Let's put this myth to rest once and for all: The Republican Party is NOT the "pro-life" party.

gyard
Yep, every living thing on this planet is a blob of cells.

you
Then you agree a blob of cells is not a person.

A huge one must have had your jetpack on.

 

Um every living thing is not a person.

 

↑
FoxHastings said: ↑
This is a fact: If you invite someone onto your property and they attack and harm you you have the right to get rid of them any way you can.
I placed no blame......

GOODGAWD!!!!
YOU were the one who introduced "blame"...

I can see you not reading MY posts but you don't seem to be reading your own !!!!!

 

Nope in lots of states mothers can still kill their unborn babies and the pro-abortionist want to make sure there are no restrictions on doing so. The abortion, the purposeful killing, of the baby in the womb because the mother doesn't want it to live. Doesn't want to deal with it and even kill it before allowing it to live and placing up for adoption.

 

LOL, NOW you're dodging with "motive"? "motive " for what? I didn't mention "motive".

FoxHastings said: ↑
LOL, NOW you're dodging with "motive"? "motive " for what? I didn't mention "motive".

But that'sn a nice dodge away from facts for you

 

Didn't say it was and neither did gyard and it he was being sarcastic.

 

FoxHastings said: ↑


Hilarious! I especially like the Oh So Dramatic ""slaves to your lust" whatever TF that means....


THAT is what Anti-Choicers use as an argument ???? Entertaining but really silly..



I understand English just fine ....but your emotional dramatic and silly "slaves to your lust" needs explaining...it's just TOO TOO ridiculous..

You don't seem to understand English when I described slavery and bodily autonomy....maybe you should try again

Ugduggaduh....addiction may be slavery but it is NOT legally slavery.


Taking away people's right to bodily autonomy is making them slaves.



What TF does sexual addiction have to do with anything in this thread? Nothing.

 

You know exactly what he is talking about you ASSIGNED a motive upon which I called you

"LOL, Thank you for once again PROVING that Anti-Choicers ONLY want to punish women for having sex..."

To which I responded

No thank you for your desperate "I will make up a motive and assign it to you for lack of anything of substance".

 

Yes, yes shouty person, I understand that you don't think attacking and harming somebody implies blame.

 

No, shouty person, that's even more projection on your part. You assigned a motive to others, somebody noted you doing so, You said "what motive??", you then again explicitly assigned the same motive, and now you whine in red text projecting that I'm dodging some facts having nothing to do with the foregoing. You're kind of special eh?

 

OH THAT "motive"....why TF couldn't that poster EXPLIAN what TF he was talking about....wouldn't that have been SIMPLER???!


Did he TRY to not be understood ....?

 

It was quite clear and your second dodge of it. Why TF can't you keep up and answer?

 

Answer what? Was there a question ?

 

PROVING that Anti-Choicers ONLY want to punish women for having sex..."


YES, that's the motive of Anti-Choicers.....as proven by their contention that if a woman has sex she must give birth.

As proven by the fact that some of the Anti-Choicers make an exception for rape and incest.

 

Possibly some of them, but certainly not all, and I'm not convinced its even many. Why would they want to punish women for having sex? Are they just evil demon creatures?

And why do you dismiss taking them at face value, that for whatever reason they see the unborn as a person in need of protection? Is it simply easier for you to villify them?

 

PROVING that Anti-Choicers ONLY want to punish women for having sex..."


YES, that's the motive of Anti-Choicers.....as proven by their contention that if a woman has sex she must give birth.

As proven by the fact that some of the Anti-Choicers make an exception for rape and incest.

I put the UNCHERRY PICKED post above.

YES, MANY Anti-Choicers say if a woman has sex she must go through the pregnancy....it has been said in almost every thread on abortion including THIS ONE.


Do YOU want to make an exception in the case of rape or incest????

Or force rape victims to be punished by having their rapist's kid?

 

It is nice to see you improving and now putting in the qualifier "many" instead of your previous broad sweeping statement, but eve with that, that actually isn't what you claimed:

Can you spot the difference?

 

Exception to what? I am pro-choice. I am just not projecting insidious motives onto people I don't agree with.

I think there are plenty of pro-life people who genuinely see the unborn as people in need of protection, and who think they have a right to live, and weigh that against the mother's right to bodily autonomy and go with life over choice, hence "pro-life".

For some if them, the idea of having to have a rapists baby tips the scale in the opposite direction.

Just because you ultimately go with one concern to the expense of the other when the two conflict, doesn't mean you don't have both concerns.

You demanding they "only want to punish women for having sex" is like if they demanded you only want to kill babies. It completely disregards the actual stated concern (life of the unborn for them; women's bodily autonomy and free choice for you).

 

THIS,, PROVING that Anti-Choicers ONLY want to punish women for having sex...""

has been my experience.

Are YOU contending that they don't ??? LOLOL

 

When ANYONE makes an exception for rape they are CLEARLY stating that women who have consensual sex must be punished but not women who had sex forced on them.


An abortion procedure and OUTCOME are exactly the same whether the woman was raped or had consensual sex.

So IF a person makes an exception for rape ...WHY TF are they against abortion??????

 

No thank you for your desperate "I will make up a motive and assign it to you for lack of anything of substance" your phony denial notwithstanding

 

ROTFLMAO .........................................and there is it the RAPE RAPE RAPE hammer............................1% of all abortions but when all is lost pull it out to justify NO restriction on abortion up to the moment of birth. Only shows the shallow weak position you take.

 

Just as much as mine has been PROVING that the Pro-Abortioners ONLY want to kill unborn babies......

 

You're being quite disingenuous by refusing to see the larger context.

It is the Republican Party that has embraced this whole "pro-life" stance, yet their history of legislation continually underscores they do not give a damn about born children as they are the ones that continually vote to defund programs that actually help children.

 

You made the claim. You have nothing to back it up other than your own malice. Especially when you go so far as to say they ONLY want that. You completely disregard their stated reason about caring about the unborn. It's on par with if they accused you of only wanting to kill babies.