Post by l***@yahoo.caPost by Planet Visitor IIPost by l***@yahoo.caPost by Planet Visitor IIPost by l***@yahoo.caPost by elizabethPost by l***@yahoo.caWhy do you want to force women to accept these risks?
"There were 4,673,700 pregnancy and delivery hospital stays recorded in these hospital
discharge data among females ages 15 to 44 years in 2008. As shown in table 1, there
were 473,700 non-delivery maternal hospital stays with complicating conditions as a
principal or secondary diagnosis. Among the 4.2 million deliveries in 2008, the vast
majority (94.1 percent) listed some type of complicating condition."
http://www.hcup-us.ahrq.gov/reports/statbriefs/sb113.jsp
"Pregnancy symptoms and complications can range from mild and annoying discomforts
severe, sometimes life-threatening, illnesses. Sometimes it can be difficult for a woman
to determine which symptoms are normal and which are not. Problems during pregnancy
may include physical and mental conditions that affect the health of the mother or the
baby. These problems can be caused by or can be made worse by being pregnant."
<snip>
"Maternal morbidity includes physical and psychologic conditions that result from or are
aggravated by pregnancy and have an adverse effect on a woman's health. The most
severe complications of pregnancy, generally referred to as severe maternal morbidity
(SMM), affect more than 50,000 women in the United States every year. Based on
recent trends, this burden has been steadily increasing."
http://www.cdc.gov/reproductivehealth/maternalinfanthealth/pregcomplications.htm
In a free society we do not have to assume any level of health risk which is not acceptable
to us, especially not to conform to a notion of morality which we do not personally agree with.
If you do not desire to live in a free society where women have the right to self-determination,
you might want to consider moving to Iran.
How many children have YOU had, lizzy? My wife had four, and the worst thing she complained
about was hemorrhoids.
Was that before or after you fucked her to keep her from dumping you? What did you do, knock her
up on purpose to make her stay? You sick, vile pig. Best to shut up about your wife given that you've bragged about doing something to her that sounds a lot like rape.
Obviously you find my wife to be a "juicy target" for you to rape.
Obvious how, scum? You're the one who bragged about it.
Obviously you're the one obsessed with her. You sick twisted sadist.
Post by l***@yahoo.caPost by Planet Visitor IISorry, you sick bastard,
she's usually too old for even a rapist, unless they're as sick as you seem to be.
Thanks for confirming once again that you think rape is about sexual desire, psychopath.
Lie # 1,314. I've never said any such thing. Rape is about power, and sadistic
domination. It's what you're all about. They're never too old for a sadistic
rapist to want to dominate and overpower and brutalize. That's what you dream
about doing. You're obsessed with sex, but not in a normal way. No prude sees sex
in a normal way. They see it as dirty... and sadistic prudes need to dominate in
rape. That's you all over.
Post by l***@yahoo.caPost by Planet Visitor IIPerhaps
you should try raping your mother, which would be difficult as I hear she's always up for
"a good time," and would more likely be a volunteer.
Slurs on an innocent, uninvolved person noted and dismissed, scum. Your belief that women want rape is also noted once again.
Just your mother, shit-for-brains. You were the one who started this by claiming
I was first "raping my wife." You're another one who thinks you can dish it out,
but find yourself unable to take it. I can well picture you fucking your mother,
because that's what she wanted, and why it turned you into such a pervert.
Obviously something must have done it, since no one is "born" a pervert. You
had to be taught how to be one. See how you like it when the insults are turned
back on YOU, fuckwit.
Post by l***@yahoo.caPost by Planet Visitor IIPost by l***@yahoo.caIncidentally, are you aware that you're responding to my words but addressing somebody else?
It's hard to tell the difference between the two of you. You both have the same
methods in calling anyone who disagrees with you a "sheep fucker," or a "rapist."
Translation: "I'm a senile, crazy old fuck and I forgot who I was talking to. I don't know my ass from a teapot. Please kill me."
Translations from a pervert are always slanted toward sadism.
