# Texas abortion law forced women to carry a dead fetus for 2 weeks



## Nothereed (Jul 23, 2022)

https://web.archive.org/web/2022072...07/20/abortion-miscarriage-texas-fetus-stell/

Tl;dr jesus christ this is fucked
She had to get several invasive ultra sounds, all to prove without a doubt that the fetus was dead. Otherwise the doctors would risk loosing their medical license. How the fuck is this not considered inhumane by the republican party?

Oh wait
https://www.politico.com/news/2022/07/14/anti-abotion-10-year-old-ohio-00045843
"“She would have had the baby, and as many women who have had babies as a result of rape, we would hope that she would understand the reason and ultimately the benefit of having the child,”' From Jim Bop, one of the major people who wrote the right to life laws that exist in many states. Talking about the benefits of having a child as a 10 year old.

So never mind, odds are this is the thing you supported. And if you didn't? Maybe don't be surprised that the lions ate my face party, decides to eat your face. And for those who said "well it wasn't enumerated as a constitutional right, so therefore it's right to remove abortion/make it a state choice" not only is implied and stated we have un-enumerated rights, but now you have this problem having several times over, so was it worth removing something that everyone had already accepted as a right? Just because it had supposedly shaky ground?
 So, let me ask you Republican voters. How would you go about solving these issues? Because now, as part of the party that caused this problem, you better have a reasonable solution to it without being utterly arbitrary.


----------



## aoikurayami (Jul 23, 2022)

Things like these make me wish Hugh Laurie could reprise his role and "be witty" with these folk so hard, they'd have flashbacks to him roasting him, therefore keeping em from commiting anymore stupidity..

I wonder what they would think if someone told em "their body is not theirs"

I hate ppl like that.


----------



## Dark_Ansem (Aug 18, 2022)

I love how this thread got deserted by pro-birther hypocrites.


----------



## Dragon91Nippon (Aug 19, 2022)

Dark_Ansem said:


> I love how this thread got deserted by pro-birther hypocrites.


Yup all they can do is react with the laughing emoji because they know they don't have a good argument that people here won't instantly tear apart.


----------



## Creamu (Aug 19, 2022)

Dragon91Nippon said:


> Yup all they can do is react with the laughing emoji because they know they don't have a good argument that people here won't instantly tear apart.


Fair enough, let's go through this.


Nothereed said:


> Tl;dr [...]
> She had to get several invasive ultra sounds,


I am not an expert on this. How invasive can an ultra sound be?


Nothereed said:


> all to prove without a doubt that the fetus was dead.


How is this not reasonable?


Nothereed said:


> Otherwise the doctors would risk loosing their medical license.


Yes, if your doctor gives you advise that deviates a little bit from what his/her/their authoritive sources say, the same thing might happen. You can loose your license (as far as I know) for very little slights as a doctor.


Nothereed said:


> How the fuck is this not considered inhumane by the republican party?


I don't get the moral appeal to the republican party (or any of the two established parties). This made me seriously laugh.


Nothereed said:


> "“She would have had the baby, and as many women who have had babies as a result of rape, we would hope that she would understand the reason and ultimately the benefit of having the child,”' From Jim Bop, one of the major people who wrote the right to life laws that exist in many states. Talking about the benefits of having a child as a 10 year old.


Okay... I feel like I am missing something.


Nothereed said:


> So never mind, odds are this is the thing you supported. And if you didn't? Maybe don't be surprised that the lions ate my face party, decides to eat your face.


I don't know what you are talking about here.


Nothereed said:


> And for those who said "well it wasn't enumerated as a constitutional right, so therefore it's right to remove abortion/make it a state choice" not only is implied and stated we have un-enumerated rights, but now you have this problem having several times over, so was it worth removing something that everyone had already accepted as a right? Just because it had supposedly shaky ground?


?


Nothereed said:


> So, let me ask you Republican voters.


That's not me. Maybe this is why I don't get your... elaboration.


Nothereed said:


> How would you go about solving these issues?


Checking if a baby is still alive to assess the situation I find perfectly reasonable, so I would keep it at that.


Nothereed said:


> Because now, as part of the party that caused this problem, you better have a reasonable solution to it without being utterly arbitrary.


I think the republican party is retarded in the literal sense of the word. They do what the left party is doing with increased latency.


----------



## tabzer (Aug 19, 2022)

"I don't need no 'invasive ultra sounds' doc, I've got 1.5 million followers and an image to promote.  Now reach into me and scrape this thing out."


----------



## LainaGabranth (Aug 19, 2022)

For two weeks? Christ alive, that's immoral. We definitely need to reign in states like Texas, this shit is unacceptable.


----------



## Dragon91Nippon (Aug 19, 2022)

Texas is overall one of the worst states for anyone of any kind of diversity or vulnerability, they not only have extreme Prejudice towards LGBTQ but also treat women absolutely atrociously. I know they're not the only one, Florida is pretty awful as well but Texas has been doing all the bad stuff lately.


----------



## Dakitten (Aug 20, 2022)

tabzer said:


> "I don't need no 'invasive ultra sounds' doc, I've got 1.5 million followers and an image to promote.  Now reach into me and scrape this thing out."


He misspoke when he said invasive, as neither article uses the word. The fact remains that the woman WANTED THE CHILD AND IT DIED INSIDE OF HER AND THEY WOULD NOT REMOVE IT OUT OF FEAR OF REPRISAL YOU ILLITERATE SCUMBAG! It wasn't even an abortion story in the truest sense, the woman simply had complications that prevented the fetus from developing, and it was already too developed to be reabsorbed harmlessly or discharged easily so removal (which at this point isn't considered an abortion but dilation and curettage) was required for her health and well being. No "babykilling" or other stupid crap y'all rant about on here about, just a grieving woman who lost her potential child stuck with the remains inside of her and nobody would help her get it out due to fear of reprisal. I hope your bodypillow is very svelte because ignorance and pride like yours is never going to land you much by way of companionship.


Creamu said:


> I am not an expert on this. How invasive can an ultra sound be?
> 
> How is this not reasonable?
> 
> Checking if a baby is still alive to assess the situation I find perfectly reasonable, so I would keep it at that.


They already knew it was a miscarriage right from minute one. I wager he meant to say traumatizing or something to that effect, as exposing your body to unnecessary procedures to repeatedly confirm what you've already established is pretty brutal. Congratulations, you've proven once again that you can't read, you lean hard conservative/anti choice/anti women, and that you're in general just not a very empathic fellow.


----------



## Nothereed (Aug 20, 2022)

Dakitten said:


> I wager he meant to say traumatizing or something to that effect,


I did pretty much mispeak. Sorry about that. Unless you want to count my janky logic of " having to do multiple ultra sounds when you already know the baby is dead is really invasive." Which I really wouldn't, and that's more of a retroactive fix . Traumatizing is the more accurate word here. Especially since well... Having to go through another ultra sound after the child is already known to be dead is... Just... Fucked. Especially if you end up having to do it again...
I am a dude, I can't possibly comprehend in full how that would feel but just... Yikes... I can't imagine how... disgruntaling? Excruatiating? Like a word beyond/stronger traumatizing essentially... 
I can't imagine how that would feel. Or more so can't imagine it in full. Other than knowing it's extremely horrorible
Edit:devastated is the word I was looking for


----------



## RAHelllord (Aug 20, 2022)

Creamu said:


> How is this not reasonable?


2 weeks is more than enough time for the dead fetus to start decomposing and then poison and kill the mother. It takes about 15 minutes total to fully verify whether a fetus is dead or not, and no procedure on the planet exists to reverse the death. Having multiple ultrasounds to satisfy the incompetent law making of some dudes with no medical training whatsoever has no other reason than to be a show of strength at best and outright oppression at worst.

I repeat, in case this wasn't entirely clear the first time around, 2 weeks of having a dead fetus inside the womb is a very real and deadly risk to the mother. Dead tissue needs to be removed asap because the slightest complication can kill the mother before an ambulance reaches her. A dead fetus is a ticking timebomb and needs to be treated as the medical emergency it is, it's not a bruise you can ignore for a couple weeks.



tabzer said:


> "I don't need no 'invasive ultra sounds' doc, I've got 1.5 million followers and an image to promote.  Now reach into me and scrape this thing out."


"I only do things for attention online and therefor everybody else must also only do things for attention." ~ verbatim from tabzer, ca. 2022


----------



## tabzer (Aug 20, 2022)

Dakitten said:


> He misspoke when he said invasive, as neither article uses the word. The fact remains that the woman WANTED THE CHILD AND IT DIED INSIDE OF HER AND THEY WOULD NOT REMOVE IT OUT OF FEAR OF REPRISAL YOU ILLITERATE SCUMBAG!



Ah more sensationalism.  This is even better because you are accusing me of being illiterate for mocking the OP's (lack of) literacy.  Learn to own it.  Adjust your meds.  

I don't think abortion is the controversial subject here.  Either the doctor sucks or the patient thinks they are more aware of biology and medicine than the doctor.  (Or, dystopia, medical doctors are politicians in disguise).  Either way, there are enough examples in the article itself to demonstrate inconsistency, which makes it even more unreliable than both the patient and the doctor.  Then you have OP adding another level... of illiteracy.  Also, FYI, I referenced dilation and curettage in my original response.  

Way to go!


----------



## Nothereed (Aug 20, 2022)

tabzer said:


> Ah more *sensationalism*. This is even better because you are accusing me of being illiterate for mocking the OP's (lack of) literacy.


You know... I'd hope you know what that word means in bold. I at least owned up to the fact I mispoke.
Because uh

Sensationalism: (especially in journalism) the use of exciting or shocking stories or language at the expense of accuracy, in order to provoke public interest or excitement.

Last time I checked, reporting on a factually true story is not sensationalist, since for something to be sensationalized, would require accuracy/facts on the matter be to falsified, or overblown.


----------



## tabzer (Aug 20, 2022)

Nothereed said:


> You know... I'd hope you know what that word means in bold. I at least owned up to the fact I mispoke.
> Because uh
> 
> Sensationalism: (especially in journalism) the use of exciting or shocking stories or language at the expense of accuracy, in order to provoke public interest or excitement.
> ...



I already mentioned inconsistencies.  Why don't you ask about that?  (I already mocked your sensationalism)


----------



## Nothereed (Aug 20, 2022)

tabzer said:


> I already mentioned inconsistencies. Why don't you ask about that?


First off. Deflecting from the fact that you just proved that you are illiterate, or acting as such in your previous statement with using "it's sensationalized" as an argument. When you clearly don't understand the meaning behind said word.
Edit: a side of whataboutism as well.
"Okay, but let's focus on what I said earlier." Says the person in an attempt to move the discussion away from a mistake they made.

Second off. I don't have to mentioned inconsistencies. Since @Dakitten
Already said what I was going to say about your statement (with a lot less swearing of you being a piece of crap)
Edit: and @RAHelllord


----------



## tabzer (Aug 20, 2022)

Nothereed said:


> First off. Deflecting from the fact that you just proved that your are illiterate or acting as such in your previous statement with using "it's sensationalized" as an argument. When you clearly don't understand the meaning behind said word.
> 
> Second off. I don't have to mentioned inconsistencies. Since @Dakitten
> Already said what I was going to say about your statement (with a lot less swearing of you being a piece of crap)
> Edit: and @RAHelllord



I haven't done anything illiterate.  Before we go forward, you need to point out how you "mispoke" is my fault.  I said there were inconsistencies and that the article is more unreliable than the SNS celebrity.  Your sensationalist take is a 3rd layer of bias.  "Apologizing" after I mocked you doesn't make me the one who was being illiterate, lol.


----------



## Dark_Ansem (Aug 20, 2022)

Well wdyk i resurrected this thread and the result is an apocalypse of misogyny and antiscienticic nonsense paired with pathetic attempts at justifying necromancy.


----------



## tabzer (Aug 20, 2022)

Dark_Ansem said:


> antiscienticic




That's awesome. Someone who won't bother to proof their own statements can't be trusted to thoroughly read what they are responding to.


----------



## Nothereed (Aug 20, 2022)

tabzer said:


> I haven't done anything illiterate.


We are going to take this slow. Very slow. I'm not going to go through any of your other talking points. Outside the first two sentences of your quote. For the moment.


tabzer said:


> Before we go forward, you need to point out how you "mispoke" is my fault.


Never my argument or statement. I never pinned the blame on you. Go ahead, ctrl f it for me.
 However Dakitten summed up what would be my argument best.


Dakitten said:


> he fact remains that the woman WANTED THE CHILD AND IT DIED INSIDE OF HER AND THEY WOULD NOT REMOVE IT OUT OF FEAR OF REPRISAL


The women in question, wanted the child removed who was already dead. You decided to post this in response


tabzer said:


> Ah more sensationalism.



Tabzer, you know what sensationalism is right?

I'd assume so.



tabzer said:


> "I don't need no 'invasive ultra sounds' doc, I've got 1.5 million followers and an image to promote. Now reach into me and scrape this thing out."


especially as the person who practices sensationalism themself.

So I'm going to say this _once_.

You are acting illiterate here, if you knew what sensationalism meant, you wouldn't have tried throwing it as a accusation.

Me misspeaking, isn't your fault.
_it's your fault for coming in and not reading the damn article yourself_
had you read it, you wouldn't have called it sensationalist.

If we can come to an agreement, I'll move onto the rest of your talking points. Otherwise, I will not bother.


----------



## tabzer (Aug 20, 2022)

Nothereed said:


> You are acting illiterate here, if you knew what sensationalism meant, you wouldn't have tried throwing it as a accusation.



Wrong.  WAPO article, your OP, and Dakitten are all being sensationalists.  I don't know enough about SNS celebrity.



Nothereed said:


> Me misspeaking, isn't your fault.



Oh, learning.  Cool.



Nothereed said:


> _it's your fault for coming in and not reading the damn article yourself_
> had you read it, you wouldn't have called it sensationalist.



I read the article.  There is evidence in that I originally responded to details that were only accessible by the article.

Now.  If you read the article, tell me how someone miscarries the same fetus twice?


----------



## RAHelllord (Aug 20, 2022)

tabzer said:


> Now.  If you read the article, tell me how someone miscarries the same fetus twice?


They're two different fetuses as the woman had a similar miscarriage last year, and wanted to use the same procedure as last time, probably because it worked well for her.


> After she was told last year that the fetus did not have a heartbeat and she no longer had a viable pregnancy, the Texas woman asked her doctor to perform a dilation and curettage, or D and C — a standard procedure to remove the fetus following a miscarriage to help prevent infection or long-term health problems. *Stell had the procedure after her first miscarriage in 2018 in Washington state*, when she felt so much pain that she could not walk, and *she wanted to go through with it again* before trying again for a second child, she told The Washington Post.


Giving this information we know she has one child already, had a miscarriage in 2018, one last year, but would still like to have a second child.


----------



## Nothereed (Aug 20, 2022)

tabzer said:


> Now. If you read the article, tell me how someone miscarries the same fetus twice?.


"Marlena Stell’s happiness turned to heartbreak after she found out about 9½ weeks into her pregnancy that she had suffered a miscarriage.
*After she was told last year *that the fetus did not have a heartbeat and she no longer had a viable pregnancy, the Texas woman asked her doctor to perform a dilation and curettage, or D and C — a standard procedure to remove the fetus following a miscarriage to help prevent infection or long-term health problems*. Stell had the procedure after her first miscarriage in 2018 in Washington state*, _when she felt so much pain that she could not walk,* and she wanted to go through with it again*_"

You sure your not illiterate? Or at least, maybe not ready to be handling logical shit at the moment?
Since 2018 was stated to be the "first miscarriage" and it was in Washington state.
The second miscarriage, obviously happens in Texas "last year"
Considering the large amount of time, you could even logically conclude that it's two different fetus's. That she got her D and C for the first. And the events of the article, are during the second.

it also fits with rulings and such regarding abortions and Texas.

Edit: you're embarrassing yourself right now, if I'm going to be honest.

Edit2: and if you read further, and was confused on the wording. You would of got even more clarification... So uh...
Nice argument?????????????????
"After her initial miscarriage in 2018, Stell and her husband had their first child, a daughter, in April 2020. When the couple moved from Washington state to Texas in 2021, they were trying to have a second child, Stell said, even though she knew she was at high risk because of her age, previous health problems and miscarriage. So when she found a doctor who specialized in high-risk pregnancies last summer, she was thrilled to find out that the early weeks of her pregnancy looked promising."


----------



## tabzer (Aug 20, 2022)

RAHelllord said:


> They're two different fetuses as the woman had a similar miscarriage last year, and wanted to use the same procedure as last time, probably because it worked well for her.
> 
> Giving this information we know she has one child already, had a miscarriage in 2018, one last year, but would still like to have a second child.



You missed it.  Doctor asked her to try to miscarry after having a miscarriage, according to the article.  Either the doctor is being inaccurate or SNS celebrity is "misspeaking".  Regardless, the article passed the editorial board and what we are talking about is on them.



Nothereed said:


> it also fits with rulings and such regarding abortions and Texas.



If the doctor is endangering the woman by not providing the D&C, the doctor is at fault.


----------



## Nothereed (Aug 20, 2022)

tabzer said:


> You missed it.


quote it. You have the article, quote the exact line.


----------



## tabzer (Aug 20, 2022)

Lol, no, you.  Ctrl + f "try".


----------



## Creamu (Aug 20, 2022)

RAHelllord said:


> 2 weeks is more than enough time for the dead fetus to start decomposing and then poison and kill the mother. It takes about 15 minutes total to fully verify whether a fetus is dead or not, and no procedure on the planet exists to reverse the death.


I am not qualified to comment on such details, and am willing to take your word for it. Would you agree that there should be a standard proceedure that documents the death of the baby?


RAHelllord said:


> Having multiple ultrasounds to satisfy the incompetent law making of some dudes with no medical training whatsoever has no other reason than to be a show of strength at best and outright oppression at worst.


Okay, would you blame this on the republican party as a whole?


----------



## Nothereed (Aug 20, 2022)

tabzer said:


> Lol, no, you.  Ctrl + f "try".


evidence falls on you. considering how willing you were to make a whole fuss about it, and then proceed to not back it up. I'm going to assume that your making shit up.
So that ends the conversation then. Also, next time, how about you click reply? Maybe not be a coward and try to avoid pinging me for your response.


----------



## Dark_Ansem (Aug 20, 2022)

Nothereed said:


> You are acting illiterate here, if you knew what sensationalism meant, you wouldn't have tried throwing it as a accusation.


Spoiler alert: it's not an act.


----------



## tabzer (Aug 20, 2022)

Nothereed said:


> evidence falls on you. considering how willing you were to make a whole fuss about it, and then proceed to not back it up.
> So that ends the conversation then. Also, next time, how about you click reply? Maybe not be a coward and try to avoid pinging me for your response.



I gave you an address.  Are you claiming it's not there?  You need practice.  Nobody who reads what I said is going to pretend it doesn't exist.  Do you have anything to stake on the matter?  You are asking me to do more than what you were willing to do. 

Try not being a coward.  I trust you'll see a direct response to your comment.  I don't care to be overly redundant.



Dark_Ansem said:


> Spoiler alert: it's not an act.



I've demonstrated literary capacity beyond the standard demonstrated in this thread.  Thanks for playing.


----------



## RAHelllord (Aug 20, 2022)

tabzer said:


> You missed it.  Doctor asked her to try to miscarry after having a miscarriage, according to the article.  Either the doctor is being inaccurate or SNS celebrity is "misspeaking".  Regardless, the article passed the editorial board and what we are talking about is on them.


Miscarriage has two meanings, they're both used in the article, and both are correct.

The first meaning is the loss of a fetus before the 20th week of pregnancy, and the other is the unplanned expulsion of a fetus before it can survive on its own. The fetus died in the womb (meaning a miscarriage per the first definition happened) and the doctor, fearing the removal of their medical license, advices the women try to induce a miscarriage (meaning the expulsion of the dead fetus) at home. There really is no confusion there if you read the article carefully and don't just skim through it.

I found it pretty clear which is used where, and I don't think it's an issue with the editor or author but more so with English using the same word for two related but not quite identical definitions while not having more precise alternatives.


Creamu said:


> I am not qualified to comment on such details, and am willing to take your word for it. Would you agree that there should be a standard proceedure that documents the death of the baby?


The standard procedure already existed for decades and has been followed to the best interests of both the unborn fetus and the mother before lawmakers started endangering pregnant women in a misguided attempt to offer more protections to a fetus than to the women. Do remember that the only doctors offering those procedures have decades of studies under their belt and are highly trained to know what they're dealing with. They also all have sworn the oath of Hippocrates to do no harm and always act in the best interests of their patients, and breaking that oath can lead to the loss of their license, and thus loss of their livelihood.


Creamu said:


> Okay, would you blame this on the republican party as a whole?


Every member of the party that has either condoned the policy, advocated for it, or voted for it.

Miscarriages where the fetus is not directly expulsed are very common, and having to carry the dead fetus or embryo for longer than absolutely necessary is a huge health risk that can and will kill the mother. This has been heavily documented over decades and is a fundamental pillar of modern healthcare. Slowing it down via pointless or outright damaging legislation is nothing short of evil, there is no justification for it.


----------



## Creamu (Aug 20, 2022)

RAHelllord said:


> The standard procedure already existed for decades and has been followed to the best interests of both the unborn fetus and the mother


If the death status is properly documented, we are in agreement. That is all I am arguing for here.


RAHelllord said:


> before lawmakers started endangering pregnant women in a misguided attempt to offer more protections to a fetus than to the women.


I don't know the details about that.


RAHelllord said:


> Do remember that the only doctors offering those procedures have decades of studies under their belt and are highly trained to know what they're dealing with. They also all have sworn the oath of Hippocrates to do no harm and always act in the best interests of their patients, and breaking that oath can lead to the loss of their license, and thus loss of their livelihood.


This in principle is good.


RAHelllord said:


> Every member of the party that has either condoned the policy, advocated for it, or voted for it.


Condoned? What is that going to do?


RAHelllord said:


> Miscarriages where the fetus is not directly expulsed are very common, and having to carry the dead fetus or embryo for longer than absolutely necessary is a huge health risk that can and will kill the mother. This has been heavily documented over decades and is a fundamental pillar of modern healthcare. Slowing it down via pointless or outright damaging legislation is nothing short of evil, there is no justification for it.


I can see your point and have nothing to add.


