SCOTUS removes Roe V Wade

[Calfredd]

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=H1Yt0xJKDY8

Yes you are and I feel great pity for you but unless you ask for help we can't help you.

[Sunseeker]

Science says you're killing babies.

You'll agree one day. Just takes some growing and perspective. I guarantee it

Okay now I'm done. For now

Who cares?

At the end of the day, it's none of your goddamed business. You want to pay for the baby to be born and raised? Do that. Oh whats that? You don't? It's about punishing people for not living their lives in accordance with your beliefs? Well bugger off then!

Would I get an abortion (assuming I were female and pregnant), no, but that's my goddamned decision to live with. Someone who is pregnant wants to get an abortion, that's their goddamned decision to live with.

Why is this so fucking hard?

Yes I'm pissed, because I'm tired of retreading the same ground every day.
"Oh don't you care about the babies?"
"No, not really! I care about the people who are already here and have difficult enough lives as it is!"

[Endus]

"Oh don't you care about the babies?"
"No, not really! I care about the people who are already here and have difficult enough lives as it is!"

This really bears repeating.

Pro-choices care more about real people than imaginary hypothetical future people. Which is what pro-lifers are so annoyed about, for some reason, while simultaneously denying that real person's basic human rights.

[Edge-]

Yes I'm pissed, because I'm tired of retreading the same ground every day.
"Oh don't you care about the babies?"
"No, not really! I care about the people who are already here and have difficult enough lives as it is!"

Reminder that these people actually exist. They'll adopt your baby! But they actually won't because that's hard and expensive and time consuming and do you have a little bit of socialism to give them some money?

Because they're always liars.

[Calfredd]

As a reminder, it's not Pro-life vs Pro-choice, it's Pro-birth vs Pro-choice as seen time and time again that they fight to make women give birth and do nothing to help with the child afterward.

[Edge-]

As a reminder, it's not Pro-life vs Pro-choice, it's Pro-birth vs Pro-choice as seen time and time again that they fight to make women give birth and do nothing to help with the child afterward.

Funding post-natal care?

What the fuck, why would we do that? Life is sacred, but those sluts shoulda thought about their finances before they went jumping on every dick they could. It's not our responsibility to pay to ensure that children we forced to be born are taken care. Those little lazy moochers need to get themselves a fuckin job, you can be a baby model so start workin them hips and bringing in that cash money, literal baby.

[Darththeo]

Reminder that these people actually exist. They'll adopt your baby! But they actually won't because that's hard and expensive and time consuming and do you have a little bit of socialism to give them some money?

Because they're always liars.

I encountered someone on twitter who was like "I plan to adopt when I am able to provide for the child" ... I called him on the BS because you can ALWAYS push it off under than guideline. "Oh, my car just went into repairs, can't start the process now." "Oh, taxes on my home went up, need to wait for that raise."

- - - Updated - - -

As a reminder, it's not Pro-life vs Pro-choice, it's Pro-birth vs Pro-choice as seen time and time again that they fight to make women give birth and do nothing to help with the child afterward.

Which is the reason why I say in the US we do not have a right to life.

[Edge-]

I encountered someone on twitter who was like "I plan to adopt when I am able to provide for the child" ... I called him on the BS because you can ALWAYS push it off under than guideline. "Oh, my car just went into repairs, can't start the process now." "Oh, taxes on my home went up, need to wait for that raise."

Being "baby poor" is a thing, and it seems that most of these folks simply aren't willing to make the sacrifices they're demanding that others make instead.

[Varx]

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=hR5wj6otwJI

Here's Michael Knowles spitting some facts against a professional baby killer advocate.

There's a 2 hour version too...
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=yiNW84kJy_k

[Rasulis]

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=hR5wj6otwJI

Here's Michael Knowles spitting some facts against a professional baby killer advocate.

There's a 2 hour version too...
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=yiNW84kJy_k

We are seriously using Youtube as source of reference now? Here I thought youtube is only good for watching cute cat videos or wuxia series.

[Endus]

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=hR5wj6otwJI

Here's Michael Knowles spitting some facts against a professional baby killer advocate.