Post by l***@yahoo.caPost by Planet Visitor IIPost by l***@yahoo.caPost by Planet Visitor III'll bet you're scared shitless about the possibility of becoming pregnant.
Given the risks, what woman wouldn't be?
My wife.
Since you have hinted that you raped her (you euphemistically called it "bedded") so she'd be too scared to leave you, I'm guessing you don't have a ton of insight into her feelings, scum.
Well, if that's the case, how did your mother first "bed" you?? Perhaps you're not
willing to share the gory details, but we are here for you, and letting out those
repressed sadistic emotions could be the first step to your mental recovery.
No need to hurry, but when you're ready know that we are here for you.
Post by l***@yahoo.caPost by Planet Visitor IIAnd I suspect far more women than those who ARE scared shitless about
the possibility of becoming pregnant. But when someone like you hates women
so much that he insists they must ALL be scared shitless to be pregnant it only
exposes the depths of your depravity.
How does that work, Jim? explain how it's depraved to think women might be scared of the possible consequences of pregnancy?
You'd know that far better than I would. Why do you hate women??
Post by l***@yahoo.caYou have no room to talk about depravity, with the evil shit you post. You are, no exaggeration, the most depraved, twisted poster I've ever seen on alt.abortion. Worse than J Young and Heishman put together. Your seething, psychopathic malice is palpable. You're trapped in an old man's body and no longer able to physically abuse people, so you go on usenet and post reams of misogynistic, perverted filth and narcissistic drivel. Who do you think you're fooling?
Heh... Given your sadistic nature born from nurturing, I suspect your mother is
probably stroking your penis as you ramble with that comment? You certainly
seem obsessed with "perverted filth."
Post by l***@yahoo.caPost by Planet Visitor III suspect you have no children, and probably have no wife.
Bully for you.
Who gives a shit what you, I, or anybody else suspects, fool?
Heh... I knew it. A "mama's boy." Until the day she dies. When you'll
probably prop her up in the attic a la Norman Bates.
Post by l***@yahoo.caPost by Planet Visitor IISince you sound like
a "mama's boy" to me.
You don't even know if I'm a boy or a girl, amateur. You assumed. Why is that?
I suspect you're androgynous.
Post by l***@yahoo.caPost by Planet Visitor IIDoes she still spank you? Do you get a woody when she
hugs you??
Wow, your twisted inner landscape is out there for all to see. Mommy issues much, psychopath?
So you do have Mommy issues, pervert. I thought so.
Post by l***@yahoo.caPost by Planet Visitor IIPost by l***@yahoo.caPost by Planet Visitor IIYou must be the only 60-year-old virgin in the U.S.
No wonder you have penis-envy.
Another in your long line of disgustingly sexist statements. Why don't you try the one about
how she wants to be raped again, psycho.
But lizzy claims I couldn't want to rape her because I only want to fuck sheep or young
boys. Is she a sheep? Yes or No. Is she a young boy? Yes or No.
Whenever you say somebody claims something, that indicates you're about to lie. Hell, whenever you put your gnarled fingers onto the keyboard to type it indicates you're about to lie.
Answer the question. Why are you avoiding it?? It just takes a yes or no. Rather
than an insult as a retort, while we both know that's all you have going for you.
Post by l***@yahoo.caPost by Planet Visitor IIPost by l***@yahoo.caPost by Planet Visitor IIPost by l***@yahoo.caPost by elizabethCome on now, antiabortniks are essentially rapists who believe that women are supposed to
suffer, and they get off on the woman's suffering.
Women are SUPPOSED to be capable of having children and HAVE a maternal instinct.
Typical of you, fascist, to try to dictate to women who they should be and how they should feel. Not all >> > women want children. Women are individuals and driven by more than just hormones, you stupid
sexist wanker.
Actually it's not ME... it's NATURE that dictates what a woman should be capable of doing,
Nature doesn't make value judgements like "should", idiot.
It isn't a "value judgment," it's just what it is. It's what nature has DICTATED. You think men
were given a penis and women were given a womb to do nothing with them??? You think we
as humans had anything to do with that process? Obviously the ONLY entity capable of
making a "value judgment" is the human being.
