but they cannot give a coherent definition of person
that would exclude the developing unborn human being.
Adam A. Wanderer
2017-04-16 00:54:07 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Ted
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
http://www.journalgazette.net/news/us/20170415/in-states-tide-turn
ing -a gainst
So abortion is "settled" law?
Perhaps it isn't as "settled" as the left would like us to think.
It's settled. Not only is it settled by law, the Constitution and
basic human rights and decency, but by technology.
So human rights and decency make it acceptable to kill children?
No child is involved in any abortion. I know, I've seen many
abortions.
Rudy makes a very good argument against abortion. It changed my mind,
and I've not yet read an adequate counter. Up until I read it, I was
as much in favor of abortion as you are.
The pro-abortion mob have to lie to themselves, and to others, about
the moral and physical status of the entity they wish to kill. They
claim it isn't human, or isn't "a" human, but it clearly is. They
claim it isn't a person, but they cannot give a coherent definition of
person that would exclude the developing unborn human being.
A fetus is just tissue, much like a hangnail that needs to be trimmed.
It is good to abort, and sick and degenerate to give birth.

<http://tinyurl.com/nrd33o4>

<http://wonkette.com/605773/texas-defunding-of-planned-parenthood-
improving-womens-health-by-killing-them>

<http://tinyurl.com/hymyr43

<http://www.vox.com/2016/8/30/12709638/teen-pregnancy-birth-control>
Ted
2017-04-16 00:57:45 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Ted
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
http://www.journalgazette.net/news/us/20170415/in-states-tide-turning
-a gainst
So abortion is "settled" law?
Perhaps it isn't as "settled" as the left would like us to think.
It's settled. Not only is it settled by law, the Constitution and
basic human rights and decency, but by technology.
So human rights and decency make it acceptable to kill children?
No child is involved in any abortion. I know, I've seen many
abortions.
Rudy makes a very good argument against abortion. It changed my mind, and
I've not yet read an adequate counter. Up until I read it, I was as much in
favor of abortion as you are.
The pro-abortion mob have to lie to themselves, and to others, about the
moral and physical status of the entity they wish to kill. They claim it
isn't human, or isn't "a" human, but it clearly is. They claim it isn't
a person, but they cannot give a coherent definition of person that would
exclude the developing unborn human being.
Exactly.
Adam A. Wanderer
2017-04-16 01:02:16 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ted
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Ted
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
http://www.journalgazette.net/news/us/20170415/in-states-tide-tur
ning -a gainst
So abortion is "settled" law?
Perhaps it isn't as "settled" as the left would like us to think.
It's settled. Not only is it settled by law, the Constitution
and basic human rights and decency, but by technology.
So human rights and decency make it acceptable to kill children?
No child is involved in any abortion. I know, I've seen many
abortions.
Rudy makes a very good argument against abortion. It changed my
mind, and I've not yet read an adequate counter. Up until I read it,
I was as much in favor of abortion as you are.
The pro-abortion mob have to lie to themselves, and to others, about
the moral and physical status of the entity they wish to kill. They
claim it isn't human, or isn't "a" human, but it clearly is. They
claim it isn't a person, but they cannot give a coherent definition
of person that would exclude the developing unborn human being.
Exactly.
Lies are the weapons of choice for forced birthers:

<http://tinyurl.com/nrd33o4>

<http://wonkette.com/605773/texas-defunding-of-planned-parenthood-
improving-womens-health-by-killing-them>

<http://tinyurl.com/hymyr43

<http://www.vox.com/2016/8/30/12709638/teen-pregnancy-birth-control>
Ted
2017-04-16 01:14:05 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ted
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Ted
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
http://www.journalgazette.net/news/us/20170415/in-states-tide-tur
ning -a gainst
So abortion is "settled" law?
Perhaps it isn't as "settled" as the left would like us to think.
It's settled. Not only is it settled by law, the Constitution
and basic human rights and decency, but by technology.
So human rights and decency make it acceptable to kill children?
No child is involved in any abortion. I know, I've seen many
abortions.
Rudy makes a very good argument against abortion. It changed my
mind, and I've not yet read an adequate counter. Up until I read it,
I was as much in favor of abortion as you are.
The pro-abortion mob have to lie to themselves, and to others, about
the moral and physical status of the entity they wish to kill. They
claim it isn't human, or isn't "a" human, but it clearly is. They
claim it isn't a person, but they cannot give a coherent definition
of person that would exclude the developing unborn human being.
Exactly.
Yes I know. Both sides lie.
Adam A. Wanderer
2017-04-16 01:42:41 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ted
Post by Ted
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Ted
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
http://www.journalgazette.net/news/us/20170415/in-states-tide-t
ur ning -a gainst
So abortion is "settled" law?
Perhaps it isn't as "settled" as the left would like us to think.
It's settled. Not only is it settled by law, the Constitution
and basic human rights and decency, but by technology.
So human rights and decency make it acceptable to kill children?
No child is involved in any abortion. I know, I've seen many
abortions.
Rudy makes a very good argument against abortion. It changed my
mind, and I've not yet read an adequate counter. Up until I read
it, I was as much in favor of abortion as you are.
The pro-abortion mob have to lie to themselves, and to others,
about the moral and physical status of the entity they wish to
kill. They claim it isn't human, or isn't "a" human, but it
clearly is. They claim it isn't a person, but they cannot give a
coherent definition of person that would exclude the developing
unborn human being.
Exactly.
Yes I know. Both sides lie.
No!!! Forced-birthers lie! Pro-choicers tell the pure truth!!!
Adam A. Wanderer
2017-04-16 03:01:00 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ted
Post by Ted
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Ted
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
http://www.journalgazette.net/news/us/20170415/in-states-tide
-t ur ning -a gainst
So abortion is "settled" law?
Perhaps it isn't as "settled" as the left would like us to think.
It's settled. Not only is it settled by law, the
Constitution and basic human rights and decency, but by
technology.
So human rights and decency make it acceptable to kill
children?
No child is involved in any abortion. I know, I've seen many
abortions.
Rudy makes a very good argument against abortion. It changed my
mind, and I've not yet read an adequate counter. Up until I read
it, I was as much in favor of abortion as you are.
The pro-abortion mob have to lie to themselves, and to others,
about the moral and physical status of the entity they wish to
kill. They claim it isn't human, or isn't "a" human, but it
clearly is. They claim it isn't a person, but they cannot give a
coherent definition of person that would exclude the developing
unborn human being.
Exactly.
Yes I know. Both sides lie.
No!!! Forced-birthers lie, pro-choicers only tell the truth.
Very true, but what did you expect?
Pro-abortionists are always truthful.
<http://www.imnotsorry.net>
Adam A. Wanderer
2017-04-16 01:41:31 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
http://tinyurl.com/nrd33o4
This link gives you pure truth!!!
Adam A. Wanderer
2017-04-16 03:03:10 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
http://tinyurl.com/nrd33o4
This link gives you pure truth.
I know!
This is a good site to learn the wholesomeness of abortion:

<http://www.imnotsorry.net>
Rudy Canoza
2017-04-16 01:05:58 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ted
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Ted
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
http://www.journalgazette.net/news/us/20170415/in-states-tide-turning
-a gainst
So abortion is "settled" law?
Perhaps it isn't as "settled" as the left would like us to think.
It's settled. Not only is it settled by law, the Constitution and
basic human rights and decency, but by technology.
So human rights and decency make it acceptable to kill children?
No child is involved in any abortion. I know, I've seen many
abortions.
Rudy makes a very good argument against abortion. It changed my mind, and
I've not yet read an adequate counter. Up until I read it, I was as much in
favor of abortion as you are.
The pro-abortion mob have to lie to themselves, and to others, about the
moral and physical status of the entity they wish to kill. They claim it
isn't human, or isn't "a" human, but it clearly is. They claim it isn't
a person, but they cannot give a coherent definition of person that would
exclude the developing unborn human being.
Exactly.
The key point is that their definition of person is contrived, and
incoherent. The mere fact of live birth certainly isn't what creates a
person - the just-born baby is no different physically or mentally from
the baby a minute or a few seconds before birth. We have proved that
mental ability cannot be what makes for a person, because fully
competent adult humans who are in comas or under anesthesia have no
mental ability whatever during the time they are in that state, and by
no means do we declare them not to be persons - they are persons.

All living human beings are persons, regardless of their stage of
development and regardless of their mental or emotional or moral ability
at any given moment. There is no way around it, except by some
arbitrary and capricious declaration that is intellectually indefensible.
Ted
2017-04-16 01:14:05 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Ted
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Ted
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
http://www.journalgazette.net/news/us/20170415/in-states-tide-turning
-a gainst
So abortion is "settled" law?
Perhaps it isn't as "settled" as the left would like us to think.
It's settled. Not only is it settled by law, the Constitution and
basic human rights and decency, but by technology.
So human rights and decency make it acceptable to kill children?
No child is involved in any abortion. I know, I've seen many
abortions.
Rudy makes a very good argument against abortion. It changed my mind, and
I've not yet read an adequate counter. Up until I read it, I was as much in
favor of abortion as you are.
The pro-abortion mob have to lie to themselves, and to others, about the
moral and physical status of the entity they wish to kill. They claim it
isn't human, or isn't "a" human, but it clearly is. They claim it isn't
a person, but they cannot give a coherent definition of person that would
exclude the developing unborn human being.
Exactly.
The key point is that their definition of person is contrived, and
incoherent. The mere fact of live birth certainly isn't what creates a
person - the just-born baby is no different physically or mentally from
the baby a minute or a few seconds before birth. We have proved that
mental ability cannot be what makes for a person, because fully competent
adult humans who are in comas or under anesthesia have no mental ability
whatever during the time they are in that state, and by no means do we
declare them not to be persons - they are persons.
All living human beings are persons, regardless of their stage of
development and regardless of their mental or emotional or moral ability
at any given moment. There is no way around it, except by some arbitrary
and capricious declaration that is intellectually indefensible.
Nail hit head. That's the convincing argument. If anybody has a solid
counter, I'd like to read it.
Adam A. Wanderer
2017-04-16 01:48:12 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ted
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Ted
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Ted
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
http://www.journalgazette.net/news/us/20170415/in-states-tide-t
urning -a gainst
So abortion is "settled" law?
Perhaps it isn't as "settled" as the left would like us to think.
It's settled. Not only is it settled by law, the Constitution
and basic human rights and decency, but by technology.
So human rights and decency make it acceptable to kill children?
No child is involved in any abortion. I know, I've seen many
abortions.
Rudy makes a very good argument against abortion. It changed my
mind, and I've not yet read an adequate counter. Up until I read
it, I was as much in favor of abortion as you are.
The pro-abortion mob have to lie to themselves, and to others,
about the moral and physical status of the entity they wish to
kill. They claim it isn't human, or isn't "a" human, but it
clearly is. They claim it isn't a person, but they cannot give a
coherent definition of person that would exclude the developing
unborn human being.
Exactly.
The key point is that their definition of person is contrived, and
incoherent. The mere fact of live birth certainly isn't what creates
a person - the just-born baby is no different physically or mentally
from the baby a minute or a few seconds before birth. We have proved
that mental ability cannot be what makes for a person, because fully
competent adult humans who are in comas or under anesthesia have no
mental ability whatever during the time they are in that state, and
by no means do we declare them not to be persons - they are persons.
All living human beings are persons, regardless of their stage of
development and regardless of their mental or emotional or moral
ability at any given moment. There is no way around it, except by
some arbitrary and capricious declaration that is intellectually
indefensible.
Nail hit head. That's the convincing argument. If anybody has a solid
counter, I'd like to read it.
Start here, life can only begin at birth:

<http://tinyurl.com/nrd33o4>

<http://wonkette.com/605773/texas-defunding-of-planned-parenthood-
improving-womens-health-by-killing-them>

<http://tinyurl.com/hymyr43

<http://www.vox.com/2016/8/30/12709638/teen-pregnancy-birth-control>

<http://tinyurl.com/hv52cog>

<http://tinyurl.com/p78s6nl>

<http://tinyurl.com/q8ufgvj>

<http://tinyurl.com/nppjsbe>

<http://tinyurl.com/257n5k6>

<http://tinyurl.com/ovqrxv6>

<http://rhrealitycheck.org/>

<http://www.plannedparenthood.org>

<http://www.imnotsorry.net>

<http://www.prochoice.org>

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planned_Parenthood>

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margaret_Sanger>

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_pro-choice_movement>

<http://www.mariestopes.org>

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marie_Stopes_International>

<https://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/08/15/1412371/-New-England-
Journal-Of-Medicine-Will-Spin-GOP-Anti-Choice-Heads-And-Expose-The-Truth-
About-PP?detail=emailclassic>

<http://tinyurl.com/q45xwfv>
Ted
2017-04-16 01:57:18 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ted
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Ted
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Ted
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
http://www.journalgazette.net/news/us/20170415/in-states-tide-t
urning -a gainst
So abortion is "settled" law?
Perhaps it isn't as "settled" as the left would like us to think.
It's settled. Not only is it settled by law, the Constitution
and basic human rights and decency, but by technology.
So human rights and decency make it acceptable to kill children?
No child is involved in any abortion. I know, I've seen many
abortions.
Rudy makes a very good argument against abortion. It changed my
mind, and I've not yet read an adequate counter. Up until I read
it, I was as much in favor of abortion as you are.
The pro-abortion mob have to lie to themselves, and to others,
about the moral and physical status of the entity they wish to
kill. They claim it isn't human, or isn't "a" human, but it
clearly is. They claim it isn't a person, but they cannot give a
coherent definition of person that would exclude the developing
unborn human being.
Exactly.
The key point is that their definition of person is contrived, and
incoherent. The mere fact of live birth certainly isn't what creates
a person - the just-born baby is no different physically or mentally
from the baby a minute or a few seconds before birth. We have proved
that mental ability cannot be what makes for a person, because fully
competent adult humans who are in comas or under anesthesia have no
mental ability whatever during the time they are in that state, and
by no means do we declare them not to be persons - they are persons.
All living human beings are persons, regardless of their stage of
development and regardless of their mental or emotional or moral
ability at any given moment. There is no way around it, except by
some arbitrary and capricious declaration that is intellectually
indefensible.
Nail hit head. That's the convincing argument. If anybody has a solid
counter, I'd like to read it.
No. Now that you've read Rudy's argument, tell us where it fails. I'm eager
to be re-converted to "pro-choice"*.

*Rudy also pointed out the hypocrisy of the term "pro-choice".
Adam A. Wanderer
2017-04-16 02:10:26 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ted
Post by Ted
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Ted
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Ted
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
http://www.journalgazette.net/news/us/20170415/in-states-tide
-t urning -a gainst
So abortion is "settled" law?
Perhaps it isn't as "settled" as the left would like us to think.
It's settled. Not only is it settled by law, the
Constitution and basic human rights and decency, but by
technology.
So human rights and decency make it acceptable to kill
children?
No child is involved in any abortion. I know, I've seen many
abortions.
Rudy makes a very good argument against abortion. It changed my
mind, and I've not yet read an adequate counter. Up until I read
it, I was as much in favor of abortion as you are.
The pro-abortion mob have to lie to themselves, and to others,
about the moral and physical status of the entity they wish to
kill. They claim it isn't human, or isn't "a" human, but it
clearly is. They claim it isn't a person, but they cannot give a
coherent definition of person that would exclude the developing
unborn human being.
Exactly.
The key point is that their definition of person is contrived, and
incoherent. The mere fact of live birth certainly isn't what
creates a person - the just-born baby is no different physically or
mentally from the baby a minute or a few seconds before birth. We
have proved that mental ability cannot be what makes for a person,
because fully competent adult humans who are in comas or under
anesthesia have no mental ability whatever during the time they are
in that state, and by no means do we declare them not to be persons
- they are persons.
All living human beings are persons, regardless of their stage of
development and regardless of their mental or emotional or moral
ability at any given moment. There is no way around it, except by
some arbitrary and capricious declaration that is intellectually
indefensible.
Nail hit head. That's the convincing argument. If anybody has a
solid counter, I'd like to read it.
No. Now that you've read Rudy's argument, tell us where it fails. I'm
eager to be re-converted to "pro-choice"*.
*Rudy also pointed out the hypocrisy of the term "pro-choice".
So Rudy is an anti-choice, forced-birther, pro-liar. What else is new?
Rudy doesn't know his head from a hole in the ground. Start here:

<http://www.imnotsorry.net>
Ted
2017-04-16 02:29:02 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
Post by Ted
Post by Ted
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Ted
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Ted
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
http://www.journalgazette.net/news/us/20170415/in-states-tide
-t urning -a gainst
So abortion is "settled" law?
Perhaps it isn't as "settled" as the left would like us to think.
It's settled. Not only is it settled by law, the
Constitution and basic human rights and decency, but by
technology.
So human rights and decency make it acceptable to kill children?
No child is involved in any abortion. I know, I've seen many
abortions.
Rudy makes a very good argument against abortion. It changed my
mind, and I've not yet read an adequate counter. Up until I read
it, I was as much in favor of abortion as you are.
The pro-abortion mob have to lie to themselves, and to others,
about the moral and physical status of the entity they wish to
kill. They claim it isn't human, or isn't "a" human, but it
clearly is. They claim it isn't a person, but they cannot give a
coherent definition of person that would exclude the developing
unborn human being.
Exactly.
The key point is that their definition of person is contrived, and
incoherent. The mere fact of live birth certainly isn't what
creates a person - the just-born baby is no different physically or
mentally from the baby a minute or a few seconds before birth. We
have proved that mental ability cannot be what makes for a person,
because fully competent adult humans who are in comas or under
anesthesia have no mental ability whatever during the time they are
in that state, and by no means do we declare them not to be persons
- they are persons.
All living human beings are persons, regardless of their stage of
development and regardless of their mental or emotional or moral
ability at any given moment. There is no way around it, except by
some arbitrary and capricious declaration that is intellectually
indefensible.
Nail hit head. That's the convincing argument. If anybody has a
solid counter, I'd like to read it.
No. Now that you've read Rudy's argument, tell us where it fails. I'm
eager to be re-converted to "pro-choice"*.
*Rudy also pointed out the hypocrisy of the term "pro-choice".
So Rudy is an anti-choice, forced-birther, pro-liar. What else is new?
<http://www.imnotsorry.net>
Do you consider yourself pro-choice?
Rudy Canoza
2017-04-16 02:46:38 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ted
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
Post by Ted
Post by Ted
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Ted
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Ted
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
http://www.journalgazette.net/news/us/20170415/in-states-tide
-t urning -a gainst
So abortion is "settled" law?
Perhaps it isn't as "settled" as the left would like us to think.
It's settled. Not only is it settled by law, the
Constitution and basic human rights and decency, but by
technology.
So human rights and decency make it acceptable to kill children?
No child is involved in any abortion. I know, I've seen many
abortions.
Rudy makes a very good argument against abortion. It changed my
mind, and I've not yet read an adequate counter. Up until I read
it, I was as much in favor of abortion as you are.
The pro-abortion mob have to lie to themselves, and to others,
about the moral and physical status of the entity they wish to
kill. They claim it isn't human, or isn't "a" human, but it
clearly is. They claim it isn't a person, but they cannot give a
coherent definition of person that would exclude the developing
unborn human being.
Exactly.
The key point is that their definition of person is contrived, and
incoherent. The mere fact of live birth certainly isn't what
creates a person - the just-born baby is no different physically or
mentally from the baby a minute or a few seconds before birth. We
have proved that mental ability cannot be what makes for a person,
because fully competent adult humans who are in comas or under
anesthesia have no mental ability whatever during the time they are
in that state, and by no means do we declare them not to be persons
- they are persons.
All living human beings are persons, regardless of their stage of
development and regardless of their mental or emotional or moral
ability at any given moment. There is no way around it, except by
some arbitrary and capricious declaration that is intellectually
indefensible.
Nail hit head. That's the convincing argument. If anybody has a
solid counter, I'd like to read it.
No. Now that you've read Rudy's argument, tell us where it fails. I'm
eager to be re-converted to "pro-choice"*.
*Rudy also pointed out the hypocrisy of the term "pro-choice".
So Rudy is an anti-choice, forced-birther, pro-liar. What else is new?
<http://www.imnotsorry.net>
This is bullshit. Lots of women *are* sorry, including the late Norma
McCorvey, the "Roe" in Roe v. Wade.

