“Ignorance is bliss.”

Since: May 11

Westerville, OH

#228636 Apr 5, 2013
LightForce wrote:
<quoted text>
Stating that something is so, isn't the same thing as it actually being so.
hahahahahahaha...oh my, we've got a Grunt groupie. Well, let me tell you this: I've known abused women and I've known women who have gotten abortions. And there isn't one damn similarity between them.

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#228637 Apr 5, 2013
Mpnf1979 wrote:
<quoted text>
You don't answer a very important question that's been posed to you by I believe three posters and by me repeatedly. You only put your hand in where you think it's not going to get messy. You're a coward. And the fact that you feel bullied just proves my point that you don't like the fact that I've backed you into a corner.
When it comes to your retorts, all that you've shown is that your uneducated and lacking in logic. Nothing else.
So until you can add "I've answered all the questions" I would say your resume is quite incomplete and you're credibility is lost. Since it's lost, you can't seriously think that any of us would read what you wrote above and do anything other than laugh, do you?
You don't pick and choose the questions asked. That's your tactic. You get beaten on a topic, so you deflect. You either deny it with no support, or you ignore it completely. Then you pop something else up to shift focus to.

You're a liar and a fraud. You get destroyed in rational discussion, so you make it irrational, then cry about it.

That's where we are now.

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#228638 Apr 5, 2013
Mpnf1979 wrote:
<quoted text>
I've never disputed any position PP has taken. But they've also never said "We want to kill born babies" like you say they have.
They want to give women the right to kill born babies if they choose. Same thing. They support killing born babies.

Deflection

“Ignorance is bliss.”

Since: May 11

Westerville, OH

#228639 Apr 5, 2013
Grunt56 wrote:
<quoted text>
You don't pick and choose the questions asked. That's your tactic. You get beaten on a topic, so you deflect. You either deny it with no support, or you ignore it completely. Then you pop something else up to shift focus to.
You're a liar and a fraud. You get destroyed in rational discussion, so you make it irrational, then cry about it.
That's where we are now.
But I haven't been beaten. Not once. The one crying and whining is you. Every time you whine, I come back with more evidence. Then you whine and name-call again. And still don't do anything but speculate and avoid.

I can point out several instances on here where you deflect.

Answering that question yet?

“Ignorance is bliss.”

Since: May 11

Westerville, OH

#228640 Apr 5, 2013
Grunt56 wrote:
<quoted text>
They want to give women the right to kill born babies if they choose. Same thing. They support killing born babies.
Deflection
I don't think you understand what deflection means.

A man in Philadelphia just went to jail for killing babies of botched abortions. So how could it possibly be legal for PP to do this?

http://www.care2.com/causes/why-the-response-...

If you aren't sure what that is above, it's called evidence.

If Planned Parenthood as an organization performed illegal late-term abortions like this man did, I would discredit them as well.

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#228641 Apr 5, 2013
Mpnf1979 wrote:
<quoted text>
But I haven't been beaten. Not once. The one crying and whining is you. Every time you whine, I come back with more evidence. Then you whine and name-call again. And still don't do anything but speculate and avoid.
I can point out several instances on here where you deflect.
Answering that question yet?
Another prime example of you ignoring your position smashed and deflecting.

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#228642 Apr 5, 2013
Mpnf1979 wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't think you understand what deflection means.
A man in Philadelphia just went to jail for killing babies of botched abortions. So how could it possibly be legal for PP to do this?
http://www.care2.com/causes/why-the-response-...
If you aren't sure what that is above, it's called evidence.
If Planned Parenthood as an organization performed illegal late-term abortions like this man did, I would discredit them as well.
Again, this is a prime example of your idiocy.

I say this is something Planned Parenthood wants to allow. I provide a video of Planned Parenthood speaking to Congress, trying to get legislation passed to allow this.

You post something explaining that it's illegal.

Do you see how stupid you are? Could you explain to me WHAT it being illegal has to do with my position that Planned Parenthood wants it to be legal?

This is why a discussion with you is impossible. You're too stupid to even follow it.

“I'm here with bells on.”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#228643 Apr 5, 2013
Grunt56 wrote:
<quoted text>
I've never created life that I didn't support, nor have I leached off others as an adult.
Nice try, liar.
I don't believe you.
You likely live in your mother's basement, and collect disability for your borderline personality disorder.
Moron.
Sadist.
Liar.
Troll.

“Ignorance is bliss.”

Since: May 11

Westerville, OH

#228644 Apr 5, 2013
Grunt56 wrote:
<quoted text>
Another prime example of you ignoring your position smashed and deflecting.
Okay...lol. I am sensing you need something in your life to fill a void. Maybe you're upset that you don't get to spend time with your kids, but whatever it is, I really hope you get help. You seem like a sad person. I know you'll call this a deflection (a word I've notice you've picked up quite a bit since I started using it on you - I appreciate the flattery), but honestly, I really do think you need some help. And I already know what your comeback will be. Actually, you know what? I'm not going to say. I'm just going to let you prove me right.