----------



## tabzer (Aug 20, 2022)

RAHelllord said:


> Miscarriage has two meanings, they're both used in the article, and both are correct.
> 
> The first meaning is the loss of a fetus before the 20th week of pregnancy, and the other is the unplanned expulsion of a fetus before it can survive on its own. The fetus died in the womb (meaning a miscarriage per the first definition happened) and the doctor, fearing the removal of their medical license, advices the women try to induce a miscarriage (meaning the expulsion of the dead fetus) at home. There really is no confusion there if you read the article carefully and don't just skim through it.



I very obviously didn't skim the article on that point.  Don't you see the irony when it was you who didn't know what I was referencing to in the first place?



RAHelllord said:


> I found it pretty clear which is used where, and I don't think it's an issue with the editor or author but more so with English using the same word for two related but not quite identical definitions while not having more precise alternatives.



If the doctor said, "try to miscarry at home", it's not because there wasn't a precise word for it (there is).  It's because SNS all-star was paraphrasing and leaving out relevant medical information while footing a political edge for a political piece (or the paper is doing it).

It might be true that miscarriage can have multiple meanings, but the only one I know of is when a baby dies before it is able to be formed.  I doubt the authenticity of the story and believe that the doctor either thought it wasn't endangering her or should be formally accused of malpractice.

If the doctor is being accused of malpractice, that should be the story.  Otherwise, it's sensationalism riding on the coat-tails of the Roe vs. Wade reversal news, which occured about a year after this incident, and had no bearing.


----------



## Nothereed (Aug 20, 2022)

tabzer said:


> Don't you see the irony when it was you who didn't know what I was referencing to in the first place?


yeah because you intentionally refuses giving a quote on what it was, and gave the very vague statement of "ctrl+f"
without any quotes from the article
Don't go expecting people to know wtf your talking about, when you refuse to explain it.


tabzer said:


> Lol, no, you. Ctrl + f "try".


----------



## tabzer (Aug 20, 2022)

Nothereed said:


> yeah because you intentionally refuses giving a quote on what it was, and gave the very vague statement of "ctrl+f"
> without any quotes.



I said ctrl +f "try".  Try is in quotes.

It's the second result from the top.

Keep butchering the English language while you are at it..



Nothereed said:


> Don't go expecting people to know wtf your talking about, when you refuse to explain it.



Don't go expecting people to read the article for you after accusing them of not reading the article, lol.


----------



## RAHelllord (Aug 20, 2022)

tabzer said:


> I very obviously didn't skim the article on that point.  Don't you see the irony when it was you who didn't know what I was referencing to in the first place?
> 
> It might be true that miscarriage can have multiple meanings, but the only one I know of is when a baby dies before it is able to be formed.  I doubt the authenticity of the story and believe that the doctor either thought it wasn't endangering her or should be formally accused of malpractice.
> 
> If the doctor is being accused of malpractice, that should be the story.  Otherwise, it's sensationalism riding on the coat-tails of the Roe vs. Wade reversal news, which occured about a year after this incident, and had no bearing.


It's not in response to Roe v Wade getting overturned but the Texas heartbeat act that went into effect last September, they mention that in the article, too.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_Heartbeat_Act

The heartbeat act specifically targets those procedures and made them punishable even if they were still federally protected by that time. I don't know why they only published the article about this last month, maybe the woman felt compelled to tell her story now that it'll affect more people than just Texans.

As for the definition, that's the medical one, though. If the fetus dies in utero it's a miscarriage, but if it doesn't get fully expelled it's an incomplete miscarriage and needs to be completed somehow. This is done either by manually scraping the lining off of the uterus to ensure nothing gets infected, or by using medication that forces the lining to be rejected by the body like a period would. Hence why both just then act of the fetus dying and the procedure of actually expelling it use the same term.


----------



## Nothereed (Aug 20, 2022)

tabzer said:


> I said ctrl +f "try".  Try is in quotes.
> 
> It's the second result from the top.
> 
> ...


"My doctor had said that since the heartbeat bill had just passed, she didn’t want me to do a D and C. And she asked that I try to miscarry at home,” said Stell, 42, of Conroe, Tex. “It just was emotionally difficult walking around, knowing that I had a dead fetus inside.”
"


tabzer said:


> You missed it. Doctor asked her to try to miscarry after having a miscarriage,


You didn't read the article did you.... Or at least heavily skimmed it. If this is supposed to be your argument, it's not a very logical one.


Stell said on Twitter this week that the experience almost 10 months ago is the reason she and her husband have decided that they would not try to have additional children in Texas. She told The Post that her two miscarriages put her at higher risk for a third.

SO I'll be a a mother bird and carefully spoon feed you the information.
Okay. First miscarriage in around 2018.

Second miscarriage happened in "last year"
so 2021.

She didn't "miscarry after having a miscarriage" it's two separate miscarriages.
The doctor wanted her to use pills to remove it (which proably doesn't always work and have factors I'm not aware of)

But the fact your even confused on this fact, is well, illiterate to put it simply.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Also the fact that your focusing on specifics like "well she didn't talk about EvErYthing" and if she did it wouldn't be enough would it?

At the end of the day, Republican law, caused a mother, to carry a dead fetus, for two weeks, with multiple appointments and ultrasounds,making her traumatized. I don't think someone would like to be reminded of their dead child, especially if they WANTED a child.



tabzer said:


> I said ctrl +f "try". Try is in quotes.


also "try" isn't a full quote. it's like me saying "ctrl+to" and telling you to figure out where it would be.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


tabzer said:


> If the doctor is endangering the woman by not providing the D&C, the doctor is at fault.


Yes, and No. Because of texas's strict abortion ban(heart beat bill), it's now on doctors to prove that they aren't giving an abortion, or they risk their jobs (and more)
So no, it's not the doctors fault if they're afraid to do their damn job because some law some politician past that now makes them criminally liable if they fuck up.


----------



## Nothereed (Aug 20, 2022)

snipped for double


----------



## Nothereed (Aug 20, 2022)

snipped for a triple


----------



## tabzer (Aug 20, 2022)

RAHelllord said:


> I don't know why they only published the article about this last month



Lol.  Weird.  We might never know.



RAHelllord said:


> Hence why both just then act of the fetus dying and the procedure of actually expelling it use the same term.



The body has natural methods in handling the miscarriage as well.  If the doctor had reason to think that 2 weeks was the best path forward, I would expect a medical reason.  I understand your rationalization of how it's okay that the doctor told the woman to try to miscarry her miscarriage (words to delineate exist), but the medical opinion is completely missing.  I do not respect that doctor if this WAPO article is faithfully representing them.  It's as good as hearsay to be frank.



Nothereed said:


> "My doctor had said that since the heartbeat bill had just passed, she didn’t want me to do a D and C. And she asked that I try to miscarry at home,” said Stell, 42, of Conroe, Tex. “It just was emotionally difficult walking around, knowing that I had a dead fetus inside.”
> "
> 
> You didn't read the article did you.... Or at least heavily skimmed it. If this is supposed to be your argument, it's not a very logical one.
> ...



How is possible to swallow one's entire leg?


----------



## Nothereed (Aug 20, 2022)

tabzer said:


> How is possible to swallow one's entire leg?


???
Do you use google translate or something? Since that's not even a thing I said, but okay.


----------



## RAHelllord (Aug 20, 2022)

tabzer said:


> The body has natural methods in handling the miscarriage as well.  If the doctor had reason to think that 2 weeks was the best path forward, I would expect a medical reason.  I understand your rationalization of how it's okay that the doctor told the woman to try to miscarry her miscarriage (words to delineate exist), but the medical opinion is completely missing.  I do not respect that doctor if this WAPO article is faithfully representing them.  It's as good as hearsay to be frank.


Trusting on those is risky and can have far more grave consequences than having it done by a professional. Having the procedure done at a doctor's office is the far better solution. According to the woman the doctor also specifically referenced the just passed heartbeat act as the reason why she isn't willing to perform the procedure, not that there is no medical reason to do so:


> “My doctor had said that since the heartbeat bill had just passed, she didn’t want me to do a D and C. And she asked that I try to miscarry at home,” said Stell, 42, of Conroe, Tex.


At least to me that very clearly puts the blame on the law, and that the doctor also believed that the fetus needed to be removed but couldn't do it herself. I'd assume since doctors aren't lawyers and a 10,000 dollar fine plus potential prison sentence are pretty steep punishments they may have rather wanted to be safe than sorry.

No other place in the western world would send someone back home with a dead fetus still inside.


----------



## KitChan (Aug 20, 2022)

They were buying time for necromantic researchers to make a breakthrough and save the fetus.

Won't somebody please think of the zombie fetuses?


----------



## Creamu (Aug 20, 2022)

KitChan said:


> They were buying time for necromantic researchers to make a breakthrough and save the fetus.
> 
> Won't somebody please think of the zombie fetuses?


No, the zombie fetuses are for Plutocrats to consume.


----------



## tabzer (Aug 20, 2022)

RAHelllord said:


> Trusting on those is risky and can have far more grave consequences than having it done by a professional. Having the procedure done at a doctor's office is the far better solution. According to the woman the doctor also specifically referenced the just passed heartbeat act as the reason why she isn't willing to perform the procedure, not that there is no medical reason to do so:
> 
> At least to me that very clearly puts the blame on the law, and that the doctor also believed that the fetus needed to be removed but couldn't do it herself. I'd assume since doctors aren't lawyers and a 10,000 dollar fine plus potential prison sentence are pretty steep punishments they may have rather wanted to be safe than sorry.
> 
> No other place in the western world would send someone back home with a dead fetus still inside.



You are filling in the gaps with your inexpertise and taking this WAPO article and its Twitter sourced hearsay as gospel.

Everything I can read about D&C is that before 10 weeks, it wouldn't be necessary or generally recommended.  Instead, it's actually more intrusive*.  

This is fake news.

If the law commanded doctors to injure their patients, I would absolutely blame doctors if they did so.

Also where do you get your $10,000 and prison time from?  Afaik, a doctor wouldn't go to prison and malpractice insurance exists for the reason of claims being made against them.


----------



## LainaGabranth (Aug 20, 2022)

So called "libertarians" sure do freak out when someone decides what to do with their own wombs.


----------



## tabzer (Aug 20, 2022)

LainaGabranth said:


> So called "libertarians" sure do freak out when someone decides what to do with their own wombs.



If you want a doctor to do something, you aren't the one deciding.  But you can always try it at home, according to WAPO doctor.


----------



## Dakitten (Aug 20, 2022)

Creamu said:


> Fair enough, let's go through this.
> 
> I am not an expert on this. How invasive can an ultra sound be?
> 
> ...


So, this was the initial line for line tit for tat reply to the OP...



Creamu said:


> I am not qualified to comment on such details, and am willing to take your word for it. Would you agree that there should be a standard proceedure that documents the death of the baby?
> 
> Okay, would you blame this on the republican party as a whole?



I know RA already hit this, but for the love of fluffy bunnies, if you're this ignorant about the subject maybe you shouldn't be arguing about it?

Honestly, your ability to argue even after professing ignorance on a topic is some powerful ammunition as to why men should not be involved in the determination of women's health rights. Y'all don't seem to care to educate yourselves on biology that isn't your own.


----------



## Dakitten (Aug 20, 2022)

tabzer said:


> You are filling in the gaps with your inexpertise and taking this WAPO article and its Twitter sourced hearsay as gospel.
> 
> Everything I can read about D&C is that before 10 weeks, it wouldn't be necessary or generally recommended.  Instead, it's actually more intrusive*.
> 
> ...


This sort of thing happens routinely around the world in barbaric countries with anti-choice laws. The doctors involved in this article were at risk of losing everything if they performed a procedure without understanding and complying with new laws that were not created with the aide of medical experts or even folks with a basic knowledge of biology and anatomy, so they "kicked her down the road" to be somebody else's problem. The moral of the story, dear manchild, is that anti-choice legislation causes harm for women and clouds the judgment of doctors even under uncontroversial conditions... and that you obviously only see what you want to see and won't be swayed by facts and/or logic.

To be fair, why should you? You're obviously very happy to just be a worthless troll hunting down them sweet lulz! Get ya sum, brah! You triggered? OMG pwned!


----------



## Osha (Aug 20, 2022)

LainaGabranth said:


> For two weeks? Christ alive, that's immoral. We definitely need to reign in states like Texas, this shit is unacceptable.


Not only is it immoral, it is also a massive health hazard for the person.


----------



## LainaGabranth (Aug 20, 2022)

Osha said:


> Not only is it immoral, it is also a massive health hazard for the person.


I'd love to hear from anti-choicers why this is okay.


----------



## Creamu (Aug 20, 2022)

Dakitten said:


> Honestly, your ability to argue even after professing ignorance on a topic is some powerful ammunition


I was laughing about a quote of OP.


Dragon91Nippon said:


> Yup all they can do is react with the laughing emoji because they know they don't have a good argument that people here won't instantly tear apart.


I saw that it might be fair to confront OPs argument even though it's not a subject I am familiar with.


Dakitten said:


> as to why men


Please don't assume my gender.


Dakitten said:


> should not be involved in the determination of women's health rights.


I agree.


Dakitten said:


> Y'all don't seem to care to educate yourselves on biology that isn't your own.


Maybe men have cared too much about women in the western world. If the world as it seems like it does turns deeper into barbarism this may self adjust. Those who don't reproduce don't have a say in things one generation later anyway.


----------



## tabzer (Aug 20, 2022)

Dakitten said:


> This sort of thing happens routinely around the world in barbaric countries with anti-choice laws.




What sort of thing?  Afaik, it routinely already happens in America, on medical recommendation.  Abortion laws or not.  Saying it's okay for doctors to violate their Hippocratic oath because the government is their rightful authority is your difference in opinion.  People are claiming that the doctor's decision created a health hazard here, and that could be true, but there is no evidence provided.  If you've got facts, show them.


----------



## RAHelllord (Aug 20, 2022)

tabzer said:


> You are filling in the gaps with your inexpertise and taking this WAPO article and its Twitter sourced hearsay as gospel.
> 
> Everything I can read about D&C is that before 10 weeks, it wouldn't be necessary or generally recommended.  Instead, it's actually more intrusive*.


[Citation Needed]
The only reliable source I can find is saying that before 10 weeks it's generally not needed as the embryo will clear out by itself, considering the woman had to carry the embryo for 2 additional weeks before it got removed by another doctor that, obviously, didn't happen and it was necessary directly from the start.
Weird how that works.


tabzer said:


> This is fake news.


Everything that doesn't adhere to your narrow world view and lacking understanding of woman's health is fake news now?
If only we'd have actual doctors like planned parenthood stating time and time again that not allowing safe and ready access to abortions is a huge risk to woman's health.


tabzer said:


> If the law commanded doctors to injure their patients, I would absolutely blame doctors if they did so.


Except a D&C is incredibly safe and bad outcomes are incredibly rare, meanwhile leaving dead tissue inside a body is almost always a bad idea.


tabzer said:


> Also where do you get your $10,000 and prison time from?  Afaik, a doctor wouldn't go to prison and malpractice insurance exists for the reason of claims being made against them.


I already linked the bill but here it is again, CTRL+F for the sections if you want to. Jail time results if the massive fines can't be paid. https://webservices.sos.state.tx.us/legbills/files/RS87/SB8.pdf


> (2)  statutory damages in an amount of not less than
> $10,000 for each abortion that the defendant performed or induced
> in violation of this subchapter, and for each abortion performed or
> induced in violation of this subchapter that the defendant aided or
> ...


And here's the wikipedia link again in case you don't want to read legalese for the rest of the context: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_Heartbeat_Act


----------



## LainaGabranth (Aug 20, 2022)

RAHelllord said:


> [Citation Needed]


The secret to arguing with Tabzer is that they're an epistemic anti-realist lmao.


----------



## RAHelllord (Aug 20, 2022)

Creamu said:


> I saw that it might be fair to confront OPs argument even though it's not a subject I am familiar with.


Instead of arguing from a position of ignorance it would reflect a lot better on yourself if you just admit to yourself that you don't know enough to have a good, solid foundation for your arguments and then take a step back and educate yourself on the topic. Or instead of trying to argue pedantic points ask questions you actually want answered.

As for the topic at hand Mayo Clinic has some great resources on all things surrounding woman's health, and as a sub-topic reproductive health:

Quick primer:
https://www.mayoclinic.org/healthy-...y-week/in-depth/pregnancy-basics/art-20503433
Miscarriage:
https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases...loss-miscarriage/symptoms-causes/syc-20354298
Medical Abortion:
https://www.mayoclinic.org/tests-procedures/medical-abortion/about/pac-20394687
Ectopic Pregnancy:
https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/ectopic-pregnancy/symptoms-causes/syc-20372088
Dilation & Curettage:
https://www.mayoclinic.org/tests-procedures/dilation-and-curettage/about/pac-20384910

Not Mayo Clinic but still relevant here, Medical vs Surgical Abortion:
https://www.uclahealth.org/obgyn/medical-versus-surgical-abortion

Mayo Clinic ain't perfect but most of the problems are isolated to their administration making more money than they deserve and that they have too much political power over the places they operate in due to their sheer size. But that has no impact on the validity of their research and medical resources for reading and learning.


Dakitten said:


> Honestly, your ability to argue even after professing ignorance on a topic is some powerful ammunition as to why men should not be involved in the determination of women's health rights. Y'all don't seem to care to educate yourselves on biology that isn't your own.


I grew up with multiple sisters and had a lot of woman in my life altogether, including quite a few girls and now woman as friends, so for some completely unfathomable reason I see them as people and not objects. And I also am quite interested in science in general so I also have apparently a lot of basic knowledge about the human body other dudes don't have.
But not to worry the ignorance goes both ways. Ask a dude if they know what the corpus cavernosum is on their body and they'll look as dumbfounded as if you'd ask them to point out the labia minora. It's just baffling all around so I try to at least educate some people on the finer notes of basic reproductive knowledge.


----------



## tabzer (Aug 20, 2022)

RAHelllord said:


> The only reliable source I can find is saying that before 10 weeks it's generally not needed as the embryo will clear out by itself, considering the woman had to carry the embryo for 2 additional weeks before it got removed by another doctor that, obviously, didn't happen and it was necessary directly from the start.
> Weird how that works.



Yeah.  It can take a couple of weeks to clear out.  It's almost as if doctors were monitoring her situation before determining a D&C to being the best course of action.  I think she should be able to have the D&C upon discovery of the baby having died, and I believe that the doctor wasn't confident enough with her diagnosis.



RAHelllord said:


> Everything that doesn't adhere to your narrow world view and lacking understanding of woman's health is fake news now?
> If only we'd have actual doctors like planned parenthood stating time and time again that not allowing safe and ready access to abortions is a huge risk to woman's health.



This fake news WAPO article isn't "everything".  I specifically called this article fake news, and I have been demonstrating why I think so.  Despite it being WAPO, the actual source was Twitter/Youtuber who wants to be famous.  Would love to hear what the doctor actually said.



RAHelllord said:


> Except a D&C is incredibly safe and bad outcomes are incredibly rare, meanwhile leaving dead tissue inside a body is almost always a bad idea.



You want to blame the law if a doctor treats a patient in a way that endangers their health.  I want to blame the doctor.  I am not saying that D&C is unsafe.  You are suggesting that the doctor endangered the woman by not giving it to her at the time she wanted it.  



RAHelllord said:


> I already linked the bill but here it is again, CTRL+F for the sections if you want to. Jail time results if the massive fines can't be paid. https://webservices.sos.state.tx.us/legbills/files/RS87/SB8.pdf



You don't go to jail if you can't pay your fines.  You go to jail if you try to hide your assets and avoid court-ordered examination.  Contempt.


----------



## Dakitten (Aug 20, 2022)

Creamu said:


> I was laughing about a quote of OP.
> 
> I saw that it might be fair to confront OPs argument even though it's not a subject I am familiar with.


Fools who live in glass houses really ought to reconsider throwing stones, comrade.


Creamu said:


> Please don't assume my gender.


I wasn't assuming your gender... just your sex. Seriously if you were female at birth you're way too young to be on these forums as you have no idea how your own body works. By all means, feel free to refute this as I'll confess to the possibility of being wrong here, but it isn't very probable.


----------



## Creamu (Aug 20, 2022)

RAHelllord said:


> Instead of arguing from a position of ignorance it would reflect a lot better on yourself if you just admit to yourself that you don't know enough to have a good, solid foundation for your arguments and then take a step back and educate yourself on the topic.


Did you read my last post that was adressing your points?


RAHelllord said:


> Or instead of trying to argue pedantic points ask questions you actually want answered.


Either way is fine to get the discussion going as is evident in this thread.



Dakitten said:


> Fools who live in glass houses really ought to reconsider throwing stones, comrade.


I'm not much of a stone thrower, I prefer arrows.


Dakitten said:


> I wasn't assuming your gender... just your sex.


Don't assume that as well, please.


----------



## tabzer (Aug 20, 2022)

Creamu said:


> Don't assume that as well, please.



She's thinking about what you got in your pants.


----------



## Creamu (Aug 20, 2022)

tabzer said:


> She's thinking about what you got in your pants.


That sounds incredibly invasive.


----------



## tabzer (Aug 20, 2022)

Creamu said:


> That sounds incredibly invasive.



It's more invasive than assuming one's gender.


----------



## Creamu (Aug 20, 2022)

tabzer said:


> It's more invasive than assuming one's gender.


How the f*** is this not considered inhumane by the republican party DaKitten?


----------



## tabzer (Aug 20, 2022)

Creamu said:


> How the f*** is this not considered inhumane by the republican party DaKitten?



If I understand how she thinks, she already talked about her genitalia, so it's only fair for her to talk about yours.


----------



## RAHelllord (Aug 20, 2022)

tabzer said:


> Yeah.  It can take a couple of weeks to clear out.  It's almost as if doctors were monitoring her situation before determining a D&C to being the best course of action.  I think she should be able to have the D&C upon discovery of the baby having died, and I believe that the doctor wasn't confident enough with her diagnosis.


If the doctor wasn't confident why did she suggest the woman try and induce a complete miscarriage at home? Assuming the doctor wasn't confident that would mean she might have send the woman home to actually kill a viable fetus.

Your argument doesn't make sense even as a hypothetical assumption.


tabzer said:


> This fake news WAPO article isn't "everything".  I specifically called this article fake news, and I have been demonstrating why I think so.  Despite it being WAPO, the actual source was Twitter/Youtuber who wants to be famous.  Would love to hear what the doctor actually said.


You demonstrated nothing but how you believe a woman talking about her own health experience is lying for clout because she has a public YouTube channel.
That's a hypothesis at best and in light of existing laws and new punishments just outright disingenuous.