Post by l***@yahoo.caNature only provides maternal instinct and ability to most women, but not all. What they do
with it is up to them. The rational mind can rule over instinct if it is in one's interest to do so.
This is what a woman's mind does every time she ignores the tug of maternal instinct and uses >contraception, you pig-ignorant dullard.
I never said that a woman can't enter a convent and be a virgin all her life, or that a man
can't enter the priesthood and "actually" be celibate the rest of his life. Those are the
VALUE JUDGMENTS... and have absolutely nothing to do with NATURE. Do try to separate
the two.
Post by l***@yahoo.caPost by Planet Visitor IIand drives them to not be afraid of doing it. Who elected YOU to overrule NATURE???
You can prove that nature somehow prevents women from fearing the consequences of pregnancy? That >would mean no woman has ever feared it. You're really going to run with that?
Lie # 1,315. I made no such assumption.
By your very nature, and your "value judgments" you are most certainly a Bible-thumper.
Post by l***@yahoo.caPost by Planet Visitor IIbut clearly you can't overrule EVOLUTION, unless you have
a God-complex. Do you have a God-complex? How in the world do YOU KNOW what
women want?
Where did I claim I know what women want, scum? Where did I dispute evolution, scum? Strawmen are all you have, loser. That's because you are utterly inadequate at making arguments, buffoon.
Answer the question, fuckwit. Once again your methodology in answering question
is to use an insult. You're incredibly stupid. You ask questions and you expect me
to answer them, but whenever I ask you a question, all I get is an insult, and never
an answer than makes any sense whatsoever.
Post by l***@yahoo.caPost by Planet Visitor IIIt is sexist to claim that a man knows what ALL WOMEN WANT.
And it's stupid to use a strawman to illustrate that point, crud.
No proof offered. Your claim fails. So you actually believe that a man claiming
to know what ALL WOMEN WANT is not sexist. You silly boy.
Post by l***@yahoo.caPost by Planet Visitor IIPost by l***@yahoo.caPost by Planet Visitor IIBut
unfortunately lizzy believes that if a woman is poor and Black she is genetically wired to
not have that maternal instinct.
Heh! You're the racist who claims black people love their kids more, asshole.
That's not genetic.
Oh, so only claims about ~genetic~ differences are racist? So if a racist told you that blacks are ___ (fill in the blank with any nasty, negative claim), it's not racist if they put it down to nurture rather than nature?
No. I'm only claiming what I stated and nothing else. The argument that Blacks are
more nurturing that Whites is not an argument meant to imply genetics. I very
carefully explained it as follows --
Post by l***@yahoo.caPost by Planet Visitor IIBut probably true because of the past of slavery, and now part
of a meme that motivates Blacks to be more caring of their children than Whites, but
only in the U.S., as a "legacy" of SLAVERY, and the fact that so many are poor, which
is always a factor that drives a greater nurturing toward family connectedness for
mutual support than when a family is rich.
But that was probably too complicated for you.
Post by l***@yahoo.caOh, so now poor people love their kids more. What factual info do you base that on, nut?
The fact that the poor have more children than the rich... just as on-demand
abortion in the U.S. argues that the poor should be first to abort because they
already have too many children and any more would be "unwanted." See --
http://www.statista.com/statistics/241530/birth-rate-by-family-income-in-the-us/
In 2010, those earning under $10,000 a year in the U.S. had a fertility rate of
98.3 per 1,000 women, compared to those earning $75,000 a year or more in
the U.S. having a fertility rate of 54.8 per 1,000 women. Almost half the fertility
rate of the poorest class of our citizens.
Unlike you, I try to use FACTS when I state FACTS, rather than opinions, which
you claim automatically become FACTS when they are your opinions.
Bet you didn't see that coming.
Post by l***@yahoo.caPost by Planet Visitor IIJust as SLAVERY is responsible for
American Blacks being the most religiously devout group in the U.S. See --
http://www.christianpost.com/news/african-americans-most-religiously-devout-group-36736/
The reason for this is certainly not GENETIC, but a result of SLAVERY, and seeing
religion as a moral crutch to hold on to, in spite of being treated as non-persons
during that period.
