Announcement

Collapse

Forum Rules - You must read(Updated!)

DISCLAIMER

You agree to NOT use this site or its affiliated sites, services you may have access to as a result of being a member here (subscriber or otherwise), to post items (images, textual material, etc.) that are pornographic in nature, illegal in the United States and/or the country you reside in, support or encourage illegal activities (e.g., terrorism), advertise for your own personal profit, or send unsolicited messages (i.e. SPAM) to members or non-members.

AND

You agree that if any clause or component of this document is found to not be legally binding in a court of law of proper jurisdiction then the remainder of this document shall remain fully binding and in full force.

AND

You agree to NOT hold Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd. (makers of the forum software), uspoliticsonline.com, sites affiliated with uspoliticsonline.com, its administrators, its moderators, others associated with its operation, and its owners liable for any and all of the following (in whole or in part):
Personal insults/attacks by other members.
The content posted by other members, whether directed at you personally or a label/classification you associate with. This includes remarks you consider to be libelous or slanderous in any way.
Any financial or time loss due to your participation here or as a result of something you read at this site, including posts/PMs by other members and feature(s)/software available at the domain uspoliticsonline.com.
The dissemination of any personal information about you as a result of either your negligence (e.g. staying logged into a computer that others have access to) or willingness to post such information on a public and or private forum, private message or chat box. This includes using your real name or other details that could allow other members and/or the general public to determine your true identity. You are prohibited from using your real name on these forums, either as your username or in posts / PMs you write.

FORUM RULES, IN ADDITION TO THE DISCLAIMER

1. These rules apply to all sections of USPOL, including public and private forums, blogs, and visitor messages.

2. You cannot attack and/or personally insult someone. You cannot bait other forum members; this includes referring to posters by derogatory terms. Please, remain courteous and respectful to all forum members at all times. You agree to take responsibility for reporting such posts when you come across them. Please, use the ignore feature if need be. Any member who intentionally and continually posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response, or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion, may be regarded as a troll by staff, and have their account suspended or banned.

3. You cannot harass (sexually or otherwise) other members. This includes malicious, slanderous, or defamatory comments. If you are not sure if something you write is inappropriate or not then don't say it. Err on the side of caution.

4. Copying and Pasting Articles, and Starting New Threads. You cannot simply cut and paste in posts or when starting threads. You MUST provide the identifying information (source, author, date, and URL). You must also offer some original thoughts along with the cut and paste. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts from the article. Excerpts really shouldnt be more then a paragraph or two. Furthermore, if you use images or other copyrighted material in your posts or signature you must have permission of the copyright holder unless you know for a fact that the image is in the public domain. In addition:
a. It must include the identifying information; e.g., where available, the author, the publication, the date, the URL.
b. The member must offer some context, including: How did you hear of this article? What is your opinion? Why is it important to you? Why should it be important to forum readers? The more context you provide, the more you assist others in gauging the excerpted information's significance.
c. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts, not the whole thing or even the majority of the whole thing to encourage people to read the entire article.

A violation of any of the above will result in the deletion or closing of the post or thread and could earn you a warning or suspension. If you have any questions concering any of the above please PM a moderator and we will be happy to clarify.

5. You cannot post the same thing in multiple forums. You must not open similar threads about the same or a similar topic. You cannot spam the board or send unsolicited messages to members via PM, email or any other means.

6. Do not post off-topic. You cannot derail a thread with off topic posts.

7. You cannot shout in posts. This includes posting in all CAPS, bold, lIkE tHiS, and extra large font. Posts should also be one color, although you may use an additional color for highlighting ideas you wish to address.

8. You may not alter quotes in a way that misrepresents what was originally said.

9. Multiple accounts are not allowed. If you are found to have more than one account all accounts will be permanently terminated.

10. You cannot have a user name, avatar, signature, or post images that are deliberately offensive. That includes the display of overly explicit or graphic images that may not be suitable for minors.

11. Signatures can not have more than three lines of text, with a font size no larger than "4", and no more than two font colors. Images in signatures cannot be any larger than 800 pixels wide x 200 pixels tall. Animated images are not allowed.

12. You are prohibited from taking any action to disturb the use of the services by others, distribute material that contains viruses, spyware or any other malicious code or harmful programs. This includes interfering with the working of the network, attempts to gain unauthorized access to a service or other computer systems that are part of the site or any other site, by use of the available services.

