House Bill 586

by **DWags** 2017-01-24, 14:08

Here it comes. Life begins at fertilization.

At what point do they make you stop masterbating?

by **Robert J Sakimano** 2017-01-24, 14:29

the "Sanctity of Human Life" Act..

brought to you by the same "christians" that support a racist, bigot, misogyist, xenophobe and an admitted sexual predator.

House Bill 586 502811600

by Guest 2017-01-24, 14:34

Those sonsabitches.

Maybe you can get Warren to introduce the "Fuck Human Life Act" so you'll have something to support that is the opposite of this.

by **Robert J Sakimano** 2017-01-24, 15:01

LooseGoose wrote:Those sonsabitches.

Maybe you can get Warren to introduce the "Fuck Human Life Act" so you'll have something to support that is the opposite of this.

that would be cool..

or we could just allow the same "pro life" republicans tell us all about how much they love the death penalty.

by Guest 2017-01-24, 15:51

Robert J Sakimano wrote:
LooseGoose wrote:Those sonsabitches.

Maybe you can get Warren to introduce the "Fuck Human Life Act" so you'll have something to support that is the opposite of this.
that would be cool..

or we could just allow the same "pro life" republicans tell us all about how much they love the death penalty.

I love it when silly Libs try to equate chopping an innocent baby to bits and vacuuming it up to the death penalty.

It's the king of all false equivalences.

by **Robert J Sakimano** 2017-01-24, 15:52

LooseGoose wrote:
Robert J Sakimano wrote:that would be cool..

or we could just allow the same "pro life" republicans tell us all about how much they love the death penalty.

I love it when silly Libs try to equate chopping an innocent baby to bits and vacuuming it up to the death penalty.

It's the king of all false equivalences.

I'm sorry that I'm consistently pro-life.

by **DWags** 2017-01-24, 15:53

LooseGoose wrote:
Robert J Sakimano wrote:that would be cool..

or we could just allow the same "pro life" republicans tell us all about how much they love the death penalty.

I love it when silly Libs try to equate chopping an innocent baby to bits and vacuuming it up to the death penalty.

It's the king of all false equivalences.

What's the percentage of people actually guilty on death row Goose?

by Guest 2017-01-24, 16:07

DWags wrote:
LooseGoose wrote:

I love it when silly Libs try to equate chopping an innocent baby to bits and vacuuming it up to the death penalty.

It's the king of all false equivalences.

What's the percentage of people actually guilty on death row Goose?

What percentage of babies are guilty of a crime?

And I don't have an exact percentage of those that are guilty on death row but it's got to be well over 95%, but 100% of them are alive.

by **DWags** 2017-01-24, 16:17

LooseGoose wrote:
DWags wrote:

What's the percentage of people actually guilty on death row Goose?

What percentage of babies are guilty of a crime?

And I don't have an exact percentage of those that are guilty on death row but it's got to be well over 95%, but 100% of them are alive.

Wow over 95%. That somehow doesn't bother you?

Forget it, don't answer. I'm pretty sure it doesn't.

Im both impressed and disgusted by it.

by **Watch Out Pylon!** 2017-01-24, 16:29

House Bill 586 Researchers-in-China-have-manipulated-human-embryos

So this is a human now?

by **DWags** 2017-01-24, 16:31

Watch Out Pylon! wrote:

So this is a human now?

Next year it's this.
House Bill 586 3434560931

by Guest 2017-01-24, 16:45

DWags wrote:
LooseGoose wrote:

What percentage of babies are guilty of a crime?

And I don't have an exact percentage of those that are guilty on death row but it's got to be well over 95%, but 100% of them are alive.

Wow over 95%. That somehow doesn't bother you?

Forget it, don't answer. I'm pretty sure it doesn't.

Im both impressed and disgusted by it.

You didn't ask whether it bothered me.

But go ahead and jump to conclusions again, it's what most here excel at.