There is plenty of literature about woman having grave health consequences from unremoved fetuses or where doctors weren't willing to induce an abortion until the pregnant woman nearly died because the unviable fetus still had a useless heartbeat.
Your entire argument that it isn't a real story hinges on your unfounded assumption that it doesn't fit your worldview that shitty things happen to pregnant woman due to old white man making laws about subjects they know nothing about. No, you don't need to know know every single detail of that woman's medical history and her interactions with the doctor to be able to have an opinion on the situation that doesn't immediately denounce her as a liar.


tabzer said:


> You want to blame the law if a doctor treats a patient in a way that endangers their health.  I want to blame the doctor.  I am not saying that D&C is unsafe.  You are suggesting that the doctor endangered the woman by not giving it to her at the time she wanted wanted it to


She got the treatment she wanted after her last miscarriage, and requested it so she wouldn't have to go through the pain of the complications from the first time around where the fetus remained inside her for longer.
This also still in direct contradiction with the advise to go home and induce a full miscarriage by herself.


tabzer said:


> You don't go to jail if you can't pay your fines.  You go to jail if you try to hide your assets and avoid court-ordered examination.  Contempt.


I actually misread something, the prison sentence isn't from the Texas heartbeat act but from the still legal (and with the fall or Roe v Wade enforceable again) Revised Civil Statutes §4512.1 through §4512.6, and they impose felony criminal liability on anyone who performs an elective abortion, as well as anyone who "furnishes the means for procuring an abortion knowing the purpose intended".


> The punishment is two to five years' imprisonment for each abortion performed or facilitated, and the statute of limitations is three years





Creamu said:


> Did you read my last post that was adressing your points?


I did, nothing required a reply so I didn't.


Creamu said:


> Either way is fine to get the discussion going as is evident in this thread.


It's in your own best interest to go into an argument with a solid basis of knowledge so you have an easier time participating actively and in a way that doesn't exhaust the other participants. It's also generally more courteous to not require everyone else to get yourself up to speed as the discussion is happening. Respect other people's time and they will respect yours, etc etc.

Other people are also a lot less likely to belittle for your lack of knowledge if you don't have to ask questions that 30 seconds on Google can answer in detail.


----------



## Creamu (Aug 20, 2022)

RAHelllord said:


> It's in your own best interest


I was interested in getting the coversation going.


RAHelllord said:


> to go into an argument with a solid basis of knowledge so you have an easier time participating actively


If an argument is shaky and someone can inform others, that is a participation I am open to and see value in.


RAHelllord said:


> and in a way that doesn't exhaust the other participants.


Oh, don't worry about that. Haha


RAHelllord said:


> It's also generally more courteous to not require everyone else to get yourself up to speed as the discussion is happening.


Well, you don't need to respond to it, if you feel it is beneath you. Whether someone makes an argument without full knowledge or someone asks a question, it's not that different.


RAHelllord said:


> Respect other people's time and they will respect yours, etc etc.


No, you keep that resposibility to yourself. If you don't see value in setting things straight, then it is on you not to do it. You gave me further information and I took it. Was this a waste of your time, then thats on you. What would the time differnce had been if I was formulating my post in questions.


----------



## Dragon91Nippon (Aug 20, 2022)

Creamu said:


> That sounds incredibly invasive.


Maybe but if you were actually a woman you would care about this stuff a little bit more because anti abortion laws essentially mean that your body belongs to someone else (if you're a woman). So techecally we can infer that you are male because if you weren't you would care a bit more (unless you're either too old or have been sterilized).


----------



## Creamu (Aug 20, 2022)

Dragon91Nippon said:


> Maybe but if you were actually a woman you would care about this stuff a little bit more because anti abortion laws essentially mean that your body belongs to someone else (if you're a woman). So techecally we can infer that you are male because if you weren't you would care a bit more (unless you're either too old or have been sterilized).


I kindly ask you not to assume my reproductive organs. Your statement is sexist, women are free to take different positions on different subject matters.


----------



## tabzer (Aug 20, 2022)

RAHelllord said:


> If the doctor wasn't confident why did she suggest the woman try and induce a complete miscarriage at home? Assuming the doctor wasn't confident that would mean she might have send the woman home to actually kill a viable fetus.
> 
> Your argument doesn't make sense even as a hypothetical assumption.



I doubt the doctor suggested that the woman try to "induce a complete miscarriage at home".  What I could consider to be more realistic of a professional is if they said try to wait it out to see if it happens naturally and schedule a follow-up appointment.  If the doctor really suggested DIY then that is unethical and that's the real story.



RAHelllord said:


> You demonstrated nothing but how you believe a woman talking about her own health experience is lying for clout because she has a public YouTube channel.
> That's a hypothesis at best and in light of existing laws and new punishments just outright disingenuous.



I demonstrated that the story is uncorroborated and hearsay at best.  The doctor should be questioned before outrage over this article should be taken seriously.  The story might be real, and if it is, I'd be more concerned with the doctor's actions.



RAHelllord said:


> There is plenty of literature about woman having grave health consequences from unremoved fetuses or where doctors weren't willing to induce an abortion until the pregnant woman nearly died because the unviable fetus still had a useless heartbeat.



And this isn't one of those situations.



RAHelllord said:


> Your entire argument that it isn't a real story hinges on your unfounded assumption that it doesn't fit your worldview that shitty things happen to pregnant woman due to old white man making laws about subjects they know nothing about.



That's not my worldview.  It sounds like yours.  It's also narrow.



RAHelllord said:


> No, you don't need to know know every single detail of that woman's medical history and her interactions with the doctor to be able to have an opinion on the situation that doesn't immediately denounce her as a liar.



I need more information.  As it is, it sounds like an embellishment of facts and relevent details are missing.



RAHelllord said:


> She got the treatment she wanted after her last miscarriage, and requested it so she wouldn't have to go through the pain of the complications from the first time around where the fetus remained inside her for longer.
> This also still in direct contradiction with the advise to go home and induce a full miscarriage by herself.



I do see a contradiction in what you are saying.  While I am not proposing it, I don't see how exactly the article is doing so either.

"Stell had the procedure after her first miscarriage in 2018 in Washington state, when she felt so much pain that she could not walk, and she wanted to go through with it again before trying again for a second child, she told The Washington Post."

This is the closest I could find.  It seems to suggest that she wanted to have a second D&C procedure before her second miscarriage--is that another example of poor editing?  I am not seeing where timelines of the two miscarriages are being compared.



RAHelllord said:


> I actually misread something, the prison sentence isn't from the Texas heartbeat act but from the still legal (and with the fall or Roe v Wade enforceable again) Revised Civil Statutes §4512.1 through §4512.6, and they impose felony criminal liability on anyone who performs an elective abortion, as well as anyone who "furnishes the means for procuring an abortion knowing the purpose intended".



I guess we'll see how that plays out.


----------



## Dakitten (Aug 20, 2022)

Creamu said:


> I kindly ask you not to assume my reproductive organs. Your statement is sexist, women are free to take different positions on different subject matters.


You guys are hilarious. You think playing the trans/anonymity card is some kind of gotcha, but y'all are flexing your own ignorance and bigotry. 

Even a Trans woman would not presume to intrinsically know what it is like to be pregnant, so you obviously are not that. A Trans man or a cis woman would know enough about their body to not repeat your ignorant comments, so you obviously are not that either.

You are almost certainly a dumb boy with a stunning amount of ego desperate for validation. If I am wrong, feel free to say so... but I am almost certainly not and your games are just proof you are a disingenuous interlocutor with delusions of recognized content contributions swirling in your head.


----------



## Creamu (Aug 20, 2022)

Dakitten said:


> You guys are hilarious. You think playing the trans/anonymity card is some kind of gotcha, but y'all are flexing your own ignorance and bigotry.


I was kindly asking you to not assume my reproductive organs.


Dakitten said:


> You are almost certainly a dumb boy


Please don't...


Dakitten said:


> your games


All I am asking is to keep my reproductive organs out of this.


----------



## tabzer (Aug 20, 2022)

Dakitten said:


> You guys are hilarious. You think playing the trans/anonymity card is some kind of gotcha, but y'all are flexing your own ignorance and bigotry.
> 
> Even a Trans woman would not presume to intrinsically know what it is like to be pregnant, so you obviously are not that. A Trans man or a cis woman would know enough about their body to not repeat your ignorant comments, so you obviously are not that either.
> 
> You are almost certainly a dumb boy with a stunning amount of ego desperate for validation. If I am wrong, feel free to say so... but I am almost certainly not and your games are just proof you are a disingenuous interlocutor with delusions of recognized content contributions swirling in your head.



Is this your version of "tits or gtfo"?

You want me to disclose the nature of my genitalia to you?

Not all women agree with you.  Deal with it.


----------



## lolcatzuru (Aug 20, 2022)

Nothereed said:


> https://web.archive.org/web/2022072...07/20/abortion-miscarriage-texas-fetus-stell/
> 
> Tl;dr jesus christ this is fucked
> She had to get several invasive ultra sounds, all to prove without a doubt that the fetus was dead. Otherwise the doctors would risk loosing their medical license. How the fuck is this not considered inhumane by the republican party?
> ...



we should tax the middle class more! that help!


----------



## lolcatzuru (Aug 20, 2022)

More to the point, as a republican, this is absurd, i agree, and where i do believe that abortion should be banned, as i believe it affects discipline,  i do think there need to be exceptions, like this example, where  something can be easily solved. I think part of the problem is, liberals were fine foregoing rights to the magic needle, and the government took that as an opportunity to take away more.


----------



## Creamu (Aug 20, 2022)

lolcatzuru said:


> we should tax the middle class more! that help!


But Lolcatzuru-san, taxing the middle class will destabilize things with this ongoing inflation and coming crisis?!


----------



## lolcatzuru (Aug 20, 2022)

Creamu said:


> But Lolcatzuru-san, taxing the middle class will destabilize things with this ongoing inflation and coming crisis?!



no no you fool didnt you hear the senile old man on TV?!?!   borrowing more money and taxing the middle class will be extremely helpful! and one of his lackeys even said inflation is a good thing! the TV would never lie!


----------



## Creamu (Aug 20, 2022)

lolcatzuru said:


> no no you fool didnt you hear the senile old man on TV?!?!


I heard of him before. The ice-cream man.


lolcatzuru said:


> borrowing more money and taxing the middle class will be extremely helpful! and one of his lackeys even said inflation is a good thing! the TV would never lie!


Okay, I believe it!


lolcatzuru said:


> where i do believe that abortion should be banned, as i believe it affects discipline,


Discipline is a persuasive argument. We can use more of that.


lolcatzuru said:


> I think part of the problem is, liberals were fine foregoing rights to the magic needle, and the government took that as an opportunity to take away more.


Yeah, it is an ironic twist of discourse.


----------



## lolcatzuru (Aug 20, 2022)

Creamu said:


> I heard of him before. The ice-cream man.
> 
> Okay, I believe it!
> 
> ...



That's solely the reason im against abortion, is that it passes the buck off of the people that got involved, ironically ,this is what they do in communist states with guns right?  " well, it isn't the homicidal maniacs fault! the gun made him do it!" and the proceed to try to sue the gun manufacturer though ironically, we dont sue car manufacturer's which is just the darndest thing. If we want to pursue this idea that people aren't held responsible for their actions, then i guess we should let derrick chauvin out of the joint, as its not HIS fault, its isaac newton's fault, how dare that son of a bitch create the law's of gravity, if he didn't maybe Floyd would be alive.

 believe that if people know that they can make a mistake that can't be easily fixed, hopefully they'll stop doing it, perhaps its a forlorn idea but, either way, its better than fragrant disregard of behavior.


----------



## Creamu (Aug 20, 2022)

lolcatzuru said:


> That's solely the reason im against abortion, is that it passes the buck off of the people that got involved, ironically ,this is what they do in communist states with guns right?  " well, it isn't the homicidal maniacs fault! the gun made him do it!" and the proceed to try to sue the gun manufacturer though ironically, we dont sue car manufacturer's which is just the darndest thing.


Yes, they rule with hermetic dialectic to suck up power, to get what the want without showing themselves, because no one would accept them.


lolcatzuru said:


> I believe that if people know that they can make a mistake that can't be easily fixed, hopefully they'll stop doing it, perhaps its a forlorn idea but, either way, its better than fragrant disregard of behavior.


To a point. There are people who can't help themselves, but if you abandon standards there is no more insentive for discipline and you grow a culture of neglect and nihilism.


----------



## RAHelllord (Aug 20, 2022)

tabzer said:


> I doubt the doctor suggested that the woman try to "induce a complete miscarriage at home".  What I could consider to be more realistic of a professional is if they said try to wait it out to see if it happens naturally and schedule a follow-up appointment.  If the doctor really suggested DIY then that is unethical and that's the real story.


Medication to take at home for an abortion is completely normal, there is nothing really suspect about that by itself, especially since the medication usually takes up to three days.


tabzer said:


> I demonstrated that the story is uncorroborated and hearsay at best.  The doctor should be questioned before outrage over this article should be taken seriously.  The story might be real, and if it is, I'd be more concerned with the doctor's actions.


The doctor wouldn't be able to talk about it because of privacy laws, it also shouldn't be even required to take a plausible report seriously. Based on existing laws this is entirely feasible behavior to keep their medical license.


tabzer said:


> And this isn't one of those situations.


Luckily, nothing stops it from becoming one of those for other woman in the same position, and then having to deal with the fallout.


tabzer said:


> That's not my worldview.  It sounds like yours.  It's also narrow.


It's not narrow; it matches reality. The exceeding majority of laws in the US written that govern abortion procedures and other reproductive rights have been written and voted into law by old, white men with a negligible portion being contributed by woman.

And that is a problem when those lawmakers demonstrate time and time again they know exactly nothing about woman's reproductive health.

It still makes my blood boil that people like former congressman Todd Akin, who thinks that a woman's body has ways to shut pregnancy from "legitimate rape" down, are able to make laws for those things.


tabzer said:


> I need more information.  As it is, it sounds like an embellishment of facts and relevent details are missing.


No relevant details are missing, you just want to enforce a silly amount of burden of proof and "require" details to believe a story that have no reason to be public.

No, we don't have to have a full interview under oath before we can extend a trivial amount of courtesy and take it at face value. If the woman lied for personal gain that can be sorted out later, right now there are valid concers as the story is plausible the way it supposedly happened.


tabzer said:


> I do see a contradiction in what you are saying.  While I am not proposing it, I don't see how exactly the article is doing so either.
> 
> "Stell had the procedure after her first miscarriage in 2018 in Washington state, when she felt so much pain that she could not walk, and she wanted to go through with it again before trying again for a second child, she told The Washington Post."
> 
> This is the closest I could find.  It seems to suggest that she wanted to have a second D&C procedure before her second miscarriage--is that another example of poor editing?  I am not seeing where timelines of the two miscarriages are being compared.


The second D&C procedure in the section you pasted references the one she asked to have done in Texas, and was denied because of the heartbeat act going into effect, see the quote I gave earlier.


tabzer said:


> I guess we'll see how that plays out.


I'd really rather not when the life of people are at stake during medical emergencies. Just because Mrs Stell survived doesn't mean everyone else will. An ectopic pregnancy that ruptures a fallopian tube but still has a heartbeat will kill the mother before the fetus stops having a heartbeat.
There are too many ways that happen with some regularity that are completely ignored by the laws in effect to just sit around and wait.


Creamu said:


> Well, you don't need to respond to it, if you feel it is beneath you. Whether someone makes an argument without full knowledge or someone asks a question, it's not that different.


It's not that it's beneath me, it's that just acknowledging your reply doesn't really feel worth a dedicated response in an active thread.


Creamu said:


> No, you keep that resposibility to yourself. If you don't see value in setting things straight, then it is on you not to do it. You gave me further information and I took it. Was this a waste of your time, then thats on you. What would the time differnce had been if I was formulating my post in questions.


I said respect, not responsibility.
It's not exactly reflecting well on you if your idea of good participation is breaking things on the basis that if it's worth something someone else will repair it.


----------



## Creamu (Aug 20, 2022)

RAHelllord said:


> It's not that it's beneath me, it's that just acknowledging your reply doesn't really feel worth a dedicated response in an active thread.


My post was an ice-breaker since there was much laughter, dead air, and users who insisted on a response.


RAHelllord said:


> I said respect, not responsibility.
> It's not exactly reflecting well on you if your idea of good participation is breaking things on the basis that if it's worth something someone else will repair it.


That's the nature of discourse.


----------



## lolcatzuru (Aug 20, 2022)

Creamu said:


> Yes, they rule with hermetic dialectic to suck up power, to get what the want without showing themselves, because no one would accept them.
> 
> To a point. There are people who can't help themselves, but if you abandon standards there is no more insentive for discipline and you grow a culture of neglect and nihilism.



to the first point, yes, this, hard.

there are ALWAYS exceptions to the rule, but as a HUGE generality, its optional behavior.


----------



## Dakitten (Aug 21, 2022)

Creamu said:


> I was kindly asking you to not assume my reproductive organs.
> 
> Please don't...
> 
> All I am asking is to keep my reproductive organs out of this.


No. 

In this particular instance, it is relevant. You've shown that you have no idea what you're talking about, but are quite opinionated on the subject. You obviously have no skin in the game, but you do find yourself to be morally justified in questioning the rights of others. You've kinda played your hand and showed yourself to be a bit of an arse, I fear.



tabzer said:


> Is this your version of "tits or gtfo"?
> 
> You want me to disclose the nature of my genitalia to you?


No need, you've already made it clear and it used to be posted in your profile. I'd more say my viewpoint is "Tits or educate yourself on the factors involved with women and reproductive rights or gtfo". Consequently, yeah, GTFO.



tabzer said:


> Not all women agree with you.  Deal with it.


Most women and most men do. Deal with it.



lolcatzuru said:


> That's solely the reason im against abortion, is that it passes the buck off of the people that got involved, ironically ,this is what they do in communist states with guns right?  " well, it isn't the homicidal maniacs fault! the gun made him do it!" and the proceed to try to sue the gun manufacturer though ironically, we dont sue car manufacturer's which is just the darndest thing. If we want to pursue this idea that people aren't held responsible for their actions, then i guess we should let derrick chauvin out of the joint, as its not HIS fault, its isaac newton's fault, how dare that son of a bitch create the law's of gravity, if he didn't maybe Floyd would be alive.
> 
> believe that if people know that they can make a mistake that can't be easily fixed, hopefully they'll stop doing it, perhaps its a forlorn idea but, either way, its better than fragrant disregard of behavior.


I swear to yob all of these man babies... for the upteenth time, abortions are NOT used like birth control by loose women! They are involved, often quite uncomfortable or outright painful, and anybody dumb enough to rely on it as a form of birth control once will almost absolutely never be dumb enough to try it twice! 

Abortions are often tragedies rooted in issues such as finances, partner issues after the fact, and sometimes just being overwhelmed by the magnitude of responsibility and physical debilitation and suffering which accompanies pregnancy. Every woman is different, and there are a TON of individual reasons an abortion might be the most reasonable choice. The women dealing with being pregnant are always in the best situation to gauge this issue, because all the effects of pregnancy fall directly on them.

Maybe try coming down off your high horse before using stupid generalizations to justify your ignorance of an issue.


----------



## lolcatzuru (Aug 21, 2022)

Dakitten said:


> No.
> 
> In this particular instance, it is relevant. You've shown that you have no idea what you're talking about, but are quite opinionated on the subject. You obviously have no skin in the game, but you do find yourself to be morally justified in questioning the rights of others. You've kinda played your hand and showed yourself to be a bit of an arse, I fear.
> 
> ...



do you have a source on that? because the only souce that i've seen is a source that the OVERWHELMINGLY majority of cases, its entire because the woman wants it, in fact, ironically most of the left coopt this idea by saying " well what about rape babies or life threatening cases"  which are actually real concerns ( and ones already addressed in law" but an obscene number of cases are just women who are choosing t that they dont want to have the kid, period.  I recommend doing some research before calling someone out, it helps you look more educated.


----------



## Nothereed (Aug 21, 2022)

lolcatzuru said:


> do you have a source on that? because the only souce that i've seen is a source that the OVERWHELMINGLY majority of cases, its entire because the woman wants it


Says the person asking sources with no sources for their claims.

Secondly. Dakitten is a female, she'd know the topic far better than us since (I'm at least suspecting) that you are a guy. So the fact that your are trying to argue that it's:
1.Not a painful process
2. something that women actively look or want to do. which is a utter cow bullock. Since getting an abortion is painful, requires a doctor and additional assistance. Vs birth control or condoms which are very easily obtained.

3. But also your essentially making the implication that all women are slutty people, who love the "full experience" And that they just cannot handle the responsibility of doing it like that. Hence the need for an abortion. Even though it's straight up bullshit.

There are MANY factors that comes into the need for an abortion. Rape is one of them. The condom breaking or birth control failing is one of them. But how about the situations were finances drastically change, since let's face it, nearly everyone is holding on be a small thread. Perhaps maybe you don't, but all my neighbors I talk to, are underpaid, and living in by a slim margin (including myself. I'm going to be in the red this month)

If there finances dropped, if one of their jobs changed, or if they got severely injured. I guarantee they wouldn't be able to handle caring for a kid.

Everyone reason for it is going to be different and depend on circumstance, but practically NONE are doing it as a form of birth control. Abortions are costly. Would I rather pay about 3+6 dollars for a condom. (birth control's cost I'm not aware of. but it's also much cheaper still)
Or would I want to pay 500 dollars, for an abortion.

Which is easier? The painless 6 dollar option. Or the 500 dollar painful option that's going to debilitate for someone for a while.

Unless your calling all women a masochist, I'd assume (logically. we don't like pain. we don't like over spending) the former.


----------



## Dakitten (Aug 21, 2022)

lolcatzuru said:


> do you have a source on that?


Most abortions are first time abortions, and most abortions are for women who've started families and thus aren't using it as birth control

Reasons for abortion are diverse and justifiable



lolcatzuru said:


> because the only souce that i've seen is a source that the OVERWHELMINGLY majority of cases,


Grammar nazi check, I know, but aside from wanting to see this source, I'd love to know what the fluff you're trying to convey...



lolcatzuru said:


> its entire because the woman wants it,


And here we have a run on sentence with no purpose! I never said women didn't want abortions, I said they're all tragedies that have to be weighed against the ability to care for the child, the ability for the mother to endure the pregnancy safely, the presence of a partner that wishes to cooperate in raising a child, etc. Mothers are the ones carrying the life, thus they are directly present for every minute of every day of its development and should be the only voice that counts when figuring out what is best.



lolcatzuru said:


> in fact, ironically most of the left coopt this idea by saying " well what about rape babies or life threatening cases"  which are actually real concerns ( and ones already addressed in law"


You read many papers or threads here, comrade? This is just open failure on display.



lolcatzuru said:


> but an obscene number of cases are just women who are choosing t that they dont want to have the kid, period.  I recommend doing some research before calling someone out, it helps you look more educated.


