A simple fix for unwanted kids

[atlkvb]

If you strip away all of the window dressing, the Left's primary opposition to Judge Kavanaugh is based on fear he will be the vote on the Supreme Court that overturns Roe v Wade. Abortion.

It's admittedly a divisive issue but here's a solution to uncomplicate it.

First, we agree abortion is selective termination of a Human Life. We know this by Science, by nature, and by fact. You cannot perform an abortion unless you kill the child, and there is no question that IS a human child...no matter what stage of development it is.

So given that...let's offer a solution that satisfies both sides. Pro Lifers obviously want to save lives, Pro Choicers don't want women to be forced to keep Babies they don't want right?

OK. So let's say we meet in the middle. Let's allow unwanted Babies to be born, then after Moms get a chance to look them over...check 'em out....and they still don't want to keep them, then just kill them. Or offer them up for adoption if murdering them is too strong. What's the difference?

The point is it makes no sense to kill the Baby before it is born when you can just as easily kill it after it is born. In fact waiting until it is born might help the Mom make a better informed decision. Once she sees the Baby, she can have a better idea if it's worth keeping. That's true choice!. Keep it, kill it, or place it into adoption. All options are open are they not? Where's the chance to save the Baby if it's killed in utero?

If she kills it before it's born, she can't change her mind. If she's of the mind to kill it anyway, having it born won't change that. If we're into infanticide, why hide it?

This represents the best compromise. No one will force you to kill your unwanted child, but you are free to do so after it is born if that's your wish. But at least the child gets to be born, and maybe gets a chance to live even if it's still unwanted by the reluctant Mom.

Just wait 'till birth to either kill the babies or place them into adoption or keep them after birth. Problem solved. Objections?

@moe ,@MountaineerWV ,@Boomboom521 @Keyser76 @bamaEER@WVUCOOPER @RichardPeterJohnson, @Bulya , @WVUBRU @Op2 @Original Mountaineer1 @countryroads89 @CpEER @Orlaco ?

 

[atlkvb]

For those of you who think this is just loopy, why does it make more sense to kill the Baby in the womb? That's a much more difficult, messy, complicated, and controversial procedure. If the Baby is still unwanted after birth, a simple asphyxiation with a chloroform cloth over its mouth makes the procedure quick, clean, and efficient as opposed to the bloody mess an in utero abortion is!

Again, all we're doing is killing an unwanted child are we not? Doing that after birth seems to me to be the much more sanitized and humane way to do it, rather than butchering the Baby while it's still in the womb, leaving the Mom a bloody mess and she hasn't even had a chance to see it before she ends its Life!

@moe ,@MountaineerWV ,@Boomboom521 @Keyser76 @bamaEER @WVUCOOPER @RichardPeterJohnson, @Bulya , @WVUBRU @Op2 @Original Mountaineer1 @countryroads89 @CpEER @Orlaco ?

 

[atlkvb]

@moe ,@MountaineerWV ,@Boomboom521 @Keyser76 @bamaEER @WVUCOOPER @RichardPeterJohnson, @Bulya , @WVUBRU @Op2 @ Original Mountaineer1 @countryroads89 @CpEER @Orlaco ?

Explain to me why it makes more sense to kill the Baby in the womb first intead of birthing it then killing it if it's still unwanted?

Why is killing it in utero better? That's like deciding a cake isn't worth sampling before it's finished baking. Bake it, taste it...then decide if it's bad. If it is, destroy it.

Same with the little Babies. Birth em, look em over, don't like what you see or just don't want it? OK then, kill it.

 

[Pospecteer]

Hate to break to you, but I am catholic and very conservative and it's not that easy. My wife is pregnant with our 2nd child. My wife has an ultrasound with a new OB since we just moved to Cinti from WV and actually just moved into our house earlier in the week. The ultrasound shows severe birth defects but they don't tell us until we meet with another doctor. After additional testing they diagnose my son with Trisomy 13 (not downs) . We find out our son has a 0% chance to live. His heart and stomach is forming outside of his body and his brain is not developed. On top of that my wife is accumulating additional fluids and she has a greater than a 50% chance of rupturing her uterus if she goes full term which could make her sterile.

They recommend a late term procedure (abortion) to induce labor so that my wife will be safe and not add to additional complications moving forward. It was the worst day of our life. My wife is very catholic and does not want to have the procedure. I had to convince her the risk of dying if she carries our son to full term with a 0% chance that he will ever survive is not what god wanted for her. She agreed but to this day every time time this debate comes up it makes both of us feel empty inside.

 

[atlkvb]

Hate to break to you, but I am catholic and very conservative and it's not that easy. My wife is pregnant with our 2nd child. My wife has an ultrasound with a new OB since we just moved to Cinti from WV and actually just moved into our house earlier in the week. The ultrasound shows severe birth defects but they don't tell us until we meet with another doctor. After additional testing they diagnose my son with Trisomy 13 (not downs) . We find out our son has a 0% chance to live. His heart and stomach is forming outside of his body and his brain is not developed. On top of that my wife is accumulating additional fluids and she has a greater than a 50% chance of rupturing her uterus if she goes full term which could make her sterile.

They recommend a late term procedure (abortion) to induce labor so that my wife will be safe and not add to additional complications moving forward. It was the worst day of our life. My wife is very catholic and does not want to have the procedure. I had to convince her the risk of dying if she carries our son to full term with a 0% chance that he will ever survive is not what god wanted for her. She agreed but to this day every time time this debate comes up it makes both of us feel empty inside.

I'm not familiar with all of the particulars of your case but I do know that it is rare if ever a Baby has to be aborted in order to save the mother's Life. Again, I'm not familiar with your particular case and I don't doubt your sincerity and the gut wrenching decision that must be for you and your Wife. However your case is extremely rare. In almost 99% of the cases of selective abortions, the choice is simply to kill a perfectly healthy and survivable yet unwanted child.

This scenario I'm painting sounds like a caricature, but if you stop and think about it, it's using the very arguments Pro Choice people demand in order to be allowed to kill unwanted children without conscience. It actually makes no difference if the Baby is killed inside or outside the womb except for the removal of guilt!

A 24 hour hour waiting period before a live birth is terminated, and requiring the Mother actually kill her own unwanted Baby instead of a paid Abortionist would remove society's guilt for having to pay a third party to commit murder or even prosecute the mother if she still didn't want to keep the Baby after it was born. There is no difference terminating the Life, yet allowing her to force taxpayers pay someone else to kill her unwanted Baby inside her womb, rather than just allowing her to kill her own unwanted Baby outside her womb after it is born. The Baby is still just as unwanted, and it's still just as dead.