13. Discussion of moderation actions in public and/or private forums is not permitted. Moderation actions include warnings, suspensions and the editing or deletion of posts. If a member has a concern about a moderation action, he or she is invited to address it with the board staff via Private Message. This rule exists to protect the privacy of all posters with regards to disciplinary action. The moderator team will never publicly discuss the warnings/suspensions of any posters, and we ask that you return the favor, whether about yourself or another poster. Posting about moderation actions in the public forums constitutes a violation. You are free to discuss a moderation action via Private Message with the moderator involved, but you may not harass or abuse the moderators (as already specified in the forum rules). In practical terms, this means that once a moderator tells you his or her decision is final, no further PMs about that moderation action are permitted. If you have a concern about a moderation action, you are free to appeal to a Forum Administrator via Private Message. You may only discuss moderator activities or discussion of moderation with staff member if you chose to private message and are not under any circumstances allowed to use the PM function to forward or promote moderator discussion in regards to specific forum action, amongst other regular members. Administrators do reserve the right to read said PMs and may do so ; if that results in discovery of messaging between posters of such moderator discussion then it will lead to the same violation being received for discussing said moderator actions on the forum. If you receive a message to the effect of having been given moderator information, please report it to a member of staff. Engaging back in that discussion with the original violator will earn you just as stiff a sanction.

14. Do not ignore moderators or administrators. Do not repost something a moderator or administrator has deleted. You cannot have moderators or administrators on your ignore list.

15. Only post in English. Short passages in foreign languages may be acceptable if its use seems helpful for the ongoing discussion and when there is no indication of a potential violation of the forum rules. Always provide a translation into English in such cases. In case of doubt, the incident will be regarded as a violation, no matter of the actual meaning of the foreign language text.

16. The use of words/comments etc. written by other posters, without approval of the poster in your personal signature is not allowed nor are references, by name, to other posters allowed.

17. Please pay attention to announcements by Forum staff that will be found in the "Welcome! / News & Announcements" forum from time to time.

18. Use of "liar", "lies", "lying", etc. Accusing someone of being a "liar" or similar accusations towards other posters will generally be regarded as implying an insult and therewith as a violation of the forum rules. "I question the validity of your statement because...", "That's not the truth" or "you are wrong about that" are sufficient for any decent discussion if you want to disagree with somebody's assertions.

19. Thread opening restriction for new members. In order to control SPAM, new members must have moderator approval to start their own threads.

20. Thread titles must relate to the discussion within. Do not make misleading titles, or titles such as "Guess what..." or "You'll never believe this...". Members need to be able to identify the general gist of the thread via the title. Profanity in thread titles is not permitted.

21. Forum members are instructed to use forum tools and abilities for their intended purposes and no other. If members identify a forum glitch or weakness of any kind that allows you to see or do something you know you shouldn't, please report it. Being aware of any unintended access to the Forum and failing to take appropriate steps to notify staff of said access issues, will create a presumption of seeking to take advantage of the issue, will result in either account suspension, or banishment.

22. Any link to a site that contains graphic content, must contain a warning describing what a person might reasonably expect to view if they click on said link. No graphic pictures are to be posted on the Forum.

23. Threats or advocations of violence toward a public figure, or member of the Forum, will not be tolerated. Conversation about revolution or the like is not prohibited by this rule; directly calling for violence is, eg It's time to kill every <redacted> that voted for the bill, is not permitted.

24. Accounts with no posts will be deleted after 30 days. Inactive accounts with low post histories may be deleted after one year.

25. Private forums are something offered to members that decide to contribute directly to this site via donations. These donations help immensely in keeping this site up and running. Private forums are designed to allow the contributing member discuss whatever he/she wants to and to have the power to direct that discussion in whatever way he/she chose. They were not designed nor are they intended for simply talking trash about members that don't have access to the forum. While the targeted members cannot see the forum or the comments, it creates a negative atmosphere that really isn't necessary. If you want to totally rip apart ideas, ideologies, political parties, etc. that is fine. We simply ask that you don't use the private forums as a means to attack other members that aren't privy to such comments. It is difficult enough to have a political discussion forum because the discussion of politics is inherently heated as people are so passionate about their beliefs...the ones that take the time to come to such a site in the first place at least. The idea of private forums is so people of similar political persuasions can discuss whatever they want without fear of being attacked. Nonetheless, we hope that a certain level of maturity would foster itself within such an arena and not simply lend itself to a bashing forum.

Private Forums are governed by all of the above Forum rules. In addition:
  • Private forums that essentially become abandoned homes will be subject to deletion, donation or reorganization. Just like elsewhere in life, clubs sometimes lose their vitality and purpose for a myriad of reasons. If it becomes clear that a private forum has clearly lost its vitality and nobody is going to really use it anymore, owners are advised to consider whether to reuse the forum for something new and productive rather than let them linger or notify the Administration that the forum should be rearranged for other purposes, closed, merged with other compatible private forums, donated to others for new purposes, etc. Do not be concerned that your forum must be a membership and post count race with others to avoid falling under this policy; the question is whether your forum has actual vitality instead of being 'brain dead.'
  • Additionally, private forums may only be owned by subscribed members in the Platinum or Diamond categories.
  • Should the owner of a private forum be banned, quit USPOL or otherwise abandon the forum the PF will be transferred to another owner or closed.
  • Propriety of private forums. Administration staff will determine the desirability of a proposed private forum and enact any conditions upon it to ensure its purpose is productive.
  • Any and all instances of sharing accounts by allowing someone else to log in under their own account so they can see into private forums for which they are otherwise not permitted to access, will be deemed violation of the double account rule and all caught doing so will be permanently banned.
  • Relaying private forum posts and information to other posters who are not members of the particular private forum for any negative or destructive purpose (eg mean-spirited gossip, fueling interpersonal disputes, etc), is not permitted, and will constitute a violation of the Forum rules.
  • For purposes of monitoring USPOL Terms of Service Administrative staff (not Moderators) will have access to Private Forums.
  • All Private Forums must have at least one active Administrator as a member for purposes of handling issues which cannot be addressed through moderation permissions.
  • Discussion of moderation activities is prohibited on the open site and is likewise prohibited in Private Forums.