Fools who dwell in glass hou-waitasec I remember saying this line earlier... Seriously, you're just a conga line of misogynist goldfish unable to keep prior discourse in your heads.

I hate to pull this card AGAIN, but as SOMEONE WHO HAS TWO CHILDREN THAT HAD TO COPE WITH AN ABORTION THAT WOULD HAVE POTENTIALLY LOST THEM A PARENT, DESPITE WANTING AND TRYING FOR ANOTHER CHILD I believe I'm a little more experienced and credible than dumb kid with a hot take 85677 here. If you aren't a parent, a woman, or an individual who is experienced and educated on this topic, your ability to address this topic is questionable at best and you may want to quietly hit the sidelines.


----------



## LainaGabranth (Aug 21, 2022)

Dragon91Nippon said:


> Maybe but if you were actually a woman you would care about this stuff a little bit more because anti abortion laws essentially mean that your body belongs to someone else (if you're a woman). So techecally we can infer that you are male because if you weren't you would care a bit more (unless you're either too old or have been sterilized).


Anti-choice laws have and always will be about the theft of bodily autonomy from individuals, to be given to the state.


----------



## tabzer (Aug 21, 2022)

Dakitten said:


> No need, you've already made it clear and it used to be posted in your profile. I'd more say my viewpoint is "Tits or educate yourself on the factors involved with women and reproductive rights or gtfo". Consequently, yeah, GTFO.



If you must know, I am intersex/hermaphrodite.  My labia probably isn't as floppy as yours and I will never be able to get pregnant.  



Dakitten said:


> Most women and most men do. Deal with it.



Hah.  That's not even close to the point and I doubt that your "everything is about women's oppression" mentality is appealing to people in general.  Militant feminism is stinky and wholly unpleasant.


----------



## tabzer (Aug 21, 2022)

RAHelllord said:


> Medication to take at home for an abortion is completely normal, there is nothing really suspect about that by itself, especially since the medication usually takes up to three days.



You say it's not really suspect and I say that makes the story a lot more suspect.  If there were better alternatives than what Stell chose to do, then it's not exactly a legal restriction that caused her scenario.



RAHelllord said:


> The doctor wouldn't be able to talk about it because of privacy laws, it also shouldn't be even required to take a plausible report seriously. Based on existing laws this is entirely feasible behavior to keep their medical license.



Doctors can talk about the type of scenario without going into specifics regarding identity of a patient or a case.



RAHelllord said:


> Luckily, nothing stops it from becoming one of those for other woman in the same position, and then having to deal with the fallout.



"Luckily.  Nothing stops..."  Lol.   Anyway, you are tossing red herrings.  I don't think Stell's story reliably paints the picture.  I'd like someone a little more professional and apolitical to explain the law or medical consensus regarding this particular type of scenario.



RAHelllord said:


> It's not narrow; it matches reality. The exceeding majority of laws in the US written that govern abortion procedures and other reproductive rights have been written and voted into law by old, white men with a negligible portion being contributed by woman.



Just because some American interstate shenanigans resonates with a political frustration you have, doesn't make it a "worldview".  Even in your specific part of the world, women do have the right to vote and run for office.  If it's not enough for you, then I don't know what to tell you.



RAHelllord said:


> And that is a problem when those lawmakers demonstrate time and time again they know exactly nothing about woman's reproductive health.



They at least know enough to make restrictions.



RAHelllord said:


> It still makes my blood boil that people like former congressman Todd Akin, who thinks that a woman's body has ways to shut pregnancy from "legitimate rape" down, are able to make laws for those things.



Ok. 



RAHelllord said:


> No relevant details are missing, you just want to enforce a silly amount of burden of proof and "require" details to believe a story that have no reason to be public.



I don't find the story to be believable for a myriad of reasons.  Discussing it with you brings exposure to more.



RAHelllord said:


> No, we don't have to have a full interview under oath before we can extend a trivial amount of courtesy and take it at face value. If the woman lied for personal gain that can be sorted out later, right now there are valid concers as the story is plausible the way it supposedly happened.



Getting outraged is not trivial courtesy.  At face value, it's some youtuber interviewing with a political rag for a sensational piece to ride on the heels of a recent major political event.  It's not someone who is confiding to their family or friends.  If you do think the story is plausible, what would be the next step?



RAHelllord said:


> The second D&C procedure in the section you pasted references the one she asked to have done in Texas, and was denied because of the heartbeat act going into effect, see the quote I gave earlier.



I'm asking where you got the comparisons for the timelines of the two different miscarriages and why you think they should be treated the same way.  If the first miscarriage was over 10 weeks, for example, a D&C might have been immediately recommended.  It might be because she was having cramps and pains that she found out about the first miscarriage.  You are trying to invent a way for this article to make sense, to you, due to the lack of information.  We both know there isn't enough information.  That's why you are supplementing it "facts" and details that don't exist.

As far as the part I quoted, it clearly states that Stell wanted another (D&C) procedure _*before *_trying again (leading into the second miscarriage).  Either she has had at least three D&Cs or it's an editorial mistake.



RAHelllord said:


> I'd really rather not when the life of people are at stake during medical emergencies. Just because Mrs Stell survived doesn't mean everyone else will.



If you don't want to see how it'll play out, what do you think you can do to change the scenario?


----------



## lolcatzuru (Aug 21, 2022)

Nothereed said:


> Says the person asking sources with no sources for their claims.
> 
> Secondly. Dakitten is a female, she'd know the topic far better than us since (I'm at least suspecting) that you are a guy. So the fact that your are trying to argue that it's:
> 1.Not a painful process
> ...



i thought we were past the point of assuming someones gender, but i guess thats a bigot for you, also i didnt know i needed a source? i figured it was on all your liberal notecards, yes you all know the percentages are really high, so cling to something that has nothing to do with you and make it about you.


----------



## lolcatzuru (Aug 21, 2022)

Dakitten said:


> Most abortions are first time abortions, and most abortions are for women who've started families and thus aren't using it as birth control
> 
> Reasons for abortion are diverse and justifiable
> 
> ...



yea im not gonna do any of those things, thanks though, secondly, outside of the last point, i dont see how any of that qualifies you vs. anyone else. Sorry to hear about the last point, its a bummer, what i find strange, is that you let them use you for their own purpose.


----------



## Dakitten (Aug 21, 2022)

tabzer said:


> If you must know, I am intersex/hermaphrodite.  My labia probably isn't as floppy as yours and I will never be able to get pregnant.


You wish you were that interesting.


tabzer said:


> Hah.  That's not even close to the point and I doubt that your "everything is about women's oppression" mentality is appealing to people in general.  Militant feminism is stinky and wholly unpleasant.


Weird counter argument... honestly, I never figured myself as a militant feminist or an eternal victim or anything but I guess equality feels like persecution to the privileged. 



lolcatzuru said:


> yea im not gonna do any of those things, thanks though,


What things? Educate yourself or go sit on the sidelines about a topic you obviously know nothing about? Read the articles that outline my point? Learn the english language? Well...



lolcatzuru said:


> secondly, outside of the last point, i dont see how any of that qualifies you vs. anyone else. Sorry to hear about the last point, its a bummer,


You're a special kind of dumb, I see. Very well, I'll play this out with you a little bit.

I'm more qualified to talk on this subject due to my life experiences, knowledge of biology and as a plus the medical profession as well, and relatability to who this topic impacts. It is personal to me. It impacts me. It impacts a lot of people, and amongst those numbers, you are obviously not included or you would understand why it is a dangerous wrongdoing. You are not impacted. You are not knowledgeable about parenthood, pregnancy, miscarriages, and I suspect even the every day pitfalls and problems of relationships and finances. You've shown this in your circle jerk with @Creamu where you pontificated on this and other issues you have no goddamned clue about. You continue to showcase your ability to be a progressively more terrible person by doubling down on your own ignorance again and again. I implore you, reduce the amount of cringe here and just bounce out of this thread before you further ruin your rep. Maybe get really spicy and just apologize while you're there.



lolcatzuru said:


> what i find strange, is that you let them use you for their own purpose.


Who the fudge is "them" and how was I used, exactly? I'm going to go out on a limb and presume you mean pro-choice folks, and say that if anything I'm using the power of unity in numbers to make my point as loudly as possible. Do you think there is a blood tithe to the progressive/feminist cabal or something?


----------



## RAHelllord (Aug 21, 2022)

tabzer said:


> You say it's not really suspect and I say that makes the story a lot more suspect.  If there were better alternatives than what Stell chose to do, then it's not exactly a legal restriction that caused her scenario.


Medication can have undesirable side effects over a D&C, and more importantly over the counter medicine that can induce an abortion was freely available at the time, thus the doctor can recommend a course of action without taking any direct action themselves. It's an option but we don't know if it would be the better option, and since it went against the wishes of the patient there's a chance it was not for some reason.


tabzer said:


> Doctors can talk about the type of scenario without going into specifics regarding identity of a patient or a case.


You literally wanted to have the doctor questioned about this specific case, now you want the doctor to just talk in general?
Make up your mind.


tabzer said:


> "Luckily.  Nothing stops..."  Lol.   Anyway, you are tossing red herrings.  I don't think Stell's story reliably paints the picture.  I'd like someone a little more professional and apolitical to explain the law or medical consensus regarding this particular type of scenario.


The story is a personal experience based around a layman's understanding of the law on both the side of the patient and the side of the doctor. You could not be farther from the point if you believe the article aims to be a dissemination of the impact of the law changes on doctor's practices.
Also what political affiliation is beauty influencer? Is makeup left leaning or right leaning? How does her choice in mascara influence her political views on abortion?


tabzer said:


> Just because some American interstate shenanigans resonates with a political frustration you have, doesn't make it a "worldview".  Even in your specific part of the world, women do have the right to vote and run for office.  If it's not enough for you, then I don't know what to tell you.


I'm German, we have a lot more equality here than people in the US do, nice try assuming, though.


tabzer said:


> They at least know enough to make restrictions.


That's literally the dumbest argument you could have made. Passing restrictions to deny something requires literally nothing but knowing a few terms and not having any grasp on what those terms actually mean. This is perfectly demonstrated by Ohio's bill that requires a doctor to try and transplant an ectopic pregnancy to save the fetus's life in case of an ectopic pregnancy.
No procedure for that exists, period. Medicine has not found a way to transplant an embryo from the fallopian tubes to the uterus. And yet the law requires that it will be attempted or else the doctor opens themselves up for liability.


tabzer said:


> Getting outraged is not trivial courtesy.  At face value, it's some youtuber interviewing with a political rag for a sensational piece to ride on the heels of a recent major political event.  It's not someone who is confiding to their family or friends.  If you do think the story is plausible, what would be the next step?


You're the only person insisting that outrage is the goal compared to shining a light on bad legislation that needs to be fixed as soon as we can.
Also the washington post is barely left leaning. It's owned by capitalist billionaires who are very much not aligned with the actual left. And I do mean the actual left, not the right-centre democracts the US calls "the left".


tabzer said:


> I don't find the story to be believable for a myriad of reasons.  Discussing it with you brings exposure to more.


Are these reasons related to your inability to parse nested sentences correctly in english? Because that's a pitfall you can't seem to get over and that leads to you believing that "editorial mistakes" are being made when there aren't any.


tabzer said:


> I'm asking where you got the comparisons for the timelines of the two different miscarriages and why you think they should be treated the same way.  If the first miscarriage was over 10 weeks, for example, a D&C might have been immediately recommended.  It might be because she was having cramps and pains that she found out about the first miscarriage.  You are trying to invent a way for this article to make sense, to you, due to the lack of information.  We both know there isn't enough information.  That's why you are supplementing it "facts" and details that don't exist.


I do not supplement anything, I just read the article correctly and don't stumble over rather basic nested sentences and then understand them incorrectly as a result. Let me attempt to help you make sense of the quote:


> "Stell had the procedure after her first miscarriage in 2018 in Washington state, when she felt so much pain that she could not walk, and she wanted to go through with it again before trying again for a second child, she told The Washington Post."


The underlined part is the first half of the independent clause followed by a dependent clause inside the commas. After the comma continues the independent clause and gets finished with another dependent clause at the end.
From the article we already know Mrs Stell has a child, and has been trying for a second child for some time now.
Simplifying the sentence by splitting it into two separate ones we can change it to the following without altering the meaning:


> Stell had a D&C after her first miscarriage in 2018 in Washinton state, and after her second miscarriage she wanted to have another D&C again so she could try once more for the desired second child. Mrs Stell had to have a D&C after her first miscarriage due to resulting complications from an undetected incomplete miscarriage.


This also explains why she wanted a D&C for her second miscarriage, instead of having to wait for multiple weeks to have a miscarriage, and then wait some more weeks before she would be fertile again. The D&C speeds this entire process up by a considerable amount as the person won't have to wait for the miscarriage to complete, instead healing starts the same day. In addition to that consider that Mrs Stell is likely in her fourties, and thus complications become more common, too, a D&C is an easy way to ensure complications won't have a chance of happening.
Any complications that might arise if not treated would also likely have a negative impact on her chances to still get a second child. And before you claim that this is "supplementing facts" this is basic knowledge about pregnancies and quite frankly every adult should know that.


tabzer said:


> As far as the part I quoted, it clearly states that Stell wanted another (D&C) procedure _*before *_trying again (leading into the second miscarriage).  Either she has had at least three D&Cs or it's an editorial mistake.


She already tried again for a second child, hence the second miscarriage, and would like to try again for a second child following the second miscarriage. This is literally elementary school level reading comprehension you're failing at here.


tabzer said:


> If you don't want to see how it'll play out, what do you think you can do to change the scenario?


Repeal the texas heartbeat act, the other anti-abortion statutes, and implement laws that actually give doctors and patients the legal framework to make sensible decisions without the meddling of lawmakers. The doctor of any patient is going to know better what's best for their patients than any given politician ever could.


----------



## tabzer (Aug 21, 2022)

RAHelllord said:


> Medication can have undesirable side effects over a D&C, and more importantly over the counter medicine that can induce an abortion was freely available at the time, thus the doctor can recommend a course of action without taking any direct action themselves. It's an option but we don't know if it would be the better option, and since it went against the wishes of the patient there's a chance it was not for some reason.



You are suggesting that waiting 2 weeks for D&C was the better alternative "for some reason".  She did get a D&C which means that D&C isn't outlawed.  I don't buy this story.


RAHelllord said:


> You literally wanted to have the doctor questioned about this specific case, now you want the doctor to just talk in general?
> Make up your mind.



I wanted something more.  I still want the doctor's side of the story, but considering "privacy"...


RAHelllord said:


> The story is a personal experience based around a layman's understanding of the law on both the side of the patient and the side of the doctor. You could not be farther from the point if you believe the article aims to be a dissemination of the impact of the law changes on doctor's practices.
> Also what political affiliation is beauty influencer? Is makeup left leaning or right leaning? How does her choice in mascara influence her political views on abortion?



It's strictly on the side of this patient's story, which is makes this one-sided.  My point is that the article doesn't aim to accurately disseminate the impact of law changes on doctor's practices and woman's health.


RAHelllord said:


> I'm German, we have a lot more equality here than people in the US do, nice try assuming, though.



You proposed  "shitty things happen to pregnant woman due to old white man making laws about subjects they know nothing about" as a worldview and then doubled-down on it being the truth.  I am working with the material you are providing.


RAHelllord said:


> That's literally the dumbest argument you could have made. Passing restrictions to deny something requires literally nothing but knowing a few terms and not having any grasp on what those terms actually mean. This is perfectly demonstrated by Ohio's bill that requires a doctor to try and transplant an ectopic pregnancy to save the fetus's life in case of an ectopic pregnancy.
> No procedure for that exists, period. Medicine has not found a way to transplant an embryo from the fallopian tubes to the uterus. And yet the law requires that it will be attempted or else the doctor opens themselves up for liability.



It wasn't an argument.  It's stating the crass and obvious fact which was at odds with what you previously said.


RAHelllord said:


> You're the only person insisting that outrage is the goal compared to shining a light on bad legislation that needs to be fixed as soon as we can.
> Also the washington post is barely left leaning. It's owned by capitalist billionaires who are very much not aligned with the actual left. And I do mean the actual left, not the right-centre democracts the US calls "the left".



Outrage was the OP.  You defend it by suggestion it as a trivial courtesy.  If you are suggesting that OP is overreacting and misses sight of the intention of the article, then that is new to me.  Also, I didn't say WAPO is left leaning.  It's a political mouthpiece.



RAHelllord said:


> Are these reasons related to your inability to parse nested sentences correctly in english? Because that's a pitfall you can't seem to get over and that leads to you believing that "editorial mistakes" are being made when there aren't any.



It's a bit convoluted:

"Stell had the procedure after her first miscarriage in 2018 in Washington state, when she felt so much pain that she could not walk, and she wanted to go through with it again before trying again for a second child, she told The Washington Post."

The underlined part looks to reference the second C&D _*before *_the event leading into the second miscarriage.  "Trying again for a second child" could be referencing a third attempt, after the second D&C, but later in the article it says she doesn't want to try again because having two miscarriages puts her at higher risk for a third.

I already explained why I took issue with the doctor saying "try to miscarry at home".  You find it very believable that an upstanding doctor to give that as advice.  I don't.



RAHelllord said:


> I do not supplement anything, I just read the article correctly and don't stumble over rather basic nested sentences and then understand them incorrectly as a result.



Based on this:  "Stell had the procedure after her first miscarriage in 2018 in Washington state, when she felt so much pain that she could not walk," 

You said this:  "she got the treatment she wanted after her last miscarriage, and requested it so she wouldn't have to go through the pain of the complications from the first time around where the fetus remained inside her for longer"

We do not know the length of one pregnancy compared to the other before leading to miscarriage.  We do not know for how long the fetus had died before she was feeling pain.  As far as we know, she found out she had a miscarriage the first time around because she had pain.  She also had switched changed doctors in between, which doesn't really help her out.



RAHelllord said:


> This also explains why she wanted a D&C for her second miscarriage, instead of having to wait for multiple weeks to have a miscarriage, and then wait some more weeks before she would be fertile again. The D&C speeds this entire process up by a considerable amount as the person won't have to wait for the miscarriage to complete, instead healing starts the same day. In addition to that consider that Mrs Stell is likely in her fourties, and thus complications become more common, too, a D&C is an easy way to ensure complications won't have a chance of happening.
> Any complications that might arise if not treated would also likely have a negative impact on her chances to still get a second child. And before you claim that this is "supplementing facts" this is basic knowledge about pregnancies and quite frankly every adult should know that.



Mayyyybe.  The entire story is told about one year after the fact, retrospectively.  Not only will she embellish details, but you are jumping in to supplement it.  We are so far away from the actual event.



RAHelllord said:


> She already tried again for a second child, hence the second miscarriage, and would like to try again for a second child following the second miscarriage. This is literally elementary school level reading comprehension you're failing at here.



Nah, you just don't want to admit that the story is just a poorly told story with its contradictions.



RAHelllord said:


> Repeal the texas heartbeat act, the other anti-abortion statutes, and implement laws that actually give doctors and patients the legal framework to make sensible decisions without the meddling of lawmakers. The doctor of any patient is going to know better what's best for their patients than any given politician ever could.



You do that.


----------



## tabzer (Aug 21, 2022)

Dakitten said:


> You wish you were that interesting.



I know how hard it is for you to say that I am interesting while you are trying to gatekeep online forums with your genitals.  I accept the nod.



Dakitten said:


> Weird counter argument... honestly, I never figured myself as a militant feminist or an eternal victim or anything but I guess equality feels like persecution to the privileged.



Not really a counter argument.  I said you missed the point of me saying that not all women agree with you.  You challenged me to consider how many women agree with you, and when I did, I realized that you are a fringe narcissist  on gaming website talking about how you are the most equal person, fighting for women's rights in places where they aren't repressed.  The fact that most women aren't here along with you or behave like you says enough.


----------



## RAHelllord (Aug 21, 2022)

tabzer said:


> It's a bit convoluted:
> 
> "Stell had the procedure after her first miscarriage in 2018 in Washington state, when she felt so much pain that she could not walk, and she wanted to go through with it again before trying again for a second child, she told The Washington Post."
> 
> ...


This is actually getting sad. No, it's referencing the miscarriage and a wish to try again for another child, and she is now, 10 months later and after Roe v Wade getting overturned, deciding that it's not worth the risk to her wellbeing as she's at risk for getting another miscarriage. If she were to have another miscarriage she would have to go through the entire healthcare circus again to get the treatment she needs in order to prevent potential health complications as doctors drag their feet due to legislation requiring it.

All of that is made exceedingly clear in the article:


> After her initial miscarriage in 2018, Stell and her husband had their first child, a daughter, in April 2020. When the couple moved from Washington state to Texas in 2021, they were trying to have a second child, Stell said, even though she knew she was at high risk because of her age, previous health problems and miscarriage. So when she found a doctor who specialized in high-risk pregnancies last summer, she was thrilled to find out that the early weeks of her pregnancy looked promising.
> 
> “I was about 7½ weeks pregnant, and everything looked great,” Stell said. “The doctor said there was some movements and fluttering, but everything with the pregnancy looked normal.”
> [...]
> ...


Like, seriously, this couldn't be any more clear if they provided an actual calendar and bullet points to follow the timeline.


tabzer said:


> You said this: "she got the treatment she wanted after her last miscarriage, and requested it so she wouldn't have to go through the pain of the complications from the first time around where the fetus remained inside her for longer"
> 
> We do not know the length of one pregnancy compared to the other before leading to miscarriage. We do not know for how long the fetus had died before she was feeling pain. As far as we know, she found out she had a miscarriage the first time around because she had pain. She also had switched changed doctors in between, which doesn't really help her out.