I will Pray for you and your Wife, Almighty God will have to handle that one which I'm sure he is able to do if he hasn't already. He is author of that fragile Life, you and your Wife are simply vessels. God Bless!

Fact: Less than 1% of all abortions are performed to save the Life of the Mother

excerpt:
"It is an extremely rare case when abortion is required to save the mother’s life. Of course, when two lives are threatened and only one can be saved, doctors must always save that life. However, abortion for the mother’s life and abortion for the mother’s health are usually not the same issue".

Full article:
https://www.abortionfacts.com/facts/8

The vast majority of abortions are elective

 

[Pospecteer]

I get it, and it is rare for what happened to my family. Most often the fetus aborts before a medical procedure is needed. But while I can't believe that any women thinks it's just a choice and it does not have a lasting impact on their life moving forward is just not right.

My only thing is this stuff does happen and there are very few absolutes in this world.

 

[atlkvb]

I get it, and it is rare for what happened to my family. Most often the fetus aborts before a medical procedure is needed. But while I can't believe that any women thinks it's just a choice and it does not have a lasting impact on their life moving forward is just not right.

My only thing is this stuff does happen and there are very few absolutes in this world.

True, and once again I will Pray for you and your Wife. One thing you mentioned in your post but you didn't explain, why is it necessary for the Baby to be carried full term before the procedure to abort? I would think that brings more complications with uterine bleeding, accidentally being ruptured during the extraction, or damage to her Fallopian tubes?

The Left always asks "what are you gong to do if abortion is outlawed, arrest and prosecute Women?"

No.

We're going to give them the choice of killing their own Babies if following a 24 hour period of waiting after their Baby is born, they still don't want the kid or don't want to give it up to adoption. We aren't prosecuting or paying Doctors anymore to kill Children, and we're not prosecuting Mothers either, just allowing them to choose whether their own Children live or die? If Death is their choice, they have to kill their own Baby by their own hands.

See how nicely this works?

@moe ,@MountaineerWV ,@Boomboom521 @Keyser76 @bamaEER@WVUCOOPER @RichardPeterJohnson, @Bulya , @WVUBRU @Op2@Original Mountaineer1 @countryroads89 @CpEER @Orlaco ?

 

[atlkvb]

my wife is accumulating additional fluids and she has a greater than a 50% chance of rupturing her uterus if she goes full term which could make her sterile.

They recommend a late term procedure (abortion) to induce labor so that my wife will be safe and not add to additional complications moving forward

This is why I'm confused over your Wife's particular situation. On the one hand she has risks carrying the Baby full term (according to your post), yet she needs to have a late term procedure (known as an intact dilation and extraction) to avoid permanent damage to her reproductive system?

Explain?

 

[Airport]

As a conservative I'm in a different boat when it comes to abortion. I just think if you are going to do it, do it before the fetus can survive outside the womb. That's 20 weeks, here it's 22 weeks. Even liberal Europe cuts it off at 20 weeks.

 

[Pospecteer]

This is my point, we did not want the baby to go full term or go into labor away from a controlled setting, so we decided to induce labor (late term abortion) and control the situation.

My wife was entering her 3rd trimester when we found out. For whatever reason our son continued to develop but the umbilical cord was leaking out amniotic fluid which caused her to be the size of a full term pregnancy. If she would have let nature play out, she could have went another 6 weeks and once she went into labor our son could have caused harm to my wife.

The safe bet was to control the birth and do it before additional pressure was put on my wife's body. She is 5'2 and less than 100 lbs at the time and the baby and fluid was already by volume of a 10 lb baby would produce. On top of that, she v-backed our first son due to him being breech which added to the complexity.

While I can see what you are trying to accomplish, the end result is the most brutal thing you could ever imagine.

My wife and I woke up and went to UC hospital (only hospital in in the area that would do this procedure) to induce labor. She laid there being pumped with drugs to induce labor while other things were done to speed the process. The doctors did not come into the room and told us that once the baby comes to call a nurse. Four hours later my wife delivers a baby boy, I call for help. 10 minutes later two doctors come and take our baby into another room and bring him back for us to hold.

We had no idea this is what we signed up for. They are actually kind of excited about our son and asked us if we would donate his body to science. Apparently, our son had some deformities that have never been documented before. Me being in healthcare and my wife wanting something good to come of this agreed. We end up going home later that day for my wife to recover.

60 days later, we go to the hospital to receive our son's ashes, and the priest arranges for a burial at a local cemetery for infants. Later that week, he shows up with my wife and I to have a funeral. We decided that we not tell our 3 year old son and since we don't have family close to us, it was just us. We ended staying with the dr for our daughter as she was considered high risk. Our 3rd daughter was born without incident.

I can't believe that I just told this story, as I have never went into detail about that segment of my families history. I was the worst day of lives, nothing has come close to that. I will tell you it forever changed us for the better and brought us closer to god. Up until that time, we had nothing but roses in our life and this made us realize that life is the most important thing in life.

That being said, I would not wish this upon anyone and forcing women to relive our story is not something I would support.

 

[atlkvb]

This is my point, we did not want the baby to go full term or go into labor away from a controlled setting, so we decided to induce labor (late term abortion) and control the situation.

My wife was entering her 3rd trimester when we found out. For whatever reason our son continued to develop but the umbilical cord was leaking out amniotic fluid which caused her to be the size of a full term pregnancy. If she would have let nature play out, she could have went another 6 weeks and once she went into labor our son could have caused harm to my wife.

The safe bet was to control the birth and do it before additional pressure was put on my wife's body. She is 5'2 and less than 100 lbs at the time and the baby and fluid was already by volume of a 10 lb baby would produce. On top of that, she v-backed our first son due to him being breech which added to the complexity.

While I can see what you are trying to accomplish, the end result is the most brutal thing you could ever imagine.

My wife and I woke up and went to UC hospital (only hospital in in the area that would do this procedure) to induce labor. She laid there being pumped with drugs to induce labor while other things were done to speed the process. The doctors did not come into the room and told us that once the baby comes to call a nurse. Four hours later my wife delivers a baby boy, I call for help. 10 minutes later two doctors come and take our baby into another room and bring him back for us to hold.

We had no idea this is what we signed up for. They are actually kind of excited about our son and asked us if we would donate his body to science. Apparently, our son had some deformities that have never been documented before. Me being in healthcare and my wife wanting something good to come of this agreed. We end up going home later that day for my wife to recover.

