« First        Comments 93 - 132 of 138       Last »     Search these comments

93   Patrick   2022 May 6, 8:16am  

https://babylonbee.com/news/hello-again-old-friend-progressive-dusts-off-my-body-my-choice-sign-she-put-in-storage-at-beginning-of-the-pandemic?source=patrick.net





PORTLAND, OR—Local progressive Juniper Clouts has once again become outraged this week, this time causing her to go searching for her old signs that express her anger about the current thing. Luckily, she found her old "My Body, My Choice" sign she had tucked away at the beginning of the pandemic.

"Ah good as new," said Juniper, dusting off the old sign. "I missed not being able to hold you up after those backward, idiotic anti-vaxxers started trying to use you too."

"Bodily autonomy only applies to us women trying to abort another body—I mean a clump of cells. It clearly doesn't apply to the government telling you to inject a foreign, experimental substance into your own body," continued Juniper. "Why is that so hard for people to understand?"

According to sources, Juniper Clouts was then spotted at a local pro-abortion protest shouting things like "MY BABY'S BODY, MY CHOICE", and "Keep the government off my body, unless they want to vaxx me again, then it's ok."

At publishing time, Juniper realized she was actually protesting at an anti-mandate rally. She immediately fell to her knees and tore her beloved sign in half while shouting "NOOOOOOO!"
97   RWSGFY   2022 May 6, 9:10am  

Patrick says








But it's been fixed! Weemenz can now be conscripted too, right?
98   Ceffer   2022 May 6, 1:09pm  

RWSGFY says
But it's been fixed! Weemenz can now be conscripted too, right?





Military SJW lesbians are skilled in using their strap ons as nunchucks. They are not to be trifled with.
99   Patrick   2022 May 7, 5:23pm  

https://notthebee.com/article/woman-sorry-people-who-bleed-are-starting-to-sterilize-themselves-over-the-pending-roe-decision?source=patrick.net

Women (sorry, people who bleed) are starting to sterilize themselves over the pending Roe decision


It's kind of like the vaxx.

It's hard not to encourage them.

"Yes, yes, you do need that booster too..."
101   Patrick   2022 May 7, 7:27pm  



My personal position is that abortion not a binary thing, like biological sex, which is obviously binary.

An egg is not a person, and I don't think a fertilized egg is a person either.

But a baby is a person just before it is born, and clearly is a person for months before that.

There is a fuzzy line where personhood happens, and I'd rather err on the side of caution. "The first synapses in baby’s spinal cord form during week 7 of pregnancy. By week 8, electrical activity begins in the brain..." (from some random site)

So maybe in the first two months it's OK.
104   PeopleUnited   2022 May 7, 10:19pm  

Patrick says
An egg is not a person, and I don't think a fertilized egg is a person either.


Life begins not at fertilization, but when the blood supply from the mother starts nourishing the embryo. The reason I say this is that life cannot occur without a mother. Even Jesus, whose conception involved no sex, needed a willing mother to accept implantation. Even test tube babies don’t become human until a mother accepts them into her uterine lining. Simply put, the uterus gives life to an embryo.
105   AmericanKulak   2022 May 8, 12:46am  

Consider this:

The same year the Liberal Court used a novel Legal Theory to create a right to abortion in defiance of all precedence...

It became a criminal act to interfere with the eggs of Sea Turtles.

1973.

But seriously, the first thing that came to mind was some Horror Movie where the Tribesmen are worshipping Shub-Niggerath dancing around with dead babies.
109   richwicks   2022 May 8, 8:40pm  

PeopleUnited says

Life begins not at fertilization, but when the blood supply from the mother starts nourishing the embryo. The reason I say this is that life cannot occur without a mother. Even Jesus, whose conception involved no sex, needed a willing mother to accept implantation.


Take it from me, a non religious person will simply dismiss all your reasoning once you use religion as part of your argument.

I can appreciate the point of view of the morality of the situation, however, appealing to something people don't believe in is a mistake. Your religion is irreconcilable with a person's viewpoint if they are not religious.

From my point of view, I would agree that as soon as the developing child starts to develop brain activity, it becomes a moral issue and that's something like 2 months in. Abortion should be safe, legal, and extremely rare. I don't think it's moral to use abortion as a birth control measure and all steps should be in place to prevent accidental pregnancy. If we can reach that point, the whole morality of the question goes away.
110   PeopleUnited   2022 May 9, 7:44am  

richwicks says
appealing to something people don't believe in is a mistake. Your religion is irreconcilable with a person's viewpoint if they are not religious.


If you are going to lecture me kid, I’m going to return the favor. When all is said and done, if you don’t change your mind before it is too late, you will find yourself doing things you never thought you could ever do, and facing consequences you never imagined were possible. It’s not because of religion that you misunderstand God and his powers it is your own flawed views that are dragging you down. Simply put, the Bible is true, and everyone who approaches it as a child would with an open heart and no preconceived notions will find the truth if they will only let God show them. And yes, that includes even you, unless you decide you want to be stubborn.



richwicks says
I don't think it's moral to use abortion as a birth control measure and all steps should be in place to prevent accidental pregnancy. If we can reach that point, the whole morality of the question goes away.


