And continues to this day. In an ongoing process that doesn't care whether you're a sperm, egg, zygote, fetus, newborn, child, adult, or elder.
POLITICAL THREAD
- Thread starter kybobcat
- Start date
Billionaire criminal justice? Sure. 🤣
Judge Cannon is a Trump political appointee from the Federalist Society and the jury pool is all Floridians. Not to mention the location screams govt prosecutor overconfidence.
Still waiting for Sambo, I believe it was, to show us proof of the "oceans" of Confederate flags at "all" of the Trump Rally's.
Your comparison doesn't work as it's considered indecent for either sex to bare their bottoms. But men can show their tops in public without a second glance, and women cannot. Complete with nipples. If that's a man, which y'all contend it is, then they shouldn't even have to cover their nipples. Those titties should be on full display and wouldn't be indecent in the slightest.
Yes, it currently isn't. You can change the law to define it as such, as some Republicans are trying to do, but unless/until that's successful the law is what it is.
James is all in on brainwashing propaganda - feel bad for people like him who are told what to say and exactly how to say it - when you lose your freedom of speech and freedom of opinion it must be a cold and dark place.
To repeat what I said, they are treated as a human under the law. You admit it and then try to deny it at the same time. Do better.
Probably 40B in cash. The rest is in equipment and whatnot. Total is now well over 100B.
Ok then would a biological man with no implants squeezing and bouncing his natural man breasts while posing for pictures on the WH lawn even be appropriate? Would any country who expected to be taken seriously allow and celebrate this on their capitol grounds?
Again, what does public nudity and sexual gestures have to do with being gay? Why is it not enough to accept peoples right to be gay and their right to celebrate that without accepting all the gross public sexual expressions that so often go with it? Or have they become all just one in the same?
Only during specific carveouts as I continually reiterate. If fetuses were a person or treated as a person under the law you wouldn't need a specific fetal homicide law. They would just be covered under homicide. In general fetuses are not legally considered persons. Only specific laws treat them as such with respect to that particular law.
and the guy you morons get on your hands and knees to worship spends everyday at his club playing golf with these "conspiring democrats". Maybe you haven't figure it out yet because you have 2 brain cells. But once you reach a certain level of rich or power there is no D or R. There is only $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$. Ted Cruz gets in his witty TV lines and then he goes back the country club and gets a good laugh with the same people you proclaim to be evil scum of the earth. McConnel spews his bullshit about getting tough on China and then goes home to his CCP wife. Everyone at the top worships two things, money and control. The "2 sides" just feed their flock different bullshit and abuse different demographics to get there.
You have a few standouts like Elizabeth Warren and Paul Ryan who I think actually stand for something good and want to push positive change. But guess how much they get done? jack shit. And usually after some time in DC they just join the good boys club.
Your Savior Trump is no different. Your just stupid enough to fall for a con.
Yeah, that'd be perfectly acceptable in our society. No blurring required.
But I guess since we are speaking of trannys.
Are we not doing the "ppl will literally die bc of this" thing anymore...has Dion chimed in to claim its bc of fear
Are we not doing the "ppl will literally die bc of this" thing anymore...has Dion chimed in to claim its bc of fear
I just worry about James when his dreams are shattered. Folks like Trump and Biden rarely suffer for any misdeeds that they might do.
This is an inane argument. The fact that you double down on it suggests your are wildly ignorant or just baiting. Neither conclusion is flattering for you. And, neither deserves a substantive response. I will let you continue to believe the carpool lane is how we should define life.
My gosh, I wish I had missed this intellectual nugget. Wow, you are regressing.
I explained this, but you conveniently ignore that post. Your side is the inconsistent side that denies science and tries to use carpool lane arguments for their conclusions about life.
Now show us where an XX human can have a penis and where an XY human can have a vagina. I will wait.
For those who think a fetus is not a living being.
A year or two later....
A year or two later....
But they don’t take up another seat in the carpool lane!!!!For those who think a fetus is not a living being.
A year or two later....
This is the definition of nonsense. I've seen footage. Who hasn't? I'm not even sure of what the point is? Confusion? Propaganda? Is it pro-Putin? anti-Putin? Is the poster of this applauding the alleged absence? applauding 1984? You have to make a statement. Not use innuendo if you want to communicate something.
Your soon-to-be Republican nominee for President...
(I hear the avalanche of moderates and independents flocking to Trump as I type)
(I hear the avalanche of moderates and independents flocking to Trump as I type)
It isn’t how we define life, it’s how the legal system defines a person. Fetuses are not individual persons with legal rights according to our system. That is conveyed when you’re born. Again, you can try to change that if you want, but that’s how it is.
Which post? In your chromosome one you accused Down’s syndrome patients of not being human. Hardly an explanation.
No wonder Fox News is going to shit
That is not even correct. Maybe they don’t have carpool lanes in the mountains, but a carpool lane is concerned with not having empty seats in vehicles and rewarding vehicles that have more than the driver seat occupied. Pregnant women and their babies driving a car only take up one seat. Carpool lanes do not define legal person, as that is not the motivation of the law. But, every law defines terms used in the law differently than other laws. So, even if some carpool lane law attempted to define a person, we would not look to that definition outside of the context and intent of that statute or ordinance. Again, dumb argument. Really.
The United States has created the paradox concerning a very simple matter by opening the doors to abortion.
Scenario 1: Pregnant woman w fetus murdered by father who is then charged for double homicide.
Scenario 2: Pregnant woman murders fetus with no charges. Abortion scenario.
The “human” status of the fetus according to gov is solely dependent on who it is that’s terminating it’s life. Is there any other egregious crime on the books that gives rights for some to commit but not others? Legally speaking.
This goes against science, religion, logic, and even the most simplistic reasoning. Is it a life or is it not? How can that classification simply be made by someone else’s external actions? Is there any other scenario in nature these rules are applied and permitted?
Again, culture has muddied the waters to such a degree we debate and argue over something so simple even a small child can see right through it.
I did not. You claimed humans can have 3 chromosomes and claimed gametes are humans.
When you lie to make your point, we know you don’t have a point. There are no humans with only 23 chromosomes. This is elementary. Literally.
No, you’re making this about abortion as that’s the contentious issue, but it isn’t. Fetuses have never been considered people or they’d have rights the instant they’re conceived instead of born. The abortion debate didn’t create this situation, it always existed.
Similar threads