60 days later, we go to the hospital to receive our son's ashes, and the priest arranges for a burial at a local cemetery for infants. Later that week, he shows up with my wife and I to have a funeral. We decided that we not tell our 3 year old son and since we don't have family close to us, it was just us. We ended staying with the dr for our daughter as she was considered high risk. Our 3rd daughter was born without incident.

I can't believe that I just told this story, as I have never went into detail about that segment of my families history. I was the worst day of lives, nothing has come close to that. I will tell you it forever changed us for the better and brought us closer to god. Up until that time, we had nothing but roses in our life and this made us realize that life is the most important thing in life.

That being said, I would not wish this upon anyone and forcing women to relive our story is not something I would support.

God Bless you Man.

 

[atlkvb]

So how many of you "pro choice" advocates are ready to exonerate Moms who kill their unwanted babies on their own? We're not asking abortionists to do the messy job anymore, and we don't expect Moms to have to be degraded in "back alleys". Let's just allow the little tykes to be born, give Mom a 24 hour wait period to think it over, then if she still doesn't want the little bundle of joy simply allow her to chose her preferred method of extermination among many forms of euthanasia we could offer her as "pro choice" .

We have asphyxiation by a chloroform cloth she could hold hold over the Baby's mouth (very humane), injection by saline solution she can quickly and cleanly deliver to the unwanted fully formed fetus, she could feed it a formula laced with arsenic that would eat the baby's intestines away (sort of a last minute nourishment as she lovingly says goodbye holding the unwanted fetus cradled in her arms) or she can simply place the fetus into a specially lined incubator that quickly and efficiently delivers a deadly gas within a matter of a few minutes and the fetus stops breathing after she turns up the dial watching the kid draw its last few breaths?

It's her "choice".

Now before you "pro choicers" get all huffy and indignant over my reasonable and humane options I'm suggesting as a compromise in our Pro Life/Pro Choice argument, kindly tell me why my suggestions are any more heinous than the way we currently allow Moms to "choose" to have their own unwanted fetuses disposed of? We have dismemberment and body parts chopped up then sold off like pieces of meat or trinkets of gold, they are often strangled to death using their own umbilical cords, their tiny skulls are crushed or punctured and their brains are sucked out, they are smothered & choked to death in saline solutions injected into the amniotic sack or placenta, or they are otherwise sucked out of their host Mother's wombs in a bloody vacuum type operation that causes all sorts of risks to the reproductive system of the Mother? Aren't we trying to protect Women's health in this debate? Isn't that your primary focus on the Pro Choice side? Well, there 'ya go!

So tell me, how are you protecting her health by exposing her to such risky and dangerous procedures simply because she doesn't want to keep the fetus? Isn't allowing the fetus to be born, then giving Mom the options on if it lives or dies the safest, most compassionate, most choice filled humane way to both settle the argument, give the babies a chance at least for life, yet preserve her "choices" as well as protect her reproductive system? Under my compromise we remain a humane society by cleanly, mercifully and efficiently killing our unwanted children at the hands of only the Mothers who we permit to make the ultimate death choice decision do we not? It really is "her" body, & her "choice" is it not?

Point out the flaws in my compromise as opposed to the efficacy in the way we currently support aborting unwanted fetuses? Why is the way we are currently doing it so much more ethical and even healthier or better for both Moms and their unwanted fetuses as we restrict Women's "choices"?

@moe ,@MountaineerWV ,@Boomboom521 @Keyser76 @bamaEER @WVUCOOPER @RichardPeterJohnson, @Bulya , @WVUBRU @Op2 @Original Mountaineer1 @countryroads89 @CpEER @Orlaco ?

 

[atlkvb]

This is my point, we did not want the baby to go full term or go into labor away from a controlled setting, so we decided to induce labor (late term abortion) and control the situation.

My wife was entering her 3rd trimester when we found out. For whatever reason our son continued to develop but the umbilical cord was leaking out amniotic fluid which caused her to be the size of a full term pregnancy. If she would have let nature play out, she could have went another 6 weeks and once she went into labor our son could have caused harm to my wife.

The safe bet was to control the birth and do it before additional pressure was put on my wife's body. She is 5'2 and less than 100 lbs at the time and the baby and fluid was already by volume of a 10 lb baby would produce. On top of that, she v-backed our first son due to him being breech which added to the complexity.

While I can see what you are trying to accomplish, the end result is the most brutal thing you could ever imagine.

My wife and I woke up and went to UC hospital (only hospital in in the area that would do this procedure) to induce labor. She laid there being pumped with drugs to induce labor while other things were done to speed the process. The doctors did not come into the room and told us that once the baby comes to call a nurse. Four hours later my wife delivers a baby boy, I call for help. 10 minutes later two doctors come and take our baby into another room and bring him back for us to hold.

We had no idea this is what we signed up for. They are actually kind of excited about our son and asked us if we would donate his body to science. Apparently, our son had some deformities that have never been documented before. Me being in healthcare and my wife wanting something good to come of this agreed. We end up going home later that day for my wife to recover.

60 days later, we go to the hospital to receive our son's ashes, and the priest arranges for a burial at a local cemetery for infants. Later that week, he shows up with my wife and I to have a funeral. We decided that we not tell our 3 year old son and since we don't have family close to us, it was just us. We ended staying with the dr for our daughter as she was considered high risk. Our 3rd daughter was born without incident.

I can't believe that I just told this story, as I have never went into detail about that segment of my families history. I was the worst day of lives, nothing has come close to that. I will tell you it forever changed us for the better and brought us closer to god. Up until that time, we had nothing but roses in our life and this made us realize that life is the most important thing in life.

That being said, I would not wish this upon anyone and forcing women to relive our story is not something I would support.

I don't see where you "aborted" your Son. Sounds like it was just a complicated pregnancy and you did what was best to protect both Mom and try to save your Son? Where's the "abortion"?

 

[atlkvb]

@moe ,@MountaineerWV ,@Boomboom521 @Keyser76 @bamaEER @WVUCOOPER @RichardPeterJohnson, @Bulya , @WVUBRU @Op2 @Original Mountaineer1 @countryroads89 @CpEER @Orlaco ?

I'm very disappointed in you "pro choicers". I mean here I have offered a perfect compromise to our never ending debate over Abortion, and not one of you have offered a better solution or even had the guts to point out where the flaw or illogic in my compromise argument is?

My compromise solution preserves a Woman's choice, respects her body, offers the Baby a reasonable chance for Life, leaves the decision to kill the unwanted fetus strictly in the hands of the Mother, protects her reproductive health, as well as saves taxpayers from funding bloody abortions which everyone is against but no one wants to "impose" onto others!

What's not to like? Why no takers? "Ya, know atl...you have a point"!