26. The administrators and moderators reserve the right to edit and/or delete a post,and/or close a thread, and/or delete a thread at any time if of the opinion that the post is too obscene, inappropriate, or the discussion has run its course.

27. 'Back seat moderating' is not allowed. If you take issue with another poster's contribution to the forum, you're welcome to report any posts you think are out of line, but you should not bring it up publicly within the forum.

28. Images in posts (whether embedded or hot linked) must be reasonable in size. 800x800 should be considered a good rule of thumb. Excessively large images make it difficult for users on mobile devices to load pages. If necessary please simply link to very large images using the URL tags. In addition, the following images are not permitted (including, but not limited to pages with images or videos containing):
  • Strategically covered nudity
  • Sheer or see-through clothing
  • Lewd or provocative poses
  • Close-ups of breasts, buttocks, or crotches

29. Any solicitation or communication involving sports betting / gambling / online casinos / bookies and or internet based card or slot machine systems or sites will lead to all said content being physically removed from the site and server, and will lead to any and or all parties involved being permanently removed and banned from the site to the farthest extent possible. This includes any links to any form of bookmaker, casino, any type of game or match or event where money transfers on the outcome or link of any sort to wire act violations and or anything in violation of either the Internet Gambling Regulation, Consumer Protection, and Enforcement Act, Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006, or the Federal wire Act. This applies not only to the open forum but all and or any chat rooms, articles, private messages and or private forums. All content that violates this rule will be deleted, without notice.

CONSEQUENCES

Failure to comply with any of the forum rules may result in your posts being edited or deleted and/or your account being temporarily or permanently banned from the forums. U.S. Politics Online uses a warning system that generates an automated Private Message to members when they are in violation of Forum rules. The decision to issue a warning is left to the discretion of the moderator or administrator handling the violation. If a member does not agree with an action taken by a moderator, they can appeal to an administrator after seeking clarification from the moderator who issued the warning/infraction and appealing to them in the first instance. Members MAY NOT harass a moderator or administrator by sending excessive PMs when they are discussing an appeal.

Violations are assigned a point value. Points are valid for 30 days. When a members earns 10 points, their account will be automatically suspended: five (5) days for a first suspension; ten (10) days for a second suspension; and twenty (20) days for a third suspension. If a member incurs an additional 10 points after having served three periods of suspension, then they will be permanently banned from the Forum.

Point values are as follows:
Zero (0) points Warning
Two (2) points - Minor infraction / Non post infraction (minor) / Off topic posts / spamming
Four (4) points - Academic dishonesty / Baiting / Discussing moderator or administrator actions / Implying an insult / Minor insults / Moderate infraction / Non-post infraction (moderate) / Thread dumping
Six (6) points - Direct insult at another member / major infraction / Non-post infraction (major)
Ten (10) points - Act of criminality, or advocating thereof

The administrators and moderators also bear the right to issue warnings, temporarily suspend or ban posters for continued trolling or other serious misconduct (eg. professional spamming) even if the poster has not yet reached the maximum warning points or suspensions level. Other options if the above consequences do not seem adequate include placing the member in a moderation queue, which means all posts will have to be approved before they are posted to the board.

PRIVACY POLICY

All information obtained by the end user via the registration process is for internal purposes only and will not be sold to or shared with any third parties. However, if the end user participates in illegal activities and a court of proper jurisdiction orders U.S. Politics Online to release certain information about said user then we will act according to the law. Furthermore, no information will be released on threat of a lawsuit, attempted or actual intimidation, or due to any other reason except as notated in the first sentence of this paragraph. Nonetheless, keep in mind that the information we do have is very limited and generally only consists of the IP address a member uses.

SUBSCRIPTIONS

U.S. Politics Online offers several subscription plans to help cover the operational costs of the site. As a thank you for your donation, you will receive special added benefits meant to enhance your U.S. Politics Online experience. Plans vary in price, starting at only $0.05/day, and benefits vary with the price. Benefits include ability to go straight to new posts, to search the forum, larger avatar, private forums, invisible mode, photo gallery, email, web hosting, and no advertisement banners. Please, click here for more details.
See more
See less

Murder, or late term abortion ?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #61

    Originally posted by Marcus1124 View Post
    Let's not forget, if Roe were overturned tomorrow, abortion would still be legal in most of the country in most instances (I suspect late-term abortions would be banned in most states fairly quickly). When we talk of overturning Roe, we should ALWAYS make it clear that this does not make abortion illegal...it merely returns the issues to each of the states, the people of each would decide what the law should be through their elected state representatives. When polled on that specifically (letting each state decide for itself whether abortion should be legal or not) the overwhelming majority of people approve of that (not realizing that this is what overturning Roe does).