“Becoming a better me!”

Since: Jul 09

Location hidden

#228645 Apr 5, 2013
LightForce wrote:
<quoted text>
One question so that I can understand your position a little more clearly, and be able to “work with the facts”. Should the survivor of an abortion be considered a person with the right to live, and everything be done possible to save their life regardless of whether the mother wants them or not?
Yes____ No____
Each state has different laws, and your situation wouldn't/couldn't, in some cases, be decided by an individual, but the law. It's not possible to answer it with a yes or a no.

You are looking for a "one size fits all" answer, and it's simply not that easy.

You are continuing to ignore the simple fact that it's far, far more than continuing a pregnancy. It's a life long commitment.

Who am I to tell ANYONE that they MUST make a life long commitment? That they must consider the needs of someone else over their own for years? Who are you to do that? Or anyone?

It's far more than sharing your body. Can you understand where I'm coming from?

I'm looking at the WHOLE picture, and you are only looking at a very narrow scope, the pregnancy part.

I'm sorry, it's late and I'm tired, so I'm not wording this very well. But I hope you can see how it's considerably more than just a "it shares your uterus for 9 months" argument.

NO ONE has the right to tell ANY WOMAN that she MUST give birth.

We can sit here and argue philosophically about it, but is that right? Is is right to tell a woman she MUST give up her body for 9 months? And that then she must either surrender her child or else surrender her freedom for 9 months?

These are choices that should be made of a willingness, not a decision forced upon us because of circumstances.

“Ignorance is bliss.”

Since: May 11

Westerville, OH

#228646 Apr 5, 2013
Grunt56 wrote:
<quoted text>
Again, this is a prime example of your idiocy.
I say this is something Planned Parenthood wants to allow. I provide a video of Planned Parenthood speaking to Congress, trying to get legislation passed to allow this.
You post something explaining that it's illegal.
Do you see how stupid you are? Could you explain to me WHAT it being illegal has to do with my position that Planned Parenthood wants it to be legal?
This is why a discussion with you is impossible. You're too stupid to even follow it.
I don't care what you *think* PP wants to allow, I'm letting you know that they are illegal. If PP practiced the same tactics as this man, I would want the same outcome. I do not now and never have advocated for late-term abortions. This woman made comments that alluded to the right being turned over to the physician and the woman. PP issued a statement that said both the woman and the infant would receive medical treatment in the unlikely event that this would occur.

Now here you have two problems:

You're basing your argument on some assumption that I condone late-term abortions. I do not and have stated that very clearly several times.

Your second problem is that you think that PP goes around performing late-term abortions right and left. They do not. Late-term abortions that are LEGAL have to meet specific criteria before they are permitted. If PP were performing them illegally, that's bad. If they did not provide medical care to an infant of a botched abortion, I believe that's bad too. I'm not a PP ass-kisser, but I do believe they provide a great service for women that do not come close to abortions. In that video, that woman did not say they want the right to kill born babies. She said the decision on how to handle the situation would be left up to the doctor and the mother.

“Becoming a better me!”

Since: Jul 09

Location hidden

#228647 Apr 5, 2013
LightForce wrote:
<quoted text>
So should the survivor of an abortion be considered a person with the right to live, and everything be done possible to save their life regardless of whether the mother wants them or not?
Morals are NOT cut and dried. They are unique to each person. And no one can judge someone elses morals.

It may be immoral for YOU to have remove the potential human being in your uterus, but is it moral for you to tell another human being that she MUST risk her life by remaining pregnant? Or that she must give birth to another human being created by force?

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#228648 Apr 5, 2013
Sister Kathryn Lust wrote:
<quoted text>I don't believe you.
You likely live in your mother's basement, and collect disability for your borderline personality disorder.
Moron.
Sadist.
Liar.
Troll.
You caught me.

Wow. That really has a lot to do with the intellectual beat down you've experienced.

Oh wait. It doesn't. It's just a side bar to draw attention from it.

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#228649 Apr 5, 2013
mamma-san wrote:
<quoted text>
Each state has different laws, and your situation wouldn't/couldn't, in some cases, be decided by an individual, but the law. It's not possible to answer it with a yes or a no.
You are looking for a "one size fits all" answer, and it's simply not that easy.
You are continuing to ignore the simple fact that it's far, far more than continuing a pregnancy. It's a life long commitment.
Who am I to tell ANYONE that they MUST make a life long commitment? That they must consider the needs of someone else over their own for years? Who are you to do that? Or anyone?
It's far more than sharing your body. Can you understand where I'm coming from?
I'm looking at the WHOLE picture, and you are only looking at a very narrow scope, the pregnancy part.
I'm sorry, it's late and I'm tired, so I'm not wording this very well. But I hope you can see how it's considerably more than just a "it shares your uterus for 9 months" argument.
NO ONE has the right to tell ANY WOMAN that she MUST give birth.
We can sit here and argue philosophically about it, but is that right? Is is right to tell a woman she MUST give up her body for 9 months? And that then she must either surrender her child or else surrender her freedom for 9 months?
These are choices that should be made of a willingness, not a decision forced upon us because of circumstances.
HA! I thought you were done? Do you ever tell the truth about anything? No?