There is always an element of desperation in these "I'm not sorry"
bullshit claims - the women *clearly* are trying to convince themselves,
and it's not working.
Post by Ted
Do you consider yourself pro-choice?
Adam A. Wanderer
2017-04-16 03:14:29 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Ted
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
Post by Ted
Post by Ted
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Ted
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Ted
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
http://www.journalgazette.net/news/us/20170415/in-states-t
ide -t urning -a gainst
So abortion is "settled" law?
Perhaps it isn't as "settled" as the left would like us to think.
It's settled. Not only is it settled by law, the
Constitution and basic human rights and decency, but by
technology.
So human rights and decency make it acceptable to kill children?
No child is involved in any abortion. I know, I've seen
many abortions.
Rudy makes a very good argument against abortion. It changed
my mind, and I've not yet read an adequate counter. Up until
I read it, I was as much in favor of abortion as you are.
The pro-abortion mob have to lie to themselves, and to others,
about the moral and physical status of the entity they wish to
kill. They claim it isn't human, or isn't "a" human, but it
clearly is. They claim it isn't a person, but they cannot
give a coherent definition of person that would exclude the
developing unborn human being.
Exactly.
The key point is that their definition of person is contrived,
and incoherent. The mere fact of live birth certainly isn't
what creates a person - the just-born baby is no different
physically or mentally from the baby a minute or a few seconds
before birth. We have proved that mental ability cannot be what
makes for a person, because fully competent adult humans who are
in comas or under anesthesia have no mental ability whatever
during the time they are in that state, and by no means do we
declare them not to be persons - they are persons.
All living human beings are persons, regardless of their stage
of development and regardless of their mental or emotional or
moral ability at any given moment. There is no way around it,
except by some arbitrary and capricious declaration that is
intellectually indefensible.
Nail hit head. That's the convincing argument. If anybody has a
solid counter, I'd like to read it.
No. Now that you've read Rudy's argument, tell us where it fails.
I'm eager to be re-converted to "pro-choice"*.
*Rudy also pointed out the hypocrisy of the term "pro-choice".
So Rudy is an anti-choice, forced-birther, pro-liar. What else is
new? Rudy doesn't know his head from a hole in the ground. Start
<http://www.imnotsorry.net>
This is bullshit. Lots of women *are* sorry, including the late Norma
McCorvey, the "Roe" in Roe v. Wade.
There is always an element of desperation in these "I'm not sorry"
bullshit claims - the women *clearly* are trying to convince
themselves, and it's not working.
Post by Ted
Do you consider yourself pro-choice?
No woman is ever sorry for an abortion. All women who give birth are
truly sorry they gave birth!!! All praise abortion.
Adam A. Wanderer
2017-04-16 02:49:08 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ted
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
Post by Ted
Post by Ted
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Ted
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Ted
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
http://www.journalgazette.net/news/us/20170415/in-states-ti
de -t urning -a gainst
So abortion is "settled" law?
Perhaps it isn't as "settled" as the left would like us to think.
It's settled. Not only is it settled by law, the
Constitution and basic human rights and decency, but by
technology.
So human rights and decency make it acceptable to kill children?
No child is involved in any abortion. I know, I've seen many
abortions.
Rudy makes a very good argument against abortion. It changed
my mind, and I've not yet read an adequate counter. Up until I
read it, I was as much in favor of abortion as you are.
The pro-abortion mob have to lie to themselves, and to others,
about the moral and physical status of the entity they wish to
kill. They claim it isn't human, or isn't "a" human, but it
clearly is. They claim it isn't a person, but they cannot give
a coherent definition of person that would exclude the
developing unborn human being.
Exactly.
The key point is that their definition of person is contrived,
and incoherent. The mere fact of live birth certainly isn't what
creates a person - the just-born baby is no different physically
or mentally from the baby a minute or a few seconds before birth.
We have proved that mental ability cannot be what makes for a
person, because fully competent adult humans who are in comas or
under anesthesia have no mental ability whatever during the time
they are in that state, and by no means do we declare them not to
be persons - they are persons.
All living human beings are persons, regardless of their stage of
development and regardless of their mental or emotional or moral
ability at any given moment. There is no way around it, except
by some arbitrary and capricious declaration that is
intellectually indefensible.
Nail hit head. That's the convincing argument. If anybody has a
solid counter, I'd like to read it.
No. Now that you've read Rudy's argument, tell us where it fails.
I'm eager to be re-converted to "pro-choice"*.
*Rudy also pointed out the hypocrisy of the term "pro-choice".
So Rudy is an anti-choice, forced-birther, pro-liar. What else is
new? Rudy doesn't know his head from a hole in the ground. Start
<http://www.imnotsorry.net>
Do you consider yourself pro-choice?
No. All women should abort, like it or not.
Ted
2017-04-16 02:52:48 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
Post by Ted
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
Post by Ted
Post by Ted
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Ted
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Ted
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
http://www.journalgazette.net/news/us/20170415/in-states-ti
de -t urning -a gainst
So abortion is "settled" law?
Perhaps it isn't as "settled" as the left would like us to think.
It's settled. Not only is it settled by law, the
Constitution and basic human rights and decency, but by
technology.
So human rights and decency make it acceptable to kill children?
No child is involved in any abortion. I know, I've seen many
abortions.
Rudy makes a very good argument against abortion. It changed
my mind, and I've not yet read an adequate counter. Up until I
read it, I was as much in favor of abortion as you are.
The pro-abortion mob have to lie to themselves, and to others,
about the moral and physical status of the entity they wish to
kill. They claim it isn't human, or isn't "a" human, but it
clearly is. They claim it isn't a person, but they cannot give
a coherent definition of person that would exclude the
developing unborn human being.
Exactly.
The key point is that their definition of person is contrived,
and incoherent. The mere fact of live birth certainly isn't what
creates a person - the just-born baby is no different physically
or mentally from the baby a minute or a few seconds before birth.
We have proved that mental ability cannot be what makes for a
person, because fully competent adult humans who are in comas or
under anesthesia have no mental ability whatever during the time
they are in that state, and by no means do we declare them not to
be persons - they are persons.
All living human beings are persons, regardless of their stage of
development and regardless of their mental or emotional or moral
ability at any given moment. There is no way around it, except
by some arbitrary and capricious declaration that is
intellectually indefensible.
Nail hit head. That's the convincing argument. If anybody has a
solid counter, I'd like to read it.
No. Now that you've read Rudy's argument, tell us where it fails.
I'm eager to be re-converted to "pro-choice"*.
*Rudy also pointed out the hypocrisy of the term "pro-choice".
So Rudy is an anti-choice, forced-birther, pro-liar. What else is
new? Rudy doesn't know his head from a hole in the ground. Start
<http://www.imnotsorry.net>
Do you consider yourself pro-choice?
No. All women should abort, like it or not.
Wow, kewl.
Rudy Canoza
2017-04-16 03:00:19 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ted
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
Post by Ted
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
Post by Ted
Post by Ted
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Ted
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Ted
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
http://www.journalgazette.net/news/us/20170415/in-states-ti
de -t urning -a gainst
So abortion is "settled" law?
Perhaps it isn't as "settled" as the left would like us to
think.
It's settled. Not only is it settled by law, the
Constitution and basic human rights and decency, but by
technology.
So human rights and decency make it acceptable to kill children?
No child is involved in any abortion. I know, I've seen many
abortions.
Rudy makes a very good argument against abortion. It changed
my mind, and I've not yet read an adequate counter. Up until I
read it, I was as much in favor of abortion as you are.
The pro-abortion mob have to lie to themselves, and to others,
about the moral and physical status of the entity they wish to
kill. They claim it isn't human, or isn't "a" human, but it
clearly is. They claim it isn't a person, but they cannot give
a coherent definition of person that would exclude the
developing unborn human being.
Exactly.
The key point is that their definition of person is contrived,
and incoherent. The mere fact of live birth certainly isn't what
creates a person - the just-born baby is no different physically
or mentally from the baby a minute or a few seconds before birth.
We have proved that mental ability cannot be what makes for a
person, because fully competent adult humans who are in comas or
under anesthesia have no mental ability whatever during the time
they are in that state, and by no means do we declare them not to
be persons - they are persons.
All living human beings are persons, regardless of their stage of
development and regardless of their mental or emotional or moral
ability at any given moment. There is no way around it, except
by some arbitrary and capricious declaration that is
intellectually indefensible.
Nail hit head. That's the convincing argument. If anybody has a
solid counter, I'd like to read it.
No. Now that you've read Rudy's argument, tell us where it fails.
I'm eager to be re-converted to "pro-choice"*.
*Rudy also pointed out the hypocrisy of the term "pro-choice".
So Rudy is an anti-choice, forced-birther, pro-liar. What else is
new? Rudy doesn't know his head from a hole in the ground. Start
<http://www.imnotsorry.net>
Do you consider yourself pro-choice?
No. All women should abort, like it or not.
Wow, kewl.
W.T.S. is a fascist, of course.
Ted
2017-04-16 03:43:35 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Ted
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
Post by Ted
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
Post by Ted
Post by Ted
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Ted
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Ted
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
http://www.journalgazette.net/news/us/20170415/in-states-ti
de -t urning -a gainst
So abortion is "settled" law?
Perhaps it isn't as "settled" as the left would like us to
think.
It's settled. Not only is it settled by law, the
Constitution and basic human rights and decency, but by
technology.
So human rights and decency make it acceptable to kill children?
No child is involved in any abortion. I know, I've seen many
abortions.
Rudy makes a very good argument against abortion. It changed
my mind, and I've not yet read an adequate counter. Up until I
read it, I was as much in favor of abortion as you are.
The pro-abortion mob have to lie to themselves, and to others,
about the moral and physical status of the entity they wish to
kill. They claim it isn't human, or isn't "a" human, but it
clearly is. They claim it isn't a person, but they cannot give
a coherent definition of person that would exclude the
developing unborn human being.
Exactly.
The key point is that their definition of person is contrived,
and incoherent. The mere fact of live birth certainly isn't what
creates a person - the just-born baby is no different physically
or mentally from the baby a minute or a few seconds before birth.
We have proved that mental ability cannot be what makes for a
person, because fully competent adult humans who are in comas or
under anesthesia have no mental ability whatever during the time
they are in that state, and by no means do we declare them not to
be persons - they are persons.
All living human beings are persons, regardless of their stage of
development and regardless of their mental or emotional or moral
ability at any given moment. There is no way around it, except
by some arbitrary and capricious declaration that is
intellectually indefensible.
Nail hit head. That's the convincing argument. If anybody has a
solid counter, I'd like to read it.
No. Now that you've read Rudy's argument, tell us where it fails.
I'm eager to be re-converted to "pro-choice"*.
*Rudy also pointed out the hypocrisy of the term "pro-choice".
So Rudy is an anti-choice, forced-birther, pro-liar. What else is
new? Rudy doesn't know his head from a hole in the ground. Start
<http://www.imnotsorry.net>
Do you consider yourself pro-choice?
No. All women should abort, like it or not.
Wow, kewl.
W.T.S. is a fascist, of course.
LOL. She's pretty damn extreme, that's for certain.
Adam A. Wanderer
2017-04-16 04:51:22 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Ted
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
Post by Ted
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
Post by Ted
Post by Ted
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Ted
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Ted
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
http://www.journalgazette.net/news/us/20170415/in-state
s-ti de -t urning -a gainst
So abortion is "settled" law?
Perhaps it isn't as "settled" as the left would like
us to think.
It's settled. Not only is it settled by law, the
Constitution and basic human rights and decency, but by
technology.
So human rights and decency make it acceptable to kill
children?
No child is involved in any abortion. I know, I've seen
many abortions.
Rudy makes a very good argument against abortion. It
changed my mind, and I've not yet read an adequate
counter. Up until I read it, I was as much in favor of
abortion as you are.
The pro-abortion mob have to lie to themselves, and to
others, about the moral and physical status of the entity
they wish to kill. They claim it isn't human, or isn't "a"
human, but it clearly is. They claim it isn't a person,
but they cannot give a coherent definition of person that
would exclude the developing unborn human being.
Exactly.
The key point is that their definition of person is
contrived, and incoherent. The mere fact of live birth
certainly isn't what creates a person - the just-born baby is
no different physically or mentally from the baby a minute or
a few seconds before birth.
We have proved that mental ability cannot be what makes for a
person, because fully competent adult humans who are in comas
or under anesthesia have no mental ability whatever during
the time they are in that state, and by no means do we
declare them not to be persons - they are persons.
All living human beings are persons, regardless of their
stage of development and regardless of their mental or
emotional or moral ability at any given moment. There is no
way around it, except by some arbitrary and capricious
declaration that is intellectually indefensible.
Nail hit head. That's the convincing argument. If anybody has
a solid counter, I'd like to read it.
No. Now that you've read Rudy's argument, tell us where it
fails. I'm eager to be re-converted to "pro-choice"*.
*Rudy also pointed out the hypocrisy of the term "pro-choice".
So Rudy is an anti-choice, forced-birther, pro-liar. What else
is new? Rudy doesn't know his head from a hole in the ground.
<http://www.imnotsorry.net>
Do you consider yourself pro-choice?
No. All women should abort, like it or not.
Wow, kewl.
W.T.S. is a fascist, of course.
<http://tinyurl.com/nrd33o4>