It is a fact that the poor have more children than the rich.
Yes, it certainly is.
Post by l***@yahoo.caPost by Planet Visitor IIIt is a fact that those who
support abortion obviously target the poor for abortion because of that.
Bzzt! Begging the question. It's not established that anyone has been "targeted", scum.
Oh, yes it has. All one has to do is look at the on-demand abortion rates to
see that the poor are most certainly targeted for abortion. Didn't I mention
that Blacks are the poorest segment of our nation? Didn't I mention that
Blacks have a 36% abortion rate while only have a population density of
12.6%? Is that too complicated for you to grasp. This isn't correlation...
it is simply causation Those who support abortion readily admit that the
poor have children who are "unwanted," and that not having further children
with on-demand abortion should be supported unconditionally.
Post by l***@yahoo.caPost by Planet Visitor IIIt is a
form of Plutocracy that drives support for on-demand abortion in the U.S., and in
doing so helps support the objectives of racists in targeting Blacks for more
abortion than Whites because they are poor, and because they do have more
children than Whites, and would have far more children than Whites if there
were no on-demand abortion.
This is seen as an obscene objective by those who support abortion
Baloney. You can't possibly know what every supporter of abortion thinks, asshat.
I've seen enough here to know what a survey of a majority of those who support
on-demand abortion would favor. You seem to claim you are qualified to know
what every opponent of on-demand abortion thinks. But then you claim to have
a God-complex, while I'm just a lowly human.
Post by l***@yahoo.caPost by Planet Visitor IIbecause they live in great fear of a much larger Black population,
Crock of shit. You can't possibly know that, dolt.
So why do they always whine that there are enough Blacks in the U.S. which
they claim makes the issue of a 36% Black abortion rate "irrelevant"? In fact,
don't YOU insist it is "irrelevant"??
Post by l***@yahoo.caPost by Planet Visitor IIwhich they claim will only result
in more POOR, which is a hypothesis not supported by any fact.
Really? It's not a fact that having kids you can't support contributes to being poor?
See what I mean? You insist that poor Blacks should be FIRST in line for
on-demand abortion. You target the most vulnerable for those abortions.
Why don't you ever claim that more rich Whites should demand abortions?
Post by l***@yahoo.caIndicates a lie is coming.
Your Lie # 1,316.
Post by l***@yahoo.caPost by Planet Visitor IIthose
who support on-demand abortion in the U.S. strongly support the level of Black
abortion rate of 36% of all abortions, and would not favor a 12.6% Black abortion
rate in line with the Black population.
And there it is.
But you just did exactly as I stated. You said "having kids you can't support
contributes to being poor." You framed it as a fallacy of presupposition, but
that was YOUR claim.
Post by l***@yahoo.caPost by Planet Visitor IIThis is not OVERT racism,
It's not anything until you can prove it's even true, scum.
All I have to do is hold that opinion, shit-for-brains. You keep forgetting the
1st Amendment. But then that's a common failing among those who support
abortion. It's called the "abortion fascist syndrome."
Post by l***@yahoo.caPost by Planet Visitor IIbut clearly is
a form of being satisfied with the status quo of a larger percentage of Black
to White abortions. They like it just the way it is. This has been shown over and
over with excuses here from those who support abortion that this Black abortion
rate of 36% is "irrelevant," because the Black population in the U.S. is not
decreasing as a result of it.
In other words, they like it just the way it is.
As usual, Jim Noles thinks he's a mind-reader and that his biased, loony impressions constitute fact.
Well... don't you like it just the way it is??? If not, what would you change about
on-demand abortion in the U.S.????
<I suspect that this question will be met with either deathly silence or an obscene
sadistic insult claiming I've raped my wife or something on that order>
Post by l***@yahoo.caPost by Planet Visitor IIWhile I strongly favor a much larger Black population and believe it will REDUCE
the level of poverty among Blacks as there will be a tipping point which will result
in a greater level of education and employment opportunity because of that
large pool of eligible youth that can no longer be ignored. In any case, the
minority never suffers if it becomes less of a minority than it is.