Cowards all of you! Here you are smearing a good man's reputation (Brett Kavanaugh) and dragging the country through Hell all because you're afraid he's going to overturn Roe v Wade, and make it virtually impossible for any Mother to kill her unwanted Baby at any time for any reason! I've offered a compromise preserving her right to kill her unwanted fetus and you all are virtually silent over it! I'm getting no support from you "Pro choice" true believers! Why not?

I've offered the perfect compromise even though I'm Pro Life, yet none of you have pointed out the problems if any with my offer? You'd rather smear Judge Kavanaugh, or try to win the abortion debate on its own merits? "It's a woman's choice, and a Woman's body" right?

OK.... then, stand up for women! Let's put it to a vote or change the Constitution or how about you try to make your arguments for keeping things just as they are now and Abortion on demand funded by taxpayers as the Law of the Land? "Pro Choice"!!!!!!

You're losing the argument in case you haven't noticed. Judge Kavanaugh will be confirmed, and Roe v Wade will likely be eviscerated. Then what will you all do? Probably try to kill the Supreme Court Justices too!

@moe ,@MountaineerWV ,@Boomboom521 @Keyser76 @bamaEER@WVUCOOPER @RichardPeterJohnson, @Bulya , @WVUBRU @Op2@Original Mountaineer1 @countryroads89 @CpEER @Orlaco ?

 

[Boomboom521]

Hate to break to you, but I am catholic and very conservative and it's not that easy. My wife is pregnant with our 2nd child. My wife has an ultrasound with a new OB since we just moved to Cinti from WV and actually just moved into our house earlier in the week. The ultrasound shows severe birth defects but they don't tell us until we meet with another doctor. After additional testing they diagnose my son with Trisomy 13 (not downs) . We find out our son has a 0% chance to live. His heart and stomach is forming outside of his body and his brain is not developed. On top of that my wife is accumulating additional fluids and she has a greater than a 50% chance of rupturing her uterus if she goes full term which could make her sterile.

They recommend a late term procedure (abortion) to induce labor so that my wife will be safe and not add to additional complications moving forward. It was the worst day of our life. My wife is very catholic and does not want to have the procedure. I had to convince her the risk of dying if she carries our son to full term with a 0% chance that he will ever survive is not what god wanted for her. She agreed but to this day every time time this debate comes up it makes both of us feel empty inside.

I’m very sorry. Hope you and your wife give each other solid support

 

[atlkvb]

there are very few absolutes in this world.

Life is absolute, and it is precious, unique (we can't replace lost individuals) and seeks to survive absolutely. We cannot assume unto ourselves authorship of Human Life, because we are NOT its authors.

That my friend IS absolute.

 

[atlkvb]

@moe ,@MountaineerWV ,@Boomboom521 @Keyser76 @bamaEER @WVUCOOPER @RichardPeterJohnson, @Bulya , @WVUBRU @Op2 @Original Mountaineer1 @countryroads89 @CpEER @Orlaco ?

I know you "pro choicers" think I'm a nut bar...a wingnut, crazy, unrealistic, and totally "out there" with my compromise humane solution to on demand tax payer funded abortions. I also know you all agree with me that it's a Woman's choice, & her body, and we shouldn't "impose" abortion onto anyone right?

So tell me what's wrong with my compromise proposal? How is her "choice" restricted? Who is "imposing" her right to kill her own unwanted fetus onto her? How are taxpayers "forced" into paying for termination of her own unwanted pregnancy if she is the one who actually kills her own unwanted fetus? It's the perfect compromise is it not?

If you can't point out the flaws in my compromise, then at least tell me why the way we currently do it is better?

You're 'Pro Choice' right? You think the current law is just fine right? A Woman should get to choose if she carries her baby to full term right? (She can even kill it up to 20 days before scheduled birth...Hillary was for that 'ya know?) So explain why the way we currently "force" taxpayers or "impose" her choice onto others is better?

Why is the way unwanted fetuses are currently slaughtered in their Mother's wombs better and more humane than allowing the Babies to be born and then letting the Mother decide how it should be killed if that's her "choice" (she doesn't want it)? What am I suggesting that's so "crazy" beyond the way we're currently allowing her to make that same decision by "imposing" her death sentence onto that Fetus and onto the rest of the taxpayers, & her Doctor, along with the rest of the general society... more than half of whom are Pro Life* btw and would prefer she allow that Baby to live? (*according to the latest polls)

The unwanted fetuses are still Human beings are they not? They are indeed alive correct? We do kill them at the Mother's specific direction and force taxpayers to pay for the messy bloody & dangerous death operations do we not? So why is your way of doing this as it's currently done that's tearing the country apart, better than my compromise?... which is a much more efficient, cost effective, choice filled, humane solution to the same problem of unwanted pregnancies?

Where does Science confirm that unwanted fetus is NOT a Human Baby who's alive? Why does aborting it mean it has to be killed first if it isn't alive? What else is it if it isn't 'Human'? C'mon you staunch "Pro-Choicers", state your arguments! Refute my compromise!

Cowards. All of you! Even the ones among you who claim to be "pro choice" when in fact all you really favor is infanticide. (without guilt) where am I wrong?

@moe ,@MountaineerWV ,@Boomboom521 @Keyser76 @bamaEER@WVUCOOPER @RichardPeterJohnson, @Bulya , @WVUBRU @Op2@Original Mountaineer1 @countryroads89 @CpEER @Orlaco ?

 

[atlkvb]

What's more humane to you "Pro choicers"? Allowing the unwanted Baby to be born, and simply giving the Mother who doesn't want the fetus a syringe to inject it with a deadly saline solution that disintegrates the fetuses' intestines from the inside?

or

The way many "choice" abortions are currently performed by injecting a deadly saline solution into the mother's unwanted amniotic sack where the unwanted fetus lives, then it is smothered to death by the same deadly saline solution which eats away the fetus's body then attacks the amniotic sack itself before possibly damaging the host mother's Fallopian tubes or intestines unless it is followed by an equally toxic counter balance to prevent all of that.

Very dangerous, very messy and very expensive to taxpayers instead of carrying the Baby full term, then allowing the Mother to make that death decision after a 24 hour wait period following live birth? That's cheaper, more humane, more efficient, and gives the mother total control over her own body, her own death or Life choice, and her own reproductive system (saves it too) does it not?

So what's more humane and protects a woman's "choice" as well her own body?

Why no responses from you staunch 'pro choice" advocates who of course don't favor abortion but also don't want to "impose" your choice onto others?