It's from The Daily Wire. Shapiro's shitsite. Nothing but dishonest manipulation and propaganda.

He argues, after his counterpart points to the right to bodily autonomy being supreme, that he thinks right to life should be. That necessarily means he's in favor of forced organ and tissue donations.

Then he tries to say that he thought "they" just admitted right to life trumped bodily autonomy, and she corrects him that he said that, based on fucking nothing.

Then he tries to claim all other rights depend upon right to life, which isn't true, while making up "rights" like "right to this fruity drink here", which has nothing to do with right to life but does, in fact, have to do with right to bodily autonomy, since he's choosing to put that drink in his body.

I'm a minute and a half in, and he's lying about his opponent's statements from the moment before, making categorical claims he clearly doesn't even believe in, and contradicting himself directly.

Pretty much what I'd expect from an execrable propaganda outlet like the DailyWire.

How on Earth would you think dishonest drivel like this would convince anyone of anything? There's no "facts" here, just an open liar being a shitty person.

If you had a valid argument, you could just post it directly. A set of functional premises that can survive scrutiny, and which lead inevitably to their natural conclusion. That's what an argument is. The shit you keep posting is scattershot emotional appeals and other dishonest tactics that are used to try and sow doubt, not arguments in and of themselves. There is no argument for the pro-life movement that does not fundamentally require a belief in the supernatural, and even though largely aren't convincing to those who do believe, and for non-believers that faith-based premise is a complete non-starter.

If you can't make your arguments without fucking lying about everything, then you do not have an argument, and your position deserves nothing but scorn and ridicule.

[Edge-]

How on Earth would you think dishonest drivel like this would convince anyone of anything?

Because it apparently convinced him.

[Darththeo]

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=hR5wj6otwJI

Here's Michael Knowles spitting some facts against a professional baby killer advocate.

There's a 2 hour version too...
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=yiNW84kJy_k

"Facts." Why does your ilk not understand what a fact is?

[Edge-]

"Facts." Why does your ilk not understand what a fact is?

Nope.



Conservatives continue to be the "feels over reals" crowd.

[Varx]

Nope.



Conservatives continue to be the "feels over reals" crowd.

I can link vids with libbies going off their feefees too. That guy clearly doesn't know what he's saying. Most politicians don't, on either side

- - - Updated - - -

I'm feeling good. I feel like I reached some lurkers in this thread today.

[Darththeo]

I can link vids with lobbies going off their feefees too. That guy clearly doesn't know what he's saying. Most politicians don't, on either side

I am sure you could. The difference is they won't likely be calling their feelings "facts."

[gondrin]

That's exactly what a miscarriage is. For what ever reason, the female's body cannot carry the baby.

Miscarriage is the body aborting the pregnancy before its normal due date. It has nothing to do with a healthy or unhealthy or unviable pregnancy. You can have a perfectly healthy pregnancy and the body can suddenly reject it and cause a miscarriage. It is literally defined as a natural abortion.

[Varx]

I am sure you could. The difference is they won't likely be calling their feelings "facts."

Oh you sweet winter child

- - - Updated - - -

Miscarriage is the body aborting the pregnancy before its normal due date. It has nothing to do with a healthy or unhealthy or unviable pregnancy. You can have a perfectly healthy pregnancy and the body can suddenly reject it and cause a miscarriage. It is literally defined as a natural abortion.

Whatever helps you sleep at night to justify baby murder

[Darththeo]

Oh you sweet winter child

Translation: You know I am "write"

[gondrin]

I suggest you watch her content more and open yourself up since she does not base her arguments on emotion, unlike those she debates


And I'm aware of exceptions to free speech, like telling "fire" in a crowded space. I'm talking more about speech that hurts people's feelings.

As far as freedom of speech goes, the government rarely bans speech. However, private censorship of speech is very much legal. A private business, entity or person can ban whatever speech on their property regardless of anything else. The government cannot as it must come to an extremely high standard to ban speech. The government isn't banning any speech that hurts people's feelings.

That is why when some states are banning books of LBGTQ tops is illegal. That goes against the First Amendment as it is the government banning those books. However, if a business or a private residence wants to ban those same books, it is perfectly legal.