    Originally posted by Captain Trips View Post
    Yet massive ignorance, promoted by big mouths who can only function on ignorance, leads too many people to believe that overturning rvw would make "abortion" illegal.

    It's very strange how crazy the left is about this issue. It's like their Idol, or the God that they worship.

    Watch their behavior, listen to their words, read their writings, these people are as passionate as any hard core religious believer or worse !

    Which is why I often point out the religious aspect of past cultures who sacrificed infants and babies to "Gods" of old.

    Many pro-abortion people are as over the top passionate about this issue, where human babies are slaughtered, as were those who sacrificed human babies and infants to please a "God."

    Their religious-like passion for this issue, exposes a dangerous radicalism that should bother us all.
    If we had any doubt that "abortion" is a demonic sacrifice of human life to the dark side of our nature OR Satan, doubt no more.

    Celebrating death.

    ----------------------------------------------------------------

    On April 9, the Students for Life group on the UT-San Antonio campus erected a "Cemetery of the Innocents" display 911 pink crosses planted in the ground, one for every baby aborted each day in the U.S. Someone had a camera rolling when several students holding Planned Parenthood signs marched through the display shouting about their abortions.

    One of the protesters pointed to a cross at her feet and said derisively: "That one's mine." And one of the chants recorded was: "Hey, stop! What's that sound? All the fetuses are in the ground."

    ..."That is demonic; that is the devil celebrating over the murder and the butchery of unborn children.

    "That's what the devil wants," Vitagliano continued. "When we say God has a wonderful plan for your life, the devil doesn't he wants you in darkness and in chains, he wants you miserable, blind and alone."

    The left and people who support the killing of babies are so adamant and on fire about it that it can only be explained in spiritual terms. [Otherwise] why would you object to babies being born?" he wondered aloud.


    https://onenewsnow.com/culture/2019/...campus-protest




    "The Devil is crafty, indeed.

    He captures us through the things that make us most human. Lust. Pride. Anger. Avarice. Envy. Sloth. Gluttony.

    These we must guard against, just as the Lord warned us we should
    ."
    - Dead Run, E. S.

    ?


    • #62
      Originally posted by Captain Trips View Post






      If we had any doubt that "abortion" is a demonic sacrifice of human life to the dark side of our nature OR Satan, doubt no more.

      Celebrating death.

      ----------------------------------------------------------------

      On April 9, the Students for Life group on the UT-San Antonio campus erected a "Cemetery of the Innocents" display 911 pink crosses planted in the ground, one for every baby aborted each day in the U.S. Someone had a camera rolling when several students holding Planned Parenthood signs marched through the display shouting about their abortions.

      One of the protesters pointed to a cross at her feet and said derisively: "That one's mine." And one of the chants recorded was: "Hey, stop! What's that sound? All the fetuses are in the ground."

      ..."That is demonic; that is the devil celebrating over the murder and the butchery of unborn children.

      "That's what the devil wants," Vitagliano continued. "When we say God has a wonderful plan for your life, the devil doesn't he wants you in darkness and in chains, he wants you miserable, blind and alone."

      The left and people who support the killing of babies are so adamant and on fire about it that it can only be explained in spiritual terms. [Otherwise] why would you object to babies being born?" he wondered aloud.


      https://onenewsnow.com/culture/2019/...campus-protest




      "The Devil is crafty, indeed.

      He captures us through the things that make us most human. Lust. Pride. Anger. Avarice. Envy. Sloth. Gluttony.

      These we must guard against, just as the Lord warned us we should
      ."
      - Dead Run, E. S.
      Yes it is the Devils work. But even outside of a the discussion encompassing God, the accepted slaughter of innocent children is an abomination for humanity. A society who has no respect for human life, is a society that lacks love, compassion, and wisdom.

      What is the difference between an Abortionist and a Nazi? Nothing!
      Both were protected by law, both are murders, both are evil.

      ?


      • #63
        Originally posted by msc View Post
        Yes it is the Devils work. But even outside of a the discussion encompassing God, the accepted slaughter of innocent children is an abomination for humanity.
        It is.

        And it proves - again - our sinful nature. After-all, why is it that we're "aborting," killing actually, the majority of these infant humans ? Oh ? Because of rape, incest, the mothers health.....

        .. or .. wait a second ? No, this is going on because of our sin and in support OF our sin. Killing babies so we can continue living in sin...

