feminists killed tol 

7djengo7

This space intentionally left blank
Murdering children, regardless of their stage of development, is wrong

You know that, and I know that, but the brute beasts outnumbering you and I in this forum have decided that they are above right and wrong.
 

ok doser

lifeguard at the cement pond
You know that, and I know that, but the brute beasts outnumbering you and I in this forum have decided that they are above right and wrong.

TOL has become a welcoming place for people who promote evil

Didn't always used to be like this
 

7djengo7

This space intentionally left blank
I like the colour red thank you so very much. It is a nickname of mine after all...

No, it's not. Nicknames are words. Colors (including the color, red) are not words. So, no: the color, red, is not a nickname of yours after all.

Or, did you mean that the phrase, "the colour red", is a nickname of yours? What a dumb nickname!
 

eider

Well-known member
I agree though if right wingers were really concerned about unborn babies they wouldn’t go out of their way to block assisting moms2b with free or affordable medical care before and after birth as well as advancing affordable child care for workings mom.

The GOP doesn’t care about the health and welfare of these children. It’s just a political talking point.

Exactly.
 

eider

Well-known member
I've often wondered what levels of hypocrisy might exist within the Pro-Life Republican Politicians.

The Guardian seems to think there are grounds for believing that there is considerable Republican hypocrisy.

Please copy/paste the link in to google.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...heme-on-abortions-its-ok-for-me-evil-for-thee

An illustrious list of Republican men are publicly anti-choice, but privately have supported women in their lives having abortions

Republicans abhor abortions – unless it’s for their mistress, of course
Meet Scott Lloyd, the head of the Office of Refugee Resettlement; in theory he’s responsible for supporting refugees build a better life in America by providing them with financial and medical assistance. Under previous administrations, this included abortion services. But we live in a God-fearing America now, and Lloyd has made it his mission to ensure refugee women, including unaccompanied minors, don’t get abortions. He even blocked a 17-year-old-girl who had been raped from having an abortion. “The child – the one who is destroyed – is not an aggressor,” he argued in a report. No Scott, the child isn’t an aggressor; you are.
As Mother Jones reported this week, despite his patronizing proselytizing, Lloyd doesn’t always practice what he preaches. As a young man he drove an ex-girlfriend to get an abortion and paid for half of it.
Lloyd joins an illustrious list of Republicans whose stance on abortion is basically: “It’s OK for me; evil for thee.” Earlier this year, for example, it emerged that Elliot Broidy, the former RNC deputy finance chairman paid $1.6m to a Playboy Playmate he had an affair with, after she aborted his child.
Then there is Tim Murphy, the pro-life Pennsylvania Republican who resigned last year after it was revealed he had urged his mistress to consider an abortion. And let’s not forget the charming Scott DesJarlais. According to testimony during his divorce trial, the Tennessee congressman supported his ex-wife's decision to get two abortions before their marriage. The former doctor also allegedly pressured a 24-year-old patient he was having an affair with to get an abortion. Even after all that information came out DesJarlais still had the gall to vote for anti-abortion bills and boast of having a “100% pro-life voting record."
 

User Name

Greatest poster ever
Banned
Are you going to carry those pregnancies to term? Are you going to give birth? Are you going to take financial and other responsibilities for the upbringing of those children?

I didn't think so. Since you don't actually care about any of the people involved, why do you think it's any of your business in the first place?

If you say that abortion = murder, then you have the moral obligation to act accordingly. How and when do you plan to do so?

<NO ANSWER>
 

ok doser

lifeguard at the cement pond
Act accordingly to what?

If you say that forcing sex on women against their will = rape, then you have the moral obligation to act accordingly.

Now apparently you're expected to do something else

I would say a good place to start is by making sure there are laws against forcing sex on women against their will AKA rape.
 

User Name

Greatest poster ever
Banned
Lloyd joins an illustrious list of Republicans whose stance on abortion is basically: “It’s OK for me; evil for thee.” Earlier this year, for example, it emerged that Elliot Broidy, the former RNC deputy finance chairman paid $1.6m to a Playboy Playmate he had an affair with, after she aborted his child.
Then there is Tim Murphy, the pro-life Pennsylvania Republican who resigned last year after it was revealed he had urged his mistress to consider an abortion. And let’s not forget the charming Scott DesJarlais. According to testimony during his divorce trial, the Tennessee congressman supported his ex-wife's decision to get two abortions before their marriage. The former doctor also allegedly pressured a 24-year-old patient he was having an affair with to get an abortion. Even after all that information came out DesJarlais still had the gall to vote for anti-abortion bills and boast of having a “100% pro-life voting record."

