Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
30 minutes ago, tantric superman said:

Same here.  In Catholic School.  "Becoming a Person".  Abortion came up.  When I asked a nun what the rule was when a woman was raped and became pregnant, she told me that there never has been a recording instance of a woman getting pregnant from being raped.

"Well okay then," I replied.  Seemed as reasonable as anything else in Catholic school.

“If it’s a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to shut that thing down.” - Todd Akin (R-MO), Aug 19, 2012

Posted
1 hour ago, tantric superman said:

Same here.  In Catholic School.  "Becoming a Person".  Abortion came up.  When I asked a nun what the rule was when a woman was raped and became pregnant, she told me that there never has been a recording instance of a woman getting pregnant from being raped.

"Well okay then," I replied.  Seemed as reasonable as anything else in Catholic school.

Wow, wow. And I always thought nuns were honest fairly educated women. 

Posted
1 hour ago, tantric superman said:

Same here.  In Catholic School.  "Becoming a Person".  Abortion came up.  When I asked a nun what the rule was when a woman was raped and became pregnant, she told me that there never has been a recording instance of a woman getting pregnant from being raped.

"Well okay then," I replied.  Seemed as reasonable as anything else in Catholic school.

Well, that's because they're too busy raping little boys.

Duh!

Posted
6 hours ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

...a dick must take a lot of time out of your day. 

That’s just your public school sex ed talking.

  • Like 1
Posted
16 hours ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

Nope sorry, her body with another human inside of her.  It's not just her body, as many times as people say that, it's just not factually accurate.  Her mental state is for damn sure at play in such a decision.

I'm glad you are a clinical psychologist qualified to make such determinations about others with regard to their mental state. By and large the vast majority of all abortions are not late-stage when the nerve endings in the fetus would've developed. I don't buy the bullshit company-line that life begins at conception that religious organizations and sycophants push upon anyone who will listen. This is why I said in a different post the only people who get any input into a decision about an abortion are the mother, the father, and their doctor. It doesn't make one single fuck either way what you, or I, or anyone else want or think because none of us will have anything to do with any aspect of the procedure or child if the decision were made to go the other way. If you want to carry something on your conscience that had fuckall to do with you then that's your choice but it doesn't weigh at all on mine.

  • Like 6
  • 2 weeks later...
Posted
On 2/2/2019 at 6:13 PM, Asithappens said:

Can't tell if you're serious or trolling.

What type of sex ed do you think home schooled kids get?

According to Youporn, first hand demos.

  • Like 1
Posted
You should think more before posting. My remarks were strictly meant as anecdotal to what we received in our school.
I didn't need sex ed to know what a rubber was or how babies are made. If you don't know what it takes to stop a pregnancy today you're not dressing yourself in the morning.


Like appointing rapist to the Supreme Court?
Posted
On 2/3/2019 at 11:01 AM, Onboard 2.0 said:

Nope sorry, her body with another human inside of her.  It's not just her body, as many times as people say that, it's just not factually accurate.  Her mental state is for damn sure at play in such a decision.

What she does with that human inside of her body is up to her. Not you.

Posted
1 hour ago, happyfunball said:

 


Like appointing rapist to the Supreme Court?

 

Oh my fucking god, get the fuck off with that shit. You fucking have no evidence that he's a rapist, you fucking inbreeded racist.

Posted
Just now, David Dennison said:

I have no idea. You said there was no evidence. The testimony of the victim is evidence.

Well, this his testimony is evidence for his own case. That gets us nowhere.

Posted
5 minutes ago, workswithseed said:

Well, this his testimony is evidence for his own case. That gets us nowhere.

How do you think criminal trials work? 

  • 3 weeks later...
Posted

Anti-abortion people. What do you make of a story like this? I'm not just trolling. I'd really like to understand. And don't say "exceptions for rape and incest" because the groups and politicians driving the anti-abortion movement in the US don't seem to take that position. And if the fetus is really a life, with equal rights to the mother, then the outcome here is where you have to end up. 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2019/03/01/an-year-old-pleaded-an-abortion-after-she-was-raped-she-was-forced-give-birth/?utm_term=.bb1b77898eab

Quote

An 11-year-old rape victim gave birth in Argentina on Tuesday after she was apparently denied an abortion by authorities, infuriating women’s rights advocates in the country who have fought to legalize the procedure.