<http://wonkette.com/605773/texas-defunding-of-planned-parenthood-
improving-womens-health-by-killing-them>

<http://tinyurl.com/hymyr43

<http://www.vox.com/2016/8/30/12709638/teen-pregnancy-birth-control>

<http://tinyurl.com/hv52cog>

<http://tinyurl.com/p78s6nl>

<http://tinyurl.com/q8ufgvj>

<http://tinyurl.com/nppjsbe>

<http://tinyurl.com/257n5k6>

<http://tinyurl.com/ovqrxv6>

<http://rhrealitycheck.org/>

<http://www.plannedparenthood.org>

<http://www.imnotsorry.net>

<http://www.prochoice.org>

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planned_Parenthood>

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margaret_Sanger>

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_pro-choice_movement>

<http://www.mariestopes.org>

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marie_Stopes_International>

<https://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/08/15/1412371/-New-England-
Journal-Of-Medicine-Will-Spin-GOP-Anti-Choice-Heads-And-Expose-The-Truth-
About-PP?detail=emailclassic>

<http://tinyurl.com/q45xwfv>
Adam A. Wanderer
2017-04-16 03:20:18 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
Post by Ted
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
Post by Ted
Post by Ted
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Ted
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Ted
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
http://www.journalgazette.net/news/us/20170415/in-states-
ti de -t urning -a gainst
So abortion is "settled" law?
Perhaps it isn't as "settled" as the left would like us
to think.
It's settled. Not only is it settled by law, the
Constitution and basic human rights and decency, but by
technology.
So human rights and decency make it acceptable to kill children?
No child is involved in any abortion. I know, I've seen
many abortions.
Rudy makes a very good argument against abortion. It changed
my mind, and I've not yet read an adequate counter. Up until
I read it, I was as much in favor of abortion as you are.
The pro-abortion mob have to lie to themselves, and to
others, about the moral and physical status of the entity
they wish to kill. They claim it isn't human, or isn't "a"
human, but it clearly is. They claim it isn't a person, but
they cannot give a coherent definition of person that would
exclude the developing unborn human being.
Exactly.
The key point is that their definition of person is contrived,
and incoherent. The mere fact of live birth certainly isn't
what creates a person - the just-born baby is no different
physically or mentally from the baby a minute or a few seconds
before birth.
We have proved that mental ability cannot be what makes for a
person, because fully competent adult humans who are in comas
or under anesthesia have no mental ability whatever during the
time they are in that state, and by no means do we declare them
not to be persons - they are persons.
All living human beings are persons, regardless of their stage
of development and regardless of their mental or emotional or
moral ability at any given moment. There is no way around it,
except by some arbitrary and capricious declaration that is
intellectually indefensible.
Nail hit head. That's the convincing argument. If anybody has a
solid counter, I'd like to read it.
No. Now that you've read Rudy's argument, tell us where it fails.
I'm eager to be re-converted to "pro-choice"*.
*Rudy also pointed out the hypocrisy of the term "pro-choice".
So Rudy is an anti-choice, forced-birther, pro-liar. What else is
new? Rudy doesn't know his head from a hole in the ground. Start
<http://www.imnotsorry.net>
Do you consider yourself pro-choice?
No. All women should abort, like it or not.
You should be strangled.
Why? For telling the truth? For performing public services.
Abortion is good, decent and wholesome. Childbirth is the
very sickest form of perversion!!!
Adam A. Wanderer
2017-04-16 02:44:55 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
Post by Ted
Post by Ted
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Ted
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Ted
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
http://www.journalgazette.net/news/us/20170415/in-states-ti
de -t urning -a gainst
So abortion is "settled" law?
Perhaps it isn't as "settled" as the left would like us to think.
It's settled. Not only is it settled by law, the
Constitution and basic human rights and decency, but by
technology.
So human rights and decency make it acceptable to kill children?
No child is involved in any abortion. I know, I've seen many
abortions.
Rudy makes a very good argument against abortion. It changed
my mind, and I've not yet read an adequate counter. Up until I
read it, I was as much in favor of abortion as you are.
The pro-abortion mob have to lie to themselves, and to others,
about the moral and physical status of the entity they wish to
kill. They claim it isn't human, or isn't "a" human, but it
clearly is. They claim it isn't a person, but they cannot give
a coherent definition of person that would exclude the
developing unborn human being.
Exactly.
The key point is that their definition of person is contrived,
and incoherent. The mere fact of live birth certainly isn't what
creates a person - the just-born baby is no different physically
or mentally from the baby a minute or a few seconds before birth.
We have proved that mental ability cannot be what makes for a
person, because fully competent adult humans who are in comas or
under anesthesia have no mental ability whatever during the time
they are in that state, and by no means do we declare them not to
be persons - they are persons.
All living human beings are persons, regardless of their stage of
development and regardless of their mental or emotional or moral
ability at any given moment. There is no way around it, except
by some arbitrary and capricious declaration that is
intellectually indefensible.
Nail hit head. That's the convincing argument. If anybody has a
solid counter, I'd like to read it.
No. Now that you've read Rudy's argument, tell us where it fails.
I'm eager to be re-converted to "pro-choice"*.
*Rudy also pointed out the hypocrisy of the term "pro-choice".
So Rudy is an anti-choice, forced-birther
No. I am pro-choice, where choice is morally permitted. You are not
morally permitted to "choose" to murder someone.
The left are entirely anti-choice.
Abortion is never, ever "murder". It's a public service that will
someday be manditory, like in China. We won't even understand why
it wasn't manditory. Remember, abortion is beautiful!
Ted
2017-04-16 03:43:34 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ted
Post by Ted
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Ted
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Ted
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
http://www.journalgazette.net/news/us/20170415/in-states-tide-t
urning -a gainst
So abortion is "settled" law?
Perhaps it isn't as "settled" as the left would like us to think.
It's settled. Not only is it settled by law, the Constitution
and basic human rights and decency, but by technology.
So human rights and decency make it acceptable to kill children?
No child is involved in any abortion. I know, I've seen many
abortions.
Rudy makes a very good argument against abortion. It changed my
mind, and I've not yet read an adequate counter. Up until I read
it, I was as much in favor of abortion as you are.
The pro-abortion mob have to lie to themselves, and to others,
about the moral and physical status of the entity they wish to
kill. They claim it isn't human, or isn't "a" human, but it
clearly is. They claim it isn't a person, but they cannot give a
coherent definition of person that would exclude the developing
unborn human being.
Exactly.
The key point is that their definition of person is contrived, and
incoherent. The mere fact of live birth certainly isn't what creates
a person - the just-born baby is no different physically or mentally
from the baby a minute or a few seconds before birth. We have proved
that mental ability cannot be what makes for a person, because fully
competent adult humans who are in comas or under anesthesia have no
mental ability whatever during the time they are in that state, and
by no means do we declare them not to be persons - they are persons.
All living human beings are persons, regardless of their stage of
development and regardless of their mental or emotional or moral
ability at any given moment. There is no way around it, except by
some arbitrary and capricious declaration that is intellectually
indefensible.
Nail hit head. That's the convincing argument. If anybody has a solid
counter, I'd like to read it.
No. Now that you've read Rudy's argument, tell us where it fails. I'm eager
to be re-converted to "pro-choice"*.
<crickets>
Adam A. Wanderer
2017-04-16 04:50:14 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ted
Post by Ted
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Ted
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Ted
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
http://www.journalgazette.net/news/us/20170415/in-states-tid
e-t urning -a gainst
So abortion is "settled" law?
Perhaps it isn't as "settled" as the left would like us to think.
It's settled. Not only is it settled by law, the
Constitution and basic human rights and decency, but by
technology.
So human rights and decency make it acceptable to kill children?
No child is involved in any abortion. I know, I've seen many
abortions.
Rudy makes a very good argument against abortion. It changed my
mind, and I've not yet read an adequate counter. Up until I
read it, I was as much in favor of abortion as you are.
The pro-abortion mob have to lie to themselves, and to others,
about the moral and physical status of the entity they wish to
kill. They claim it isn't human, or isn't "a" human, but it
clearly is. They claim it isn't a person, but they cannot give
a coherent definition of person that would exclude the
developing unborn human being.
Exactly.
The key point is that their definition of person is contrived, and
incoherent. The mere fact of live birth certainly isn't what
creates a person - the just-born baby is no different physically
or mentally from the baby a minute or a few seconds before birth.
We have proved that mental ability cannot be what makes for a
person, because fully competent adult humans who are in comas or
under anesthesia have no mental ability whatever during the time
they are in that state, and by no means do we declare them not to
be persons - they are persons.
All living human beings are persons, regardless of their stage of
development and regardless of their mental or emotional or moral
ability at any given moment. There is no way around it, except by
some arbitrary and capricious declaration that is intellectually
indefensible.
Nail hit head. That's the convincing argument. If anybody has a
solid counter, I'd like to read it.
No. Now that you've read Rudy's argument, tell us where it fails. I'm
eager to be re-converted to "pro-choice"*.
<http://tinyurl.com/nrd33o4>

<http://wonkette.com/605773/texas-defunding-of-planned-parenthood-
improving-womens-health-by-killing-them>

<http://tinyurl.com/hymyr43

<http://www.vox.com/2016/8/30/12709638/teen-pregnancy-birth-control>

<http://tinyurl.com/hv52cog>

<http://tinyurl.com/p78s6nl>

<http://tinyurl.com/q8ufgvj>

<http://tinyurl.com/nppjsbe>

<http://tinyurl.com/257n5k6>

<http://tinyurl.com/ovqrxv6>

<http://rhrealitycheck.org/>

<http://www.plannedparenthood.org>

<http://www.imnotsorry.net>

<http://www.prochoice.org>

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planned_Parenthood>

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margaret_Sanger>

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_pro-choice_movement>

<http://www.mariestopes.org>

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marie_Stopes_International>

<https://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/08/15/1412371/-New-England-
Journal-Of-Medicine-Will-Spin-GOP-Anti-Choice-Heads-And-Expose-The-Truth-
About-PP?detail=emailclassic>