        "Great job Supreme Court !" - Lucifer

        Originally posted by msc View Post
        A society who has no respect for human life, is a society that lacks love, compassion, and wisdom.
        We're getting closer every day at an ever quickening pace

        Originally posted by msc View Post
        What is the difference between an Abortionist and a Nazi? Nothing!
        They both believe[d] they're doing a wonderful service to humanity.

        .. yup, no difference.

        Originally posted by msc View Post
        Both were protected by law, both are murders, both are evil.
        True

        ?


        • #64
          Another example of the lefts love for science.

          Or rather hate for science.

          Science is a real problem for liberals, it destroys every one of their lies.

          "Christine Quinn claimed, When a woman is pregnant, that is not a human being inside of her."

          Must be a hamster ? Maybe a fish ? A sea anemone ?

          ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

          In a segment yesterday evening on Chris Cuomos primetime show, a CNN contributor and former New York City Democratic politician made a particularly unscientific assertion in defense of abortion rights.

          During a discussion about state-level heartbeat bills, which prohibit abortion after a fetal heartbeat can be detected, Christine Quinn claimed, When a woman is pregnant, that is not a human being inside of her.


          Quinn, who served as the speaker of the New York City Council until 2013, is also a board member for the National Institute for Reproductive Health, a pro-abortion action fund. Her comment last night was, of course, factually and scientifically inaccurate by entirely objective standards.

          Basic biology tells us that every pregnant woman is pregnant not with a horse or an acorn or a tumor but with another human being.


          Inside each pregnant woman is a human being that meets all the scientific criteria to be considered alive.

          Each embryo or fetus has human DNA, entirely distinct from that of both its mother and its father and, indeed, from every other human being that has ever existed or will ever exist for all of human history.

          Each of those developing human beings is inside its mother, yes, but not part of its mother. From the moment of conception, that unborn human being has all of the cells that will develop into fully functioning organs, into its own unique fingerprints, into its own heartbeat and neural tissue.

          Birth does not magically confer humanity on that being. It was a human being from the start.

          Progressives often accuse conservatives and pro-lifers of ignoring biological facts, of being science deniers.

          Abortion-rights advocates like Quinn are the real science deniers. She openly contradicts simple, scientific, biological facts for the sake of furthering her defense of the right to kill unborn human beings in the womb.

          Her willingness to lie so blatantly is revealing.

          Why do pro-choice people blithely spew such ludicrous and unscientific nonsense as this? Because it is far easier to defend removing a clump of cells from a womans womb to dismiss abortion as no different than having a tooth pulled than it is to admit the biological fact that every abortion intentionally kills a living human being, and to defend it on those terms.



          https://www.nationalreview.com/corne...FdWPlMjUPwNBBA


          ?


          • #65
            Originally posted by Captain Trips View Post
            Another example of the lefts love for science.

            Or rather hate for science.

            Science is a real problem for liberals, it destroys every one of their lies.

            "Christine Quinn claimed, When a woman is pregnant, that is not a human being inside of her."

            Must be a hamster ? Maybe a fish ? A sea anemone ?

            ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

            In a segment yesterday evening on Chris Cuomos primetime show, a CNN contributor and former New York City Democratic politician made a particularly unscientific assertion in defense of abortion rights.

            During a discussion about state-level heartbeat bills, which prohibit abortion after a fetal heartbeat can be detected, Christine Quinn claimed, When a woman is pregnant, that is not a human being inside of her.


            Quinn, who served as the speaker of the New York City Council until 2013, is also a board member for the National Institute for Reproductive Health, a pro-abortion action fund. Her comment last night was, of course, factually and scientifically inaccurate by entirely objective standards.

            Basic biology tells us that every pregnant woman is pregnant not with a horse or an acorn or a tumor but with another human being.


            Inside each pregnant woman is a human being that meets all the scientific criteria to be considered alive.

            Each embryo or fetus has human DNA, entirely distinct from that of both its mother and its father and, indeed, from every other human being that has ever existed or will ever exist for all of human history.

            Each of those developing human beings is inside its mother, yes, but not part of its mother. From the moment of conception, that unborn human being has all of the cells that will develop into fully functioning organs, into its own unique fingerprints, into its own heartbeat and neural tissue.

            Birth does not magically confer humanity on that being. It was a human being from the start.

            Progressives often accuse conservatives and pro-lifers of ignoring biological facts, of being science deniers.

            Abortion-rights advocates like Quinn are the real science deniers. She openly contradicts simple, scientific, biological facts for the sake of furthering her defense of the right to kill unborn human beings in the womb.

            Her willingness to lie so blatantly is revealing.

            Why do pro-choice people blithely spew such ludicrous and unscientific nonsense as this? Because it is far easier to defend removing a clump of cells from a womans womb to dismiss abortion as no different than having a tooth pulled than it is to admit the biological fact that every abortion intentionally kills a living human being, and to defend it on those terms.



            https://www.nationalreview.com/corne...FdWPlMjUPwNBBA

            The left has to deny the facts that the budding human being, with its own unique DNA, isn't a baby at all, otherwise their abortion rationalizations would collapse.
            Can't have that when ideology must reign supreme, at all times.