We don't have to know the specifics about the first pregnancy to make educated guesses based on existing literature, that are pretty much in agreement that a miscarriage that doesn't remove itself will turn painful after a while. A D&C prevents that from happening. There's also simply the chance Mrs Stell doesn't even know how long the first pregnancy was a miscarriage since checkups may have been spaced further apart due to a lack of earlier complications.
But again, it does not matter at all, there is no reliable literature published by actually competent health institutions that suggest D&C should only be used as a last resort and after verifying for over two weeks that the fetus is actually dead. It takes roughly 15 minutes to determine whether fetus is dead for good or not.


tabzer said:


> Outrage was the OP. You defend it by suggestion it as a trivial courtesy. If you are suggesting that OP is overreacting and misses sight of the intention of the article, then that is new to me.


I'm not defending OP, or their arguments, I am telling you your position that the article is fake news is a load of bull for all the reasons I've stated by now.


tabzer said:


> Also, I didn't say WAPO is left leaning. It's a political mouthpiece.


Quick question, what flavor of politics is it a mouthpiece for?


tabzer said:


> It's strictly on the side of this patient's story, which is makes this one-sided. My point is that the article doesn't aim to accurately disseminate the impact of law changes on doctor's practices and woman's health.


That's not the point of the article, though. You putting the onus on it to be more than it actually aims to be misrepresents it. It's a retelling of a personal experience, it's neither a medical journal on a case nor is it an exploration of the legal intricacies of the Texas laws, and it was never meant to be either. None of that makes it fake news.



tabzer said:


> You proposed "shitty things happen to pregnant woman due to old white man making laws about subjects they know nothing about" as a worldview and then doubled-down on it being the truth. I am working with the material you are providing.
> 
> It wasn't an argument. It's stating the crass and obvious fact which was at odds with what you previously said.


It's really weird how nothing I've said contradicts anything else I've said, and how I can easily back up all my claims with sources and expert opinions on the topics I'm talking about. Meanwhile you're the only going on about "fake news", "political mouthpieces", "sensationalism", and a beauty influencer having an agenda.
You still haven't managed to provide a source for the claim that a D&C should not be performed before week 10 in a pregnancy.


tabzer said:


> The fact that most women aren't here along with you or behave like you says enough.


They're probably not as represented in the gaming community because people like you similar sad misogynistic people think ridiculing woman online is a fun pastime activity.

Case in point:


tabzer said:


> "I don't need no 'invasive ultra sounds' doc, I've got 1.5 million followers and an image to promote. Now reach into me and scrape this thing out."


Really showing your maturity and understanding about other people here.


----------



## MadonnaProject (Aug 21, 2022)

I am pro abortion. It will reduce the scourge of illegitimacy in certain communities and hopefully get them out of the gutter.


----------



## tabzer (Aug 21, 2022)

RAHelllord said:


> This is actually getting sad. No, it's referencing the miscarriage and a wish to try again for another child, and she is now, 10 months later and after Roe v Wade getting overturned, deciding that it's not worth the risk to her wellbeing as she's at risk for getting another miscarriage. If she were to have another miscarriage she would have to go through the entire healthcare circus again to get the treatment she needs in order to prevent potential health complications as doctors drag their feet due to legislation requiring it.



It's referencing 2 miscarriages and the desire to try again, but later she changes her mind because her experience with 2 miscarriages is enough.

"Stell said on Twitter this week that the experience almost 10 months ago is the reason she and her husband have decided that they would not try to have additional children in Texas. She told The Post that her two miscarriages put her at higher risk for a third."

Her decision has nothing to do with R v W, and she has found a practician who will do a D & C if she needs it.  The claim that her health has been endangered by legislation is unsubstantiated.  



RAHelllord said:


> We don't have to know the specifics about the first pregnancy to make educated guesses based on existing literature, that are pretty much in agreement that a miscarriage that doesn't remove itself will turn painful after a while. A D&C prevents that from happening. There's also simply the chance Mrs Stell doesn't even know how long the first pregnancy was a miscarriage since checkups may have been spaced further apart due to a lack of earlier complications.



Do you think all miscarriages are 9 1/2 weeks?  That is the assumption that you are making your "educated guess" on.  We do have to know at least as many details about the first miscarriage to compare it to the second.  I agree that it is possible that Stell didn't know how long she was carrying a failed pregnancy before finding out.  Maybe 2 1/2 or 3 weeks, unwittingly.



RAHelllord said:


> You still haven't managed to provide a source for the claim that a D&C should not be performed before week 10 in a pregnancy.



When we both read the same sources, claiming that a D&C is recommended for a miscarriage occurring after 10 weeks, we can infer that it isn't generally recommended for less than that.  Nowhere has it been stated that a D&C should not be performed.  It's usually elective, and recommended in cases where the health of the would-be mother would benefit in pursuing that as opposed to not doing so.



RAHelllord said:


> I'm not defending OP, or their arguments, I am telling you your position that the article is fake news is a load of bull for all the reasons I've stated by now.



In other words, you believe someone you've never met and take WAPO as gospel, so I'm wrong.  Okay.



RAHelllord said:


> Quick question, what flavor of politics is it a mouthpiece for?



The divisive kind, where previously stated billionaires inherit positions of political power via their pocket politicians.  Oligarchical authoritarianism? 



RAHelllord said:


> That's not the point of the article, though. You putting the onus on it to be more than it actually aims to be misrepresents it. It's a retelling of a personal experience, it's neither a medical journal on a case nor is it an exploration of the legal intricacies of the Texas laws, and it was never meant to be either. None of that makes it fake news.



Pointless news?  Pretending that this isn't a political piece intentionally avoiding medical and legal clarity makes you a sucker imo.  You should have higher standards.



RAHelllord said:


> t's really weird how nothing I've said contradicts anything else I've said, and how I can easily back up all my claims with sources and expert opinions on the topics I'm talking about. Meanwhile you're the only going on about "fake news", "political mouthpieces", "sensationalism", and a beauty influencer having an agenda.
> You still haven't managed to provide a source for the claim that a D&C should not be performed before week 10 in a pregnancy.



I already pointed out how you presented a worldview that you called true, and yet it doesn't apply to you because you are German.  It's weird how much simpler my English is than your WAPO piece, yet you don't see it.



RAHelllord said:


> They're probably not as represented in the gaming community because people like you similar sad misogynistic people think ridiculing woman online is a fun pastime activity.



Great story.  I'm here to ridicule women, and because of that, they aren't interested in having the same lifestyle as Dakitten.  I guess women do agree with me more.  You are going off the deep end when you say women can't represent women because they can't women enough.



RAHelllord said:


> Case in point:
> (my op)
> Really showing your maturity and understanding about other people here.



Trust me.  If it was a man, I'd be even more prejudiced.


----------



## tabzer (Aug 21, 2022)

aoikurayami said:


> Things like these make me wish Hugh Laurie could reprise his role and "be witty" with these folk so hard, they'd have flashbacks to him roasting him, therefore keeping em from commiting anymore stupidity..
> 
> I wonder what they would think if someone told em "their body is not theirs"
> 
> I hate ppl like that.



Love House, but I don't think he'd be allowed  on most platforms in this era.  The only complaint I have is how the show depicted receiving a power up from a Chozo statue as a loss.


----------



## The Catboy (Aug 21, 2022)

The fact that there are people who find this funny is the very reason why this section was a mistake. This is about another human being forced to carry a pregnancy of a dead fetus because old guys decided what others can and can’t do with their body. That’s fucked up and it’s fucked up that anyone would be ok with that.


----------



## lolcatzuru (Aug 21, 2022)

Dakitten said:


> You wish you were that interesting.
> 
> Weird counter argument... honestly, I never figured myself as a militant feminist or an eternal victim or anything but I guess equality feels like persecution to the privileged.
> 
> ...



its  weird you claim to be so professional to and yet you resort to insults, how strange


Dakitten said:


> You wish you were that interesting.
> 
> Weird counter argument... honestly, I never figured myself as a militant feminist or an eternal victim or anything but I guess equality feels like persecution to the privileged.
> 
> ...



"them are the people who pretend to care about you and claim they care about you but dont"


----------



## Creamu (Aug 21, 2022)

lolcatzuru said:


> its  weird you claim to be so professional to and yet you resort to insults, how strange
> 
> 
> "them are the people who pretend to care about you and claim they care about you but dont"


Lolcatzuru-san, please be realistic about your prospects here.


----------



## lolcatzuru (Aug 21, 2022)

Creamu said:


> Lolcatzuru-san, please be realistic about your prospects here.




whoa whoa whoa, did that guy just assume peoples genders? sounds cancelled to me.


----------



## tabzer (Aug 22, 2022)

The Catboy said:


> The fact that there are people who find this funny is the very reason why this section was a mistake. This is about another human being forced to carry a pregnancy of a dead fetus because old guys decided what others can and can’t do with their body. That’s fucked up and it’s fucked up that anyone would be ok with that.



Who says it's funny?  You also missed the fact that the D&C wasn't illegal and it was a woman doctor that was in the frontline shutting her down.


----------



## Dakitten (Aug 22, 2022)

tabzer said:


> I know how hard it is for you to say that I am interesting while you are trying to gatekeep online forums with your genitals.  I accept the nod.


Genitals or a modicum of relevant knowledge and/or experiences. Sorry you don't qualify because you wallow in filth and ignorance, but hey, the choice to be a dumb troll is and always has been yours.



tabzer said:


> Not really a counter argument.  I said you missed the point of me saying that not all women agree with you.  You challenged me to consider how many women agree with you, and when I did, I realized that you are a fringe narcissist  on gaming website talking about how you are the most equal person, fighting for women's rights in places where they aren't repressed.


You didn't agree with me, you simply stated some disagree so my point couldn't be valid. Fun fact: they're wrong, often because they've been indoctrinated by a patriarchal society into fighting against their own best interests just like most conservatives. You may even be included in this! 



tabzer said:


> The fact that most women aren't here along with you or behave like you says enough.


Not sure if you've noticed, but not a lot of women really haunt this joint. I don't think I've had any women disagree with my points on here, however, and I certainly haven't had any women rub up against my views that I recall... and if I did, it was probably my views on Cuba or something unrelated. I have had a few agree with my points outright though, so... fail again, comrade.



lolcatzuru said:


> its  weird you claim to be so professional to and yet you resort to insults, how strange


I have no chill for stupid. Particularly with this topic, there is no quarter, no debate. Abortion bans are wrong and hurt people. If you're anti-choice, you're either stupid or a grifter abusing religious and cultural failures dating back for ages.



lolcatzuru said:


> "them are the people who pretend to care about you and claim they care about you but dont"


Is this like, some kind of poorly worded conspiracy quote from somebody who can't read and write in english? I presume this is saying the left doesn't care about women somehow, to which I'd have to refute that they simply didn't call the abortion bans into being. I'm not a fan of the Democratic Party by any stretch, but at least in this instance the enemy of my enemy is my friend. The Republican Party and conservatives at large certainly don't "care" about women's health, as they've done nothing to advance it since well before my life began at the very least, so I obviously have no reason to presume they are my allies in any way, so... bad people standing for something slightly aligned with my well being versus horrible people dedicated to making my life harder due to a faith I do not belong to seems like simple math.



tabzer said:


> Who says it's funny?  You also missed the fact that the D&C wasn't illegal and it was a woman doctor that was in the frontline shutting her down.


Pettifogging at its best. The gender of the doctor doesn't matter insofar as her concerns about the law ruining her life as a professional should she consider the request go. Is it selfish and cruel? Probably. Is it related to her gender how her career could end should she show mercy to this individual? Not at all. Should we hate all the doctors who refuse to act knowing everything they've worked for could immediately cease in turn? I'd like to hope not, but it'd be nice to see some pony up...

Can we all agree that abortion laws were a contributing cause for this and many other cases of unreasonable suffering? Absolutely, provided you aren't eating paint chips while watching conservative news and bending over backwards to justify the worst political views ever!


----------



## lolcatzuru (Aug 22, 2022)

Dakitten said:


> Genitals or a modicum of relevant knowledge and/or experiences. Sorry you don't qualify because you wallow in filth and ignorance, but hey, the choice to be a dumb troll is and always has been yours.
> 
> 
> You didn't agree with me, you simply stated some disagree so my point couldn't be valid. Fun fact: they're wrong, often because they've been indoctrinated by a patriarchal society into fighting against their own best interests just like most conservatives. You may even be included in this!
> ...




well if you can't understand English, I'm required by the court of public opinion to tell you that that's fine and to carry on with it, but in all seriousness, I'm referring to people within the abortion crowd. I think you are allowing an admittedly unfortunate situation to cloud your judgement, not surprised, and are also making rash generalizations based on emotion, also not surprised, but  as i said, the number speak for themselves, and i don't mean ethno math, real math, and as a professional you should know this.  The left, and their constituents are latching onto something they have really no idea wtf their talking about and making it about them, that should bother you.

Also on a separate note, it doesn't matter if you have chill, you have to deal with it, yes there is quarter, yes there is debate, if you can't handle that, you dont have to post,  and if you are anti free speech then you're either stupid or a grifter abusing religious and cultural failures dating back for ages.


----------



## Dakitten (Aug 22, 2022)

lolcatzuru said:


> well if you can't understand English, I'm required by the court of public opinion to tell you that that's fine and to carry on with it, but in all seriousness, I'm referring to people within the abortion crowd. I think you are allowing an admittedly unfortunate situation to cloud your judgement, not surprised, and are also making rash generalizations based on emotion, also not surprised, but  as i said, the number speak for themselves, and i don't mean ethno math, real math, and as a professional you should know this.  The left, and their constituents are latching onto something they have really no idea wtf their talking about and making it about them, that should bother you.


And this is why I called you a special kind of dumb. You can't explain yourself properly, and you can't understand your own failures. I'm still waiting on your sources that run contrary to my own, by the by. Thankfully, I'm a former school teacher, so let us play sentence dissection!



lolcatzuru said:


> "them are the people who pretend to care about you and claim they care about you but dont"


For starters, this is in quotes. There is no mention of whose quote this is, where or when it was from, or any context surrounding it. The sentence begins with a lack of capitalization, the first word should be "They" not "Them". I'd give this one a pass with the assumption that it is attempting southern dialect or some nonsense if we had any idea who said it and where they were from. There is an apostrophe missing in "Dont" between the n and t, and I'd probably endorse a rework of the end of the sentence in general as it kinda rambles. You'd do better with "but they don't care" followed by some punctuation... but this ignores the big elephant in the room, that you STILL aren't clarifying who "them" and "they" even are! 

0 points, see the teacher after class. I recommend repeating the first grade. You'll get there eventually, I hope!



lolcatzuru said:


> Also on a separate note, it doesn't matter if you have chill, you have to deal with it, yes there is quarter, yes there is debate, if you can't handle that, you dont have to post,  and if you are anti free speech then you're either stupid or a grifter abusing religious and cultural failures dating back for ages.


I am here so I obviously am dealing with it, but I'm not here to convince you so much as make an example out of you. I am not anti-free speech, I'm against the idea that idiots running their mouths get to do so unchecked. On that note, your ending is adorable with how you're trying to use my own words against me without understanding what they mean. I'm not endorsing a position held by any particular faith or cultural background, and I'm unsure which of those endorses censorship in the way you are implying.

It is adorable how you've devolved into a discount @tabzer troll, but you're out of your depth.


----------



## lolcatzuru (Aug 22, 2022)

Dakitten said:


> And this is why I called you a special kind of dumb. You can't explain yourself properly, and you can't understand your own failures. I'm still waiting on your sources that run contrary to my own, by the by. Thankfully, I'm a former school teacher, so let us play sentence dissection!
> 
> 
> For starters, this is in quotes. There is no mention of whose quote this is, where or when it was from, or any context surrounding it. The sentence begins with a lack of capitalization, the first word should be "They" not "Them". I'd give this one a pass with the assumption that it is attempting southern dialect or some nonsense if we had any idea who said it and where they were from. There is an apostrophe missing in "Dont" between the n and t, and I'd probably endorse a rework of the end of the sentence in general as it kinda rambles. You'd do better with "but they don't care" followed by some punctuation... but this ignores the big elephant in the room, that you STILL aren't clarifying who "them" and "they" even are!
> ...



you aren't making an example out of me at all, all you are doing is proving your hyperbole, and sorry if english isnt my first language, racism is another quality you have I see, also, you claim to be professional, where did you go to medical school? i went to Hopkins, feel free to fail me.


----------



## Dakitten (Aug 22, 2022)

lolcatzuru said:


> you aren't making an example out of me at all, all you are doing is proving your hyperbole, and sorry if english isnt my first language,
> racism is another quality you have I see, also, you claim to be professional, where did you go to medical school? i went to Hopkins, feel free to fail me.


MEANWHILE...


lolcatzuru said:


> well if you can't understand English, I'm required by the court of public opinion to tell you that that's fine and to carry on with it, but in all seriousness, I'm referring to people within the abortion crowd.



Never brought up your race, comrade, just your inability to pump out a coherent thought utilizing the language you went with here after you insulted my proficiency in it. If you want to attribute that as an inability due to your racial background, that is your baggage. I do find it fairly amusing you claim to have gone to Hopkins given your performance in this thread, but that is your burden to prove and I don't rightly care. You obviously have no idea about relevant factors for the topic at hand and you haven't contributed any valuable insight or data, so you could be the mono-gendered president of the moon and it wouldn't make a difference.

Own your failure, it's the smart move here. I'd advise some apologies while you're at it to make yourself at least seem like a decent citizen of planet earth, but you can keep crapping in your bed like a toddler if that is what makes your Monday. I will be happy to keep outlining your flaws as time permits!


----------



## tabzer (Aug 22, 2022)

Dakitten said:


> You didn't agree with me, you simply stated some disagree so my point couldn't be valid.



The point was that your gatekeeping based on what people have what genitalia is irrelevant to the ability to report on facts regarding this article (which you have not); not that you are wrong for having feelings that make you reminisce the trauma of politicians agreeing on things you don't like.  The fact that women disagree with you is enough to demonstrate fault in your reliance on sexism as a gatekeeping method for conversation.  Frankly, the fact that you are still attempting communication reveals that you are being deluded in your sense of authority, despite trying to employ sexism as a mechanism.



Dakitten said:


> Not sure if you've noticed, but not a lot of women really haunt this joint.



That's kind of the point.  There's a reason why most women don't come onto the internet, especially here, and bleed resentment.  They generally don't agree.  You can hang out on twitter and pretend that your opinion is popular, thus "right". 



Dakitten said:


> I have had a few agree with my points outright though, so... fail again, comrade.



That's sad, right after gloating that you are popular with the ladies, you end on this note.

You may be ham-fisted and brutish--and you might not have a lot attractive about you, but...  the confidence act comes off too clingy and that's even worse.  The way you talk is like you are eating everything in sight.  It's greedy.  No one would feel secure in a commune with you.


----------



## lolcatzuru (Aug 22, 2022)

Dakitten said:


> MEANWHILE...
> 
> 
> Never brought up your race, comrade, just your inability to pump out a coherent thought utilizing the language you went with here after you insulted my proficiency in it. If you want to attribute that as an inability due to your racial background, that is your baggage. I do find it fairly amusing you claim to have gone to Hopkins given your performance in this thread, but that is your burden to prove and I don't rightly care. You obviously have no idea about relevant factors for the topic at hand and you haven't contributed any valuable insight or data, so you could be the mono-gendered president of the moon and it wouldn't make a difference.
> ...



not only am i not gonna do any of those things but fine, if it make me more of a martyr , i really didnt want to do this, but  here we are. These are stats in JUST florida as of 2015 ( as an actual professional i can tell you, the numbers dont change much)  92% of all women got an abortion electively where you would fall into the .228% of women.... So this REALLY big group of people are trying to tell you that they understand and relate to you when the numbers arent even REMOTELY close, and yet you encourage the m to coopt your cause for some cause that you are too emotionally invested in, but let me ask you this, as someone morally superior,  whats your stance on life? and i dont mean is a fetus alive life, someone being alive, are you 1 life lost is too much or theres room for error?


----------



## TraderPatTX (Aug 22, 2022)

Dark_Ansem said:


> I love how this thread got deserted by pro-birther hypocrites.


Imagine saying that an ultrasound is invasive and actually believing it and then trying to make other people believe it. That's just straight up gaslighting.

When you start the topic off with an obvious lie, people are not gonna respond to it.


----------



## Nothereed (Aug 22, 2022)

TraderPatTX said:


> Imagine saying that an ultrasound is invasive





Nothereed said:


> I did pretty much mispeak. Sorry about that. Unless you want to count my janky logic of " having to do multiple ultra sounds when you already know the baby is dead is really invasive." Which I really wouldn't, and that's more of a retroactive fix . Traumatizing is the more accurate word here. Especially since well... Having to go through another ultra sound after the child is already known to be dead is... Just... Fucked. Especially if you end up having to do it again...
> I am a dude, I can't possibly comprehend in full how that would feel but just... Yikes... I can't imagine how... disgruntaling? Excruatiating? Like a word beyond/stronger traumatizing essentially...
> I can't imagine how that would feel. Or more so can't imagine it in full. Other than knowing it's extremely horrorible
> Edit:devastated is the word I was looking for


----------



## Dark_Ansem (Aug 22, 2022)

TraderPatTX said:


> Imagine saying that an ultrasound is invasive and actually believing it and then trying to make other people believe it. That's just straight up gaslighting.
> 
> When you start the topic off with an obvious lie, people are not gonna respond to it.



Imagine desperately clinging to irrelevant details while trying to distract from the main issue.


----------



## TraderPatTX (Aug 22, 2022)

So you are against having a second opinion in making medical decisions. Interesting.


----------



## TraderPatTX (Aug 22, 2022)

Dark_Ansem said:


> Imagine desperately clinging to irrelevant details while trying to distract from the main issue.


And why is it irrelevant? Because you say so?

Calling an ultrasound invasive is not irrelevant. It was a major part of the argument. In fact, it was the lead argument so it must have been important to  @Nothereed.


----------



## Dark_Ansem (Aug 22, 2022)

TraderPatTX said:


> So you are against having a second opinion in making medical decisions. Interesting.



Not what I said but hey whatever floats your boat


----------



## Nothereed (Aug 22, 2022)

TraderPatTX said:


> Calling an ultrasound invasive is not irrelevant. It was a major part of the argument. In fact, it was the lead argument so it must have been important to @Nothereed.


was the "invasive" part that important? or acting as a descriptor?


Nothereed said:


> She had to get several invasive ultra sounds, all to prove without a doubt that the fetus was dead. Otherwise the doctors would risk loosing their medical license. How the fuck is this not considered inhumane by the republican party?


If I removed the word "invasive" Which I already explained I misspoke earlier. It wouldn't change that she had to get multiple ultra sounds (three), with the knowledge that the fetus was already dead.

So no, it's not that important, as my argument doesn't hinge on that word. Really nice try on trying to wezel yourself out of it.