It's as I've been saying, Republicans are massively hypocritical on abortion. They aren't really against abortion; they only use the issue to get votes. The above are but a few examples of that.

The majority Republican stance on abortion is that it should be outlawed because it is the murder of an innocent life--except in the cases of rape, incest, and the life of the mother. As if it's okay to murder those people based on how they were conceived, but not the others! Irrational, illogical, absurd thinking dominates the so-called "pro-life" movement.
 
Last edited:

Arthur Brain

Well-known member
You know that, and I know that, but the brute beasts outnumbering you and I in this forum have decided that they are above right and wrong.

Yeah, cos all the 'monsters' on here that don't happen to agree with you or can stay awake through the tirades of juvenile nonsense are so for murdering children.

Pathetic.
 

Arthur Brain

Well-known member
No, it's not. Nicknames are words. Colors (including the color, red) are not words. So, no: the color, red, is not a nickname of yours after all.

Or, did you mean that the phrase, "the colour red", is a nickname of yours? What a dumb nickname!

I think you'll find that that the descriptors for colours are actual words also ya big goof.

:dizzy:
 

7djengo7

This space intentionally left blank
I think you'll find that that the descriptors for colours are actual words also ya big goof.

:dizzy:

I'm aware of that, Professor. But what's your point? Your saying that does not help you any, here.

It's amusing that you're from England, and yet, you write, in English, as though it were a second language to you--one upon which you yet find yourself struggling to get a decent grip.

You did not say that a descriptor--a word--for the color, red, is your nickname; rather, you said that the color, red, is your nickname:

I like the colour red thank you so very much. It is a nickname of mine after all...

The antecedent of your pronoun, "It", is your phrase, "the colour red", by which you are denoting the color, red, no?

You did not say, "I like the word, 'red'....It is a nickname of mine", or "I like the descriptor, 'red'....It is a nickname of mine". Rather, you said, "I like the colour red....It is a nickname of mine".
 

7djengo7

This space intentionally left blank
If you know where and when murders are happening, and you are the only one who will stop the murderer, what will you do about it?

If User Name knows there are thousands of children being starved and abused across America, does the fact that User Name has not stopped, and will not stop their being starved and abused mean that thousands of children are not really being starved and abused across America (nay, worldwide)? Why have you not stopped thousands of children from being starved and abused, you shallow hypocrite?

If you say that abortion = murder, then you have the moral obligation to act accordingly. How and when do you plan to do so?

If you say that murder = murder, then you have the moral obligation to act accordingly. How and when do you plan to do so?
 

7djengo7

This space intentionally left blank
They aren't really against abortion

Please try to define for us exactly what you imagine it would be, then, to be "really against abortion".

Do you think that it is to not be "really against abortion", to affirm that abortion is murder?

Do you think that it is to be "really against abortion", to (as miscreants like yourself do) affirm that abortion is not murder?

Do you consider yourself to be "really against abortion"? If so, then please, by all means, tell us exactly what about yourself makes you consider yourself to be "really against abortion".
 

User Name

Greatest poster ever
Banned
If User Name knows there are thousands of children being starved and abused across America, does the fact that User Name has not stopped, and will not stop their being starved and abused mean that thousands of children are not really being starved and abused across America (nay, worldwide)?

In fact I don't know where children are being starved and abused. But you do claim to know where children are being murdered: At clinics that offer abortions, and Planned Parenthood offices! Now, what are you going to do about it? My guess is that you are going to do absolutely nothing, except vote Republican.
 

Arthur Brain

Well-known member
I'm aware of that, Professor. But what's your point? Your saying that does not help you any, here.

It's amusing that you're from England, and yet, you write, in English, as though it were a second language to you--one upon which you yet find yourself struggling to get a decent grip.

You did not say that a descriptor--a word--for the color, red, is your nickname; rather, you said that the color, red, is your nickname:



The antecedent of your pronoun, "It", is your phrase, "the colour red", by which you are denoting the color, red, no?

You did not say, "I like the word, 'red'....It is a nickname of mine", or "I like the descriptor, 'red'....It is a nickname of mine". Rather, you said, "I like the colour red....It is a nickname of mine".

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ....

Oh, and what a misuse of commas.

:e4e:
 
Top