Bob has done a nice swerve here and moved the discussion from abortion to the death penalty.

by **DWags** 2017-01-24, 16:46

LooseGoose wrote:
DWags wrote:

Wow over 95%. That somehow doesn't bother you?

Forget it, don't answer. I'm pretty sure it doesn't.

Im both impressed and disgusted by it.

You didn't ask whether it bothered me.

But go ahead and jump to conclusions again, it's what most here excel at.

Bob has done a nice swerve here and moved the discussion from abortion to the death penalty.

If it bothers you and you're still for it, how do you square that?

by **Cameron** 2017-01-24, 19:27

Let's get off the death penalty, that's a separate discussion.

Goose, do you take the "life begins at fertilization" position? I don't want to put words in your mouth, and you haven't explicitly said so in this thread. So I'd like to clear that up before we argue about how dumb that is.

by **DWags** 2017-01-24, 19:32

Cameron wrote:Let's get off the death penalty, that's a separate discussion.

Goose, do you take the "life begins at fertilization" position? I don't want to put words in your mouth, and you haven't explicitly said so in this thread. So I'd like to clear that up before we argue about how dumb that is.

While it's a separate he doesn't give a shit if an innocent man is put to death. So what he feels about choice makes zero difference to me. That's scum of the earth type shit.

by **GRR Spartan** 2017-01-24, 19:38

no wonder Goose loves Trump.

By any means necessary to keep women under their thumbs.

Every sperm is sacred and you expect who to pay for children after they're born?

by **Cameron** 2017-01-24, 20:40

DWags wrote:
Cameron wrote:Let's get off the death penalty, that's a separate discussion.

Goose, do you take the "life begins at fertilization" position? I don't want to put words in your mouth, and you haven't explicitly said so in this thread. So I'd like to clear that up before we argue about how dumb that is.

While it's a separate he doesn't give a shit if an innocent man is put to death. So what he feels about choice makes zero difference to me. That's scum of the earth type shit.

I just re-read all of his posts in this thread in case I was mis-remembering. But I wasn't. He didn't say that he's okay with innocent people being executed, and he in fact didn't even say he supports the death penalty at all. You are presuming that he is for it, and he may well be, but nothing in this thread indicates that, and it is unrelated to the topic at hand anyhow.

by **DWags** 2017-01-24, 20:42

Cameron wrote:
DWags wrote:

While it's a separate he doesn't give a shit if an innocent man is put to death. So what he feels about choice makes zero difference to me. That's scum of the earth type shit.

I just re-read all of his posts in this thread in case I was mis-remembering. But I wasn't. He didn't say that he's okay with innocent people being executed, and he in fact didn't even say he supports the death penalty at all. You are presuming that he is for it, and he may well be, but nothing in this thread indicates that, and it is unrelated to the topic at hand anyhow.

Then let him say he's against it.

by **Cameron** 2017-01-24, 20:44

DWags wrote:
Cameron wrote:

I just re-read all of his posts in this thread in case I was mis-remembering. But I wasn't. He didn't say that he's okay with innocent people being executed, and he in fact didn't even say he supports the death penalty at all. You are presuming that he is for it, and he may well be, but nothing in this thread indicates that, and it is unrelated to the topic at hand anyhow.

Then let him say he's against it.

He can do what he wants.

But is that the standard now? Every time the topic of abortion comes up, one needs to declare that he or she is also against executing innocent people? Seems unreasonable.

by **DWags** 2017-01-24, 20:51

Cameron wrote:
DWags wrote:

Then let him say he's against it.
He can do what he wants.

But is that the standard now? Every time the topic of abortion comes up, one needs to declare that he or she is also against executing innocent people? Seems unreasonable.

Those people who are actively trying to prevent both feel they are tied. If you believe one is murder you better come out strongly against the DP if you know the percentage of people guilty on death row isn't 100%. You're bitching about one or the other means little if you don't.

by **Cameron** 2017-01-24, 21:03

DWags wrote:
Cameron wrote:
He can do what he wants.