In any case, I have never argued that there is the SLIGHTEST genetic difference
between Blacks and Whites.
While lizzy has certainly implied
Bzzt! "Implied". Weasel word = you made it up.
Bullshit. She has very clearly argued that racism has nothing to do with that high
abortion rate among Blacks. You've agreed with that assessment. So obviously
you both claim it is either caused by magic or genetics. I've been rather kind and
feel you and her mean genetics rather than magic. But I'm willing to listen to
your arguments in support of magic being responsible for that high Black abortion
rate. You can enter such arguments right here and now --
Post by l***@yahoo.caPost by Planet Visitor IIthat the reason
Blacks abort their pregnancies more than Whites is genetic.
Quotes, scum. Prove it.
See above. And right after you provide a quote from me in which I've stated
that I raped my wife. BTW -- has your mother had that torn vagina of hers repaired.
It took a nasty cut when you ripped it in your rage at her. See how YOU like it,
sucker.
Post by l***@yahoo.caPost by Planet Visitor IIShe insists it isn't
racism, and that Blacks just like to be poor and live in the ghetto.
I'm certain that she did not post those words, scum. Provide quotes or shut your flapper.
Post by Planet Visitor IIPost by l***@yahoo.caPost by Planet Visitor IIPost by l***@yahoo.caSome of them, yeah. But some others are just naive and uninformed. They actually believe a
fetus has feelings.
Well, have you ever asked a fetus if they have feelings??
Laughable. You're a hopeless self-parody, making yourself look stupider and more shameless with each worthless post.
So the answer is NO. Yet you claim you DO KNOW.
No, I claim scientists know.
"It is concluded that the basic neuronal substrate required to transmit somatosensory information develops by mid-gestation (18 to 25 weeks), however, the functional capacity of the neural circuitry is limited by the immaturity of the system. Thus, 18 to 25 weeks is considered the earliest stage at which the lower boundary of sentience could be placed. At this stage of development, however, there is little evidence for the central processing of somatosensory information. Before 30 weeks gestational age, EEG activity is extremely limited and somatosensory evoked potentials are immature, lacking components which correlate with information processing within the cerebral cortex. Thus, 30 weeks is considered a more plausible stage of fetal development at which the lower boundary for sentience could be placed."
Read More: http://informahealthcare.com/doi/abs/10.3109/14767059209161911
Pictures are worth a thousand words -- See --
http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/fetus.jpg
That's a FETUS. Think it has no FEELINGS???
That picture was made to MAKE A POINT that refutes all that rubbish that you
squeal about a fetus not having feelings.
Post by l***@yahoo.caYou'll just pretend not to see the facts as usual, won't you, weakling.
Post by Planet Visitor IIObviously it's that God-complex
of yours at work again. You really think you can cover up your ignorance with an
insult. How typical.
Post by l***@yahoo.caThink this fetus has NO FEELINGS???
Post by Planet Visitor IISee --
http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/fetus.jpg
You fucking ignorant, uneducated hypocrite.
I've told you this before, scumbag; your stupid propaganda photo does nothing to refute the
~established fact~ that a fetus can't possibly have feelings in the first two trimesters. You've
been given factual information which proves it, but were too cowardly to confront it, shitbird.
Ah, but you made no mention of any "trimester."
Ah, but I certainly did. It's in the posts you ran away from, ass. If you'd not been such a coward, you'd have seen me say that multiple times. It's not my fault you're such a chickenshit.
Your lie # 1,317.
Post by l***@yahoo.caPost by Planet Visitor IIYou really think you can cover
up your ignorance with an insult. How typical. Was that a picture of a FETUS
or NOT? Yes or No.
Don't know, scum. Could be photo-shopped for all I know.
Just as your reference could be forged by a pro abortion fascist activist like you,
but HTML qualified.
Post by l***@yahoo.caPost by Planet Visitor IIDid that picture show FEELINGS? Yes or No.