The girl, referred to as “Lucia” to protect her identity, underwent a Caesarean section Tuesday in the 23rd week of her pregnancy, the Guardian reports.Lucia, whose baby is not expected to survive, had previously begged officials to “remove what the old man put inside me.”

That man is the 65-year-old partner of Lucia’s grandmother — who took custody of Lucia and her siblings in 2015, after her two older sisters were reportedly abused by their mother’s partner, the Guardian reported. Lucia attempted to commit suicide twice upon learning of her pregnancy Jan. 23. She was hospitalized and later placed in state care as a result of apparent self-inflicted lesions, the outlet said.

 

Posted

The part where it says the "baby is not expected to survive" will give them their out. They'll say it's God's will. 'See? No problem.' And then they'll repeat that anecdotal evidence in order to support a total ban on abortion even in cases of rape and incest. 'Don't worry. God will take care of it.'

Of course, if that child should survive, unwanted and disadvantaged, and grow up to commit a violent crime then many of them will enthusiastically endorse its execution. 

Posted

Let me make sure I have this straight.  The Democrat Party wants the government to stay out of women's bodies when they are pregnant and give them the ability to choose exactly what they want to do with said body.  However when it comes to anything else concerning anybody's body healthwise they want government to have complete control and not give individuals any choices at all concerning what they want to do with their body.  Sounds perfectly consistent and logical to me.

Posted
5 minutes ago, EMAWesome said:

Let me make sure I have this straight.  The Democrat Party wants the government to stay out of women's bodies when they are pregnant and give them the ability to choose exactly what they want to do with said body.  However when it comes to anything else concerning anybody's body healthwise they want government to have complete control and not give individuals any choices at all concerning what they want to do with their body.  Sounds perfectly consistent and logical to me.

You mean the government won't allow me to have my special alone time? Will I have to get a permit?

Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, WhatTheBuck said:

The part where it says the "baby is not expected to survive" will give them their out. They'll say it's God's will. 'See? No problem.' And then they'll repeat that anecdotal evidence in order to support a total ban on abortion even in cases of rape and incest. 'Don't worry. God will take care of it.'

Of course, if that child should survive, unwanted and disadvantaged, and grow up to commit a violent crime then many of them will enthusiastically endorse its execution. 

Everything about this is correct.

"Baby not expected to survive" - God's will; gotta give it a chance; miracles happen
Put mom through that - probably her fault for being a sexy-looking 11 year old or something gross/Baylor-esque
Child lives - MIRACLE but we won't provide it or mom any sort of assistance because her responsible ass got pregnant
Child grows up poor and commits a crime as an adult - FILTHY FUCKING ANIMALS THEY SHOULD DIE

Edited by Js1
Posted
Let me make sure I have this straight.  The Democrat Party wants the government to stay out of women's bodies when they are pregnant and give them the ability to choose exactly what they want to do with said body.  However when it comes to anything else concerning anybody's body healthwise they want government to have complete control and not give individuals any choices at all concerning what they want to do with their body.  Sounds perfectly consistent and logical to me.

Genuine frontier gibberish.

You are gonna have to explain the “anything else”/govt control not giving people any choice concerning what they want to do with their body thing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Posted
5 hours ago, EMAWesome said:

Let me make sure I have this straight.  The Democrat Party wants the government to stay out of women's bodies when they are pregnant and give them the ability to choose exactly what they want to do with said body.  However when it comes to anything else concerning anybody's body healthwise they want government to have complete control and not give individuals any choices at all concerning what they want to do with their body.  Sounds perfectly consistent and logical to me.

Surely you have examples.

Posted
On 2/13/2019 at 3:58 PM, wildcat09 said:

If there was a god he'd throw a dictionary at the head of every dipshit who demonstrates that they don't know what the word "evidence" means.

Right after he got done throwing it at people who don't know the subjunctive.  :)

  • Like 1
Posted
1 minute ago, Asithappens said:

Right after he got done throwing it at people who don't know the subjunctive.  :)

What the fuck did you just call me?

  • Like 2
Posted
8 hours ago, EMAWesome said:

Let me make sure I have this straight.  The Democrat Party wants the government to stay out of women's bodies when they are pregnant and give them the ability to choose exactly what they want to do with said body.  However when it comes to anything else concerning anybody's body healthwise they want government to have complete control and not give individuals any choices at all concerning what they want to do with their body.  Sounds perfectly consistent and logical to me.

Is this some thinly veiled anti-vaxxer statement?