            ?


            • #66
              Originally posted by eohrnberger View Post
              The left has to deny the facts that the budding human being, with its own unique DNA, isn't a baby at all, otherwise their abortion rationalizations would collapse.
              Can't have that when ideology must reign supreme, at all times.
              It's a strange phenomenon watching liberals use the weird, amorphous definition of "science" that they use.

              But it's ALL "science" and supports what they believe.... even though it's not science at all, they just tell us it is to help them sell their garbage.

              ?


              • #67
                Originally posted by Captain Trips View Post

                It's a strange phenomenon watching liberals use the weird, amorphous definition of "science" that they use.

                But it's ALL "science" and supports what they believe.... even though it's not science at all, they just tell us it is to help them sell their garbage.
                Except for sex...XY chromosomes, penises, and vaginas are merely something science deniers cling to in order to defend their obsolete notions of biological determination of sex...when everyone know that REAL SCIENCE says that sex is completely subjective and determined NOT be any actual objective physical reality, but by the feelings of the individual.

                ?


                • #68
                  Originally posted by Marcus1124 View Post

                  Except for sex...XY chromosomes, penises, and vaginas are merely something science deniers cling to in order to defend their obsolete notions of biological determination of sex...when everyone know that REAL SCIENCE says that sex is completely subjective and determined NOT be any actual objective physical reality, but by the feelings of the individual.
                  Exactly.

                  "Real" science - is fake science, when it's convenient for them.

                  Fake science - is "real" science, when it's convenient for them.

                  It's like the "news."

                  ?


                  • #69
                    Sex is not 'fluid', any more than someone's sec chromosomes are 'fluid'. Not any rational people are disputing this.
                    Gender is what the left is claiming is 'fluid'. I'm like Meh.

                    The left gets into trouble when they try to use these two terms interchangeably, especially in the cases of public policy, which more and more they are attempting to do, as the manufactured bathroom controversy would testify to.

                    ?


                    • #70
                      Originally posted by eohrnberger View Post
                      Sex is not 'fluid', any more than someone's sec chromosomes are 'fluid'. Not any rational people are disputing this.
                      Gender is what the left is claiming is 'fluid'. I'm like Meh.

                      The left gets into trouble when they try to use these two terms interchangeably, especially in the cases of public policy, which more and more they are attempting to do, as the manufactured bathroom controversy would testify to.
                      It is their typical, disingenuous, Orwellian word-play. I tend to agree with Ben Shapiro, my more libertarian side says if someone wants to pretend they are the opposite sex, live and let live, but they have no right or expectation to force society as a whole or other individuals to indulge in their fantasy. Don't expect me to refer to a man as "her" or a woman as "he".

                      ?


                      • #71
                        Originally posted by Marcus1124 View Post

                        It is their typical, disingenuous, Orwellian word-play. I tend to agree with Ben Shapiro, my more libertarian side says if someone wants to pretend they are the opposite sex, live and let live, but they have no right or expectation to force society as a whole or other individuals to indulge in their fantasy. Don't expect me to refer to a man as "her" or a woman as "he".
                        Agreed.

                        ?


                        • #72
                          Some people are going craaaaazzzy...

                          About abortion.

                          They want to be able to keep on killing babies !! They're going mad because they are being limited on how many babies they can kill !!!

                          Some people are obviously nuts.

                          But, that's America today after roe V wade

                          ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          Alabamas mostly Republican lawmakers and governor passed a strong abortion ban this week, and liberals are fit to be tied.

                          Today, I signed into law the Alabama Human Life Protection Act, a bill that was approved by overwhelming majorities in both chambers of the legislature, said Gov. Kay Ivey. To the bills many supporters, this legislation stands as a powerful testament to Alabamians deeply held belief that every life is precious and that every life is a sacred gift from God.

                          In todays secular culture, the governors invocation of God is almost as bold as signing the bill into law. But its gratifying that some public officials are willing to observe that respect for life is fundamentally a spiritual issue.

                          Im sure many leftists are horrified at the reference to God, but they have their hands full hyperventilating over the strictness of the law itself, and so, they will probably let this slide for now. The bill prohibits abortion except when the life of the mother is in jeopardy or the unborn child has a lethal anomaly. The bill makes it a felony for doctors to perform or attempt to perform an abortion.

                          In her statement, Ivey acknowledged that the law might not be constitutional under the Supreme Courts notorious 1973 Roe v. Wade decision that legalized abortion in all 50 states. But she noted that the bills sponsors hope the bill will prompt the court to revisit this issue.

                          Justices Roberts and Kavanaugh have both expressed their abiding respect for longstanding Supreme Court precedent, apparently even if, like Roe, its rationale was manufactured out of whole cloth.

                          The courts decision was not only egregious in substance inventing a constitutional right to abortion out of imaginary language in the Constitution creatively referred to as emanations and penumbras; its effect on society was just as bad.