No, scum. A picture can't prove anything about feelings. But this can;
"It is concluded that the basic neuronal substrate required to transmit somatosensory information develops by mid-gestation (18 to 25 weeks), however, the functional capacity of the neural circuitry is limited by the immaturity of the system. Thus, 18 to 25 weeks is considered the earliest stage at which the lower boundary of sentience could be placed. At this stage of development, however, there is little evidence for the central processing of somatosensory information. Before 30 weeks gestational age, EEG activity is extremely limited and somatosensory evoked potentials are immature, lacking components which correlate with information processing within the cerebral cortex. Thus, 30 weeks is considered a more plausible stage of fetal development at which the lower boundary for sentience could be placed."
http://informahealthcare.com/doi/abs/10.3109/14767059209161911
Ah... a forgery. Nor does it PROVE anything.
Post by l***@yahoo.caPost by Planet Visitor IIPost by l***@yahoo.caPost by Planet Visitor IIPost by l***@yahoo.caPost by elizabethI think it's because they know their own mothers should have aborted.
What's really sickening about antiabortniks is their total denial of overpopulation and the
fact that we simply can't take care of everyone here already, and they demand gestation.
Agreed. Overpopulation is destroying the planet.
Well, you can always off yourself, if you're really determined to do your part in
solving overpopulation on this planet. Maybe you can get lizzy to join you in
the "Lemmings leap."
You mewled endlessly about how awful it was when Elizabeth told you to kill yourself. Different
standards apply for ~you~, naturally. You should know that I don't give a shit and won't cry about
it like you did, titty baby.
No response re; your double standards, creep? You did something you claimed to consider wrong when it was done to you. You do that all the time.
Your lie # 1,318. I actually offered a long response which still exists below, which
you've responded to with some sadistic ravings. Here was my response in total --
=====================
But you're the one complaining about over-population. I'm not doing so, so why
should it be demanded by lizzy that "I" sacrifice my life for her and your objective?
I'm simply offering you a way for "YOU" to do your part in achieving YOUR objective.
Certainly it's obscene to demand that "I" sacrifice MY LIFE for YOUR objective.
But it's reasonable to ask that you do YOUR part for YOUR OWN objective, rather
than "I" do it for you. If you intended to support on-demand abortion in the
U.S. by a carrying a sign outside of the White House with your objective written
in it, would you really expect ME to carry that sign FOR YOU???
What were your words??? Oh, yeah... "Overpopulation is destroying the
planet." What do you intend to do about it, that doesn't involve killing others
who do not believe in your doctrine?? Obviously, if you're willing to demand
that OTHERS do what they can to solve what YOU consider a problem, why
don't YOU volunteer to do your part, rather than demanding it of others?
But this is far too complicated for your tiny mind to grasp. Because it's all about
YOU, and saving your own life, while demanding that "I" sacrifice MINE and
fetuses sacrifice theirs to suit YOU, and YOUR objective.
=======================
Post by l***@yahoo.caPost by Planet Visitor IIBut you're the one complaining about over-population.
Nope. One sentence in response to somebody else doesn't add up to "complaining about over-population". Have you ever seen me post about it, scum?
You sucking one cock provides ammunition to call you a cocksucker.
Post by l***@yahoo.caPost by Planet Visitor III'm not doing so, so why
should it be demanded by lizzy that "I" sacrifice my life for her and your objective?
Loaded question fallacy, as usual.
No proof offered. Your claim fails (again!!)
Post by l***@yahoo.caPost by Planet Visitor III'm simply offering you a way for "YOU" to do your part in achieving YOUR objective.
Certainly it's obscene to demand that "I" sacrifice MY LIFE for YOUR objective.
But it's reasonable to ask that you do YOUR part for YOUR OWN objective, rather
than "I" do it for you. If you intended to support on-demand abortion in the
U.S. by a carrying a sign outside of the White House with your objective written
in it, would you really expect ME to carry that sign FOR YOU???
How would me killing myself solve the problem, scum? There would still be millions being born at the same time, crud.