But is that the standard now? Every time the topic of abortion comes up, one needs to declare that he or she is also against executing innocent people? Seems unreasonable.

Those people who are actively trying to prevent both feel they are tied. If you believe one is murder you better come out strongly against the DP if you know the percentage of people guilty on death row isn't 100%. You're bitching about one or the other means little if you don't.

If you're against the death penalty but pro-choice, do you need to state in every thread about the death penalty that you're okay with abortion? How inextricably linked are these two topics in your mind?

by **DWags** 2017-01-24, 21:25

Cameron wrote:
DWags wrote:

Those people who are actively trying to prevent both feel they are tied. If you believe one is murder you better come out strongly against the DP if you know the percentage of people guilty on death row isn't 100%. You're bitching about one or the other means little if you don't.

If you're against the death penalty but pro-choice, do you need to state in every thread about the death penalty that you're okay with abortion? How inextricably linked are these two topics in your mind?

1 very

2 very

There are two kinds of people I've found who work with homeless pregnant domestically abused women. Those that are for choice because of it and those that will do almost anything for these women to prevent it in a socially responsible way who continue to work with the mother and child afterward with limited funding (soon to be more limited by a Neanderthal who doesn't realize he will encourage abortion by cutting programs). They are not for choice. To understand why it's made and are often emotional ally debated when it is made. But at their core are the forgiving and compassionate type of Christian.

The caveat here is right now the law of the land says it is legal. That doesn't mean because people are pro choice they're pro abortion.

Then you have the anti abortion but pro death penalty people. The most morally twisted sick fuckers I know. Especially if they believe there isn't 100% guilt on death row.

Yes they are tied. Especially if you believe they both involve murder.

by **Cameron** 2017-01-24, 21:32

DWags wrote:
Cameron wrote:

If you're against the death penalty but pro-choice, do you need to state in every thread about the death penalty that you're okay with abortion? How inextricably linked are these two topics in your mind?
1 very

2 very

There are two kinds of people I've found who work with homeless pregnant domestically abused women. Those that are for choice because of it and those that will do almost anything for these women to prevent it in a socially responsible way who continue to work with the mother and child afterward with limited funding (soon to be more limited by a Neanderthal who doesn't realize he will encourage abortion by cutting programs). They are not for choice. To understand why it's made and are often emotional ally debated when it is made. But at their core are the forgiving and compassionate type of Christian.

The caveat here is right now the law of the land says it is legal. That doesn't mean because people are pro choice they're pro abortion.

Then you have the anti abortion but pro death penalty people. The most morally twisted sick fuckers I know. Especially if they believe there isn't 100% guilt on death row.

Yes they are tied. Especially if you believe they both involve murder.

I guess I see where you're coming from. But bringing the death penalty into things just muddies up the conversation for people whose views you would deem logically consistent (that is, people who are pro-life and anti-death penalty or pro-choice and pro-death penalty) who may want to have a focused conversation about a single issue. This thread has been almost as much about the death penalty as it has abortion, and I think that is a disservice to both topics, frankly. Each issue is important and merits the full focus of a discussion.

by **DWags** 2017-01-24, 21:37

Cameron wrote:
DWags wrote:
1 very

2 very

There are two kinds of people I've found who work with homeless pregnant domestically abused women. Those that are for choice because of it and those that will do almost anything for these women to prevent it in a socially responsible way who continue to work with the mother and child afterward with limited funding (soon to be more limited by a Neanderthal who doesn't realize he will encourage abortion by cutting programs). They are not for choice. To understand why it's made and are often emotional ally debated when it is made. But at their core are the forgiving and compassionate type of Christian.

The caveat here is right now the law of the land says it is legal. That doesn't mean because people are pro choice they're pro abortion.