Posted
6 hours ago, Gatorubet said:


Genuine frontier gibberish.

You are gonna have to explain the “anything else”/govt control not giving people any choice concerning what they want to do with their body thing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Any kind of socialized medicine is going to eventually involve rationing of care (Oh you are how old?  well you aren't going to be viable for this procedure, go home and die.).  It's the only way to maintain affordibility.  If health care is ran by the government the government is going to eventually come up with regulations involving who can get what kind of medical treatment and when and where they can get it.  It won't be the patient making the decision it will be the government.

Posted
3 hours ago, horncyclist said:

No response to that article I posted? Prolifers, what say you?

Abort the child rapist, spare the child.

Posted

I'm still waiting for a response to the 11-year old raped by a 65-year old who wants to "get out what he put inside [her.]" How do you defend forcing such cruelty on a child? 

 

Posted
21 hours ago, EMAWesome said:

Any kind of socialized medicine is going to eventually involve rationing of care (Oh you are how old?  well you aren't going to be viable for this procedure, go home and die.).  It's the only way to maintain affordibility.  If health care is ran by the government the government is going to eventually come up with regulations involving who can get what kind of medical treatment and when and where they can get it.  It won't be the patient making the decision it will be the government.

I missed out on all of the Canadian and Swedish olds killing that those socialist medicine countries were committing.  Weird.

Now, explain how a lack of universal healthcare in our system does not lead to a rationing of healthcare to those not rich enough to afford it?   Not having the financial wherewithal to obtain health care is rationing of care on steroids. 

 

Posted
21 hours ago, EMAWesome said:

Any kind of socialized medicine is going to eventually involve rationing of care (Oh you are how old?  well you aren't going to be viable for this procedure, go home and die.).  It's the only way to maintain affordibility.  If health care is ran by the government the government is going to eventually come up with regulations involving who can get what kind of medical treatment and when and where they can get it.  It won't be the patient making the decision it will be the government.

You do realize that this system already applies to everyone 65 and older, right? And that it's wildly popular?

Posted
50 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

You do realize that this system already applies to everyone 65 and older, right? And that it's wildly popular?

Is that something that can be found on Fox News' website?

Posted
12 hours ago, horncyclist said:

I'm still waiting for a response to the 11-year old raped by a 65-year old who wants to "get out what he put inside [her.]" How do you defend forcing such cruelty on a child? 

 

You don’t. I’m not up on all of the numbers, but I suspect that the majority of pro-lifers today would see this situation where abortion is a reasonable if tragic conclusion to a terrible situation. It’s similar in intellectual honesty to all the cries of Democrats voting for infanticide. It’s focusing on highly emotional and extreme edge cases where I suspect the vast majority of people would be in agreement if we weren’t all fixated on scoring rhetorical points.

Posted
On 3/1/2019 at 8:27 PM, EMAWesome said:

Any kind of socialized medicine is going to eventually involve rationing of care 

News flash: we already have health care rationing.

  • Like 1
Posted
News flash: we already have health care rationing.
Yeah, try dealing with end of life care for an elderly person. That's when you find out how far the insurance is willing to cover things that won't make them recover, but might prolong life a little bit. Once you see the cost estimates, you have to make a lot of adult decisions about priorities, cost effectiveness of treatment, the wishes of the person and then balance all of that against your conscience. It's not easy, especially when their wishes go against the one thing that would keep them alive.
  • Like 2
Posted
Any kind of socialized medicine is going to eventually involve rationing of care (Oh you are how old?  well you aren't going to be viable for this procedure, go home and die.).  It's the only way to maintain affordibility.  If health care is ran by the government the government is going to eventually come up with regulations involving who can get what kind of medical treatment and when and where they can get it.  It won't be the patient making the decision it will be the government.


Currently, without socialized medicine, insurance companies make those decisions, not the patient.
  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Posted
19 minutes ago, scottsins said:

 


Currently, without socialized medicine, insurance companies make those decisions, not the patient.

 

2020-2030 gonna be a hell of a ride for anybody in healthcare imo. 

Posted
1 hour ago, scottsins said:

Currently, without socialized medicine, insurance companies make those decisions, not the patient.

 

It's amazing how thoroughly a private industry has convinced people in this country that they make their own health care decisions. 

Posted

It’s clear that most people thinking that M4A somehow empowers patients in the medical decision making process relative to private insurance or MA don’t really understand how Medicare works.

  • Like 1


×
×
  • Create New...