----------



## TraderPatTX (Aug 22, 2022)

Nothereed said:


> was the "invasive" part that important? or acting as a descriptor?
> 
> If I removed the word "invasive" Which I already explained I misspoke earlier. It wouldn't change that she had to get multiple ultra sounds (three), with the knowledge that the fetus was already dead.
> 
> So no, it's not that important, as my argument doesn't hinge on that word. Really nice try on trying to wezel yourself out of it.


It was important enough for you to include it in your argument.

So you are arguing against patients getting a second opinion. You do understand that doctors are only practicing medicine. They do make mistakes from time to time. One would think a mother would want to be absolutely sure before undertaking a procedure that cannot be reversed.

But we all know that the abortion cult does not care. The goal is to rip out as many babies limb from limb and cut as many spinal cords as possible.


----------



## Nothereed (Aug 22, 2022)

TraderPatTX said:


> So you are against having a second opinion in making medical decisions. Interesting.


What the hell are you even talking about? You don't need a second opinion a week later to prove that in a ultrasound the baby is dead. One ultra sound is enough to prove it.
Unless your telling me that your expecting it to auto-magically a few days to  a week later the heart starts up again, which biology would heavily disagree with that premise. If the heart stops for more than 30 minutes, it's very likely dead.


----------



## Nothereed (Aug 22, 2022)

TraderPatTX said:


> But we all know that the abortion cult does not care. The goal is to rip out as many babies limb from limb and cut as many spinal cords as possible.


Why? What's the point?
No seriously.
Your insane if you think people want to do that shit.


TraderPatTX said:


> So you are arguing against patients getting a second opinion.


except she didn't need a second opinion, the doctor did it to cover his ass because of shitty laws. He wouldn't have suggested trying to abort at home if he believed the baby was alive.
He only said he wouldn't, in fear of the prison sentence and the insane fee.

I'm going to suggest this once to you Trader. Only out of recent knowledge I found. I mean this sincerely.

Take a moment, step out of politics for a solid month.
Don't listen to any news, don't listen to any friends, or at least ask them to stop talking about politics, both in jokes and so on.

If you notice I do similar, I'm not always here in these forms.

after that month, comeback.


----------



## TraderPatTX (Aug 22, 2022)

Nothereed said:


> What the hell are you even talking about? You don't need a second opinion a week later to prove that in a ultrasound the baby is dead. One ultra sound is enough to prove it.
> Unless your telling me that your expecting it to auto-magically a few days to  a week later the heart starts up again, which biology would heavily disagree with that premise. If the heart stops for more than 30 minutes, it's very likely dead.


I was always told that clumps of cells didn't have hearts. Has that changed recently?


----------



## TraderPatTX (Aug 22, 2022)

Nothereed said:


> Why? What's the point?
> No seriously.
> Your insane if you think people want to do that shit.
> 
> ...


You should get out more. People say it every single day. There are women out there who are proud of the number of abortions they have gotten.

Doctors always cover their asses. Why do you think they order so many tests every time you walk in?

I do take breaks, but thank for caring. Means a lot to me. Bros 4ever.


----------



## Dark_Ansem (Aug 22, 2022)

TraderPatTX said:


> Because you never say anything important or intelligible.



Only because you're illiterate


----------



## Nothereed (Aug 22, 2022)

TraderPatTX said:


> There are women out there who are proud of the number of abortions they have gotten.


Go outside, talk to your peers. Do they really think that?
Or are you just going by what someone ELSE told you.

Because I know you got that from someone else, and that someone else got it from someone else. a game of online telephone and information silos.

I can tell you that people don't think that, your not going to believe me. So do it with your own eyes. Go ask people, not online, but in person. Do it politely, at least work up to being good aquentices before asking such a question.


----------



## Dark_Ansem (Aug 22, 2022)

Nothereed said:


> Go outside, talk to your peers



You want him to talk to sewer rats and gutter trash?


----------



## Nothereed (Aug 22, 2022)

Dark_Ansem said:


> You want him to talk to sewer rats and gutter trash?


funny, but I mean honestly. I want him to talk to other people. Because honestly the only way for me to prove that people don't think that, is for him to get up and look around. Get people's actual opinions. Not from some talking heads, or people who got those talking points from talking head and telephoned it to him.


----------



## TraderPatTX (Aug 22, 2022)

Nothereed said:


> Go outside, talk to your peers. Do they really think that?
> Or are you just going by what someone ELSE told you.
> 
> Because I know you got that from someone else, and that someone else got it from someone else. a game of online telephone and information silos.
> ...


I'm going by what women post on social media. Actual videos.

You don't know as much as you think you know.

You can tell that nobody thinks that? That's a bold statement, Cotton...

This woman seems very excited about her abortions. She's also a bigot for assuming that person's gender. Obviously, she doesn't know that men can get pregnant too.

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/...bout-her-multiple-abortions-i-dont-give-a-fk/


----------



## Nothereed (Aug 22, 2022)

TraderPatTX said:


> I'm going by what women post on social media. Actual videos.


social media is not real life. There's agorthims shaped for YOUR consumption. The results you see are not reflective of real life. It's reflective of what the agorthim thinks is going to get the most engagement from you and keep you on those platforms.


----------



## TraderPatTX (Aug 22, 2022)

Nothereed said:


> social media is not real life. There's agorthims shaped for YOUR consumption. The results you see are not reflective of real life. It's reflective of what the agorthim thinks is going to get the most engagement from you and keep you on those platforms.


Videos are videos. You said people don't think like that. I found one in 5 seconds. There are many more out there.


----------



## Nothereed (Aug 22, 2022)

TraderPatTX said:


> Videos are videos. You said people don't think like that. I found one in 5 seconds. There are many more out there.


How many of those videos are faked? How many of them are real, but reflective of a small minority?
You can't know, until you talk to people in the real world. 
Social media and news outlets are not always reflective of what is happening in real life.


----------



## Nothereed (Aug 22, 2022)

@TraderPatTX
Unironically, I believe you take yourself as a truths and logic person. Or at least desire to meet that bar in some capacity.

Don't just take what people tell you is the truth. Check with your own eyes and ears from peers in the real world. Other people.


----------



## Nothereed (Aug 22, 2022)

TraderPatTX said:


> Videos are videos. You said people don't think like that. I found one in 5 seconds. There are many more out there.


Because right now I could look up "everyone is a flat earther"
And get similar results in 5 seconds.
And say that everyone is a flat earther, and I'm the only logical one.

Is it a stupid conclusion? absolutely. But if I was someone who believed that everyone is a flat eather except me and a rare few, and really believed it. And you told me I was wrong, I wouldn't believe you.

That's why I'm asking you to check with people in the real world. Primarily because of the premise. You believe in something strongly, so I'm asking you to put it to the test. See if people actually reflect what your seeing online.


----------



## TraderPatTX (Aug 22, 2022)

Nothereed said:


> How many of those videos are faked? How many of them are real, but reflective of a small minority?
> You can't know, until you talk to people in the real world.
> Social media and news outlets are not always reflective of what is happening in real life.


There are many videos from the Women's March with thousands of people in attendance supporting those views. I agree, they are a small minority, but they are a very vocal minority whose voices are amplified on social media, the corporate media and Hollywood to make them seem like the majority.


----------



## TraderPatTX (Aug 22, 2022)

Nothereed said:


> Because right now I could look up "everyone is a flat earther"
> And get similar results in 5 seconds.
> And say that everyone is a flat earther, and I'm the only logical one.
> 
> ...


Being a flat earther doesn't kill babies though.


----------



## Nothereed (Aug 22, 2022)

TraderPatTX said:


> There are many videos from the Women's March with thousands of people in attendance supporting those views.


Again, Trader, I can do the same for any other issue though for any other protest. Or more accurately, from a news outlet telling me what the a movement is doing.

Because that's what's going on, right? You did look at some of the womens march videos, but, only after it got recommended to you on social media, or a news outlet talked about it.

Again, companies, regardless, not to be trusted.
For example, twitter will always recommend me shit from democrats. Not because I am a democrat, but because the algorithm thinks I'll engage on it. Same applies for facebook, or pretty much any social media platform. The money they get are from me being on the platform both in ads, and things it learns about it me.


TraderPatTX said:


> Being a flat earther doesn't kill babies though.


Your right. But I'm trying to get a specific idea across.  It paints a "the whole world are villains, and I'm the only one of the good guys" situations. Which, by checking on with people IRL, you can at least confirm or deny if it's the case.

Because right now, I can almost guarantee, your in a self confirming situation.
You go look it up online, and the algorithm tells you it's true. It pulls things you'll like, because the algorithm is designed for you to engage. Getting you angry, keeping you on the platform. Which then leads you back to the news websites your familar with talking about the subject, and you go look it up online again, and repeat. It's a information silo.

It's not your fault for falling in it. (almost everyone does, up until they realize what's going on... and sadly some don't figure out)



TraderPatTX said:


> but they are a very vocal minority whose voices are amplified on social media, the corporate media and Hollywood to make them seem like the majority.


I'm going to suggest this. How are you sure that it's not a narrative you were told to believe?

Let's use flat earthers again. pretend that I'm a flat earther

you tell me that the Earth is round. You give me all the evidence and data to back that up. I tell you that no, the earth is flat, and i link a article from the information silo I've been in.
You might find the situation funny at first, but then it becomes irritating. As it feels like you can never get through to me.  You know the article I'm linking is bullshit. So why can't I see it being bullshit?
The reason is though, that I've been caught in a information silo.

No matter what information or evidence you give me to prove to the contray. I'll still believe the earth is flat. Because when you give me the countering information, I'll just end up looking on social media, which knows I'm a flat earther, and give me more flat earth content, eventually linking to someones explanation of why that counter argument you made, doesn't work.
And then I'll say those talking points, even though it's riddled with bullet holes.
my websites tell me the earth is flat, therefore it's flat. I'm given everything to prove that it's flat, and NOTHING in my feed allows it be wrong, because the algorithm knows that I'll stop engaging if it gives me anything other than that.

So let's apply your scenario. You believe that there is an abortion cult, and it's being boosted by the media. I give you evidence and a bit of logic to prove the contrary. You go online, and find results proving your belief. So you then bring up the talking points to disprove me, even though it may or may not be riddled with bullet holes, from a newsoutlet, linked from said social media. This then feeds back into itself, you go online, and find even more shocking things.

See how this plays out?
You'll keep being fed information that works within your silo, because the algorithm whatever platform may be, wants you to keep interacting. Even reading or hovering over a tweet is vital information is sold. So it gives you stories that are self confirming. Blowing things way out of proportion to what they may actually be.
That's why I'm suggesting you to take a break from politics, and talk to people IRL. As that's literately the only way to attempt breaking out of a information silo. It enables a sanity check essentially.

I do that semi monthly. Or at least try my best to. Since it gives me time to actually make sure that I'm not being trapped in one.


----------



## Nothereed (Aug 22, 2022)

snipped


----------



## TraderPatTX (Aug 23, 2022)

Nothereed said:


> Again, Trader, I can do the same for any other issue though for any other protest. Or more accurately, from a news outlet telling me what the a movement is doing.
> 
> Because that's what's going on, right? You did look at some of the womens march videos, but, only after it got recommended to you on social media, or a news outlet talked about it.
> 
> ...


So I should just disregard everything I see with my lying eyes, right?

Twitter recommends Democrat narratives because their bot farms are Democrat.

There are many good people in the world. I would estimate 94-96% of the people in the world are good. Real life tells me 100%, but that would be naïve. But I can honestly say, I've only been called a fascist and a Nazi online. Never in real life, because people would never say that to your face, but here, anything is game.

I can disprove flat earthers with one statement. If the Earth is flat, cats would have already knocked everything off of it. Boom. You can use that with your next discussion with a flat earther.

You know what helps me see thru these narratives? I spent the first 29 years of my life as a Democrat. I know the talking points. I lived in that silo for a very long time. Then I decided to look outside the echo chamber and found that the beliefs I once held, couldn't withstand even the simplest of challenges. We see it here all the time. These forums are nothing but leftist struggle sessions. They should be happy right now. They control the presidency, the Senate and the House, yet they are even more miserable than when Trump was in office.

I read the same narratives on here from leftists that I used to say. I used to be pro-choice, but as I watched my kids grow up, I couldn't imagine aborting them. Now after seeing how extreme leftists are concerning abortion, there is no way I could ever be pro-choice again. 

I've watched the left become more and more extreme through the decades. Who would have thought 10 years ago that we'd be arguing over giving kids puberty blockers and life altering surgeries without informing parents? Who would have thought 10 years ago that we'd be arguing over teachers talking about sex to kindergartners and telling them to not tell their parents?

If I would have told you 10 years ago that the government was going to lock everybody down and prevent them from going to work for a year over a virus similar to the flu, you would have called me a nutcase.

You know what's better than commenting online? Seeing real life. I know people who lost a parent who died in a hospital alone because they were not allowed to see them. Then to twist that knife, they were prevented from having a funeral for their loved one. That's real life. I witnessed it not once but twice. If it's one thing I've learned over the past 2 years is that the left is the complete opposite of love and acceptance.

Now watch the hate roll in from the usual suspects.

At the end of the day, I am an optimist. I know the best is yet to come and nobody can take that away from me.


----------



## Dakitten (Aug 23, 2022)

TraderPatTX said:


> So I should just disregard everything I see with my lying eyes, right?
> 
> Twitter recommends Democrat narratives because their bot farms are Democrat.
> 
> ...



So, to boil this down to a simple paragraph, you are an older privileged individual who fears change and uses strawman corner cases and personal anecdotes to justify your comforts. You used to lean left until you became a parent with a career and got settled and cozy with life so now you just want to maintain the status quo that suits your needs.

Yeah, you aren't wrong about gathering ire with your post, comrade. I don't think you are a fascist or a nazi, just a coward and a fool.


----------



## Dakitten (Aug 23, 2022)

lolcatzuru said:


> not only am i not gonna do any of those things but fine, if it make me more of a martyr , i really didnt want to do this, but  here we are. These are stats in JUST florida as of 2015 ( as an actual professional i can tell you, the numbers dont change much)  92% of all women got an abortion electively where you would fall into the .228% of women.... So this REALLY big group of people are trying to tell you that they understand and relate to you when the numbers arent even REMOTELY close, and yet you encourage the m to coopt your cause for some cause that you are too emotionally invested in, but let me ask you this, as someone morally superior,  whats your stance on life? and i dont mean is a fetus alive life, someone being alive, are you 1 life lost is too much or theres room for error?


And your shared statistics are a pdf of a single image without a link or anything... smh...

Okay! Back to school time! Any guesses as to why this chart is worthless? Is it because the majority reply claims elective without reason? Yes. Is it because there is no associated link that helps break down the chart and give greater context? You know it! How about the age of the report and the sample size of an anomaly compared to the rest of the country? Hat trick achieved, you clever devil.

You even make a point about how the numbers don't change much over the years, yet a more recent study (with the same issue regarding no comment as just elective from the same root source) has wildly different numbers. It is also CURIOUS how that chart doesn't match the formatting of their website... could it be that you pulled it from an anti-abortion website with a darker edgelord vibe?

As you can see, these numbers don't even come close to matching your insane percentages from istanforembryos.lol or whatever. And this is from the Florida AHCA, the source your chart used. Glad to see your medschool training is paying off!

I honestly was going to have a big apology and come to Jesus moment with you before I went hunting for your unlisted source and discovered this disgustingly deceptive tactic that you backed up with your personal reassurance. My view on life is that all life is sacred,  but not all violence is a sin. This is why I am repeatedly murdering your replies with a clear conscience.


----------



## Dakitten (Aug 23, 2022)

tabzer said:


> Wah you're dumb and ugly and I don't think you're attractive which means you're worthless and you make me feel insecure talking nonsense about things I know nothing about but I'll masturbate to the thought of owning you some day wah.


Please don't hit on me, sir. I'm happily married to somebody of genuine quality.


----------



## TraderPatTX (Aug 23, 2022)

Dakitten said:


> So, to boil this down to a simple paragraph, you are an older privileged individual who fears change and uses strawman corner cases and personal anecdotes to justify your comforts. You used to lean left until you became a parent with a career and got settled and cozy with life so now you just want to maintain the status quo that suits your needs.
> 
> Yeah, you aren't wrong about gathering ire with your post, comrade. I don't think you are a fascist or a nazi, just a coward and a fool.


I'm a fool for seeing things for how they really are? 

Not sure how I'm a coward. I'm pretty sure I have a lot more life experiences than you can possibly imagine. You sound like you are 12 and have never lived in the real world. That's why you still believe communism works when there is massive evidence that it does not. Communism may work in the college classroom, but that is not real life. Sorry to burst your bubble.


----------



## LainaGabranth (Aug 23, 2022)

TraderPatTX said:


> I'm a fool for seeing things for how they really are?
> 
> Not sure how I'm a coward. I'm pretty sure I have a lot more life experiences than you can possibly imagine. You sound like you are 12 and have never lived in the real world. That's why you still believe communism works when there is massive evidence that it does not. Communism may work in the college classroom, but that is not real life. Sorry to burst your bubble.


idk man you got really pressed when I proposed the idea of a nationwide marriage equality law, seems like you are definitely irrationally afraid of quite a few things


----------



## TraderPatTX (Aug 23, 2022)

LainaGabranth said:


> idk man you got really pressed when I proposed the idea of a nationwide marriage equality law, seems like you are definitely irrationally afraid of quite a few things


A law is not needed if the state and federal governments got out of the marriage business. Your statement assumes Dems will always be in charge when in fact, that has never happened. You make lots of assumptions. They are the basis of all of your arguments, but unfortunately for you, this isn't a college classroom.


----------



## LainaGabranth (Aug 23, 2022)

TraderPatTX said:


> A law is not needed if the state and federal governments got out of the marriage business. Your statement assumes Dems will always be in charge when in fact, that has never happened. You make lots of assumptions. They are the basis of all of your arguments, but unfortunately for you, this isn't a college classroom.


Oh no, you misunderstand, the law is needed, because states cannot be trusted to accurately ensure human rights are being equally enforced. Anyone with an understanding of history would know this.


----------



## TraderPatTX (Aug 23, 2022)

LainaGabranth said:


> Oh no, you misunderstand, the law is needed, because states cannot be trusted to accurately ensure human rights are being equally enforced. Anyone with an understanding of history would know this.


Unfortunately for you, the states reign supreme. That is by design. If you don't like it, you can always try and get rid of the Constitution. Good luck with that.


----------



## LainaGabranth (Aug 23, 2022)

TraderPatTX said:


> Unfortunately for you, the states reign supreme. That is by design. If you don't like it, you can always try and get rid of the Constitution. Good luck with that.


Idk, you've been pretty tilted about Biden and all, so it doesn't seem like the states reign supreme after all, does it?


----------



## TraderPatTX (Aug 23, 2022)

LainaGabranth said:


> Idk, you've been pretty tilted about Biden and all, so it doesn't seem like the states reign supreme after all, does it?


I'm loving everything that Biden does. Watching everything blow up in his and the Dems faces brings me joy every single day. Watching the people wakeup brings me even more joy. Watching you flail in these forums brings me immense joy. This awakening will continue.


----------



## lolcatzuru (Aug 23, 2022)

Dakitten said:


> And your shared statistics are a pdf of a single image without a link or anything... smh...
> 
> Okay! Back to school time! Any guesses as to why this chart is worthless? Is it because the majority reply claims elective without reason? Yes. Is it because there is no associated link that helps break down the chart and give greater context? You know it! How about the age of the report and the sample size of an anomaly compared to the rest of the country? Hat trick achieved, you clever devil.
> 
> ...



so then you are a liar then?  i mean you'd have to be unless... you dont drive a car? id hope not, someone could lose their life, it happens all the time!


----------



## lolcatzuru (Aug 23, 2022)

Dakitten said:


> And your shared statistics are a pdf of a single image without a link or anything... smh...
> 
> Okay! Back to school time! Any guesses as to why this chart is worthless? Is it because the majority reply claims elective without reason? Yes. Is it because there is no associated link that helps break down the chart and give greater context? You know it! How about the age of the report and the sample size of an anomaly compared to the rest of the country? Hat trick achieved, you clever devil.
> 
> ...



thats your gotcha? 32000 elective abortions this year and you fit in in the 500?  jesus come on do yourself a favor god damn


----------



## Dakitten (Aug 23, 2022)

TraderPatTX said:


> I'm a fool for seeing things for how they really are?
> 
> Not sure how I'm a coward. I'm pretty sure I have a lot more life experiences than you can possibly imagine. You sound like you are 12 and have never lived in the real world. That's why you still believe communism works when there is massive evidence that it does not. Communism may work in the college classroom, but that is not real life. Sorry to burst your bubble.


You're a fool because you fail to understand how things are and how they will influence the lives of your children in the future. You'd rather cling to the things that have failed us to this point than try something different, and you desperately search for strawmen (or women, in this case. As an aside, the woman in the breitbart video never said she had abortions for spite or without cause, just that the gentleman standing opposite her and her fellow protesters has no right to determine how her body should be managed. If the majority of people are good, how can you be so certain she falls in that dreaded 6% you talked about from a 2 minute clip?) to validate your choice to abandon responsibility and change from what you saw as broken.

If you think you've got something better than communism, by all means, make your case. Your posts in my other thread did show you aren't very contented with things either, yet you just are afraid (like a coward, see?) of anything that disrupts your tiny bubble. I feel bad for your kids.



TraderPatTX said:


> I'm loving everything that Biden does. Watching everything blow up in his and the Dems faces brings me joy every single day. Watching the people wakeup brings me even more joy. Watching you flail in these forums brings me immense joy. This awakening will continue.


Take the red pill. We will rise up on truth social, and uphold the constitution by attacking the government. We will find joy in the suffering of others because we are the party of love and brotherhood... that means no girls allowed unless they put out before and after making dinner. Gotta love boomer mentality.



lolcatzuru said:


> so then you are a liar then?  i mean you'd have to be unless... you dont drive a car? id hope not, someone could lose their life, it happens all the time!


Did you just presume my response and not read my words? I drive safe and don't run over people, so... nobody dies? I really don't see what kinda gotcha you're going for, but it missed. You're really bad at this. I hope you aren't murdering folk behind the wheel while screaming "it's the same as an abortion!"



lolcatzuru said:


> thats your gotcha? 32000 elective abortions this year and you fit in in the 500?  jesus come on do yourself a favor god damn



Cute. Thanks for confirming my above suspicion. I'll just share a couple of bullet points as to why you're floundering here.