@moe ,@MountaineerWV ,@Boomboom521 @Keyser76 ,@bamaEER @WVUCOOPER @RichardPeterJohnson, @Bulya , @WVUBRU @Op2 @Original Mountaineer1 @countryroads89 @CpEER @Orlaco ?

Where'ya'll at?

 

[Pospecteer]

Life is absolute, and it is precious, unique (we can't replace lost individuals) and seeks to survive absolutely. We cannot assume unto ourselves authorship of Human Life, because we are NOT its authors.

That my friend IS absolute.

I'm out of this conversation. Best of luck to you moving forward.

 

[atlkvb]

I'm out of this conversation. Best of luck to you moving forward.

Well judging from the responses, no one else wants to be in it either!

Just give Thanks for Life. It's the only thing we have worth fighting for. Take care my friend.

 

[atlkvb]

@moe ,@MountaineerWV ,@Boomboom521 @Keyser76 @bamaEER @WVUCOOPER @RichardPeterJohnson, @Bulya , @WVUBRU @Op2 @Original Mountaineer1 @countryroads89 @CpEER @Orlaco ?

It's just amazing to me. Here you folks are on the Left, with fierce opposition to Judge Kavanaugh because he is seen as the deciding vote on the Supreme Court that overturns Roe v Wade and no one has a defense of the current Law as opposed to what I've laid out in this thread as a compromise alternative to settle all the arguing? What's not to like in my compromise, especially if you are "pro choice" but don't want to "impose" abortion onto anyone else?

To recap my compromise among other things:

• Protects and preserves a Woman's full right to choose if her unwanted Baby lives or dies. It even goes one step further, and places that decision to kill the unwanted fetus entirely into her hands and hers only!
• Assures the "humane" treatment of the unwanted fetuses
• Allows for a reasonable "choice" that Mothers choose Life
• Saves taxpayers from expensive, messy and bloody abortions
• Protects a Woman's health and reproductive system
• Doesn't "impose" on demand abortions onto taxpayers
• Removes Doctors from being held criminally liable if abortions are eventually banned after Judge Kavanaugh is seated on the Supreme Court
• Protects the sanctity of Human Life, even if the Mother chooses to terminate the unwanted fetus after its born
• removes the "stigma" of back alley abortions
• Allows for infanticide if killing unwanted Babies makes you happy

• Is more humane than vacuuming out a Woman's guts or sucking the Baby's brains out!

What's not to like about my compromise? Why is the current Law better? Why is it fairer or more humane to Women who don't wish to keep their unwanted fetuses? If this issue is so important to you, important enough to smear Judge Kavanaugh's good name, why aren't you all defending it or accepting my compromise which satisfies the demands of all sides of the debate does it not?

If not, why can't anyone point out where it is flawed? C'mon Pro Choicers, this is YOUR big issue against Judge Kavanaugh is it not? If it isn't, why are you all on the Left so against him? What else does he represent that's worth all of this organized opposition and destruction of his good name? Defend the current Abortion Laws vs this compromise I've offered, or accept the compromise and leave Judge Kavanaugh alone please if this is not that important to you.

@moe ,@MountaineerWV ,@Boomboom521 @Keyser76 @bamaEER @WVUCOOPER @RichardPeterJohnson, @Bulya , @WVUBRU @Op2 @Original Mountaineer1 @countryroads89 @CpEER @Orlaco ?

 

[DvlDog4WVU]

@moe ,@MountaineerWV ,@Boomboom521 @Keyser76 ,@bamaEER@WVUCOOPER @RichardPeterJohnson, @Bulya , @WVUBRU @Op2@Original Mountaineer1 @countryroads89 @CpEER ?

It's just amazing to me. Here you folks are on the Left, with fierce opposition to Judge Kavanaugh because he is seen as the deciding vote on the Supreme Court that overturns Roe v Wade and no one has a defense of the current Law as opposed to what I've laid out in this thread as a compromise alternative to settle all the arguing? What's not to like in my compromise, especially if you are "pro choice" but don't want to "impose" abortion onto anyone else?

To recap my compromise among other things:

• Protects and preserves a Woman's full right to choose if her unwanted Baby lives or dies. It even goes one step further, and places that decision to kill the unwanted fetus entirely into her hands and hers only!
• Assures the "humane" treatment of the unwanted fetuses
• Allows for a reasonable "choice" that Mothers choose Life
• Saves taxpayers from expensive, messy and bloody abortions
• Protects a Woman's health and reproductive system
• Doesn't "impose" on demand abortions onto taxpayers
• Removes Doctors from being held criminally liable if abortions are eventually banned after Judge Kavanaugh is seated on the Supreme Court
• Protects the sanctity of Human Life, even if the Mother chooses to terminate the unwanted fetus after its born
• removes the "stigma" of back alley abortions
• Allows for infanticide if killing unwanted Babies makes you happy

• Is more humane than vacuuming out a Woman's guts or sucking the Baby's brains out!

What's not to like about my compromise? Why is the current Law better? Why is it fairer or more humane to Women who don't wish to keep their unwanted fetuses? If this issue is so important to you, important enough to smear Judge Kavanaugh's good name, why aren't you all defending it or accepting my compromise which satisfies the demands of all sides of the debate does it not?

If not, why can't anyone point out where it is flawed? C'mon Pro Choicers, this is YOUR big issue against Judge Kavanaugh is it not? If it isn't, why are you all on the Left so against him? What else does he represent that's worth all of this organized opposition and destruction of his good name? Defend the current Abortion Laws vs this compromise I've offered, or accept the compromise and leave Judge Kavanaugh alone please if this is not that important to you.

@moe ,@MountaineerWV ,@Boomboom521 @Keyser76 ,@bamaEER@WVUCOOPER @RichardPeterJohnson, @Bulya , @WVUBRU @Op2@Original Mountaineer1 @countryroads89 @CpEER ?

They all have you on ignore.

 

[atlkvb]

They all have you on ignore.

Maybe. Maybe not. I'm not the easiest person to debate Abortion with because of my passion for innocent Human Life. So I can understand why they ignore me, or simply resort to name calling like "wingnut" or just avoid me altogether because they can't win their arguments in a "Pro Choice" debate against mine "for Life". (they're all personally opposed to Abortion but don't want to "impose" that choice onto anyone else) [eyeroll]

However if they want to win this debate to stop Judge Kavanaugh, they'd better be ready to defend the current Abortion Laws because they will get challenged and he may be the one challenging many of their "Pro Choice" assumptions under the current Law just as I have. I'm surprised how none of them is willing to debate me on it since they're so passionately opposed to Judge Kavanaugh? Is there any other reason they so fiercely oppose him besides Abortion?