<http://tinyurl.com/q45xwfv>
Ted
2017-04-16 05:06:15 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
Post by Ted
Post by Ted
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Ted
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Ted
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
http://www.journalgazette.net/news/us/20170415/in-states-tid
e-t urning -a gainst
So abortion is "settled" law?
Perhaps it isn't as "settled" as the left would like us to think.
It's settled. Not only is it settled by law, the
Constitution and basic human rights and decency, but by
technology.
So human rights and decency make it acceptable to kill children?
No child is involved in any abortion. I know, I've seen many
abortions.
Rudy makes a very good argument against abortion. It changed my
mind, and I've not yet read an adequate counter. Up until I
read it, I was as much in favor of abortion as you are.
The pro-abortion mob have to lie to themselves, and to others,
about the moral and physical status of the entity they wish to
kill. They claim it isn't human, or isn't "a" human, but it
clearly is. They claim it isn't a person, but they cannot give
a coherent definition of person that would exclude the
developing unborn human being.
Exactly.
The key point is that their definition of person is contrived, and
incoherent. The mere fact of live birth certainly isn't what
creates a person - the just-born baby is no different physically
or mentally from the baby a minute or a few seconds before birth.
We have proved that mental ability cannot be what makes for a
person, because fully competent adult humans who are in comas or
under anesthesia have no mental ability whatever during the time
they are in that state, and by no means do we declare them not to
be persons - they are persons.
All living human beings are persons, regardless of their stage of
development and regardless of their mental or emotional or moral
ability at any given moment. There is no way around it, except by
some arbitrary and capricious declaration that is intellectually
indefensible.
Nail hit head. That's the convincing argument. If anybody has a
solid counter, I'd like to read it.
No. Now that you've read Rudy's argument, tell us where it fails. I'm
eager to be re-converted to "pro-choice"*.
<http://tinyurl.com/nrd33o4>
<http://wonkette.com/605773/texas-defunding-of-planned-parenthood-
improving-womens-health-by-killing-them>
<http://tinyurl.com/hymyr43
<http://www.vox.com/2016/8/30/12709638/teen-pregnancy-birth-control>
<http://tinyurl.com/hv52cog>
<http://tinyurl.com/p78s6nl>
<http://tinyurl.com/q8ufgvj>
<http://tinyurl.com/nppjsbe>
<http://tinyurl.com/257n5k6>
<http://tinyurl.com/ovqrxv6>
<http://rhrealitycheck.org/>
<http://www.plannedparenthood.org>
<http://www.imnotsorry.net>
<http://www.prochoice.org>
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planned_Parenthood>
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margaret_Sanger>
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_pro-choice_movement>
<http://www.mariestopes.org>
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marie_Stopes_International>
<https://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/08/15/1412371/-New-England-
Journal-Of-Medicine-Will-Spin-GOP-Anti-Choice-Heads-And-Expose-The-Truth-
About-PP?detail=emailclassic>
<http://tinyurl.com/q45xwfv>
Are you unable to tell us in your own words, Adam?
Adam A. Wanderer
2017-04-16 02:57:07 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ted
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Ted
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Ted
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
http://www.journalgazette.net/news/us/20170415/in-states-tide
-t urning -a gainst
So abortion is "settled" law?
Perhaps it isn't as "settled" as the left would like us to think.
It's settled. Not only is it settled by law, the
Constitution and basic human rights and decency, but by
technology.
So human rights and decency make it acceptable to kill
children?
No child is involved in any abortion. I know, I've seen many
abortions.
Rudy makes a very good argument against abortion. It changed my
mind, and I've not yet read an adequate counter. Up until I read
it, I was as much in favor of abortion as you are.
The pro-abortion mob have to lie to themselves, and to others,
about the moral and physical status of the entity they wish to
kill. They claim it isn't human, or isn't "a" human, but it
clearly is. They claim it isn't a person, but they cannot give a
coherent definition of person that would exclude the developing
unborn human being.
Exactly.
The key point is that their definition of person is contrived, and
incoherent. The mere fact of live birth certainly isn't what
creates a person - the just-born baby is no different physically or
mentally from the baby a minute or a few seconds before birth. We
have proved that mental ability cannot be what makes for a person,
because fully competent adult humans who are in comas or under
anesthesia have no mental ability whatever during the time they are
in that state, and by no means do we declare them not to be persons
- they are persons.
All living human beings are persons, regardless of their stage of
development and regardless of their mental or emotional or moral
ability at any given moment. There is no way around it, except by
some arbitrary and capricious declaration that is intellectually
indefensible.
Nail hit head. That's the convincing argument. If anybody has a
solid counter, I'd like to read it.
Pure bullshit. You can't even define "life", being a murderer.
Abortion is never "murder", it's a public service that should be
compulsive. All praise to abortion!

<http://www.imnotsorry.net>
Adam A. Wanderer
2017-04-16 03:21:41 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
Post by Ted
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Ted
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Ted
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
http://www.journalgazette.net/news/us/20170415/in-states-ti
de -t urning -a gainst
So abortion is "settled" law?
Perhaps it isn't as "settled" as the left would like us to think.
It's settled. Not only is it settled by law, the
Constitution and basic human rights and decency, but by
technology.
So human rights and decency make it acceptable to kill children?
No child is involved in any abortion. I know, I've seen many
abortions.
Rudy makes a very good argument against abortion. It changed
my mind, and I've not yet read an adequate counter. Up until I
read it, I was as much in favor of abortion as you are.
The pro-abortion mob have to lie to themselves, and to others,
about the moral and physical status of the entity they wish to
kill. They claim it isn't human, or isn't "a" human, but it
clearly is. They claim it isn't a person, but they cannot give
a coherent definition of person that would exclude the
developing unborn human being.
Exactly.
The key point is that their definition of person is contrived,
and incoherent. The mere fact of live birth certainly isn't what
creates a person - the just-born baby is no different physically
or mentally from the baby a minute or a few seconds before birth.
We have proved that mental ability cannot be what makes for a
person, because fully competent adult humans who are in comas or
under anesthesia have no mental ability whatever during the time
they are in that state, and by no means do we declare them not to
be persons - they are persons.
All living human beings are persons, regardless of their stage of
development and regardless of their mental or emotional or moral
ability at any given moment. There is no way around it, except
by some arbitrary and capricious declaration that is
intellectually indefensible.
Nail hit head. That's the convincing argument. If anybody has a
solid counter, I'd like to read it.
Pure bullshit. You can't even define "life", being a murderer.
Abortion is never "murder"
It is *always* murder, by the very definition of murder. It is the
deliberate killing of another human being other than in self defense,
and that is murder - always.
Horse shit!!! Abortion is beautiful and wonderful!!! All priase to
abortion!!!

<http://www.imnotsorry.net>
Rudy Canoza
2017-04-16 02:23:52 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ted
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Ted
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Ted
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
http://www.journalgazette.net/news/us/20170415/in-states-tide-turning
-a gainst
So abortion is "settled" law?
Perhaps it isn't as "settled" as the left would like us to think.
It's settled. Not only is it settled by law, the Constitution and
basic human rights and decency, but by technology.
So human rights and decency make it acceptable to kill children?
No child is involved in any abortion. I know, I've seen many
abortions.
Rudy makes a very good argument against abortion. It changed my mind, and
I've not yet read an adequate counter. Up until I read it, I was as much in
favor of abortion as you are.
The pro-abortion mob have to lie to themselves, and to others, about the
moral and physical status of the entity they wish to kill. They claim it
isn't human, or isn't "a" human, but it clearly is. They claim it isn't
a person, but they cannot give a coherent definition of person that would
exclude the developing unborn human being.
Exactly.
The key point is that their definition of person is contrived, and
incoherent. The mere fact of live birth certainly isn't what creates a
person - the just-born baby is no different physically or mentally from
the baby a minute or a few seconds before birth. We have proved that
mental ability cannot be what makes for a person, because fully competent
adult humans who are in comas or under anesthesia have no mental ability
whatever during the time they are in that state, and by no means do we
declare them not to be persons - they are persons.
All living human beings are persons, regardless of their stage of
development and regardless of their mental or emotional or moral ability
at any given moment. There is no way around it, except by some arbitrary
and capricious declaration that is intellectually indefensible.
Nail hit head. That's the convincing argument. If anybody has a solid
counter, I'd like to read it.
All you'll get is unsupported assertions and arbitrary definitions. If
they don't think a human being and a person comes into existence at
conception, they have to say not just when, but also *how* the living
growing developing organism is transformed into a person. Remember,
this is not a legal term, but a moral and philosophical one. A person
is an entity to whom other persons *owe* moral consideration - that is,
a person has rights the impose restrictions on the behavior of others.