It won't SOLVE the problem. But it will show your willingness to DO YOUR PART to
solve the problem. No one is capable of solving a problem of such scope all by
himself. Those who want to help solve the problem need YOU to set an example
for them.
Post by l***@yahoo.caYou can admit you said it because you're both mean-spirited and a hypocrite now, psycho.
Heh... that from the sadistic prudish pervert of alt.abortion.
Post by l***@yahoo.caPost by Planet Visitor IIWhat were your words??? Oh, yeah... "Overpopulation is destroying the
planet." What do you intend to do about it, that doesn't involve killing others
who do not believe in your doctrine??
I have reduced my carbon footprint. Besides urging others to do the same, it's all I can do. I don't delude myself that I have the power to change anything.
Obviously it's not ALL you can do.
Post by l***@yahoo.caPost by Planet Visitor IIObviously, if you're willing to demand
that OTHERS do what they can to solve what YOU consider a problem,
I'm willing to request it, in the form of reducing their carbon footprint. Have you done that, slime?
I'm not concerned about it. Just as I'm not concerned about pixies invading
our planet. Nor do I see on-demand abortion in the U.S. having the slightest
to do with overpopulation in the U.S. Why in the world should Americans
carry any burden of reducing the world population when our nation could
easily thrive with double her present population, which would force some
very positive changes to take place on the political and social scene in the
U.S.?? As it is now, the rich get richer, and the poor get poorer. While
those who support abortion believe that exterminating the poor will solve
that problem, yet in reality it will only mean the rich get even richer, and
the poor become even a more marginalized segment of our society. While
racists will rub their hands with glee, because Blacks will continue to
abort at a much higher rate than their population would expect.
Post by l***@yahoo.caPost by Planet Visitor IIwhy
don't YOU volunteer to do your part, rather than demanding it of others?
Done it and continue to do it, scum. Got anything else to whine about, vileness?
No, you haven't REALLY volunteered. Just as you haven't volunteered for any
on-demand abortion in the U.S., while you keep insisting others should do what
you say.
Post by l***@yahoo.caPost by Planet Visitor IIBut this is far too complicated for your tiny mind to grasp. Because it's all about
YOU, and saving your own life, while demanding that "I" sacrifice MINE and
fetuses sacrifice theirs to suit YOU, and YOUR objective.
What rank bullshit. I'm not going to die from it. I'll already be dead by the time it reaches that point.
So you don't really consider it your concern after all. I'll probably be dead long
before you (in case you don't know it, I'll be 83 on 1 Feb 2015). But I still concern
myself with the future of my country, and feel on-demand abortion is a deep wound
in our moral conscience, at a time when our moral conscience needs all the help
it can muster, ever since Vietnam.
Post by l***@yahoo.caI don't demand anybody do anything, scum.
Sure you do, chum.
Post by l***@yahoo.caYou're the fascist prick who demands women sacrifice themselves so you can feel all
warm and fuzzy about forcing them to give birth, misogynist filth.
Go kiss your mother's fuzzy pussy again, you twisted freak.
Post by l***@yahoo.caEvery time you try to nail somebody else you only end up putting another nail in
your own coffin, dumbass. Will you never learn?
So, you yellow-eyed, bloodsucking, cornucopia of lies, forgeries,
racism and Nazism; you belly-of-the-beast-dwelling, hater of Jews,
hater of Blacks, hater of Americans, hater of humanity, Nazi-loving,
misogynistic, xenophobic, narcissist, Holocaust-denying, homicidal
maniac - may the ghost of every aborted fetus of the past rise up
from their grave, as grim specters... naked and twisted, with broken
and brutally savaged bodies, rise from their graves, hollowed eyes
ablaze in fire, thundering their demand for your apology. Thundering
their rage that you would DARE find them all to be "unwanted children."
Thundering their fury that you would support the elimination of all
Black American fetuses. Your words are the FINAL insult you offer
to them. A final spit from you upon their graves. May you never
find a single night of rest for the remainder of your life. That's the curse
for just being who you are; and the fact that you are even living.
But best wishes for your recovery.
Planet Visitor II