I'm actually taking their side, and using their language and their reasoning for support of it to make my points, and none of them has a come back or is willing to point out my flaws in logic, or logically defend their positions on it? I'm not name calling, or making fun of their positions, or even suggesting they are wrong. I'm simply logically using their own arguments against them trying to get them to defend their own "Pro Choice" positions. No takers. Silence. Muted. Speechless.

Telling isn't it?

 

[atlkvb]

I may be a wingnut to you Leftists who are avoiding me in this debate and that's OK. But is it also OK if I consider you all to be the real "wing nuts"?

Here's why?

You oppose Pro Life legislation, or "banning" Abortions correct? You say it's between a Mother and her Doctor, and it's her body correct? So why is the death of the unwanted fetus limited to only killing the Baby? Aren't Mother's lives at risk? Aren't we killing them too?

I mean if it's her body we're talking about, why isn't her health and protecting it part of the equation? You say it is? Oh Really?

So you expose her to some of the most invasive and dangerous procedures one could possibly engage in. Inserting a powerful suction device into her uterus to vacuum out half her guts?:scream: Inseminating her uterus and the amniotic sack with poisonous saline that cooks her insides out? there is a procedure that is currently 100% llegal called an "intact dilation & extraction" in which the unwanted Fetus' skull is punctured and it's brains are sucked out while it's held in the uterus. It's grotesque. What does that have to do with a woman's health?

That's "humane"? That "protects" her reproductive system & rights?
That's just wingnut extra double crunch nut nutty!

You say Women shouldn't be forced into carrying a Baby full term if they don't want to? Well, who's forcing them? Don't they freely engage in Sex, and freely accept that an unwanted pregnancy could be a result of it? We aren't forcing them to be sterilized are we? China has a forced abortion policy, we haven't gone that far yet have we? You're not OK with that are you? You'd be opposed to that wouldn't you? You're pro-life on forced abortions aren't you?

So which so which mother who finds herself with an unwanted fetus has control over if or when she conceives or not? If it's not in her total control, how is she being "forced" to carry a Baby she does not want? Don't we allow her to kill it?

That type of uninformed thinking is nothing but wingnut nutty.

You say it's her decision if the Baby lives or dies right? So why do we have any restrictions at all on when she can have an abortion? Why not let her kill the unwanted Baby at any time, for any reason, up to 3 minutes before it's born? What is the difference if she kills it 8 weeks into her unwanted pregnancy or after 36 weeks of gestation? It's the same Baby isn't it? Why restrict her rights and call it "choice"? It's still her body isn't it? What doesn't the baby have after 8 weeks that it has at 36 weeks? It's all there. Similar to how a 2 year old has everything they will have @ 65 years of age...minus a little more gray and some wisdom hopefully! What actually allows her to decide if the Baby lives or dies, especially since it's a completely separate person we're talking about aren't we?

That type of narrow minded thinking is simply wingnut crazy.

If Human Life is worth saving when is it not worth saving? We pay doctors to save lives do we not? Why are we paying them to kill Babies then in their most vulnerable stages? Besides, I thought it was all about the woman's body? Why are the doctors only trying to kill the unwanted Baby if it's the woman's body we're protecting? Why not just let the Baby live then? Her body is being exposed to massive internal bleeding during an Abortion, unsafe sharp instruments that could damage her Fallopian tubes, or rupture her spleen, or slit her uterus, unsafe, unsanitary conditions at many abortion clinics that could lead to her contracting herpes, chlamydia, topical cervical cancer or any number of horribly destructive STD's. If we're all about protecting the mothers, why would we allow her to be exposed to such unsafe procedures or unsanitary conditions just to kill an unwanted fetus?

That is just wingnut batsh*t crazy.

You all are "Pro choice" but don't want to "impose" your decisions for Abortion onto anyone else right? So why do you support taxpayer funding for on demand Abortions? Half the country is Pro Life, and don't want their tax dollars being used here or overseas to fund sex selection, or unwanted pregnancy abortions. Yet, you're willing to "impose" that tax onto Americans regardless of if they are Pro Life or not? They have no say in the matter, and you call them names if they oppose their money being used for such dangerous, unsafe, and even to many immoral procedures?

And then you call them "wingnuts"?

That is really wingnut crazy too!

 

[Boomboom521]

They all have you on ignore.

Jeez man, come on.....be objective once in a while would ya?

 

[DvlDog4WVU]

Jeez man, come on.....be objective once in a while would ya?

Huh?

 

[atlkvb]

If you strip away all of the window dressing, the Left's primary opposition to Judge Kavanaugh is based on fear he will be the vote on the Supreme Court that overturns Roe v Wade. Abortion.

Anyone on the Left dispute this as the primary reason for opposition to Judge Kavanaugh? If this isn't it, what else is the reason for the Left's maniacal opposition to his nomination to the Supreme Court?

Do you care if Roe v Wade is overturned or not? Is he the reason you're concerned it may be?

It's a Yes or No answer.

If it's Yes, do you think the current Abortion Law of the land is OK and shouldn't be overturned?

If it's No, do you think we should restrict Abortions or that restrictions on it are Constitutional?

Note: Judge Kavanaugh will be deciding this issue! See link:

https://www.cnn.com/2018/06/29/politics/abortion-roe-v-wade-supreme-court/index.html

excerpt:

"Over the past year, state legislatures in Iowa, Louisiana and Mississippi have advanced strict limits on abortion that some lawmakers believe could trigger a successful challenge to the landmark 1973 Supreme Court decision that legalized abortion nationwide".

So once again, is your opposition on the Left to Judge Kavanaugh based in fear of Roe v Wade being overturned? If not, what is your opposition to him based on?

@moe ,@MountaineerWV ,@Boomboom521 @Keyser76, @bamaEER@WVUCOOPER @RichardPeterJohnson, @Bulya , @WVUBRU @Op2 @Original Mountaineer1 @countryroads89 @CpEER @Orlaco ?

 

[atlkvb]

Pro Choice Leftists: "Atl is crazy posting about killing live Babies! What an ignoramus"

Pro Lifers: "Why are we paying for gruesome bloody Abortions of perfectly normal and live innocent Babies anyway? Isn't that insane?

Leftists: "No! It's about a woman's health, and a woman's choice. Keep your hands off my *****!"

Pro Lifers "OK...but you're risking sterilization, infection, STDs, hemorrhaging, infertilization, not to mention emotional and physical trauma if you allow anonymous butchers to touch your ***** & suck out or chop up your unwanted Baby just to save your health. Why not just birth the unwanted tyke yourself since it's your own body, and then only you kill it if you still don't want it instead of risking your health and forcing taxpayers to pay for it or paying someone else to kill it in that dangerous, bloody, messy operation"?

