KillingtonZone.com

easyrider16 wrote: ↑May 4th, '22, 08:40 Won't this ultimately result in pro-life people reproducing while pro-choice people do not and die out?

throbster wrote: ↑May 3rd, '22, 20:18 Why do liberals want to kill the unborn so badly?

Also, I'm pretty sure there are no women on this forum except you and you don't sleep with men, sooo....

asher2789 wrote: ↑May 4th, '22, 16:42

throbster wrote: ↑May 3rd, '22, 20:18 Why do liberals want to kill the unborn so badly?

Also, I'm pretty sure there are no women on this forum except you and you don't sleep with men, sooo....

why do "small government conservatives" have a hard on for invading the privacy of their fellow americans? this isnt just going after abortion, this is going after the right to privacy. once they go for roe v wade they will go for obgerfel, lawrence, griswold, loving and reidel. marriage equality, the right to sodomy, contraception, interracial marriage and porn will all be under threat.

theyre going to negate 50+ years of precedent all to establish a christo-fascist theocracy. i wouldnt be surprised if they went after the brown v board of ed decision either.

throbster wrote: ↑May 4th, '22, 19:08

asher2789 wrote: ↑May 4th, '22, 16:42

throbster wrote: ↑May 3rd, '22, 20:18 Why do liberals want to kill the unborn so badly?

Also, I'm pretty sure there are no women on this forum except you and you don't sleep with men, sooo....

why do "small government conservatives" have a hard on for invading the privacy of their fellow americans? this isnt just going after abortion, this is going after the right to privacy. once they go for roe v wade they will go for obgerfel, lawrence, griswold, loving and reidel. marriage equality, the right to sodomy, contraception, interracial marriage and porn will all be under threat.

theyre going to negate 50+ years of precedent all to establish a christo-fascist theocracy. i wouldnt be surprised if they went after the brown v board of ed decision either.

Nah, the list of things you mention don't involve killing an unborn child. Some propogandist has got you in a tizzy over baseless claims. Think about it.

asher2789 wrote: ↑May 4th, '22, 20:51
do you think of that every time you jerk off? how about every time a woman menstruates? or what about during sex when you finish somewhere other than the vagina? or what about when your sperm meets the egg, but for some reason, it never takes hold? or how about when a woman for whatever reason miscarries at any point? or delivering stillborn? at what point is conception? at what point is a human, human? are they human from the moment sperm meets egg (or before?), when born, or sometime in between? that is a religious question outside the knowledge of science and therefore outside the purview of government as weighing in on it would violate the first amendment clause against the establishment of religion.

an abortion is not killing an unborn child. save me the hysterics. it is aborting a fetus. a fetus is the property of its mother until it is born. most abortions are within the first trimester, and many women have irregular periods making them unaware they are pregnant until longer on than others. the women who have abortions in the second or third trimester generally do not want to have an abortion, however their health is at risk and/or the fetus is nonviable. regardless, this isnt about abortion. this is about privacy and bodily autonomy. if you do not want an abortion, do not get an abortion. you dont have the right to impose your religious views on when life starts on others.

i am so f*** tired of this anti-choice narrative about "babies". if it was about babies and actually pro-life we would have universal healthcare, universal education from pre-k to higher ed, universal paid family and medical leave, and universal welfare programs / social safety net, universal housing. pro-life would mean abolishing the death penalty and advocating against war and imperialism. but it was never about being pro-life, it was about control.

boston_e wrote: ↑May 5th, '22, 14:08 100% accurate!

boston_e wrote: ↑May 5th, '22, 14:08

asher2789 wrote: ↑May 4th, '22, 20:51
do you think of that every time you jerk off? how about every time a woman menstruates? or what about during sex when you finish somewhere other than the vagina? or what about when your sperm meets the egg, but for some reason, it never takes hold? or how about when a woman for whatever reason miscarries at any point? or delivering stillborn? at what point is conception? at what point is a human, human? are they human from the moment sperm meets egg (or before?), when born, or sometime in between? that is a religious question outside the knowledge of science and therefore outside the purview of government as weighing in on it would violate the first amendment clause against the establishment of religion.

an abortion is not killing an unborn child. save me the hysterics. it is aborting a fetus. a fetus is the property of its mother until it is born. most abortions are within the first trimester, and many women have irregular periods making them unaware they are pregnant until longer on than others. the women who have abortions in the second or third trimester generally do not want to have an abortion, however their health is at risk and/or the fetus is nonviable. regardless, this isnt about abortion. this is about privacy and bodily autonomy. if you do not want an abortion, do not get an abortion. you dont have the right to impose your religious views on when life starts on others.

i am so f*** tired of this anti-choice narrative about "babies". if it was about babies and actually pro-life we would have universal healthcare, universal education from pre-k to higher ed, universal paid family and medical leave, and universal welfare programs / social safety net, universal housing. pro-life would mean abolishing the death penalty and advocating against war and imperialism. but it was never about being pro-life, it was about control.

100% accurate!