The left-wing pro-abortion filth just don't want to think about things
like that. It gets in the way of their hedonism. They are willing to
any sense of moral reasoning aside if it gets in the way of their
childish pursuit of pleasure.
Ted
2017-04-16 02:41:18 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Ted
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Ted
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Ted
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
http://www.journalgazette.net/news/us/20170415/in-states-tide-turning
-a gainst
So abortion is "settled" law?
Perhaps it isn't as "settled" as the left would like us to think.
It's settled. Not only is it settled by law, the Constitution and
basic human rights and decency, but by technology.
So human rights and decency make it acceptable to kill children?
No child is involved in any abortion. I know, I've seen many
abortions.
Rudy makes a very good argument against abortion. It changed my mind, and
I've not yet read an adequate counter. Up until I read it, I was as much in
favor of abortion as you are.
The pro-abortion mob have to lie to themselves, and to others, about the
moral and physical status of the entity they wish to kill. They claim it
isn't human, or isn't "a" human, but it clearly is. They claim it isn't
a person, but they cannot give a coherent definition of person that would
exclude the developing unborn human being.
Exactly.
The key point is that their definition of person is contrived, and
incoherent. The mere fact of live birth certainly isn't what creates a
person - the just-born baby is no different physically or mentally from
the baby a minute or a few seconds before birth. We have proved that
mental ability cannot be what makes for a person, because fully competent
adult humans who are in comas or under anesthesia have no mental ability
whatever during the time they are in that state, and by no means do we
declare them not to be persons - they are persons.
All living human beings are persons, regardless of their stage of
development and regardless of their mental or emotional or moral ability
at any given moment. There is no way around it, except by some arbitrary
and capricious declaration that is intellectually indefensible.
Nail hit head. That's the convincing argument. If anybody has a solid
counter, I'd like to read it.
All you'll get is unsupported assertions and arbitrary definitions. If
they don't think a human being and a person comes into existence at
conception, they have to say not just when, but also *how* the living
growing developing organism is transformed into a person. Remember, this
is not a legal term, but a moral and philosophical one. A person is an
entity to whom other persons *owe* moral consideration - that is, a
person has rights the impose restrictions on the behavior of others.
Yes. As I said, I've yet to read a valid counter-argument.
Post by Rudy Canoza
The left-wing pro-abortion filth just don't want to think about things
like that. It gets in the way of their hedonism. They are willing to
any sense of moral reasoning aside if it gets in the way of their
childish pursuit of pleasure.
Apparently so.
Rudy Canoza
2017-04-16 02:57:22 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ted
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Ted
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Ted
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Ted
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
http://www.journalgazette.net/news/us/20170415/in-states-tide-turning
-a gainst
So abortion is "settled" law?
Perhaps it isn't as "settled" as the left would like us to think.
It's settled. Not only is it settled by law, the Constitution and
basic human rights and decency, but by technology.
So human rights and decency make it acceptable to kill children?
No child is involved in any abortion. I know, I've seen many
abortions.
Rudy makes a very good argument against abortion. It changed my mind, and
I've not yet read an adequate counter. Up until I read it, I was as much in
favor of abortion as you are.
The pro-abortion mob have to lie to themselves, and to others, about the
moral and physical status of the entity they wish to kill. They claim it
isn't human, or isn't "a" human, but it clearly is. They claim it isn't
a person, but they cannot give a coherent definition of person that would
exclude the developing unborn human being.
Exactly.
The key point is that their definition of person is contrived, and
incoherent. The mere fact of live birth certainly isn't what creates a
person - the just-born baby is no different physically or mentally from
the baby a minute or a few seconds before birth. We have proved that
mental ability cannot be what makes for a person, because fully competent
adult humans who are in comas or under anesthesia have no mental ability
whatever during the time they are in that state, and by no means do we
declare them not to be persons - they are persons.
All living human beings are persons, regardless of their stage of
development and regardless of their mental or emotional or moral ability
at any given moment. There is no way around it, except by some arbitrary
and capricious declaration that is intellectually indefensible.
Nail hit head. That's the convincing argument. If anybody has a solid
counter, I'd like to read it.
All you'll get is unsupported assertions and arbitrary definitions. If
they don't think a human being and a person comes into existence at
conception, they have to say not just when, but also *how* the living
growing developing organism is transformed into a person. Remember, this
is not a legal term, but a moral and philosophical one. A person is an
entity to whom other persons *owe* moral consideration - that is, a
person has rights the impose restrictions on the behavior of others.
Yes. As I said, I've yet to read a valid counter-argument.
Post by Rudy Canoza
The left-wing pro-abortion filth just don't want to think about things
like that. It gets in the way of their hedonism. They are willing to
any sense of moral reasoning aside if it gets in the way of their
childish pursuit of pleasure.
Apparently so.
Don't get me wrong. I have nothing against hedonism /per se/. That's
why I'm opposed to all laws criminalizing drugs and prostitution.
Hedonism is perfectly fine, provided the pleasure one obtains - and the
consequences of that pleasure - doesn't involve the infringement of the
rights of others. If you want to fuck for the sheer pleasure of
fucking, rather than for procreation or as an expression of intimacy
with a mutually committed partner, go for it. However, if a new human
being results from it, one does not have the moral right to kill it
because having the baby would be inconvenient. That, of course, is the
crux of the matter: the mere convenience of the people involved in the
hedonism is impaired, and being emotional children, they don't like it
and just want the impairment to be removed, no matter what the cost to
other *persons*.
Adam A. Wanderer
2017-04-16 03:13:05 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Ted
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Ted
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Ted
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Ted
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
http://www.journalgazette.net/news/us/20170415/in-states-tid
e-turning -a gainst
So abortion is "settled" law?
Perhaps it isn't as "settled" as the left would like us to think.
It's settled. Not only is it settled by law, the
Constitution and basic human rights and decency, but by
technology.
So human rights and decency make it acceptable to kill children?
No child is involved in any abortion. I know, I've seen many
abortions.
Rudy makes a very good argument against abortion. It changed my
mind, and I've not yet read an adequate counter. Up until I
read it, I was as much in favor of abortion as you are.
The pro-abortion mob have to lie to themselves, and to others,
about the moral and physical status of the entity they wish to
kill. They claim it isn't human, or isn't "a" human, but it
clearly is. They claim it isn't a person, but they cannot give
a coherent definition of person that would exclude the
developing unborn human being.
Exactly.
The key point is that their definition of person is contrived, and
incoherent. The mere fact of live birth certainly isn't what
creates a person - the just-born baby is no different physically
or mentally from the baby a minute or a few seconds before birth.
We have proved that mental ability cannot be what makes for a
person, because fully competent adult humans who are in comas or
under anesthesia have no mental ability whatever during the time
they are in that state, and by no means do we declare them not to
be persons - they are persons.
All living human beings are persons, regardless of their stage of
development and regardless of their mental or emotional or moral
ability at any given moment. There is no way around it, except by
some arbitrary and capricious declaration that is intellectually
indefensible.
Nail hit head. That's the convincing argument. If anybody has a
solid counter, I'd like to read it.
All you'll get is unsupported assertions and arbitrary definitions.
If they don't think a human being and a person comes into existence
at conception, they have to say not just when, but also *how* the
living growing developing organism is transformed into a person.
Remember, this is not a legal term, but a moral and philosophical
one. A person is an entity to whom other persons *owe* moral
consideration - that is, a person has rights the impose restrictions
on the behavior of others.
Yes. As I said, I've yet to read a valid counter-argument.
Post by Rudy Canoza
The left-wing pro-abortion filth just don't want to think about
things like that. It gets in the way of their hedonism. They are
willing to any sense of moral reasoning aside if it gets in the way
of their childish pursuit of pleasure.
Apparently so.
Don't get me wrong. I have nothing against hedonism /per se/. That's
why I'm opposed to all laws criminalizing drugs and prostitution.
Hedonism is perfectly fine, provided the pleasure one obtains - and
the consequences of that pleasure - doesn't involve the infringement
of the rights of others. If you want to fuck for the sheer pleasure
of fucking, rather than for procreation or as an expression of
intimacy with a mutually committed partner, go for it. However, if a
new human being results from it, one does not have the moral right to
kill it because having the baby would be inconvenient. That, of
course, is the crux of the matter: the mere convenience of the people
involved in the hedonism is impaired, and being emotional children,
they don't like it and just want the impairment to be removed, no
matter what the cost to other *persons*.
Fetus filth is no "person", it's just tissue that needs to be trimmed
and flushed down the toilet like a hangnail.

<http://www.imnotsorry.net>
Adam A. Wanderer
2017-04-16 03:11:22 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ted
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Ted
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Ted
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Ted
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
http://www.journalgazette.net/news/us/20170415/in-states-tide
-turning -a gainst
So abortion is "settled" law?
Perhaps it isn't as "settled" as the left would like us to think.
It's settled. Not only is it settled by law, the
Constitution and basic human rights and decency, but by
technology.
So human rights and decency make it acceptable to kill
children?
No child is involved in any abortion. I know, I've seen many
abortions.
Rudy makes a very good argument against abortion. It changed my
mind, and I've not yet read an adequate counter. Up until I read
it, I was as much in favor of abortion as you are.
The pro-abortion mob have to lie to themselves, and to others,
about the moral and physical status of the entity they wish to
kill. They claim it isn't human, or isn't "a" human, but it
clearly is. They claim it isn't a person, but they cannot give a
coherent definition of person that would exclude the developing
unborn human being.
Exactly.
The key point is that their definition of person is contrived, and
incoherent. The mere fact of live birth certainly isn't what
creates a person - the just-born baby is no different physically or
mentally from the baby a minute or a few seconds before birth. We
have proved that mental ability cannot be what makes for a person,
because fully competent adult humans who are in comas or under
anesthesia have no mental ability whatever during the time they are
in that state, and by no means do we declare them not to be persons
- they are persons.
All living human beings are persons, regardless of their stage of
development and regardless of their mental or emotional or moral
ability at any given moment. There is no way around it, except by
some arbitrary and capricious declaration that is intellectually
indefensible.
Nail hit head. That's the convincing argument. If anybody has a
solid counter, I'd like to read it.
All you'll get is unsupported assertions and arbitrary definitions.
If they don't think a human being and a person comes into existence
at conception, they have to say not just when, but also *how* the
living growing developing organism is transformed into a person.
Remember, this is not a legal term, but a moral and philosophical
one. A person is an entity to whom other persons *owe* moral
consideration - that is, a person has rights the impose restrictions
on the behavior of others.
Yes. As I said, I've yet to read a valid counter-argument.
Post by Rudy Canoza
The left-wing pro-abortion filth just don't want to think about
things like that. It gets in the way of their hedonism. They are
willing to any sense of moral reasoning aside if it gets in the way
of their childish pursuit of pleasure.
Pleasure is more important than any fetus filth.
Adam A. Wanderer
2017-04-16 02:55:47 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Ted
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Ted
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Ted
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
http://www.journalgazette.net/news/us/20170415/in-states-tide-
turning -a gainst
So abortion is "settled" law?
Perhaps it isn't as "settled" as the left would like us to think.
It's settled. Not only is it settled by law, the Constitution
and basic human rights and decency, but by technology.
So human rights and decency make it acceptable to kill
children?
No child is involved in any abortion. I know, I've seen many
abortions.
Rudy makes a very good argument against abortion. It changed my
mind, and I've not yet read an adequate counter. Up until I read
it, I was as much in favor of abortion as you are.
The pro-abortion mob have to lie to themselves, and to others,
about the moral and physical status of the entity they wish to
kill. They claim it isn't human, or isn't "a" human, but it
clearly is. They claim it isn't a person, but they cannot give a
coherent definition of person that would exclude the developing
unborn human being.
Exactly.
The key point is that their definition of person is contrived, and
incoherent. The mere fact of live birth certainly isn't what
creates a person - the just-born baby is no different physically or
mentally from the baby a minute or a few seconds before birth. We
have proved that mental ability cannot be what makes for a person,
because fully competent adult humans who are in comas or under
anesthesia have no mental ability whatever during the time they are
in that state, and by no means do we declare them not to be persons
- they are persons.
All living human beings are persons, regardless of their stage of
development and regardless of their mental or emotional or moral
ability at any given moment. There is no way around it, except by
some arbitrary and capricious declaration that is intellectually
indefensible.
Nail hit head. That's the convincing argument. If anybody has a solid
counter, I'd like to read it.
All you'll get is unsupported assertions and arbitrary definitions.
If they don't think a human being and a person comes into existence at
conception, they have to say not just when, but also *how* the living
growing developing organism is transformed into a person. Remember,
this is not a legal term, but a moral and philosophical one. A person
is an entity to whom other persons *owe* moral consideration - that
is, a person has rights the impose restrictions on the behavior of
others.
The left-wing pro-abortion filth just don't want to think about things
like that. It gets in the way of their hedonism. They are willing to
any sense of moral reasoning aside if it gets in the way of their
childish pursuit of pleasure.
Any reason for an abortion is a good reason. Any reason for childbirth
is a bad reason. All praise to abortion!!!