“I'm here with bells on.”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#228650 Apr 5, 2013
mamma-san wrote:
<quoted text>
Each state has different laws, and your situation wouldn't/couldn't, in some cases, be decided by an individual, but the law. It's not possible to answer it with a yes or a no.
You are looking for a "one size fits all" answer, and it's simply not that easy.
You are continuing to ignore the simple fact that it's far, far more than continuing a pregnancy. It's a life long commitment.
Who am I to tell ANYONE that they MUST make a life long commitment? That they must consider the needs of someone else over their own for years? Who are you to do that? Or anyone?
It's far more than sharing your body. Can you understand where I'm coming from?
I'm looking at the WHOLE picture, and you are only looking at a very narrow scope, the pregnancy part.
I'm sorry, it's late and I'm tired, so I'm not wording this very well. But I hope you can see how it's considerably more than just a "it shares your uterus for 9 months" argument.
NO ONE has the right to tell ANY WOMAN that she MUST give birth.
We can sit here and argue philosophically about it, but is that right? Is is right to tell a woman she MUST give up her body for 9 months? And that then she must either surrender her child or else surrender her freedom for 9 months?
These are choices that should be made of a willingness, not a decision forced upon us because of circumstances.
Every child deserves to be a wanted child. If it were true that even every infant is wanted, and 'adoptable', there would be no need for abortion.
This is a concept not one of the nay-sayers on here understand.

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#228651 Apr 5, 2013
Mpnf1979 wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't care what you *think* PP wants to allow, I'm letting you know that they are illegal. If PP practiced the same tactics as this man, I would want the same outcome. I do not now and never have advocated for late-term abortions. This woman made comments that alluded to the right being turned over to the physician and the woman. PP issued a statement that said both the woman and the infant would receive medical treatment in the unlikely event that this would occur.
Now here you have two problems:
You're basing your argument on some assumption that I condone late-term abortions. I do not and have stated that very clearly several times.
Your second problem is that you think that PP goes around performing late-term abortions right and left. They do not. Late-term abortions that are LEGAL have to meet specific criteria before they are permitted. If PP were performing them illegally, that's bad. If they did not provide medical care to an infant of a botched abortion, I believe that's bad too. I'm not a PP ass-kisser, but I do believe they provide a great service for women that do not come close to abortions. In that video, that woman did not say they want the right to kill born babies. She said the decision on how to handle the situation would be left up to the doctor and the mother.
Again, you're a moron. You can "let me know" anything you'd like. However, why present it as "evidence" to my argument when it has nothing to do with it?

Oh yeah. You're a moron. Seriously. Talking to you is painful.

I'll have to save this one, too.

“I'm here with bells on.”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#228652 Apr 5, 2013
Grunt56 wrote:
<quoted text>
You caught me.
Wow. That really has a lot to do with the intellectual beat down you've experienced.
Oh wait. It doesn't. It's just a side bar to draw attention from it.
You couldn't intellectually beat down your own penis.

That I 'caught' you, was a foregone conclusion.

“I'm here with bells on.”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#228653 Apr 5, 2013
Correction to post 228650:

If every child conceived was wanted and / or adoptable, there would be FAR LESS need for abortion.

Got a bit carried away there...
My apologies.

:)

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#228654 Apr 5, 2013
Sister Kathryn Lust wrote:
<quoted text>Every child deserves to be a wanted child. If it were true that even every infant is wanted, and 'adoptable', there would be no need for abortion.
This is a concept not one of the nay-sayers on here understand.
We understand that. We just don't think that the answer to unwanted people is to kill them.

“I'm here with bells on.”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#228655 Apr 5, 2013
Grunt56 wrote:
<quoted text>
We understand that. We just don't think that the answer to unwanted people is to kill them.
You just don't think, period.

I wanted the child I aborted - I was given to understand it would never BE a child. And I didn't want to die, in service to it's death via my own.

Wrap your mind around that one.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Top Stories Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Bush is a hero (Sep '07) 7 min Freebird USA 176,201
Poll If you're Christain what kind are you? (Oct '07) 8 min dollarsbill 1,946
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 11 min Rosa_Winkel 817,427
Jehovah's Witnesses are true disciple of Jesus ... (Mar '07) 18 min The Evenstar 39,951
Why didn't A320's advanced technology stop Adr... 23 min Doctor REALITY 4
Why Should Jesus Love Me? (Feb '08) 33 min Peace_Warrior 609,818
*** All Time Favorite Songs *** (Dec '10) 42 min Zombie dr Shrink 2,184
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 48 min RoSesz 578,901
Poll Was 9/11 a conspiracy?? (Oct '07) 1 hr WasteWater 270,030
More from around the web