GOP Platform: Women Not Human

King of Owls said:
ok so with reference to a child one does not want, we are now talking about decades of monetary support, as well as emotional support and participation in the development of another person? You don't call that a big deal?

bijous argument was that if a man doesn't want the child, he can walk off into the sunset and basically be free. that's not the case.
Click to expand...

Without a paternity test and legal intervention, yes he can walk off into the sunset. And if so legally ordered to support the child because he's proven to be the father, his legal obligation ENDS after he signs the check. He doesn't have to lend emotional support or participate in the child's development unless he CHOOSES to.
 
Aoxomoxoa said:
Listen sunshine, anyone you say is motivated by religion and not science as far as I'm concerned. I will reiterate for those in the cheap seats, if death is the absence of brainwave activity then life is the presence of same.
Click to expand...

I agree.....but I provided a link the first time you said it that showed brain waves are present around five weeks and you haven't bothered to respond to it yet....will you this time?......

now I would be willing to settle for a prohibition on abortions after five weeks....especially since most women aren't aware they are pregnant yet at that point....will you agree to banning all abortions after that point?....
 
PostmodernProphet said:
it means it has brain waves......which is the standard you proposed....an unconscious person wouldn't at that moment meet the standard of sentient either.....
Click to expand...

A brain stem is not a brain as you know very well, it can be likened to a router in a data network. The brain proper, or the server in this analogy, doesn't even load its software and boot up until the 26th week.
 
Last edited:
Superfreak said:
I wouldn't equate accidental death to an abortion either. It would be the same as a miscarriage.

The argument that they should not be entitled to basic human rights protections is a valid argument, we obviously differ on when they should be afforded those rights. What irritates me are those people who pretend it is not a unique human life that is being ended.
Click to expand...

If you truly believe that "every egg is sacred" as you claim, then don't you think the woman bear the responsibility of attempting to get help for the child after any spontaneous miscarriage?

You know this is actually fun. I enjoy participating in a discussion free from stupid stuff like facts, reality and common sense...it's rather freeing.

No wonder SF and so many other's arguments are rooted in the insane.
 
Superfreak said:
Obviously this is where the real discussion should be. When should basic human rights apply. I can at least respect arguments like the above, despite my disagreement with them.

I just can't stand the idiots that try to pretend it is not a unique human life.
Click to expand...


That...



Is...



HYSTERICAL!!

So now the guy who spent the past 18 pages whining and posting the most ridiculous partisan hyperbole in response to any attempt at honest discussion about the subject is trying to pretend he hasn't spent page after page pushing other people's buttons and ignoring any attempt at rational discussion.
 
Superfreak said:
Agreed. I do tend to think the idiots can be reasoned with. Yet most are too ignorant to realize just how ridiculous their 'arguments' are.
Click to expand...


Reasoning hasn't worked with you for 19 pages now...guess that proves your first claim false.


Your second statement is just plain ironic.
 
ZappasGuitar said:
If you truly believe that "every egg is sacred" as you claim, then don't you think the woman bear the responsibility of attempting to get help for the child after any spontaneous miscarriage?

You know this is actually fun. I enjoy participating in a discussion free from stupid stuff like facts, reality and common sense...it's rather freeing.

No wonder SF and so many other's arguments are rooted in the insane.
Click to expand...

You are having fun creating straw men are you?

When you get done, then perhaps you would care to join the actual conversation taking place.
 
ZappasGuitar said:
That...



Is...



HYSTERICAL!!

So now the guy who spent the past 18 pages whining and posting the most ridiculous partisan hyperbole in response to any attempt at honest discussion about the subject is trying to pretend he hasn't spent page after page pushing other people's buttons and ignoring any attempt at rational discussion.
Click to expand...

SF is a megalomaniac. I have watched with great amusement as he has turned this thread into a thread about...him. What he believes is irrelevant, this is about what the Republican party stands for and what we will be voting for, or against, in November.

Further, he is not setting this discussion. This is male privilege at its most hilarious. Men like him still think they are setting the rules or something.

About to get a huge asskicking. Will it set him straight? Nope. Not anymore than it will set those lunatics in Dc straight. But they won't be making policy either. They will be instructed what to do by women voters. And Sf will continue to rant flaccidly on this board. He will never gain the opportunity to control women or institute his woman-hating policies. That's what makes it funny.
 
ZappasGuitar said:
Reasoning hasn't worked with you for 19 pages now...guess that proves your first claim false.


Your second statement is just plain ironic.
Click to expand...

There is a difference between what I have actually stated and the strawmen you continue to create. Learn the difference and perhaps you won't out yourself as one of the ignorant we are talking about.
 
Darla is a megalomaniac. She thinks that all women must believe exactly as she does. If they don't she proclaims that they are self hating.

Further, he is not setting this discussion. This is male privilege at its most hilarious. Men like him still think they are setting the rules or something.
Click to expand...

ROFLMAO... more pure nonsense from Darla. I discuss the actual facts of genetics and she resorts to absolute bullshit.

About to get a huge asskicking. Will it set him straight? Nope. Not anymore than it will set those lunatics in Dc straight. But they won't be making policing either. They will be instructed what to do by women voters. And Sf will continue to rant flaccidly on this board. He will never gain the opportunity to control women or institute his woman-hating policies. That's what makes it funny.
Click to expand...

Ah yes, more emotional outbursts from Darla. If a man wants to protect the unborn child, he must of course hate women... and Darla wonders why people call her a lunatic on this topic. 'Believe as Darla does... you have no other options, science be damned!!!'

LMAO...
 
Superfreak said:
You are having fun creating straw men are you?

When you get done, then perhaps you would care to join the actual conversation taking place.
Click to expand...


Well I'm just following the example you have set for 20+ pages now.

As far as I can tell you've YET to join the "actual" discussion, instead deciding to engage in non-stop partisan hyperbole.

Let me know when you decide it's time for you to try honesty for a change...
 
images
 
ZappasGuitar said:
Well I'm just following the example you have set for 20+ pages now.

As far as I can tell you've YET to join the "actual" discussion, instead deciding to engage in non-stop partisan hyperbole.

Let me know when you decide it's time for you to try honesty for a change...
Click to expand...

yet another example of your bullshit.
 
King of Owls said:
it's a very special clump of cells that would one day be a person. but it's not a person yet.
Click to expand...

Or not, there are cases where the cells do not develop and die, ther are cases where the woman is not able to carry to term. There are cases of stillbirth. Not every pregnancy results in the birth of a child.

Also, there are cases where women are responsible and use birth control and coitus results in pregnancy. It is called an accident.
 
Rana said:
Or not, there are cases where the cells do not develop and die, ther are cases where the woman is not able to carry to term. There are cases of stillbirth. Not every pregnancy results in the birth of a child.
Click to expand...

In those cases the death is natural.

Also, there are cases where women are responsible and use birth control and coitus results in pregnancy. It is called an accident.
Click to expand...

The odds of this occurring if both male and female are using contraception is next to zero.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top