Things that made you laugh today (Political Version)

[Seran]

I'm not the one denying scientific fact.



The right to life should be the number one issue for every libertarian, without that right the rest of the rights don't matter.

Who's running whos life when they demand they should be able to murder the voiceless innocent?

No one is committing murder, beyond you against common sense and logic. I'm not entirely sure what part of the Bible your people deride your believe that judging the morality of others is anyone but God's, but I'm looking forward to the day the Republican party wakes up to the loss of the female vote and moderates.

[Parkbandit]

As always you come into a discussion halfway and pretend like the first half didn't happen. Fuck off.

As always, you get extremely upset over the dumbest things and dip out of a conversation when it gets too difficult or you are called out for being stupid.

He asked a simple question. You didn't want to answer it.

Then a mere 5 hours later, you come back (after dipping out) and tell him you aren't going to answer his question until he answers yours because it's not fair!

I don't blame you for your unstable emotional state.. I blame the election of 2016.. that's where it all went to hell for you.

But mean orange man not here now... you are safe.

[Gelston]

I’m regards to your wife, what happens if the mother has mental issues, doesn’t have a suitable job, in an abusive relationship, has a drug/drinking problem or is unfit to raise and care for a child? Should these be grounds for an abortion as well?

Imagine if those are the conditions after the child is born. Would you then murder that child? That is how she sees it. Adopt the child out.

[Seran]

Former darling of the ultra right and a MAGA figurehead Madison Cawthorn continues to take it in the chin. Campaign finance reports show he's spending campaign money on paying out his college reject buddies directly and through shell companies. This comes on top of the recent video of him face fucking the same dude he was being fondled by in bed. Really gotta hand it to the Right. They're so concerned about Bible thumping their way into office to end a woman's right to choose, all the while their most vocally religious members continue their active lifestyles referred to as heathen or damnable in the book they use to control others.

https://news.yahoo.com/inside-relent...084849483.html

[Parkbandit]

Former darling of the ultra right and a MAGA figurehead Madison Cawthorn continues to take it in the chin. Campaign finance reports show he's spending campaign money on paying out his college reject buddies directly and through shell companies. This comes on top of the recent video of him face fucking the same dude he was being fondled by in bed. Really gotta hand it to the Right. They're so concerned about Bible thumping their way into office to end a woman's right to choose, all the while their most vocally religious members continue their active lifestyles referred to as heathen or damnable in the book they use to control others.

https://news.yahoo.com/inside-relent...084849483.html

What a faggot, amirite Seran?

[Neveragain]

No one is committing murder, beyond you against common sense and logic. I'm not entirely sure what part of the Bible your people deride your believe that judging the morality of others is anyone but God's, but I'm looking forward to the day the Republican party wakes up to the loss of the female vote and moderates.

Looking forward to after November when Democrats only power is a lame duck, 80 year old, senile, rich, racist that's larping as a president.

[Methais]

Looking forward to after November when Democrats only power is a lame duck, 80 year old, senile, rich, racist that's larping as a president.

Seran is very upset about this.

[time4fun]

I'm not the one denying scientific fact.

I'm sorry- scientific fact?

The notion that life begins at conception is not a "scientific fact"- there's no consensus on that. There's not even a formal scientific "opinion" on the matter because it's a philosophical question, not a scientific one.

What you are claiming as a fact is actually a belief. And a new one at that.

In the late 60s/early 70s Evangelical community came together at various points to talk about the issue and, for the most part, the belief was that life begins at birth. NOT conception. And that was based on scripture:

In 1968, Christianity Today published a special issue on contraception and abortion, encapsulating the consensus among evangelical thinkers at the time. In the leading article, professor Bruce Waltke, of the famously conservative Dallas Theological Seminary, explained the Bible plainly teaches that life begins at birth:

“God does not regard the fetus as a soul, no matter how far gestation has progressed. The Law plainly exacts: 'If a man kills any human life he will be put to death' (Lev. 24:17). But according to Exodus 21:22–24, the destruction of the fetus is not a capital offense… Clearly, then, in contrast to the mother, the fetus is not reckoned as a soul.”

The magazine Christian Life agreed, insisting, “The Bible definitely pinpoints a difference in the value of a fetus and an adult.” And the Southern Baptist Convention passed a 1971 resolution affirming abortion should be legal not only to protect the life of the mother, but to protect her emotional health as well.

The idea that life begins at conception is a political narrative that was started largely after the Roe v Wade decision to organize the religious right. So it's only been a "widespread" belief (and it's not even *that* widespread) for the past few decades.

It was never a scientific stance. And it's still not. It's an arbitrary belief people started to get conservative people out to vote for their political opponents.

And if you think I'm wrong, then please show us non-partisan, objective scientific literature that clearly demonstrates a consensus belief that life begins at conception. We'll wait.

[Gelston]

I'm sorry- scientific fact?

The notion that life begins at conception is not a "scientific fact"- there's no consensus on that. There's not even a formal scientific "opinion" on the matter because it's a philosophical question, not a scientific one.

What you are claiming as a fact is actually a belief. And a new one at that.

In the late 60s/early 70s Evangelical community came together at various points to talk about the issue and, for the most part, the belief was that life begins at birth. NOT conception. And that was based on scripture:

[/B]


The idea that life begins at conception is a political narrative that was started largely after the Roe v Wade decision to organize the religious right. So it's only been a "widespread" belief (and it's not even *that* widespread) for the past few decades.

It was never a scientific stance. And it's still not. It's an arbitrary belief people started to get people out to vote for their political opponents.

Your science allows you to say men can give birth.

Also, Hippocrates said life begins at fertilization. You know, top scientist/doctor guy in the 400s BC. So no, it isn't a new thing.

The Vedic literature, of the Hindi faith, also says life begins at conception. There is another thing that is a few thousand years old.

Saying it only became a thing after Roe v Wade is laughibly incorrect.

[Seran]

Your science allows you to say men can give birth.

Also, Hippocrates said life begins at fertilization. You know, top scientist/doctor guy in the 400s BC. So no, it isn't a new thing.

The Vedic literature, of the Hindi faith, also says life begins at conception. There is another thing that is a few thousand years old.

Saying it only became a thing after Roe v Wade is laughibly incorrect.

Bahaha did you really just posit that an opinion from a physician prior to the advent of the field of medicine is proof of when life begins? Wow, just wow. They were also saying the world was flat, underneath our feet was Hades and that the head of their pantheon created multiple species from banging animals, should we also be taking that as some sort of indisputable fact regarding procreation, planetology and geology?