1. The link, which again is for a known statistical outlier of Florida due to their having a number of clinics that drew tourists to them prior to attacks against human rights, shows that YOUR numbers are just wrong. Still not going to bring that up, nor share where your graph came from? It certainly wasn't the Florida AHCA, where it says the numbers came from. Also, considering the heavy political leaning against the AHCA, I would hesitate to use those numbers myself without some serious digging to begin with, but I actually care about how data is being gathered more than if it supports my arguments immediately.

2. Elective does not mean without reason. Honestly, I don't care if the reason was a perverse desire to have a trained professional play rotor rooter in someone's innards, as I wholeheartedly believe it isn't anyone else's business, but I'll keep walking with you a while. Elective means that it wasn't a medical requirement and that there was not a reason given as to why it was deemed necessary by the woman. I can promise you that a majority had plenty of good reasons to not go through with bringing a life into the world yet, but those studies draw a lot of ire due to the stigma around abortions in this country and that state in particular, so they tend to clam up. I thought you knew how to read data, as a professional med school grad and all. 

3. Your double post to the same reply of two sentences kinda gives the game away. You're grasping because you're just an act. You're a fraud and a liar, and nobody is buying your med school claims or "data" from a pdf from liveaction.org or wherever, especially when it contradicts your own statement and the numbers from the source it claims to have pulled from. Give it up, kid, you've got nothing to contribute and you're just digging yourself deeper.


----------



## tabzer (Aug 23, 2022)

Fake it 'til you make it.  The end game doesn't look good.


----------



## mituzora (Aug 23, 2022)

here we ago again with the politcal posts.

That being said, it's important to talk about bodily rights.  

For those claiming the doctor needs to speak up.  Please see HIPAA

This is in similar vein to keeping a appedix in because while you clearly have appendicitis, we don't fully believe it's going to go south so we're going to leave it in for another two weeks.  That's just absurd and there's too much of a chance of it causing more damage to see if it will "bounce back"

Seriously, why would anybody even argue that this is fucked up?  because it has to do with abortion?  come the fuck on.  

All of these people who are claiming that this is "sensationalist" is ridiculous.  there is nothing sensationalist about doing a procedure to keep a human healthy, especially in the event that the thing removed has no viability whatsoever.  again with the appendix thing,  we don't just leave an appendix in for two weeks after it's been clearly marked with appendicitis.

as for the "assuming my gender" comments.  come the fuck on.  Grow up.

I swear most of these people on here against abortion are just sweaty ass nerds who can't get laid, (or if they do, they don't take any responsibility for their actions) so they take their frustrations out on people who enjoy their sexual freedom by stating that people only have abortions because they feel like it.

I have not met a single woman/AFAB person who wants to get an abortion just because they can.  They want available SAFE healthcare to take care of their bodies, and if an abortion falls under that umbrella then so be it.  It's pathetic how much power a woman/AFAB person has over their own body.  In several states, they won't even let you get your tubes tied unless you've had at least a kid and permission from your husband which is totally fucked.  I bet you alot of those "surveys" are skewed anyways because women/AFAB people don't likely feel comfortable talking about getting an abortion, because despite what social media makes you believe,  it's still a heavy handed subject that people don't necessarily feel comfortable talking about, especially if they had to go through an operation like this.

and finally, if you really think that most people don't want abortions to be a right, then look at Kansas which recently voted against a bill that would limit abortions and/or outright ban them, and they voted in approximately a 60/40 split.   This was also recounted because a bunch of salty right-wingers decided to procure over 100k to perform a recount and it actually made the results slightly (by approximately 60 votes) more against the bill, so your right wing conservatives decided to waste over 100k of procured money to fight a pointless recount instead of putting that towards something that counts.


----------



## Dark_Ansem (Aug 23, 2022)

mituzora said:


> I swear most of these people on here against abortion are just sweaty ass nerds who can't get laid, (or if they do, they don't take any responsibility for their actions) so they take their frustrations out on people who enjoy their sexual freedom by stating that people only have abortions because they feel like it.


Incels who hate women because they have sex with everybody but them.


----------



## tabzer (Aug 23, 2022)

mituzora said:


> All of these people who are claiming that this is "sensationalist"


Hi, that was me.  If you have a problem with what I said, point at it directly.  Learn to read what you are responding to before hopping on your soapbox.


----------



## LainaGabranth (Aug 23, 2022)

tabzer said:


> Hi, that was me.  If you have a problem with what I said, point at it directly.  Learn to read what you are responding to before hopping on your soapbox.


But the problem is you don't say anything of actual substance, beyond that the other person is wrong. You don't even put enough effort into it to appeal to an arbitrary sense of morality or authority on the matter like Trader tries.


----------



## lolcatzuru (Aug 23, 2022)

Dakitten said:


> You're a fool because you fail to understand how things are and how they will influence the lives of your children in the future. You'd rather cling to the things that have failed us to this point than try something different, and you desperately search for strawmen (or women, in this case. As an aside, the woman in the breitbart video never said she had abortions for spite or without cause, just that the gentleman standing opposite her and her fellow protesters has no right to determine how her body should be managed. If the majority of people are good, how can you be so certain she falls in that dreaded 6% you talked about from a 2 minute clip?) to validate your choice to abandon responsibility and change from what you saw as broken.
> 
> If you think you've got something better than communism, by all means, make your case. Your posts in my other thread did show you aren't very contented with things either, yet you just are afraid (like a coward, see?) of anything that disrupts your tiny bubble. I feel bad for your kids.
> 
> ...




actually im relatively sure that elective does actually mean without a reason, secondly, i do find your insults as a confirmation that you know im right. also i find it hilarious you call me a liar, when you claimed to be an expert then doubled back when you announced you were a teacher, and now you have all the facts right in front of you and can't or wont put them together, ist there another seat in your class if so, maybe you should take it and let someone more intelligent teach.


----------



## tabzer (Aug 23, 2022)

LainaGabranth said:


> But the problem is you don't say anything of actual substance, beyond that the other person is wrong. You don't even put enough effort into it to appeal to an arbitrary sense of morality or authority on the matter like Trader tries.



You can believe what you want.  But if you have a problem with an opinion, point, or fact that I have made specifically--again, address it.  Otherwise it looks like you are doing what you are accusing me of.


----------



## LainaGabranth (Aug 23, 2022)

tabzer said:


> You can believe what you want.  But if you have a problem with an opinion, point, or fact that I have made specifically--again, address it.  Otherwise it looks like you are doing what you are accusing me of.


cry about it LMAO


----------



## LainaGabranth (Aug 23, 2022)

lolcatzuru said:


> i do find your insults as a confirmation that you know im right.


this is always the funniest cope talking point from people who can't handle banter.


----------



## lolcatzuru (Aug 23, 2022)

LainaGabranth said:


> this is always the funniest cope talking point from people who can't handle banter.



im not sure that i understand what you mean?  Her little emojis which i can't help but thin are her deeper thoughts she doesnt want to admit to, and being active aggressive is banter, but genuinely calling someone a "kid"  you'd define that as banter? if so you mind if i follow you? i just wanna make sure someone calls you a name and you discredit them i can remind you of this.


----------



## LainaGabranth (Aug 23, 2022)

lolcatzuru said:


> im not sure that i understand what you mean?  Her little emojis which i can't help but thin are her deeper thoughts she doesnt want to admit to, and being active aggressive is banter, but genuinely calling someone a "kid"  you'd define that as banter? if so you mind if i follow you? i just wanna make sure someone calls you a name and you discredit them i can remind you of this.


why would i discredit anyone for calling me names?? I literally talk the most shit out of any user on this board LMAO
literally dumbest post in this thread, and Tabzer and Trader have a lot of competition with you in that regard.


----------



## tabzer (Aug 23, 2022)

LainaGabranth said:


> cry about it LMAO



That's a messed up reaction to being shown the door.


----------



## lolcatzuru (Aug 23, 2022)

LainaGabranth said:


> why would i discredit anyone for calling me names?? I literally talk the most shit out of any user on this board LMAO
> literally dumbest post in this thread, and Tabzer and Trader have a lot of competition with you in that regard.



i dont know who  they are, not a weaboo, but you didnt answer my question


----------



## LainaGabranth (Aug 23, 2022)

lolcatzuru said:


> i dont know who  they are, not a weaboo, but you didnt answer my question


I did, just not in the answer you requested. If you can't handle banter, you picked the wrong end of the forum to be in, bozo.


----------



## lolcatzuru (Aug 23, 2022)

LainaGabranth said:


> I did, just not in the answer you requested. If you can't handle banter, you picked the wrong end of the forum to be in, bozo.



sounds like a you problem


----------



## LainaGabranth (Aug 23, 2022)

lolcatzuru said:


> sounds like a you problem


Yes! It is, in fact, quite literally a you problem, if you get upset over banter in the political thread. You lose the argument if you have to complain about getting insulted LMAO


----------



## lolcatzuru (Aug 23, 2022)

LainaGabranth said:


> Yes! It is, in fact, quite literally a you problem, if you get upset over banter in the political thread. You lose the argument if you have to complain about getting insulted LMAO



 i agree you should get that looked at, maybe take the same class that other person takes


----------



## LainaGabranth (Aug 23, 2022)

lolcatzuru said:


> i agree you should get that looked at, maybe take the same class that other person takes


You know the "no u" thing only works when you aren't the only person doing the behavior being laughed at right


----------



## lolcatzuru (Aug 23, 2022)

LainaGabranth said:


> You know the "no u" thing only works when you aren't the only person doing the behavior being laughed at right



hey its just some banter, if you can't hack it, you are one the wrong place or whatever dumb bs you said


----------



## tabzer (Aug 23, 2022)

LainaGabranth said:


> You lose the argument if you have to complain about getting insulted LMAO



So you think you are "winning arguments" by dressing like a cartoon and collapsing in the middle of everyone's work area.  I suddenly understand you so much better.


----------



## TraderPatTX (Aug 23, 2022)

lolcatzuru said:


> im not sure that i understand what you mean?  Her little emojis which i can't help but thin are her deeper thoughts she doesnt want to admit to, and being active aggressive is banter, but genuinely calling someone a "kid"  you'd define that as banter? if so you mind if i follow you? i just wanna make sure someone calls you a name and you discredit them i can remind you of this.


Be sure to take screenshots. @LainaGabranth forgets her own comments within minutes.


----------



## TraderPatTX (Aug 23, 2022)

Dakitten said:


> You're a fool because you fail to understand how things are and how they will influence the lives of your children in the future. You'd rather cling to the things that have failed us to this point than try something different, and you desperately search for strawmen (or women, in this case. As an aside, the woman in the breitbart video never said she had abortions for spite or without cause, just that the gentleman standing opposite her and her fellow protesters has no right to determine how her body should be managed. If the majority of people are good, how can you be so certain she falls in that dreaded 6% you talked about from a 2 minute clip?) to validate your choice to abandon responsibility and change from what you saw as broken.
> 
> If you think you've got something better than communism, by all means, make your case. Your posts in my other thread did show you aren't very contented with things either, yet you just are afraid (like a coward, see?) of anything that disrupts your tiny bubble. I feel bad for your kids.
> 
> ...


There is a lot to unwrap, but since most of it is drivel and based on your assumptions of me, this should be quick.

If communism is so good, why do people risk their lives to flee it? Nobody has ever risked their lives leaving the US.

I love how all the leftists get up in arms about attacking the government. It's almost like you people weren't even alive from 2017-2021. Take your hypocrisy and projection elsewhere. It doesn't work on me.


----------



## lolcatzuru (Aug 23, 2022)

TraderPatTX said:


> Be sure to take screenshots. @LainaGabranth forgets her own comments within minutes.



hey you one one of the people she mentioned , i assume a patriot, good for you! and thanks for the suggestion


----------



## lolcatzuru (Aug 23, 2022)

TraderPatTX said:


> There is a lot to unwrap, but since most of it is drivel and based on your assumptions of me, this should be quick.
> 
> If communism is so good, why do people risk their lives to flee it? Nobody has ever risked their lives leaving the US.
> 
> I love how all the leftists get up in arms about attacking the government. It's almost like you people weren't even alive from 2017-2021. Take your hypocrisy and projection elsewhere. It doesn't work on me.



you know what the worst part of the whole thing is too? aside from the fact that no communist/socialist society has EVER worked well, is that when you tell them to go to that country they get all defensive, its weird, like go to canada, its a liberal paradise, you can abort as much as you want, they banned guns, and they have free health care, ill even help them pack


----------



## LainaGabranth (Aug 23, 2022)

lolcatzuru said:


> you know what the worst part of the whole thing is too? aside from the fact that no communist/socialist society has EVER worked well, is that when you tell them to go to that country they get all defensive, its weird, like go to canada, its a liberal paradise, you can abort as much as you want, they banned guns, and they have free health care, ill even help them pack


Here's a counter point: Why don't you leave instead, while we change the country :^)


----------



## TraderPatTX (Aug 23, 2022)

lolcatzuru said:


> hey you one one of the people she mentioned , i assume a patriot, good for you! and thanks for the suggestion


I think she's in love with me.


----------



## lolcatzuru (Aug 23, 2022)

LainaGabranth said:


> Here's a counter point: Why don't you leave instead, while we change the country :^)


but why even bother? its alot less work if you leave, you dont have fight the evil republicans, if their ideologies are so bad,  go to one of the countries that doesnt have them, there are plenty of them, that way, you get everything you want and we can live in the " hellscape" of not killing fetuses, personal protection, and secure elections, sounds like a nightmare im more than willing to take, and a win win.


----------



## TraderPatTX (Aug 23, 2022)

LainaGabranth said:


> Here's a counter point: Why don't you leave instead, while we change the country :^)


That doesn't make sense. If there is another country that supports your views, you should move there instead of creating a carbon copy of the same thing. Aren't you people supposed to be for diversity? Now you want all countries to be the same. Make up your collective mind.


----------



## lolcatzuru (Aug 23, 2022)

TraderPatTX said:


> I think she's in love with me.



i made this mistake once, friendly piece of advice, dont date communists.


----------



## LainaGabranth (Aug 23, 2022)

lolcatzuru said:


> but why even bother? its alot less work if you leave, you dont have fight the evil republicans, if their ideologies are so bad,  go to one of the countries that doesnt have them, there are plenty of them, that way, you get everything you want and we can live in the " hellscape" of not killing fetuses, personal protection, and secure elections, sounds like a nightmare im more than willing to take, and a win win.


This sounds an awful like you're begging us to leave rather than expressing our constitutional right to vote and shape the direction of the country. Why is that?


----------



## TraderPatTX (Aug 23, 2022)

lolcatzuru said:


> i made this mistake once, friendly piece of advice, dont date communists.


I dated a leftist once. A lesbian from Alabama. We got along great, but neither one of us were very political back then.


----------



## lolcatzuru (Aug 23, 2022)

LainaGabranth said:


> This sounds an awful like you're begging us to leave rather than expressing our constitutional right to vote and shape the direction of the country. Why is that?



because you want to turn this country into every other failure of a country, and you are so blinded by what the TV has told you, you believe that we are keeping you from paradise, rather than protecting you, so if  reason doesnt work, begging you to leave is the next best option.


----------



## TraderPatTX (Aug 23, 2022)

LainaGabranth said:


> This sounds an awful like you're begging us to leave rather than expressing our constitutional right to vote and shape the direction of the country. Why is that?


It's obvious you are not happy here, even with your guy in charge and your party controlling Congress. So we can see that you will never be happy. At least be willing to try China, Venezuela or Cuba. I hear they are nice this time of year.


----------



## lolcatzuru (Aug 23, 2022)

TraderPatTX said:


> I dated a leftist once. A lesbian from Alabama. We got along great, but neither one of us were very political back then.



ironically i also dated a leftist/communist,  she was hyperpolitical, needless to say, being a non communist was a pretty big problem for her.


----------



## LainaGabranth (Aug 23, 2022)

lolcatzuru said:


> because you want to turn this country into every other failure of a country, and you are so blinded by what the TV has told you, you believe that we are keeping you from paradise, rather than protecting you, so if  reason doesnt work, begging you to leave is the next best option.


You know none of the MSM outlets that you've been told to be mad about are communist right


----------



## lolcatzuru (Aug 23, 2022)

TraderPatTX said:


> It's obvious you are not happy here, even with your guy in charge and your party controlling Congress. So we can see that you will never be happy. At least be willing to try China, Venezuela or Cuba. I hear they are nice this time of year.



oh no she'd hate cuba now that the communists are out, they got a bastard who likes personal freedom!


----------



## TraderPatTX (Aug 23, 2022)

lolcatzuru said:


> ironically i also dated a leftist/communist,  she was hyperpolitical, needless to say, being a non communist was a pretty big problem for her.


I guess she didn't believe in diversity after all.


----------



## lolcatzuru (Aug 23, 2022)

LainaGabranth said:


> You know none of the MSM outlets that you've been told to be mad about are communist right



who told me to be mad about what? are you stalking me? and... god damn irony is a funny thing.


----------



## LainaGabranth (Aug 23, 2022)

lolcatzuru said:


> who told me to be mad about what? are you stalking me? and... god damn irony is a funny thing.


Lmfao, all rhetoric and no arguments. Typical righty...


----------



## TraderPatTX (Aug 23, 2022)

LainaGabranth said:


> You know none of the MSM outlets that you've been told to be mad about are communist right


tHeRe ArE nO cOmMuNiSt CoUnTrIeS aNd ThErE nEvEr WeRe!!


----------



## lolcatzuru (Aug 23, 2022)

LainaGabranth said:


> Lmfao, all rhetoric and no arguments. Typical righty...



lol, all rhetoric and no argument typical commie


----------



## LainaGabranth (Aug 23, 2022)

TraderPatTX said:


> tHeRe ArE nO cOmMuNiSt CoUnTrIeS aNd ThErE nEvEr WeRe!!


So, do I need to explain to you how media outlets are not a country, or are you literate enough for that to be unnecessary?


----------



## lolcatzuru (Aug 23, 2022)

TraderPatTX said:


> tHeRe ArE nO cOmMuNiSt CoUnTrIeS aNd ThErE nEvEr WeRe!!



you know i do genuinely pity the left for not realizing how supportive they are of communism and how this paradise they've been offered isnt real.


----------



## LainaGabranth (Aug 23, 2022)

lolcatzuru said:


> lol, all rhetoric and no argument typical commie


Chief you're the one who thinks the MSM (that I don't even watch lmao) is communist, you're the last one to be accusing anyone of being nothing but rhetoric. Communism is statelessness, classlessness, and moneylessness combined, with the means of production collectively owned by those who produced them.

Now, I dunno about you, but I'm not seeing the CEOs of CNN and the like coming out and saying that CNN is suddenly egalitarian. Are you?


----------



## lolcatzuru (Aug 23, 2022)

LainaGabranth said:


> Chief you're the one who thinks the MSM (that I don't even watch lmao) is communist, you're the last one to be accusing anyone of being nothing but rhetoric. Communism is statelessness, classlessness, and moneylessness combined, with the means of production collectively owned by those who produced them.
> 
> Now, I dunno about you, but I'm not seeing the CEOs of CNN and the like coming out and saying that CNN is suddenly egalitarian. Are you?



man god damn, how can someone be so close, yet so far.


----------



## LainaGabranth (Aug 23, 2022)

lolcatzuru said:


> man god damn, how can someone be so close, yet so far.


Good question. Looked in a mirror lately?
I can see why you're dodging the question, I imagine the right wing think tanks paid to think for you haven't given you a stance on these things yet.


----------



## lolcatzuru (Aug 23, 2022)

LainaGabranth said:


> Good question. Looked in a mirror lately?
> I can see why you're dodging the question, I imagine the right wing think tanks paid to think for you haven't given you a stance on these things yet.



there's no question, you confirmed they are communist, like i didnt even have to answer you went into the whole classless stateless jargon, then asked if i see CNN talking about it or the CEO, and in fairness, no i dont see the CEO i dont even know who that is, but i i assume they have a private island somewhere, but then you went on to litereally confirm, yes, they do all of those things.


----------



## LainaGabranth (Aug 23, 2022)

You uh, you know that I said *Communism* was stateless, classless, moneylessness, right? A system with no currency, no ruling party, total control by the people, and no racial, social, sexual, and so on classes whatsoever, right? Not CNN?

No wonder the Right is so bad at comedy, Jesus Christ.

I'm not even a Communist anyways, I'm an Anarcho Bidenist.


----------



## TraderPatTX (Aug 24, 2022)

LainaGabranth said:


> So, do I need to explain to you how media outlets are not a country, or are you literate enough for that to be unnecessary?


Personally, I'm enjoying watching the media sink into obscurity. I'm sure their approval numbers can sink further than 11%.

I also like watching CNN fire their on air personalities. And they were so pompous for so many years.


----------



## LainaGabranth (Aug 24, 2022)

TraderPatTX said:


> Personally, I'm enjoying watching the media sink into obscurity. I'm sure their approval numbers can sink further than 11%.
> 
> I also like watching CNN fire their on air personalities. And they were so pompous for so many years.


Not that your reply has any relevance to what I said, since I don't watch TV and haven't for over 12 years.


----------



## Glyptofane (Aug 24, 2022)

The fetus would have been like the size of a grape at this point and it's normal for it to take several weeks for the uterus to empty and complete a miscarriage without intervention which is how the majority of them go. Invasive D&C carries some risks and is only really supposed to be done as a last resort.


----------



## TraderPatTX (Aug 24, 2022)

LainaGabranth said:


> Not that your reply has any relevance to what I said, since I don't watch TV and haven't for over 12 years.


You just happen to spout corporate media nonsense verbatim.


----------



## LainaGabranth (Aug 24, 2022)

TraderPatTX said:


> You just happen to spout corporate media nonsense verbatim.


Not liking it doesn't make it "corporate," manchild. Sorry, do better!


----------



## lolcatzuru (Aug 24, 2022)

LainaGabranth said:


> You uh, you know that I said *Communism* was stateless, classless, moneylessness, right? A system with no currency, no ruling party, total control by the people, and no racial, social, sexual, and so on classes whatsoever, right? Not CNN?
> 
> No wonder the Right is so bad at comedy, Jesus Christ.
> 
> I'm not even a Communist anyways, I'm an Anarcho Bidenist.



well im not sure what being a spider has to do with anything, but uh denial is an ugly thing.


----------



## lolcatzuru (Aug 24, 2022)

LainaGabranth said:


> Not that your reply has any relevance to what I said, since I don't watch TV and haven't for over 12 years.



really? i figured you were on their payroll


----------



## mituzora (Aug 24, 2022)

TraderPatTX said:


> You just happen to spout corporate media nonsense verbatim.