                          Before the decision, the issue of abortion was the prerogative of the individual states, determined democratically by their duly elected representatives. The courts fiat was not only erroneous on its face; it tyrannically divested the authority of the states. This federal judicial travesty sparked national acrimony over abortion. Judicial tyranny, where it occurs, is just as bad as executive despotism.

                          Here we are almost 50 years later, and the court still hasnt overturned Roe. But when any of the sovereign states dares to pass a law outside Roes parameters, liberals become unhinged, huffing hysterically about the states audacity to deviate from the courts ruling.

                          Yet every day, liberals around the nation enact measures they know violate existing constitutional precedent with the undisguised intent that they serve as test cases and that courts, under relentless pressure from their activism, will change the law. When liberals do it, its noble activism; when conservatives do it, its anarchy.


                          The Guardian, for example, framed the Alabama law in racial and gender terms. Why not? Thats what liberals do. Its almost all they know anymore. These 25 Republicans all white men just voted to ban abortion in Alabama, the headline reads. The law, according to the article, will disproportionately affect black and poor women, because they are more likely to seek abortions, and less likely to have resources to obtain an abortion out-of-state.

                          Not once did the article allude to the only innocent party in the equation: the unborn baby. Nor did it mention that Americas abominably liberal abortion laws result in the grossly disproportionate killing of innocent black babies. Pro-life leaders in the black community have said that the most dangerous place for an African-American is in the womb and that abortion is the most institutionalized form of racism in America.

                          Planned Parenthood, the lefts favorite abortion factory, was outraged at the bill. Today is a dark day for women in Alabama and across the country, said Staci Fox, CEO of Planned Parenthood Southeast. Banning abortion is horrible. We will take this to court and ensure abortion remains safe and legal and accessible in the state of Alabama. She forgot profitable.

                          Democratic leaders were seemingly in a competition over who could condemn the law most harshly. Hillary Clinton said it is an example of appalling attacks on womens lives and fundamental freedoms. We can safely infer that she was not factoring in the female babies lives the law would protect. Sen. Elizabeth Warren said the ban is dangerous and exceptionally cruel. She did not comment on whether the law is cruel to the unborn babies. Warren and Sen. Kamala Harris both noted that the law is an attack on Roe v. Wade.

                          Yes, thats kind of the point, and Alabamas Republicans are admitting it. Isnt it about time the court revisited Roe in earnest? What these Democrats dont say is that their best hope of preserving existing abortion law is for the court to affirm its lawless 1973 decision, either through some newly created legal fiction or in almost-idolatrous fidelity to long-standing but screamingly bad precedent.

                          As I say, I doubt the court, even as currently constituted, will overrule Roe outright, but it would be a glorious day for America, and for Gods innocent unborn babies, if it were to do so.


                          https://www.wnd.com/2019/05/dems-com...-abortion-law/

                          ================================================== ============================

                          Abortion...

                          ================================================== =============================

                          Democrats Speak the Truth About Abortion -- Accidentally

                          Recent words by notorious Democrats again prove the old adage: even a broken clock is right twice a day. In this case, we have had two Democrats in less than two weeks accidentally speaking truth to one of the gravest moral issues of our time.

                          First of all, we have Alabama state representative John Rogers (D). At the beginning of this month, the Republican-controlled Alabama House overwhelmingly passed (74-3) pro-life legislation that would make abortion a felony except in cases where the life of the mother is at risk. The bill will likely not become law, as it will probably die in the Alabama Senate. Aware of this, pro-life lawmakers hope to use the legislation as a means to overturn Roe.

                          In debating the bill while attempting to defend the indefensible -- the killing of unborn children -- representative Rogers made clear the Democrats position when it comes to the most helpless and innocent among us when he declared,
                          Some kids are unwanted, so you kill them now or you kill them later. You bring them in the world unwanted, unloved, you send them to the electric chair. So, you kill them now or you kill them later.
                          Note that Rogers here provides us with several bits of rare clarity when it comes to Democrats and the unborn. Repeatedly using the word kill, Rogers reminds us what an abortion actually results in: the death of a human being. As a popular pro-life refrain goes, If it isnt a life, then why do you have to kill it?

                          Also, Representative Rogers failed to resort to the anthropomorphically ambiguous language so common among those who wish to sanitize what is really happening when an abortion occurs.

                          Instead, Rogers made the mistake of referring to unborn children as kids. To protect the right to kill children in the womb, for decades those corrupted by liberalism have sought to dehumanize the unborn.


                          Thus, we often hear children in the womb described as a zygote, embryo, or fetus.

                          Though these terms are medically correct, the left employs such language in order to avoid using the more humanizing words such as baby, child, or kid. Whats more, in order to hide their evil behavior toward children in the womb and to further dehumanize the unborn, the left will often abandon medically accurate terminology for unborn human beings and simply make stuff up.