Then you have the anti abortion but pro death penalty people. The most morally twisted sick fuckers I know. Especially if they believe there isn't 100% guilt on death row.

Yes they are tied. Especially if you believe they both involve murder.

I guess I see where you're coming from. But bringing the death penalty into things just muddies up the conversation for people whose views you would deem logically consistent (that is, people who are pro-life and anti-death penalty or pro-choice and pro-death penalty) who may want to have a focused conversation about a single issue. This thread has been almost as much about the death penalty as it has abortion, and I think that is a disservice to both topics, frankly. Each issue is important and merits the full focus of a discussion.

Very well, today Legislation was introduced to say life starts at inception. Inception.

That's a second away from masterbation.

by **Cameron** 2017-01-24, 21:52

DWags wrote:
Wet well, today Legislation was introduced to say life starts at inception. Inception.

That's a second away from masterbation.

Yes, it's a powerfully stupid bill.

https://www.ucsfhealth.org/education/conception_how_it_works/

Once the embryo reaches the blastocyst stage, approximately five to six days after fertilization, it hatches out of its zona pellucida and begins the process of implantation in the uterus.

In nature, 50 percent of all fertilized eggs are lost before a woman's missed menses. In the in vitro fertilization (IVF) process as well, an embryo may begin to develop but not make it to the blastocyst stage — the first stage where those cells destined to become the fetus separate from those that will become the placenta. The blastocyst may implant but not grow, or the blastocyst may grow but stop developing before the two week time at which a pregnancy can be detected. The receptivity of the uterus and the health of the embryo are important for the implantation process.

Are women going to be charged with murder for having their periods? Because they could be shitting little people out of their pussies as often as once a month.

I'm not sure why I decided to word that in the crudest way possible, but I'm not changing it now. Trump won, get over it.

by Guest 2017-01-24, 22:01

DWags wrote:
LooseGoose wrote:
Comfort yourself as you defend the ghouls.

Gosnell Trial Witness: Baby Abortion Survivor Was 'Swimming' in Toilet 'Trying to Get Out'

And yet you'd put an innocent man to death. That's messed up.

And where did i support that?

by Guest 2017-01-24, 22:03

Cameron wrote:Let's get off the death penalty, that's a separate discussion.

Goose, do you take the "life begins at fertilization" position? I don't want to put words in your mouth, and you haven't explicitly said so in this thread. So I'd like to clear that up before we argue about how dumb that is.

Yes, I do. And here, I'll even give you some more ammo to call me whatever you want. I don't believe in the 3 weasel exceptions either.

by Guest 2017-01-24, 22:04

GRR Spartan wrote:no wonder Goose loves Trump.

By any means necessary to keep women under their thumbs.

Every sperm is sacred and you expect who to pay for children after they're born?

So in these cases you disavow the great Hillary quote?? "It takes a village."

by Guest 2017-01-24, 22:06

Cameron wrote:
DWags wrote:

Then let him say he's against it.
He can do what he wants.

But is that the standard now? Every time the topic of abortion comes up, one needs to declare that he or she is also against executing innocent people? Seems unreasonable.

The abortionists ALWAYS want to change the subject from butchering babies. They would much rather talk about the 1 in 100 or 500 death penalty sentences that are wrong. That's a much more comfortable subject for them than the 100/100 babies that die when they are dismembered and vacuumed up like yard trash.

by **Watch Out Pylon!** 2017-01-24, 22:07

LooseGoose wrote:
Watch Out Pylon! wrote:

Is that anything close to what I was talking about? Think about it real hard and get back to me.

Fuck, why do I even bother? You're the biggest hypocrite on this board. Spin away Goosey!

