FLASH: To be released at 10 AM ET on RASMUSSEN: Romney breaks out 15-point lead over Giuliani in NH; up from 9 a month ago; 3-point lead in September…
Bill Mitchell - 07:11am on 11/08/2007
And this relates to the topic...how?
Flash: Romney Spambot Bill Mitchell revealed for the fraud he is! Makes irrelevant off topic posts for $$!
Bill: If you want to hype your candidate, drag your lazy ass over and start a reader blog (they’re free! They won’t cut into your $$ overhead from Romney!)
That way you can post news bulletins, puff pieces and your opinion to your heart’s content! You can defend your candidate (if your ADD allows) or simply post and take the arrows.
But your propensity to inject Romney into every discussion simply reveals you to be a Spambot and perhaps we should conclude that Romney is an empty suit by association??
Frankly, I think Romney deserves better than that!
Proof - 08:11am on 11/08/2007
Rob: I have been saying this for decades. The whole abortion situation, as it exists today, is a wholesale violation of Equal Protection; no question about it.
The real problem is that abortion on demand is a key Dem issue; they will never let go of it. It is used to control the female vote. They call it “a woman’s right to choose”, instead of “feticide as a method of birth control”, and thus sell it to women as a method of them being powerful. I guess killing your child without consequence is powerful, in a way. Denying choice to men is just a bonus for the angry, man-hating feminists.
robert108 - 09:11am on 11/08/2007
What is wrong with the court system when they’re worried about financial support and but actually make up the constitution to say these children have no right to live?
Ah yes, no unalienable rights for the unborn child.
Kinda takes all the meaning out of unalienable, no?
HG - 09:11am on 11/08/2007
The whole abortion situation, as it exists today, is a wholesale violation of Equal Protection; no question about it.
It’s rather interesting that the whole legal concept of equality goes out the window when “it’s for the kids.” That is if the kid gets to be a kid.
The Whistler - 10:11am on 11/08/2007
I guess killing your child without consequence is powerful, in a way. Denying choice to men is just a bonus for the angry, man-hating feminists.
R108,
Still, looking at those “angry, man-hating feminists” ya’ gotta wonder that any of them would worry about the possibility of getting pregnant. I don’t know about other guys, but I damn sure know I have never been that desperate… or that drunk.
Bat One - 11:11am on 11/08/2007
Still, looking at those “angry, man-hating feminists” ya’ gotta wonder that any of them would worry about the possibility of getting pregnant. I
don’t know about other guys, but I damn sure know I have never been that desperate… or that drunk.
Two things: First, many women take advantage of the tactics created by the man-hating feminists when it is to their advantage, while denying that they really are feminists.
Second, many man-hating feminists use deception to get what they want, just like many other women do.
I wasn’t referring to the man-hating feminists as direct sex partners, but when they railroaded Roe v Wade through SCOTUS, it is my opinion that at least some of their motivation was to strike a blow against men and masculinity. Just doing their bit to take down “the patriarchy”, doncha know?
robert108 - 11:11am on 11/08/2007
Still, looking at those “angry, man-hating feminists” ya’ gotta wonder that any of them would worry about the possibility of getting pregnant. I
don’t know about other guys, but I damn sure know I have never been that desperate… or that drunk.
Is this just in general or are y’all talking about a specific picture?
Anna - 12:11pm on 11/08/2007
Hmmmm, I would come to a completely opposite conclusion. That the 19 year old young man from Lufkin was railroaded by the right wingers who just HAD to define an unborn as a person. If the law were correct (it ain’t a child until it is born, just check the tax code) there would have been no charges against him.
In their blind lust to make the world live by their rules, the “right” is implementing their own version of Shariah.
Of course, that is becaus Jesus came here to make all men live under the Law, and had nothing to do with the Gospel of Grace and Mercy. [/sarcasm]
TRex
T-Rex - 06:11pm on 11/08/2007
(it ain’t a child until it is born, just check the tax code)
So, the tax code is now the arbiter of your morality? I pity you. Your conspiracy rant is worthy of a tinfoil hat. What shows how wrong you are is that the mother suffered absolutely no consequences, although she was equally responsible for the human fetuses.
This is “feminist law”, no doubt about it. The feminists are pro-abortion(for women only).
If it has human DNA, it’s human. Duh.
FLASH: To be released at 10 AM ET on RASMUSSEN: Romney breaks out 15-point lead over Giuliani in NH; up from 9 a month ago; 3-point lead in September…
And this relates to the topic...how?
Bill: If you want to hype your candidate, drag your lazy ass over and start a reader blog (they’re free! They won’t cut into your $$ overhead from Romney!)
That way you can post news bulletins, puff pieces and your opinion to your heart’s content! You can defend your candidate (if your ADD allows) or simply post and take the arrows.
But your propensity to inject Romney into every discussion simply reveals you to be a Spambot and perhaps we should conclude that Romney is an empty suit by association??
Frankly, I think Romney deserves better than that!
Rob: I have been saying this for decades. The whole abortion situation, as it exists today, is a wholesale violation of Equal Protection; no question about it.
The real problem is that abortion on demand is a key Dem issue; they will never let go of it. It is used to control the female vote. They call it “a woman’s right to choose”, instead of “feticide as a method of birth control”, and thus sell it to women as a method of them being powerful. I guess killing your child without consequence is powerful, in a way. Denying choice to men is just a bonus for the angry, man-hating feminists.
Ah yes, no unalienable rights for the unborn child.
Kinda takes all the meaning out of unalienable, no?
It’s rather interesting that the whole legal concept of equality goes out the window when “it’s for the kids.” That is if the kid gets to be a kid.
R108,
Still, looking at those “angry, man-hating feminists” ya’ gotta wonder that any of them would worry about the possibility of getting pregnant. I don’t know about other guys, but I damn sure know I have never been that desperate… or that drunk.
Two things: First, many women take advantage of the tactics created by the man-hating feminists when it is to their advantage, while denying that they really are feminists.
Second, many man-hating feminists use deception to get what they want, just like many other women do.
I wasn’t referring to the man-hating feminists as direct sex partners, but when they railroaded Roe v Wade through SCOTUS, it is my opinion that at least some of their motivation was to strike a blow against men and masculinity. Just doing their bit to take down “the patriarchy”, doncha know?
Is this just in general or are y’all talking about a specific picture?
Hmmmm, I would come to a completely opposite conclusion. That the 19 year old young man from Lufkin was railroaded by the right wingers who just HAD to define an unborn as a person. If the law were correct (it ain’t a child until it is born, just check the tax code) there would have been no charges against him.
In their blind lust to make the world live by their rules, the “right” is implementing their own version of Shariah.
Of course, that is becaus Jesus came here to make all men live under the Law, and had nothing to do with the Gospel of Grace and Mercy. [/sarcasm]
TRex
So, the tax code is now the arbiter of your morality? I pity you. Your conspiracy rant is worthy of a tinfoil hat. What shows how wrong you are is that the mother suffered absolutely no consequences, although she was equally responsible for the human fetuses.
This is “feminist law”, no doubt about it. The feminists are pro-abortion(for women only).
If it has human DNA, it’s human. Duh.