And this is exactly why we can never “reach that point” as you said above. People having sex (especially young people and people under the influence) are by definition not behaving responsibly or thinking about the consequences. One of the consequences of sex is pregnancy, and birth control is not foolproof. I used the word foolproof on purpose because premarital sex is foolish. If you don’t see that, then you are too. Furthermore, you said abortion should be rare and and steps should be in place to prevent accidental pregnancy. Why “should” these happen? If there is no moral imperative for those to occur they will not. But you are implying by using the word “should” that you yourself do have a moral motivation to prevent pregnancy in those who do not want children. But there really is no such thing as “accidental” pregnancy so unless a woman is raped, all pregnancy is premeditated, and all abortion outside of rape is also premeditated murder. Sex precedes pregnancy, there are no accidental pregnancies (besides rape).
112   Patrick   2022 May 9, 9:23pm  

Our entire police and legal system destroys its own credibility by letting Democrats, and only Democrats, get away with violent crime, including murder.
114   richwicks   2022 May 10, 4:05am  

Patrick says

Our entire police and legal system destroys its own credibility by letting Democrats, and only Democrats, get away with violent crime, including murder.


That's not true. Dan Crenshaw does insider trading just like Nancy Pelosi does. John McCain ran a fake "charity" to accept bribes just like Hillary Clinton did. Dennis Hastert was house majority whip under Bush Jr, he was a pedophile - nothing happened to him for his RAPES.

We don't have a judicial system at all. It's slanted, but not toward the left or right, it's slanted in favor of corruption of people that they control.
116   AmericanKulak   2022 May 10, 11:25pm  

Biden Regime not only announces they won't enforce the law, they're encouraging the protests outside SCOTUS homes.

117   pudil   2022 May 11, 6:55am  

Tim Pool had an interesting super chat yesterday. I hadn’t heard this one before:

Is it moral to create a bomb and put it in a time capsule that will be opened in 100 years by some unsuspecting person that hasn’t been born yet and kill them?

Obviously this is wrong. But why is it wrong to do this when abortion is okay because you are only killing someone who hasn’t been born yet?
121   AmericanKulak   2022 May 11, 9:30am  

HunterTits says


What law?

There has been no law pased regarding this.


(a)Whoever corruptly, or by threats or force, or by any threatening letter or communication, endeavors to influence, intimidate, or impede any grand or petit juror, or officer in or of any court of the United States, or officer who may be serving at any examination or other proceeding before any United States magistrate judge or other committing magistrate, in the discharge of his duty, or injures any such grand or petit juror in his person or property on account of any verdict or indictment assented to by him, or on account of his being or having been such juror, or injures any such officer, magistrate judge, or other committing magistrate in his person or property on account of the performance of his official duties, or corruptly or by threats or force, or by any threatening letter or communication, influences, obstructs, or impedes, or endeavors to influence, obstruct, or impede, the due administration of justice, shall be punished as provided in subsection (b). If the offense under this section occurs in connection with a trial of a criminal case, and the act in violation of this section involves the threat of physical force or physical force, the maximum term of imprisonment which may be imposed for the offense shall be the higher of that otherwise provided by law or the maximum term that could have been imposed for any offense charged in such case.
(b)The punishment for an offense under this section is—
(1)in the case of a killing, the punishment provided in sections 1111 and 1112;
(2)in the case of an attempted killing, or a case in which the offense was committed against a petit juror and in which a class A or B felony was charged, imprisonment for not more than 20 years, a fine under this title, or both; and
(3)in any other case, imprisonment for not more than 10 years, a fine under this title, or both.
127   Patrick   2022 Jun 1, 9:14am  

https://spectatorworld.com/topic/hunt-down-the-supreme-court-leaker/


Hunt down the Supreme Court leaker
What’s taking law enforcement so long?
128   Patrick   2022 Jun 8, 11:04am  

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2022/06/08/white-house-and-schumer-cheered-intimidation-of-supreme-court-justices-n2608411


Schumer, March 2020: "I want to tell you Kavanaugh...You have released the whirlwind and you will pay the price. You won’t know what hit you if you go forward with these awful decisions.”

Today: A man was arrested for trying to kill Justice Kavanaugh. pic.twitter.com/WRAgTHN0yt

— Townhall.com (@townhallcom) June 8, 2022
131   Patrick   2022 Jun 27, 10:50am  




I think they would be right if they did that.

The Tenth Amendment is very clear.

« First        Comments 93 - 132 of 138       Last »     Search these comments

Please register to comment:

api   best comments   contact   latest images   memes   one year ago   random   suggestions