Leftists: "Because that would be murder! Everyone knows that's not a Baby yet, so it's really not alive, it's just part of the Mother's body therefore it's her choice as to whether it lives, or she just pays someone else to kill it for her which is not really murder 'cause that's not really a live fully formed Baby, but killing it inside the womb while it's forming as a Baby still makes more sense and is more sane than her killing it outside of her womb herself which IS murder because then it's really a live fully formed Baby that's not part of her body, don't you get it?"

Atl: I'm an ignoramus?


@moe ,@MountaineerWV ,@Boomboom521 @Keyser76, @bamaEER @WVUCOOPER @RichardPeterJohnson, @Bulya , @WVUBRU @Op2 @Original Mountaineer1 @countryroads89 @CpEER @Orlaco ?

...wait a minute

 

[BobbyBoucheer]

Hate to break to you, but I am catholic and very conservative and it's not that easy. My wife is pregnant with our 2nd child. My wife has an ultrasound with a new OB since we just moved to Cinti from WV and actually just moved into our house earlier in the week. The ultrasound shows severe birth defects but they don't tell us until we meet with another doctor. After additional testing they diagnose my son with Trisomy 13 (not downs) . We find out our son has a 0% chance to live. His heart and stomach is forming outside of his body and his brain is not developed. On top of that my wife is accumulating additional fluids and she has a greater than a 50% chance of rupturing her uterus if she goes full term which could make her sterile.

They recommend a late term procedure (abortion) to induce labor so that my wife will be safe and not add to additional complications moving forward. It was the worst day of our life. My wife is very catholic and does not want to have the procedure. I had to convince her the risk of dying if she carries our son to full term with a 0% chance that he will ever survive is not what god wanted for her. She agreed but to this day every time time this debate comes up it makes both of us feel empty inside.

I'm sorry my man...

 

[BobbyBoucheer]

They all ignore you @atlkvb because you don't give up.

Anyways, abortion is a unwinnable argument no matter what position you take.

The only thing I'm against is paying for abortions with tax payer money and abortions past 10 weeks.

 

[atlkvb]

They all ignore you @atlkvb because you don't give up.

Anyways, abortion is a unwinnable argument no matter what position you take.

The only thing I'm against is paying for abortions with tax payer money and abortions past 10 weeks.

While it is certainly true they all have ignored the thread @BobbyBoucheer, the other half of your post is NOT true! I stated in the OP that the primary opposition to Judge Kavanaugh is because of this issue (right to abortion), which they all certainly have taken a position in. It is divisive, and a tough argument, but it is winnable. Those who take sides in it prove it's a winnable argument!

You have two sides to the debate, and those debating it certainly choose sides so the debate is winnable depending on which side you take is it not? So the thread simply challenges them to defend their position "for abortion", their choice in the debate. All I challenge them to do is defend their 'choice'.

As a tactic (often used to win debates), I offered a "compromise" which still allows for aborting unwanted children, as well as allows for their possible "choice" for Life. A "compromise". I used simple logic, their arguments for "choice" and their stated objective behind their support of the murder of innocent children "to protect the health of the Mother".

They have avoided the thread because the only difference between what I offered as a 'compromise' and what they currently support, is I leave the decision to terminate the unwanted fetus totally up to the Mother by having her kill her own unwanted child! That's what they argue for anyway (they're just for paying someone else to do it) and that's what they insist on when deciding FOR Abortion do they not? They do.

So, all I challenged them to do was make their argument allowing for the Mother to kill her own child...not inside her womb...but outside of it. What is the difference? It is a Human Baby is it not? (Yes it is)The Baby is still unwanted is it not? (Yes it is unwanted) It still has to be killed in order to be aborted does it not? (Yes it has to be killed in order to be aborted) It IS the Woman's choice is it not? (Yes it is) Taxpayers don't want to be charged for that do they not? (Yes, they don't want to be charged) We want the procedure safe, do we not? (Yes we do) We want it rare, do we not? (Yes rare) We want it available do we not? (Yes available)

The answer to all of the above is "Yes". So my "compromise" offers all of those things!

Amazingly, my little compromise answers all of their concerns, as well as offers Pro Lifers a chance to save the unwanted Babies simply by allowing them to live and possibly be kept alive by their unwanted Moms or at least placed into adoption. This is all Pro Lifer's want, a chance to save the unwanted Babies.

The only difference between my "compromise" and the way we do things now is instead of paying a third party to kill our unwanted children inside the Mother's womb (an unsafe and dangerous procedure) we allow the Mothers to kill their own unwanted Children outside the womb if they choose. It's their body, and their choice, and we allow the Moms to kill their own Babies, only after they are born....saving taxpayers, and offering the unwanted children a chance at least to live.

So it's a very winnable argument, but they refuse to defend their position even though all I've done is offer them a compromise to preserve their demand for "choice". The only change I made was where we allow Moms to kill their unwanted Children.

"I'm personally against abortion, but I don't think we should 'impose' that onto everyone else"...in other words it should be left up to the Mothers. This is the argument almost all of them will make in support of Abortion do they not?

Yes, they do...yet they were offered a chance in my compromise to defend it and they have all avoided it. It's an easy argument to defend if you favor killing unwanted children which they all do despite their stated opposition to it.

That's why they have all avoided me in the thread, they can't be honest about what they actually support, however in fact they do support the destruction of a good man's name in Brett Kavanuagh, simply because of their maniacal support for and insistence on infanticide which they think he will end once he's seated on the Supreme Court. (He will) That's why they so fiercely oppose him, only because of abortion.

I'm right, their silence responding to the thread is my proof. They simply cannot win the debate, so they avoid it!

@moe ,@MountaineerWV ,@Boomboom521 @Keyser76 @bamaEER@WVUCOOPER @RichardPeterJohnson, @Bulya , @WVUBRU @Op2 @ Original Mountaineer1 @countryroads89 @CpEER @Orlaco ?

 

[atlkvb]

They all ignore you @atlkvb because you don't give up.

The only ones I know for sure who have me on ignore (because they've said so) @BobbyBoucheer are @countryroads89 , @CpEER , & @WVUBRU, and @RichardPeterJohnson

As far as I know, all the rest of them at least can or do read my posts, but many of them also choose to run away or they simply refuse to respond to me because they usually can't counter something I've said or they don't want me to make them look stupid once they engage in debate with me using their weak arguments.