Yes, it's very close to what you were talking about. You were defending the work of abortionists. You can't pick and choose which ones, they're all involved in the same bloody business.

by Guest 2017-01-24, 22:08

DWags wrote:
Cameron wrote:

I guess I see where you're coming from. But bringing the death penalty into things just muddies up the conversation for people whose views you would deem logically consistent (that is, people who are pro-life and anti-death penalty or pro-choice and pro-death penalty) who may want to have a focused conversation about a single issue. This thread has been almost as much about the death penalty as it has abortion, and I think that is a disservice to both topics, frankly. Each issue is important and merits the full focus of a discussion.

Very well, today Legislation was introduced to say life starts at inception. Inception.

That's a second away from masterbation.

LMAO - another swerve. To bring masturbation into a discussion of pregnancy.

by **Cameron** 2017-01-24, 22:24

LooseGoose wrote:
Cameron wrote:Let's get off the death penalty, that's a separate discussion.

Goose, do you take the "life begins at fertilization" position? I don't want to put words in your mouth, and you haven't explicitly said so in this thread. So I'd like to clear that up before we argue about how dumb that is.

Yes, I do. And here, I'll even give you some more ammo to call me whatever you want. I don't believe in the 3 weasel exceptions either.

The "3 weasel exceptions" being rape, incest, and health/safety of the mother?

by **Cameron** 2017-01-24, 22:27

LooseGoose wrote:
Watch Out Pylon! wrote:

Is that anything close to what I was talking about? Think about it real hard and get back to me.

Fuck, why do I even bother? You're the biggest hypocrite on this board. Spin away Goosey!

Yes, it's very close to what you were talking about. You were defending the work of abortionists. You can't pick and choose which ones, they're all involved in the same bloody business.

It's disingenuous to equate an abortion of a 2 week old fetus with the abortion of an 8 month old fetus or a partial birth abortion. You're aware that the picture you posted is evidence in a criminal proceeding against the guy who performed the procedure. You don't get prosecuted for aborting a two week old fetus (at least not yet).

Basically, what I'm saying is that if DWags can't make you discuss the death penalty, you can't make people who are pro-choice support partial birth or late term abortions.

by **DWags** 2017-01-24, 22:31

LooseGoose wrote:
DWags wrote:

And yet you'd put an innocent man to death. That's messed up.

And where did i support that?

Are you against the death penalty.?

by **Cameron** 2017-01-24, 22:33

DWags wrote:
LooseGoose wrote:

And where did i support that?

Are you against the death penalty.?

Not a death penalty thread, bud. And you didn't answer his question anyway, why should he answer yours?

by **DWags** 2017-01-24, 22:34

Cameron wrote:
DWags wrote:

Are you against the death penalty.?

Not a death penalty thread, bud. And you didn't answer his question anyway, why should he answer yours?

What question do you want me to answer I won't avoid it

by **Cameron** 2017-01-24, 22:43

DWags wrote:
Cameron wrote:

Not a death penalty thread, bud. And you didn't answer his question anyway, why should he answer yours?

What question do you want me to answer I won't avoid it

You quoted it in post #38 in this thread.

by **DWags** 2017-01-24, 22:50

He has not said he is for the death penalty in this thread.

Now I'm asking him.

by AnomanderRake 2017-01-24, 23:50

Late term abortions are already illegal in almost every state Goose, with very few exceptions. Why are you posting an 8 year old example, in which the doctor is being charged with felonies associated with his illegal late term abortion operation?

If all abortions are made illegal I can guarantee you'll see even more of these disgusting late term abortions since people will not have access to medical care to make these decisions early and in a safe, more humane manner.

Late term abortions dominate the debate on the issue but they're so rare and require medical exceptions to the ban, it's a ridiculous justification for banning all abortions based on outright lights and fear tactics.

http://reason.com/blog/2016/10/21/late-term-abortions-in-america-2016

by **Robert J Sakimano** 2017-01-25, 07:54

DWags wrote:He has not said he is for the death penalty in this thread.

Now I'm asking him.

good luck getting a "yes" or "no" answer from someone who claims to be "pro-life" - Wink

by Sponsored content