End of Roe Vs Wade?

Derf

Derf

Well-known member
User Name said:
1) I don't refute it.
2) You didn't offer any refutation of the link I posted either.
Click to expand...
1) You should.
2) That's odd. I was quite certain that you actually replied to the post where I linked to a refutation of your posted link (you have to click on it, as the image isn't of your post, but the URL is):

End of Roe Vs Wade?

Joe the Rapist: Our God-given right to murder our child in the womb is because we are children of God https://www.tampafp.com/biden-says-right-to-abortion-comes-from-being-a-child-of-god/
theologyonline.com

You must not have actually read my link, which then makes me wonder if you really expect others to read your links, or if you just have lots of time on your hands.
 
User Name

User Name

Greatest poster ever
Banned
Derf said:
1) You should.
2) That's odd. I was quite certain that you actually replied to the post where I linked to a refutation of your posted link (you have to click on it, as the image isn't of your post, but the URL is):

End of Roe Vs Wade?

Joe the Rapist: Our God-given right to murder our child in the womb is because we are children of God https://www.tampafp.com/biden-says-right-to-abortion-comes-from-being-a-child-of-god/
theologyonline.com

You must not have actually read my link, which then makes me wonder if you really expect others to read your links, or if you just have lots of time on your hands.
Click to expand...
1) Why should I? Opinions are just that. If you think you've refuted someone else's opinion, that's just your opinion.
2) I can post one link to refute another link. We can on and on like that. So what?
 
Derf

Derf

Well-known member
User Name said:
1) Why should I? Opinions are just that. If you think you've refuted someone else's opinion, that's just your opinion.
2) I can post one link to refute another link. We can on and on like that. So what?
Click to expand...
So what indeed. That's about all your post is worth. Why did you post in the first place?
 
G

Gary K

New member
Banned
Derf said:
But you didn't offer any refutation of it. If there is an immoral position that you reference, I recommend you at least explain that you don't agree with it, else we will think you are immoral.
Click to expand...
You trust the strangest voices in existence. The OT says nothing in favor of abortion but I've seen "Christians" who claim it does. Their reasoning depended upon the idea that women have no souls which must rely on the idea that women are not human beings. That is so obscene an idea that when I pointed out the reasoning the socialists kicked me off the forum but wouldn't publicly admit it. They just changed my password without notice so it would look like I had just left the forum.
 
PureX

PureX

Well-known member
Does it bother anyone that having already made the decision, the SC then chose to keep it a secret until just before they break? Why be so cowardly and under-handed about it? It's the kind of thing we've come to expect politicians to do, not judges.
 
ok doser

ok doser

lifeguard at the cement pond
PureX said:
Does it bother anyone that having already made the decision, the SC then chose to keep it a secret until just before they break? Why be so cowardly and under-handed about it? It's the kind of thing we've come to expect politicians to do, not judges.
Click to expand...
Do you understand that they are deliberating on many cases all at the same time?

do you understand that traditionally the Supreme Court doesn't announce its decisions for a single session until they are all resolved?
 
TomO

TomO

Get used to it.
Hall of Fame
PureX said:
Does it bother anyone that having already made the decision, the SC then chose to keep it a secret until just before they break? Why be so cowardly and under-handed about it? It's the kind of thing we've come to expect politicians to do, not judges.
Click to expand...
:poop:
 
Idolater

Idolater

"Matthew 16:18-19" Dispensationalist (Catholic) χρ
User Name said:
To provide the explanation for why many Jews are pro-choice.
Click to expand...
I provided the explanation for why that explanation was science-deaf and -blind. We know that a fresh brand new organism is begun at conception with its own unique DNA molecule. Once that DNA molecule begins to do stuff on its own, like reproduce itself, and start creating organs and bones and such, that is an organism, we know that now, we have hard evidence of that now, we have DNA evidence.

You never replied . . . .
 
ok doser

ok doser

lifeguard at the cement pond
Derf said:
1) You should.
2) That's odd. I was quite certain that you actually replied to the post where I linked to a refutation of your posted link (you have to click on it, as the image isn't of your post, but the URL is):

End of Roe Vs Wade?

Joe the Rapist: Our God-given right to murder our child in the womb is because we are children of God https://www.tampafp.com/biden-says-right-to-abortion-comes-from-being-a-child-of-god/
theologyonline.com

You must not have actually read my link, which then makes me wonder if you really expect others to read your links, or if you just have lots of time on your hands.
Click to expand...
He's a troll
 
Derf

Derf

Well-known member
User Name said:
To provide the explanation for why many Jews are pro-choice.
Click to expand...
But that's not the real reason--That's merely their justification for wickedness, so they don't have to repent. If you disagree with them, please say so. It will do you good.
 
Derf

Derf

Well-known member
User Name said:
Nope meaning take it up with him.
Click to expand...
Coward.
Then we'll assume you believe the Bible supports intentional murder of a person made in God's image.

And because of that stance, you have no moral grounds for any stance you take.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top