                          In 2015, writing about the scandal involving Planned Parenthood and the selling of baby parts, Jen Gunter of The New Republic declared, These are not baby parts. She prefers that the tissue specimen be referred to, not as a fetus or an embryo, but as a product of conception. Gunter declared that the term baby doesnt apply until birth.

                          Likewise, on CNN recently, breaking trend with Democrats who have been accidently correct on life in the womb, while debating heartbeat bills that have become law across the U.S., former Speaker of the New York City Council, Christine Quinn -- a Democrat, of course -- said,
                          When a woman gets pregnant, that is not a human being inside of her. It is part of her body, and this is about a woman having full agency and control of her body and making decisions about her body and what is part of her body with medical professionals.
                          Thus, the so-called party of science again reveals just how much stupidity they will stoop to in order to justify their perverse sexual agenda.

                          Speaking of stupid, Alyssa Milano has tweeted again. Rightfully ignoring the threats of the ignorant Hollywood elite, Governor Brian Kemp recently signed Georgias version of a fetal heartbeat bill into law. Like so many others on the Hollywood left, because of the favorable tax laws passed by Georgia conservatives, Milano finds herself working in Georgia. Being a full-fledged member of the sex-crazed ignorant Hollywood elite, Milano cant seem to help interjecting herself into Georgia politics.

                          After Governor Kemp signed the heartbeat bill into law, Milano decided it was time for action. On May 10, through her Twitter account, Milano called for a sex strike. She tweeted:
                          Our reproductive rights are being erased. Until women have legal control over our own bodies we just cannot risk pregnancy. JOIN ME by not having sex until we get bodily autonomy back. Im calling for a #SexStrike. Pass it on.
                          It seems that liberals are more clueless about biology than we thought. Seemingly unaware of the irony of her call, pro-life conservatives on Twitter soon clued her

                          Of course, the world would be a much better place if Milano and her ilk -- men and women alike -- would remain on a sex strike, at least until they are in a committed marital relationship. Sadly, this is not the plan. As a Milano supporter in the New York Post reveals, the real desire for pro-abortionists is to turn states like Georgia into states like New York. Because, if youre in a place where you can still have abortions, like New York State, then one can f all you want!

                          And thus, we see Milano produce even more unintended truth from the left! Without stating so in such clear terms, for decades the left has sold their wicked sexual agenda upon the notion that if voters will just elect Democrats, then one can f all you want! This has resulted in not only a war on the unborn, but a war on marriage, the family, and the ultimate target of the modern left: the truth.


                          https://www.americanthinker.com/arti...identally.html

                          ?


                          • #73
                            It is a scientific fact that a human life begins at conception. The fetus' DNA is unique unto it's own. It is not the father's and it is not the mother's. It is unique unto it's own.

                            It is further a scientific fact that an abortion terminates a human life.

                            As the left tries to obfuscate and rationalize away those two scientific facts, they strain their credibility and the credibility of their arguments. And this from the supposed 'party of science' ?

                            Rationalize away all you want. An abortion is the termination of a human life. Yet, the left would still justify this through whatever rationalizations they bring to the 'discussion'.

                            ?


                            • #74
                              Originally posted by eohrnberger View Post
                              It is a scientific fact that a human life begins at conception. The fetus' DNA is unique unto it's own. It is not the father's and it is not the mother's. It is unique unto it's own.

                              It is further a scientific fact that an abortion terminates a human life.
                              Science.... in this case, the left doesn't care for science.

                              Funny that, they mumble & grunt about science sometimes - when it suits them and they can find some data that they can lie about.

                              But they go about grunting about science all the time TRYING to legitimize their insanities.

                              Originally posted by eohrnberger View Post
                              As the left tries to obfuscate and rationalize away those two scientific facts, they strain their credibility and the credibility of their arguments. And this from the supposed 'party of science' ?
                              No, they despise science.

                              Only use the word to serve a purpose.

                              Which only works on the ignorant.

                              Originally posted by eohrnberger View Post
                              Rationalize away all you want. An abortion is the termination of a human life. Yet, the left would still justify this through whatever rationalizations they bring to the 'discussion'.
                              "It's about a womans body and her 'right' to control her body....." - They still mumble & grunt these stupidities LOL

                              ?


                              • #75
                                Originally posted by Captain Trips View Post

                                Science.... in this case, the left doesn't care for science.

                                Funny that, they mumble & grunt about science sometimes - when it suits them and they can find some data that they can lie about.

                                But they go about grunting about science all the time TRYING to legitimize their insanities.



                                No, they despise science.

                                Only use the word to serve a purpose.

                                Which only works on the ignorant.



                                "It's about a womans body and her 'right' to control her body....." - They still mumble & grunt these stupidities LOL
                                I heard some idiot liberal announce that men shouldn't be voting on what women get to do with their bodies...shouldn't the same apply to poor people voting on what other people get to do with their own money...And where do trannies fit into this increasingly idiotic intersectional foolishness would it be a hate crime to make that argument about a pro-life Male-to-Female Tranny?

                                ?

                                Working...
                                X