<http://www.imnotsorry.net>
Adam A. Wanderer
2017-04-16 03:18:20 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Ted
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Ted
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Ted
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
http://www.journalgazette.net/news/us/20170415/in-states-
tide-
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Ted
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Ted
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Ted
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
turning -a gainst
So abortion is "settled" law?
Perhaps it isn't as "settled" as the left would like us to think.
It's settled. Not only is it settled by law, the Constitution
and basic human rights and decency, but by technology.
So human rights and decency make it acceptable to kill children?
No child is involved in any abortion. I know, I've seen many
abortions.
Rudy makes a very good argument against abortion. It changed my
mind, and I've not yet read an adequate counter. Up until I read
it, I was as much in favor of abortion as you are.
The pro-abortion mob have to lie to themselves, and to others,
about the moral and physical status of the entity they wish to
kill. They claim it isn't human, or isn't "a" human, but it
clearly is. They claim it isn't a person, but they cannot give a
coherent definition of person that would exclude the developing
unborn human being.
Exactly.
The key point is that their definition of person is contrived, and
incoherent. The mere fact of live birth certainly isn't what
creates a person - the just-born baby is no different physically or
mentally from the baby a minute or a few seconds before birth. We
have proved that mental ability cannot be what makes for a person,
because fully competent adult humans who are in comas or under
anesthesia have no mental ability whatever during the time they are
in that state, and by no means do we declare them not to be persons
- they are persons.
All living human beings are persons, regardless of their stage of
development and regardless of their mental or emotional or moral
ability at any given moment. There is no way around it, except by
some arbitrary and capricious declaration that is intellectually
indefensible.
Nail hit head. That's the convincing argument. If anybody has a solid
counter, I'd like to read it.
All you'll get is unsupported assertions and arbitrary definitions.
If they don't think a human being and a person comes into existence at
conception, they have to say not just when, but also *how* the living
growing developing organism is transformed into a person. Remember,
this is not a legal term, but a moral and philosophical one. A person
is an entity to whom other persons *owe* moral consideration - that
is, a person has rights the impose restrictions on the behavior of
others.
The left-wing pro-abortion filth just don't want to think about things
like that. It gets in the way of their hedonism. They are willing to
any sense of moral reasoning aside if it gets in the way of their
childish pursuit of pleasure.
Any reason for an abortion is a good reason.
No reason is valid.
All reason are valid for abortion!!!

<http://www.imnotsorry.net>
Adam A. Wanderer
2017-04-16 01:47:26 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
http://www.journalgazette.net/news/us/20170415/in-states-tide-tu
rning -a gainst
So abortion is "settled" law?
Perhaps it isn't as "settled" as the left would like us to think.
It's settled. Not only is it settled by law, the Constitution
and basic human rights and decency, but by technology.
So human rights and decency make it acceptable to kill children?
No child is involved in any abortion. I know, I've seen many
abortions.
<http://tinyurl.com/nrd33o4>

<http://wonkette.com/605773/texas-defunding-of-planned-parenthood-
improving-womens-health-by-killing-them>

<http://tinyurl.com/hymyr43

<http://www.vox.com/2016/8/30/12709638/teen-pregnancy-birth-control>

<http://tinyurl.com/hv52cog>

<http://tinyurl.com/p78s6nl>

<http://tinyurl.com/q8ufgvj>

<http://tinyurl.com/nppjsbe>

<http://tinyurl.com/257n5k6>

<http://tinyurl.com/ovqrxv6>

<http://rhrealitycheck.org/>

<http://www.plannedparenthood.org>

<http://www.imnotsorry.net>

<http://www.prochoice.org>

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planned_Parenthood>

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margaret_Sanger>

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_pro-choice_movement>

<http://www.mariestopes.org>

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marie_Stopes_International>

<https://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/08/15/1412371/-New-England-
Journal-Of-Medicine-Will-Spin-GOP-Anti-Choice-Heads-And-Expose-The-Truth-
About-PP?detail=emailclassic>

<http://tinyurl.com/q45xwfv>
Adam A. Wanderer
2017-04-16 00:50:46 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ted
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
http://www.journalgazette.net/news/us/20170415/in-states-tide-turni
ng -a gainst
So abortion is "settled" law?
Perhaps it isn't as "settled" as the left would like us to think.
It's settled. Not only is it settled by law, the Constitution and
basic human rights and decency, but by technology.
So human rights and decency make it acceptable to kill children?
No child is involved in any abortion. I know, I've seen many
abortions.
Rudy makes a very good argument against abortion. It changed my mind,
and I've not yet read an adequate counter. Up until I read it, I was
as much in favor of abortion as you are.
And you fell for his lying bull shit? Try these links and perhaps they
can clean out some of Rudy's nonsense:

<http://tinyurl.com/nrd33o4>

<http://wonkette.com/605773/texas-defunding-of-planned-parenthood-
improving-womens-health-by-killing-them>

<http://tinyurl.com/hymyr43

<http://www.vox.com/2016/8/30/12709638/teen-pregnancy-birth-control>

Oh, heck, that's just two out of dozens, but if you want the rest, let me
know.
Ted
2017-04-16 01:09:54 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
Post by Ted
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
http://www.journalgazette.net/news/us/20170415/in-states-tide-turni
ng -a gainst
So abortion is "settled" law?
Perhaps it isn't as "settled" as the left would like us to think.
It's settled. Not only is it settled by law, the Constitution and
basic human rights and decency, but by technology.
So human rights and decency make it acceptable to kill children?
No child is involved in any abortion. I know, I've seen many
abortions.
Rudy makes a very good argument against abortion. It changed my mind,
and I've not yet read an adequate counter. Up until I read it, I was
as much in favor of abortion as you are.
And you fell for his lying bull shit?
Read his argument and get back to me. I'd prefer for abortion to be legal
at any stage of pregnancy. But I'm not going deliberately to lie about it.
Adam A. Wanderer
2017-04-16 01:53:50 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ted
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
Post by Ted
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
http://www.journalgazette.net/news/us/20170415/in-states-tide-tur
ni ng -a gainst
So abortion is "settled" law?
Perhaps it isn't as "settled" as the left would like us to think.
It's settled. Not only is it settled by law, the Constitution
and basic human rights and decency, but by technology.
So human rights and decency make it acceptable to kill children?
No child is involved in any abortion. I know, I've seen many
abortions.
Rudy makes a very good argument against abortion. It changed my
mind, and I've not yet read an adequate counter. Up until I read it,
I was as much in favor of abortion as you are.
And you fell for his lying bull shit?
Read his argument and get back to me. I'd prefer for abortion to be
legal at any stage of pregnancy. But I'm not going deliberately to lie
about it.
His arguments are all lying bull shit and nonsense. Here's the true
argument:

<http://www.imnotsorry.net>

<http://wonkette.com/605773/texas-defunding-of-planned-parenthood-improvi
ng-womens-health-by-killing-them>

<http://tinyurl.com/hymyr43>
Ted
2017-04-16 01:58:33 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
Post by Ted
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
Post by Ted
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
http://www.journalgazette.net/news/us/20170415/in-states-tide-tur
ni ng -a gainst
So abortion is "settled" law?
Perhaps it isn't as "settled" as the left would like us to think.
It's settled. Not only is it settled by law, the Constitution
and basic human rights and decency, but by technology.
So human rights and decency make it acceptable to kill children?
No child is involved in any abortion. I know, I've seen many
abortions.
Rudy makes a very good argument against abortion. It changed my
mind, and I've not yet read an adequate counter. Up until I read it,
I was as much in favor of abortion as you are.
And you fell for his lying bull shit?
Read his argument and get back to me. I'd prefer for abortion to be
legal at any stage of pregnancy. But I'm not going deliberately to lie
about it.
His arguments are all lying bull shit and nonsense.
Which parts are lies and nonsense?
Adam A. Wanderer
2017-04-16 02:08:40 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ted
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
Post by Ted
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
Post by Ted
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
http://www.journalgazette.net/news/us/20170415/in-states-tide-t
ur ni ng -a gainst
So abortion is "settled" law?
Perhaps it isn't as "settled" as the left would like us to think.
It's settled. Not only is it settled by law, the Constitution
and basic human rights and decency, but by technology.
So human rights and decency make it acceptable to kill children?
No child is involved in any abortion. I know, I've seen many
abortions.
Rudy makes a very good argument against abortion. It changed my
mind, and I've not yet read an adequate counter. Up until I read
it, I was as much in favor of abortion as you are.
And you fell for his lying bull shit?
Read his argument and get back to me. I'd prefer for abortion to be
legal at any stage of pregnancy. But I'm not going deliberately to
lie about it.
His arguments are all lying bull shit and nonsense.
Which parts are lies and nonsense?
All of them, if Rudy's lips are moving or his fingers typeing, he's
lying.
Ted
2017-04-16 02:29:07 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
Post by Ted
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
Post by Ted
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
Post by Ted
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
http://www.journalgazette.net/news/us/20170415/in-states-tide-t
ur ni ng -a gainst
So abortion is "settled" law?
Perhaps it isn't as "settled" as the left would like us to think.
It's settled. Not only is it settled by law, the Constitution
and basic human rights and decency, but by technology.
So human rights and decency make it acceptable to kill children?
No child is involved in any abortion. I know, I've seen many
abortions.
Rudy makes a very good argument against abortion. It changed my
mind, and I've not yet read an adequate counter. Up until I read
it, I was as much in favor of abortion as you are.
And you fell for his lying bull shit?
Read his argument and get back to me. I'd prefer for abortion to be
legal at any stage of pregnancy. But I'm not going deliberately to
lie about it.
His arguments are all lying bull shit and nonsense.
Which parts are lies and nonsense?
All of them, if Rudy's lips are moving or his fingers typeing, he's
lying.
Oh good, then it'll be easy. When Rudy said "mental ability cannot be what
makes for a person" that's a lie and nonsense, right?
Ted
2017-04-16 03:43:35 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ted
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
Post by Ted
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
Post by Ted
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
Post by Ted
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
http://www.journalgazette.net/news/us/20170415/in-states-tide-t
ur ni ng -a gainst
So abortion is "settled" law?
Perhaps it isn't as "settled" as the left would like us to think.
It's settled. Not only is it settled by law, the Constitution
and basic human rights and decency, but by technology.
So human rights and decency make it acceptable to kill children?
No child is involved in any abortion. I know, I've seen many
abortions.
Rudy makes a very good argument against abortion. It changed my
mind, and I've not yet read an adequate counter. Up until I read
it, I was as much in favor of abortion as you are.
And you fell for his lying bull shit?
Read his argument and get back to me. I'd prefer for abortion to be
legal at any stage of pregnancy. But I'm not going deliberately to
lie about it.
His arguments are all lying bull shit and nonsense.
Which parts are lies and nonsense?
All of them, if Rudy's lips are moving or his fingers typeing, he's
lying.
Oh good, then it'll be easy. When Rudy said "mental ability cannot be what
makes for a person" that's a lie and nonsense, right?
<crickets>
Adam A. Wanderer
2017-04-16 04:49:39 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ted
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
Post by Ted
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
Post by Ted
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
Post by Ted
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
http://www.journalgazette.net/news/us/20170415/in-states-tid
e-t ur ni ng -a gainst
So abortion is "settled" law?
Perhaps it isn't as "settled" as the left would like us to think.
It's settled. Not only is it settled by law, the
Constitution and basic human rights and decency, but by
technology.
So human rights and decency make it acceptable to kill children?
No child is involved in any abortion. I know, I've seen many
abortions.
Rudy makes a very good argument against abortion. It changed my
mind, and I've not yet read an adequate counter. Up until I
read it, I was as much in favor of abortion as you are.
And you fell for his lying bull shit?
Read his argument and get back to me. I'd prefer for abortion to
be legal at any stage of pregnancy. But I'm not going
deliberately to lie about it.
His arguments are all lying bull shit and nonsense.
Which parts are lies and nonsense?
All of them, if Rudy's lips are moving or his fingers typeing, he's
lying.
Oh good, then it'll be easy. When Rudy said "mental ability cannot be
what makes for a person" that's a lie and nonsense, right?
<http://tinyurl.com/nrd33o4>