Doesn't matter @BobbyBoucheer , whatever the reason is they avoid me (usually due to some name they call me...like wingnut, etc) the fact remains they do mostly avoid me, and I gather such a sense of satisfaction and pure elation from that and my consistent ability to totally mute them or run them off that I really wish it were just that easy to get rid of Leftists & shut them up once and for all! Then 95% of our problems with them would be permanently solved, although I do believe a certain percentage of the maggots will always be around to annoy us like flies are always around otherwise spoiling our outdoor cooking and eating enjoyment! [winking]

@moe ,@MountaineerWV ,@Boomboom521 @Keyser76 @bamaEER @WVUCOOPER @RichardPeterJohnson, @Bulya , @WVUBRU @Op2 @ Original Mountaineer1 @countryroads89 @CpEER @Orlaco ?

 

[atlkvb]

@Boomboom521
"The reason they've avoided you in the thread atl is because you've made a stupid argument, and no one wants to engage in your stupidity!"

atl "what's stupid about it boom"?

@Boomboom521
"no one favors murder of Babies"

atl "why is killing unborn fetuses NOT murder"?

@Boomboom521
"because that's NOT a person...it's not a fully recognized individual with rights"

atl "what makes it NOT a person?"

@Boomboom521
"It's not yet fully formed, it's not a whole person yet, it's a Fetus...big difference 'ya know?"

atl "says who"?

@Boomboom521
"Science, nature, the Law you bigoted MFer"! (that's one of the names I usually get called by boomer when I start irritating him)[winking]

atl: "So you think Science hasn't confirmed that's a full person?"

@Boomboom521
"No!, it hasn't! It's not settled"!

atl:" So what's missing that makes it a person @ 8 week's development (the time most Women realize they're pregnant) than what is missing at 36 weeks? (nine months)

@Boomboom521
"Why don't you tell me you arrogant prick?"

atl: "Nothing! Nothing at all boom my Man! In fact, everything the Baby has at 36 weeks fully formed is also there at only 8 weeks when Moms first are able to realize they are carrying another Human being...everything"!

@Boomboom521
"Not true"!

atl: "True boomer! for instance...it has DNA...the basic building block of Life...THE identifier marking its unique humanity opposite a Fish or a Bird. It has a central nervous system, a respiratory system, a heartbeat, lungs, veins, blood vessels, a brain, arms, hands, fingers, legs, feet, toes, eyes, a nose, ears, a digestive system, sex organs (no, it's NOT Gay, it's either Male or Female) hair follicles, kidneys, even a personality.... everything a Baby at 36 weeks has! Nothing is missing boom! In fact boom, did you know ultra sound and advanced amniocentesis can identify all of those things easily and digitize them for the expectant mother to view as her Baby grows? True many of those things are forming and still developing, but my point boomer is they are there, even after only 8 weeks! The other thing it has that you probably don't believe but is also true is that Baby has a Soul, a unique Spirit from it's Creator, who also placed all of those other things there along with it to grow and develop. I know you don't believe that, but those other things didn't magically appear! No one else can do those things or put them there. The Baby is intelligently designed to be unique, it's a created thing, not manufactured, it can't be duplicated, it can't be copied, it's DNA is as unique as it is complex...that is a whole other Human Life created by the hand Almighty God himself...the Creator, and we do NOT have the right to arbitrarily terminate it simply because a Mom refuses to allow the Baby to live! It's NOT her body, there is another Human being inside of her body growing boom!"

@Boomboom521
"Well I disagree. You can't prove it's created, it's just nature, the Constitution doesn't recognize it as a person, & you can't prove it has a "Soul" and nothing else you said makes it true just because you said it creep!"

atl: "Well, you're right, I can't prove it has a Soul, and I can't prove it's created, but I can prove it's not something Men have done nor can they do all by themselves! So given that, by what right do we assume unto ourselves the decision on if it lives or dies? We didn't make it!"

@Boomboom521
"It's the mother's choice, it's her decision"

atl:" So when did she decide to conceive? What control over her ovulation did she have? When did she allow conception? How did she select it's Sex? What control does she have over it's ongoing development?"

@Boomboom521
"There is no talking to you! Your mind is made up, and the reason why no one wants to discuss this with you is because you refuse to consider any other possibility besides your own ideas! I'm finished discussing this with you, it's a pointless debate!"

Atl: "Thanks for making your point boom"! As he runs off![eyeroll]

(This of course is purely a fictional rendition of a typical debate I'd have with boomer or any other Leftist about this, yet it's also typical of how most of them usually end it!)[thumbsup]

 

[WVUBRU]

I've never said I have you on ignore but the truth has never been your friend. I just mostly ignore your incoherent ramblings and warped viewpoints by not reading your posts. But I do scan them in order to see how troubling a right wing loony sees the world. You need help and hope you get it.

 

[Boomboom521]

Very troubled mind

 

[atlkvb]

I've never said I have you on ignore but the truth has never been your friend. I just mostly ignore your incoherent ramblings and warped viewpoints by not reading your posts. But I do scan them in order to see how troubling a right wing loony sees the world. You need help and hope you get it.

OK. My mistake Bru. I thought you avoid me because you had me on ignore not because of what you just said in this post. However since you bothered to post me by telling me what a nut job I am, why don't you refute the argument I'm making in this thread about allowing mothers to kill their own babies as "choice"?

Should be easy for you to do since I'm such a loony nut bar... right?[winking]

(now you will either refute my argument or run off like most Leftists do, or call me another name thinking you've made your point) So which will it be @WVUBRU? [eyeroll]

*(edit October 5 2:32AM) so far @WVUBRU has run away and/or refused to prove my 'nuttiness') [winking]

 

[MountaineerWV]

They all ignore you @atlkvb because you don't give up.

Anyways, abortion is a unwinnable argument no matter what position you take.

The only thing I'm against is paying for abortions with tax payer money and abortions past 10 weeks.

He's ignored because he's a liar and a fraud who speaks of family values but has none of his own........[thumbsup]

 

[atlkvb]

He's ignored because he's a liar and a fraud who speaks of family values but has none of his own........[thumbsup]

Your invitation to refute the argument is available. Stop being a coward and state your case for infanticide you charlatan.[thumbsup]

 

[atlkvb]

Very troubled mind

Did I at least represent your argument fairly boomer?

 

[BobbyBoucheer]

He's ignored because he's a liar and a fraud who speaks of family values but has none of his own........[thumbsup]

I don't agree with you at all. He is overzealous at times but @atlkvb is a good man and a stand up guy.

Your post is out of the liberal playbook, don't agree with someone, besmirch their opinions and impugn their character.

Your post says more about you than anything..