<http://wonkette.com/605773/texas-defunding-of-planned-parenthood-
improving-womens-health-by-killing-them>

<http://tinyurl.com/hymyr43

<http://www.vox.com/2016/8/30/12709638/teen-pregnancy-birth-control>

<http://tinyurl.com/hv52cog>

<http://tinyurl.com/p78s6nl>

<http://tinyurl.com/q8ufgvj>

<http://tinyurl.com/nppjsbe>

<http://tinyurl.com/257n5k6>

<http://tinyurl.com/ovqrxv6>

<http://rhrealitycheck.org/>

<http://www.plannedparenthood.org>

<http://www.imnotsorry.net>

<http://www.prochoice.org>

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planned_Parenthood>

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margaret_Sanger>

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_pro-choice_movement>

<http://www.mariestopes.org>

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marie_Stopes_International>

<https://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/08/15/1412371/-New-England-
Journal-Of-Medicine-Will-Spin-GOP-Anti-Choice-Heads-And-Expose-The-Truth-
About-PP?detail=emailclassic>

<http://tinyurl.com/q45xwfv>
Ted
2017-04-16 05:06:20 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
Post by Ted
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
Post by Ted
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
Post by Ted
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
Post by Ted
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
http://www.journalgazette.net/news/us/20170415/in-states-tid
e-t ur ni ng -a gainst
So abortion is "settled" law?
Perhaps it isn't as "settled" as the left would like us to think.
It's settled. Not only is it settled by law, the
Constitution and basic human rights and decency, but by
technology.
So human rights and decency make it acceptable to kill children?
No child is involved in any abortion. I know, I've seen many
abortions.
Rudy makes a very good argument against abortion. It changed my
mind, and I've not yet read an adequate counter. Up until I
read it, I was as much in favor of abortion as you are.
And you fell for his lying bull shit?
Read his argument and get back to me. I'd prefer for abortion to
be legal at any stage of pregnancy. But I'm not going
deliberately to lie about it.
His arguments are all lying bull shit and nonsense.
Which parts are lies and nonsense?
All of them, if Rudy's lips are moving or his fingers typeing, he's
lying.
Oh good, then it'll be easy. When Rudy said "mental ability cannot be
what makes for a person" that's a lie and nonsense, right?
<http://tinyurl.com/nrd33o4>
<http://wonkette.com/605773/texas-defunding-of-planned-parenthood-
improving-womens-health-by-killing-them>
<http://tinyurl.com/hymyr43
<http://www.vox.com/2016/8/30/12709638/teen-pregnancy-birth-control>
<http://tinyurl.com/hv52cog>
<http://tinyurl.com/p78s6nl>
<http://tinyurl.com/q8ufgvj>
<http://tinyurl.com/nppjsbe>
<http://tinyurl.com/257n5k6>
<http://tinyurl.com/ovqrxv6>
<http://rhrealitycheck.org/>
<http://www.plannedparenthood.org>
<http://www.imnotsorry.net>
<http://www.prochoice.org>
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planned_Parenthood>
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margaret_Sanger>
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_pro-choice_movement>
<http://www.mariestopes.org>
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marie_Stopes_International>
<https://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/08/15/1412371/-New-England-
Journal-Of-Medicine-Will-Spin-GOP-Anti-Choice-Heads-And-Expose-The-Truth-
About-PP?detail=emailclassic>
<http://tinyurl.com/q45xwfv>
Are you unable to tell us in your own words, Adam?

Adam A. Wanderer
2017-04-16 02:54:07 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
Post by Ted
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
Post by Ted
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
Post by Ted
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
http://www.journalgazette.net/news/us/20170415/in-states-tide
-t ur ni ng -a gainst
So abortion is "settled" law?
Perhaps it isn't as "settled" as the left would like us to think.
It's settled. Not only is it settled by law, the
Constitution and basic human rights and decency, but by
technology.
So human rights and decency make it acceptable to kill
children?
No child is involved in any abortion. I know, I've seen many
abortions.
Rudy makes a very good argument against abortion. It changed my
mind, and I've not yet read an adequate counter. Up until I read
it, I was as much in favor of abortion as you are.
And you fell for his lying bull shit?
Read his argument and get back to me. I'd prefer for abortion to
be legal at any stage of pregnancy. But I'm not going deliberately
to lie about it.
His arguments are all lying bull shit and nonsense.
Which parts are lies and nonsense?
All of them
None of them, of course.
To debate “personhood” is a spiritual, moral, or philosophical
argument. While “personhood” is an abstract argument, “life” is
not. Undisputed science, from a host of sources, states that life
begins at conception.
It's a developing baby - a developing *human* baby. This is not in
rational dispute.
Oh, yes, it is. It's a proven, scientific fact, a fetus is just a fetus,
tissue that needs trimming, much like a hangnail.

<http://www.imnotsorry.net>
Adam A. Wanderer
2017-04-16 03:16:36 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
news:1317221604514000665.892276Sam.M.Tedesco-
Post by Ted
news:1913163960513997088.315482Sam.M.Tedesco-
Post by Ted
news:807796706513993914.750663Sam.M.Tedesco-
Post by Ted
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
http://www.journalgazette.net/news/us/20170415/in-states-
tide
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
Post by Ted
Post by Ted
Post by Ted
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
-t ur ni ng -a gainst
So abortion is "settled" law?
Perhaps it isn't as "settled" as the left would like us to think.
It's settled. Not only is it settled by law, the
Constitution and basic human rights and decency, but by
technology.
So human rights and decency make it acceptable to kill children?
No child is involved in any abortion. I know, I've seen many
abortions.
Rudy makes a very good argument against abortion. It changed my
mind, and I've not yet read an adequate counter. Up until I read
it, I was as much in favor of abortion as you are.
And you fell for his lying bull shit?
Read his argument and get back to me. I'd prefer for abortion to
be legal at any stage of pregnancy. But I'm not going deliberately
to lie about it.
His arguments are all lying bull shit and nonsense.
Which parts are lies and nonsense?
All of them
None of them, of course.
To debate “personhood” is a spiritual, moral, or philosophical
argument. While “personhood” is an abstract argument, “life” is
not. Undisputed science, from a host of sources, states that life
begins at conception.
It's a developing baby - a developing *human* baby. This is not in
rational dispute.
Oh, yes, it is.
No, it isn't. You're disputing it, but you have been proved to be
irrational and a mental defective.
A fetus is just filth, that's a scientific fact!!! All praise to
abortion!!!

<http://www.imnotsorry.net>
Adam A. Wanderer
2017-04-16 01:38:43 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
Post by Ted
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
http://www.journalgazette.net/news/us/20170415/in-states-tide-tur
ni ng -a gainst
So abortion is "settled" law?
Perhaps it isn't as "settled" as the left would like us to think.
It's settled. Not only is it settled by law, the Constitution
and basic human rights and decency, but by technology.
So human rights and decency make it acceptable to kill children?
No child is involved in any abortion. I know, I've seen many
abortions.
Rudy makes a very good argument against abortion. It changed my
mind, and I've not yet read an adequate counter. Up until I read it,
I was as much in favor of abortion as you are.
And you fell for his lying bull shit?
There were no lies in it.
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
Try these links
Those are the lies.
Says a pro-liar.
Adam A. Wanderer
2017-04-15 23:54:47 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Remember always, Rudy Canoza, we must all make a clean break
with procreation.
So procreation is bad?
Yes!
Ted
2017-04-16 00:15:08 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Remember always, Rudy Canoza, we must all make a clean break
with procreation.
So procreation is bad?
Yes!
I agree, sorta. Having kids is a dumb idea. But our DNA strongly disagrees
with us.
Adam A. Wanderer
2017-04-16 00:56:57 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Remember always, Rudy Canoza, we must all make a clean break
with procreation.
So procreation is bad?
Yes!
You came into this world through procreation, if you believe procreation
to be bad, it would follow that your very presence on earth is a bad
thing. From there it seems reasonable to conclude that yo must
immediately take your own life. The fact that you have no done so marks
you as a hypocrite of the first order.
You believe that life for others is bad, but that life for you is good.
<http://tinyurl.com/nrd33o4>

<http://wonkette.com/605773/texas-defunding-of-planned-parenthood-
improving-womens-health-by-killing-them>

<http://tinyurl.com/hymyr43

<http://www.vox.com/2016/8/30/12709638/teen-pregnancy-birth-control>
Adam A. Wanderer
2017-04-16 01:45:25 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
<http://tinyurl.com/nrd33o4>
That is the pure truth!!!! All women feel this way.

<http://skepchick.org/2015/07/more-women-regret-having-kids-than-aborting
-them/>
Adam A. Wanderer
2017-04-16 02:58:32 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
http://tinyurl.com/nrd33o4
It's pure truth. Abortion is good. Childbirth is a sick, degenerate,
abomination against all humanity!

<http://www.imnotsorry.net>
Adam A. Wanderer
2017-04-15 23:55:59 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
http://www.journalgazette.net/news/us/20170415/in-states-tide-tur
ni ng-
a
gainst
So abortion is "settled" law?
Perhaps it isn't as "settled" as the left would like us to
think.
It's settled.
Not settled, W.T.S., you stupid lying shitbag.
You don't think so???
Guaranteed, stupid shitbag.
Remember, abortion is good, a baby is bad!!!
No, W.T.S, you dumb mackerel cunt.
You didn't really think you'd get away with the stupid nymshift, did
you, W.T.S., you stupid mackerel cunt?
You really are about to get a shovel in your face, bitch.
Go ahead, try it.
Look for it.
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
Remember always, Rudy Canoza, we must all make a clean break
with procreation.
It's too bad your parents didn't refrain from it. I know they wished
they had. You've made the world a worse place for your entire
existence.
Well, I'm here, and I've made sure plenty of fetus filth never became
child filth.
Adam A. Wanderer
2017-04-16 00:03:25 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
http://www.journalgazette.net/news/us/20170415/in-states-tide-tu
rni ng-
a
gainst
So abortion is "settled" law?
Perhaps it isn't as "settled" as the left would like us to
think.
It's settled.
Not settled, W.T.S., you stupid lying shitbag.
You don't think so???
Guaranteed, stupid shitbag.
Remember, abortion is good, a baby is bad!!!
No, W.T.S, you dumb mackerel cunt.
You didn't really think you'd get away with the stupid nymshift,
did you, W.T.S., you stupid mackerel cunt?
You really are about to get a shovel in your face, bitch.
Go ahead, try it.
Look for it.
Post by Adam A. Wanderer
Remember always, Rudy Canoza, we must all make a clean break
with procreation.
It's too bad your parents didn't refrain from it. I know they wished
they had.
LOL.
You've made the world a worse place for your entire existence.
Sorta like the Beavis and Butthead Christmas special "It's a miserable
life".
I like to read this web site: <http://www.npg.org/>
Loading...