Just because it doesn't align with your opinions doesn't meant it's nonsense.  Besides, the last page of comments has been a circle jerk of "oh look at the lefty shaking" because you've ran out of logical things to say.


----------



## lolcatzuru (Aug 24, 2022)

mituzora said:


> Just because it doesn't align with your opinions doesn't meant it's nonsense.  Besides, the last page of comments has been a circle jerk of "oh look at the lefty shaking" because you've ran out of logical things to say.



no it being nonsense makes it nonsense, to give an example, an " anarcho bidenist"  is an example of nonsense, its an offshoot, of a bullshit term, which is also an offshoot of more bullshit,  he's basically just a troll, go ahead and look it up, its genuinely meaningless.


----------



## LainaGabranth (Aug 24, 2022)

lolcatzuru said:


> she said anarcho bidenist, she clearly must be trolling and i must have a mental breakdown over this


lol, lmao even


----------



## lolcatzuru (Aug 24, 2022)

LainaGabranth said:


> lol, lmao even



i dont get it, but you have fun with your made up term, good news is, lots of communist countries still around, bad news is, most of them hate us.


----------



## TraderPatTX (Aug 24, 2022)

LainaGabranth said:


> Not liking it doesn't make it "corporate," manchild. Sorry, do better!


Media companies that make billions per year and have executives running it makes it corporate.

The parent corporations of these media companies are also traded on the stock market. Seems a little corporatish to me.

But what do I know, you're a anarcho-bidenist. Does that mean you enjoy frequent ice cream and falling all the time?


----------



## LainaGabranth (Aug 24, 2022)

TraderPatTX said:


> Media companies that make billions per year and have executives running it makes it corporate.
> 
> The parent corporations of these media companies are also traded on the stock market. Seems a little corporatish to me.


Lmfao, CNN is hiding under your bed you know. Better watch out, or the CEO might yell BOO at you!!


----------



## lolcatzuru (Aug 24, 2022)

TraderPatTX said:


> Media companies that make billions per year and have executives running it makes it corporate.
> 
> The parent corporations of these media companies are also traded on the stock market. Seems a little corporatish to me.
> 
> But what do I know, you're a anarcho-bidenist. Does that mean you enjoy frequent ice cream and falling all the time?



i think it means that they like anarchy, but are also a bi sexual dentist


----------



## LainaGabranth (Aug 24, 2022)

lolcatzuru said:


> i dont get it, but you have fun with your made up term, good news is, lots of communist countries still around, bad news is, most of them hate us.


I was actually anti-communist but your perpetual seething about it makes me wanna be a communist now just to see how mad you get LOL


----------



## lolcatzuru (Aug 24, 2022)

LainaGabranth said:


> Lmfao, CNN is hiding under your bed you know. Better watch out, or the CEO might yell BOO at you!!



i think id prefer this over spiderbidenism.


----------



## lolcatzuru (Aug 24, 2022)

LainaGabranth said:


> I was actually anti-communist but your perpetual seething about it makes me wanna be a communist now just to see how mad you get LOL



So you are a left, anti leftist, but now that im mad about communism ( i dont see the problem with this, unless you endorse stalin, i hear anarchostalinism is in) and now you wanna be a leftist to see how mad i get.... wut.


----------



## TraderPatTX (Aug 24, 2022)

LainaGabranth said:


> Lmfao, CNN is hiding under your bed you know. Better watch out, or the CEO might yell BOO at you!!


You know who won't yell Boo at me? Chris Cuomo and Brian "the Potato" Stelter.


----------



## LainaGabranth (Aug 24, 2022)

lolcatzuru said:


> So you are a left, anti leftist, but now that im mad about communism ( i dont see the problem with this, unless you endorse stalin, i hear anarchostalinism is in) and now you wanna be a leftist to see how mad i get.... wut.


Tell us what "left" means in your words so I can laugh at you


----------



## Dakitten (Aug 24, 2022)

mituzora said:


> Just because it doesn't align with your opinions doesn't meant it's nonsense.  Besides, the last page of comments has been a circle jerk of "oh look at the lefty shaking" because you've ran out of logical things to say.


They got tired of getting owned by facts and logic, so they defaulted to the right-wing tactic of hugboxing. I wouldn't mind it, rambling to themselves like idiots means they aren't spreading misinformation and trying to sway any opinions on the topic.


----------



## Dragon91Nippon (Aug 24, 2022)

This thread has devolved so much over the last few days...


Creamu said:


> I kindly ask you not to assume my reproductive organs. Your statement is sexist, women are free to take different positions on different subject matters.


I never said they aren't free to take a different stance I said it's unlikely that they would, because women (AFAB) are able to become pregnant whether they like it or not (that includes rape) so naturally they would prefer to have the right to abort it if they do not want to commit to having a baby, especially if they didn't consent to it. The majority of them dislike the idea of the control over their bodies being taken away by old men who have no idea what it's like to carry a baby. 

Is it possible for a woman to have a different opinion on the matter? Sure, but is it Likely? No.


----------



## tabzer (Aug 24, 2022)

LainaGabranth said:


> This sounds an awful like you're begging us to leave rather than expressing our constitutional right to vote and shape the direction of the country. Why is that?


Ok.  Vote.  Then rage at the results of the legislation.  You don't like the fact that TX is its own culture?  I'm sorry.  Maybe don't leave Portland?


----------



## tabzer (Aug 24, 2022)

Dakitten said:


> They got tired of getting owned by facts and logic, so they defaulted to the right-wing tactic of hugboxing. I wouldn't mind it, rambling to themselves like idiots means they aren't spreading misinformation and trying to sway any opinions on the topic.


You know opinions are plenty.  Someone having one doesn't mean you should feel threatened about your own.  I'm still waiting on "facts and logic" from you.  All I got was an erotic fantasy of yours.

You can continue to define yourself by the upstanding person that is _still_ with you.  I assume that it is a man, based on information you have already provided.  Why don't you invite him to the thread?


----------



## LainaGabranth (Aug 24, 2022)

"You know opinions are plenty.  Someone having one doesn't mean you should feel threatened about your own.  I'm still waiting on "facts and logic" from you.  All I got was an erotic fantasy of yours."


----------



## tabzer (Aug 24, 2022)

Someone needs a dad.  I'll identify as one for you.

You are a disappointment, son.  Your mother already knows you won't make her a grandmother.  Why do you need to make her feel worse?


----------



## LainaGabranth (Aug 24, 2022)

tabzer said:


> Someone needs a dad.  I'll identify as one for you.
> 
> You are a disappointment, son.  Your mother already knows you won't make her a grandmother.  Why do you hate her?


I love how angry one 600x600 image of an emoji made you LMAOOO


----------



## tabzer (Aug 24, 2022)

I'm so angry.


----------



## lolcatzuru (Aug 24, 2022)

LainaGabranth said:


> Tell us what "left" means in your words so I can laugh at you



...democrats? wtf else would it mean?  maybe aside from cancelled al fraken who just looked constipated the whole time, they all echo the same message, which is ironically ,everything you defined as communism


----------



## Nothereed (Aug 24, 2022)

Snipped


----------



## tabzer (Aug 24, 2022)

You've snipped so much and I don't think you have anything left.

Btw, did you know that Texas abortion law forced 'women' to carry a dead fetus for 2 weeks?

Just kidding.  Sounds like news though, right?

Title should be, "Portland lady moves to Texas, finds out it is a different state.  Decides to stay and complain."

Thread ensues with people triggered over R v W being reversed, which has absolutely nothing to do with the scenario, ignoring the demonstrated *fact* that Texas "abortion law" did not force the 'women' to do anything.

I can only hope to be as much of a troll.


----------



## Nothereed (Aug 24, 2022)

tabzer said:


> You've snipped so much I don't think you have anything left.
> 
> Btw, did you know that Texas abortion law forced "women" to carry a dead fetus for 2 weeks?
> 
> ...


_This just in I got a report that nothereeds favorite game show has comeback because tabweezer has made a challenging argument 

it's all your favorites folks iiiiiinnnn!!!
*it's just stupid*
now lets look at the unfolding timeline of events!_



> _After her initial miscarriage in 2018, Stell and her husband had their first child, a daughter, in April 2020. When the couple moved from Washington state to Texas in 2021, they were trying to have a second child,_


_lets see folks what tabweezer's had to say. Is it shockingly smart? Or is it  stupendously stupid?_


tabzer said:


> Title should be, "Portland lady moves to Texas, finds out it is a different state. Decides to stay and complain."


And it's! Drumrolllll pleeeeease!

_Incredibly stupid._

Could of been at least more like "Washington girl moved to Texas" but that wouldn't have the same ring. Nor could she just "move" sounds like she rented a new house and everything. Ontop of you know. Already having a child to care for. 2021 was the year Texas introduced the law. And then enacted the same year. Not a whole lot of time for someone to move out while. Carrying for a kid.

Tabezer being lame with providing nothing burger arguments again.



tabzer said:


> You've snipped so much and I don't think you have anything left.


You know, I try to avoid interjecting into other people's arguments on some occasions. Might respond and then take it back, realizing that I don't need to say anything.

P.S
Next time at least ping me if your going to talk about me.


----------



## Dark_Ansem (Aug 24, 2022)

lolcatzuru said:


> i assume a patriot


you spelt "traitor" wrong.


----------



## Dark_Ansem (Aug 24, 2022)

TraderPatTX said:


> Media companies that make billions per year and have executives running it makes it corporate.
> 
> The parent corporations of these media companies are also traded on the stock market. Seems a little corporatish to me.
> 
> But what do I know, you're a anarcho-bidenist. Does that mean you enjoy frequent ice cream and falling all the time?


Yeah, because Fox News ain't corporate, part of Murdoch empire, THE media corporate.


----------



## smf (Aug 24, 2022)

Nothereed said:


> Tabezer being lame with providing nothing burger arguments again.


I am glad to see that despite my absence, he is staying true to form.

I wonder who pays him to act like such a dick?


----------



## tabzer (Aug 24, 2022)

Responding to someone camping out on their 'bonked' thread isn't going to deliver an additional ping.  When a comment directly follows the trash post it's in response to, there's not going to be any confusion.  For the sake of encouraging low-context users to read more, I'm leaving tags out of this post.

The fact that D&C was legal and available, and that there was a medicinal option available, seems inconvenient to your position. There is nothing in the bill that states "multiple _intrusive _ultrasounds" were necessary. The bill prohibits aborting a living fetus.

I'm sorry if the chosen doctor was of poor quality, but my offered title is _*more *_accurate than your provably false one.

Now pardon me as I allow smf to tickle my ass.


----------



## Nothereed (Aug 24, 2022)

tabzer said:


> The fact that D&C was legal and available, and that there was a medicinal option available, seems inconvenient to your position.





Dakitten said:


> The fact remains that the woman WANTED THE CHILD AND IT DIED INSIDE OF HER AND THEY WOULD NOT REMOVE IT OUT OF FEAR OF REPRISAL YOU ILLITERATE SCUMBAG!


All that has to be said here.
We've got tabzer tabbing out of the conversation. Tabzer brushing out of the conversation. And now we got tabzer pressing that fancy replay button. Because the second time is better than the last.
Suddenly I hear melee noises in the back of my head. Salty runback?


----------



## tabzer (Aug 24, 2022)

Dakitten's rage post does not change facts.  It's still ironic that the post purports illiteracy to be my issue as it defends a (supposed) doctor's illiteracy in the same breath.  Then we have you continuing to talk in a way that begs for an education.

Look at the detail stated in the article itself.  Washington woman switched care providers and got a D&C, in Texas, which means that the law wasn't the operating factor.  The idea that she elected to not do the medical alternative, which was also apparently legal, merits even more scrutiny.

Did WAPO earn your subscription yet?


----------



## TraderPatTX (Aug 24, 2022)

Dakitten said:


> They got tired of getting owned by facts and logic, so they defaulted to the right-wing tactic of hugboxing. I wouldn't mind it, rambling to themselves like idiots means they aren't spreading misinformation and trying to sway any opinions on the topic.


The left never spreads misinformation. You all are the highest form of truth tellers. I'm surprised you don't walk around in white robes dispensing your truth to the masses.


----------



## TraderPatTX (Aug 24, 2022)

Dark_Ansem said:


> Yeah, because Fox News ain't corporate, part of Murdoch empire, THE media corporate.


It's obvious either you have never read a single comment I have ever made here or you are just illiterate. Everybody should know by now that I am no fan of Fox.

Fox News is part of the corporate state-run media. They are controlled opposition to give the appearance of both sides being represented.

The fact that you can't see this speaks volumes about your level of discernment.


----------



## Dark_Ansem (Aug 24, 2022)

TraderPatTX said:


> Everybody should know by now that I am no fan of Fox.


Oh so you are basically a parrot of their main talking points by accident?


----------



## TraderPatTX (Aug 24, 2022)

Dark_Ansem said:


> Oh so you are basically a parrot of their main talking points by accident?


You tell me. You seem to watch them more than I do.


----------



## Dark_Ansem (Aug 24, 2022)

TraderPatTX said:


> You seem to watch them more than I do.


Hah! You're, as usual, wrong.


----------



## LainaGabranth (Aug 24, 2022)

lolcatzuru said:


> ...democrats? wtf else would it mean?  maybe aside from cancelled al fraken who just looked constipated the whole time, they all echo the same message, which is ironically ,everything you defined as communism









OH NO NO NO LOOK AT THIS DOOD
THE RIGHT WINGER THINKS DEMOCRATS ARE LEFTISTS


----------



## LainaGabranth (Aug 24, 2022)

Nothereed said:


> All that has to be said here.
> We've got tabzer tabbing out of the conversation. Tabzer brushing out of the conversation. And now we got tabzer pressing that fancy replay button. Because the second time is better than the last.
> Suddenly I hear melee noises in the back of my head. Salty runback?


I honestly think with how mad he gets in these threads that the repeat replies are just a coping mechanism.


----------



## tabzer (Aug 24, 2022)

LainaGabranth said:


> I honestly think with how mad he gets in these threads that the repeat replies are just a coping mechanism.



Cope is voting democrat and calling yourself a leftist.


----------



## Dakitten (Aug 24, 2022)

tabzer said:


> Cope is voting democrat and calling yourself a leftist.


Says a supporter of the minority party. Sorry, cupcake, but maybe your knowledge of US politics isn't that good, just like your knowledge of women, biological functions, how to be a decent human being, and how to be an effective troll are all tragically lacking. Don't get too down about it, I hear some countries have only a single party that allows others to exist but never to challenge their superiority so that it maintains dominance for decades. I don't know enough about those, but that sounds even more rough.


----------



## LainaGabranth (Aug 24, 2022)

Dakitten said:


> Says a supporter of the minority party. Sorry, cupcake, but maybe your knowledge of US politics isn't that good, just like your knowledge of women, biological functions, how to be a decent human being, and how to be an effective troll are all tragically lacking. Don't get too down about it, I hear some countries have only a single party that allows others to exist but never to challenge their superiority so that it maintains dominance for decades. I don't know enough about those, but that sounds even more rough.


It's very amusing when people claim to be anti-government and then just exclusively back republican talking points and shittalk the democrats. The democrats like, literally do not do anything and yet people are out here convinced that the single laziest party in the world is some ultra evil, ultra corrupt group lmfao


----------



## Dakitten (Aug 24, 2022)

LainaGabranth said:


> It's very amusing when people claim to be anti-government and then just exclusively back republican talking points and shittalk the democrats. The democrats like, literally do not do anything and yet people are out here convinced that the single laziest party in the world is some ultra evil, ultra corrupt group lmfao



The conservative leaning folk have to fight with feels, like BABY MURDER and MEN MUST BE MEN, WOMEN MUST BE WOMEN (property) or BELIEF IN CHRISTIAN GOD MUST SUPERCEDE ACTUAL LAW! If they didn't, they would have to acknowledge how they don't have any platforms that help the population at large, just gutting regulations for the owner class and  privatizing everything.

Dems may not do much, but at least they can be brought to bow to public demands more consistently. They don't outright object to diversity of ethnic origins and gender, so they have to address it clearly. They don't object to higher taxes to keep things funded, so they can occasionally actually afford progress. Their opposition at this point is akin to a sad white boy trying to mansplain theocracy on a corner while grumbling about civil war if they don't get their way. Very sad stuff.


----------



## LainaGabranth (Aug 24, 2022)

Dakitten said:


> WOMEN MUST BE WOMEN (property)


I love your whole post but this part specifically has me howling


----------



## tabzer (Aug 24, 2022)

Dakitten said:


> Says a supporter of the minority party. Sorry, cupcake, but maybe your knowledge of US politics isn't that good, just like your knowledge of women, biological functions, how to be a decent human being, and how to be an effective troll are all tragically lacking. Don't get too down about it, I hear some countries have only a single party that allows others to exist but never to challenge their superiority so that it maintains dominance for decades. I don't know enough about those, but that sounds even more rough.



Projection game is strong.  I'll let you know about the first time I vote in your "democracy".


----------



## LainaGabranth (Aug 24, 2022)

tabzer said:


> Projection game is strong.  I'll let you know the about the first time I vote in your "democracy".


Something tells me that if all you can muster is a pretentious variant of "no u" that maybe it hit too close to home


----------



## lolcatzuru (Aug 24, 2022)

LainaGabranth said:


> It's very amusing when people claim to be anti-government and then just exclusively back republican talking points and shittalk the democrats. The democrats like, literally do not do anything and yet people are out here convinced that the single laziest party in the world is some ultra evil, ultra corrupt group lmfao



all checks out to me.


----------



## tabzer (Aug 24, 2022)

LainaGabranth said:


> Something tells me that if all you can muster is a pretentious variant of "no u" that maybe it hit too close to home



I am not in a position to support the republican party, even if I wanted to.


----------



## Delerious (Aug 24, 2022)

The only way abortion should even be banned is if there is a super majority vote BY THE PEOPLE to do so. And even then, state leaders need to make exceptions to the rule, otherwise there will be casualties beyond an aborted child. Why the Republican party is still so dead set on keeping their religion in government is beyond me.


----------



## tabzer (Aug 24, 2022)

Delerious said:


> The only way abortion should even be banned is if there is a super majority vote BY THE PEOPLE to do so. And even then, state leaders need to make exceptions to the rule, otherwise there will be casualties beyond an aborted child. Why the Republican party is still so dead set on keeping their religion in government is beyond me.



Generally about %20 of the population elects a president in the US.  How is an issue going to reach an actual consensus before making a law?  How would you determine what laws need "super majority" if you are suggesting some laws don't need it?

If you want to get religion out of politics, you would need to get religion out of people.  I don't think that's possible because as government attempts to control the zeitgeist, it re-creates the religion.


----------



## TraderPatTX (Aug 25, 2022)

Dark_Ansem said:


> Hah! You're, as usual, wrong.


You found 3 specific examples and 3 general "we hear" examples. Wanna bet you don't want to talk about the tens of millions of abortions performed not because of rape, incest or medical emergency, but of convenience over the last 5 decades? How many of those aborted babies were female? BIPOC? Gay? Lesbian? Trans?


----------



## TraderPatTX (Aug 25, 2022)

Delerious said:


> The only way abortion should even be banned is if there is a super majority vote BY THE PEOPLE to do so. And even then, state leaders need to make exceptions to the rule, otherwise there will be casualties beyond an aborted child. Why the Republican party is still so dead set on keeping their religion in government is beyond me.


At least you admit that the aborted child is a casualty. I'm just not sure why you believe that is an acceptable casualty.


----------



## TraderPatTX (Aug 25, 2022)

Delerious said:


> The only way abortion should even be banned is if there is a super majority vote BY THE PEOPLE to do so. And even then, state leaders need to make exceptions to the rule, otherwise there will be casualties beyond an aborted child. Why the Republican party is still so dead set on keeping their religion in government is beyond me.


Isn't a democracy just a simple majority or is the left changing the definition of a democracy too?


----------



## TraderPatTX (Aug 25, 2022)

Dakitten said:


> Says a supporter of the minority party. Sorry, cupcake, but maybe your knowledge of US politics isn't that good, just like your knowledge of women, biological functions, how to be a decent human being, and how to be an effective troll are all tragically lacking. Don't get too down about it, I hear some countries have only a single party that allows others to exist but never to challenge their superiority so that it maintains dominance for decades. I don't know enough about those, but that sounds even more rough.


Zelensky just banned opposition political parties in Ukraine and we send him billions of dollars. So much for protecting democracy.


----------



## tabzer (Aug 25, 2022)

TraderPatTX said:


> Zelensky just banned opposition political parties in Ukraine and we send him billions of dollars. So much for protecting democracy.



"Together we can embrace any every contradiction."


----------



## Dark_Ansem (Aug 25, 2022)

TraderPatTX said:


> You found 3 specific examples and 3 general "we hear" examples. Wanna bet you don't want to talk about the tens of millions of abortions performed not because of rape, incest or medical emergency, but of convenience over the last 5 decades? How many of those aborted babies were female? BIPOC? Gay? Lesbian? Trans?



Are you literally saying that women can't decide what happens to their bodies, but somehow you can?

Weren't you one of the morons screeching " ma body ma rights" when it was time to talk about vaccines?

Also, I'm sure these 3 cases really appreciate you simply dismissing them as statistics. Are you a sociopath incapable of feeling empathy?


----------



## Dark_Ansem (Aug 25, 2022)

TraderPatTX said:


> At least you admit that the aborted child is a casualty. I'm just not sure why you believe that is an acceptable casualty.



I don't see any admission of "abortions being casualties". Because they aren't.


----------



## TraderPatTX (Aug 25, 2022)

Dark_Ansem said:


> Are you literally saying that women can't decide what happens to their bodies, but somehow you can?
> 
> Weren't you one of the morons screeching " ma body ma rights" when it was time to talk about vaccines?
> 
> Also, I'm sure these 3 cases really appreciate you simply dismissing them as statistics. Are you a sociopath incapable of feeling empathy?


I'm not talking about women's bodies. Only the left talks about women's bodies. I'm talking about the completely separate body with it's own unique and separate organs and DNA belonging to the growing baby. The left never wants to talk about that body because then all of your arguments fall apart or shows the truth that the left is a death cult.

Weren't you the one of the morons screeching "ma body ma rights" for decades and then suddenly stopped once the clot shots starting to be mandated?

Are you really sure though? Did you go ask them what they thought about a random shitposter on a gaming forum? Because I have doubts that you did. 

Says the sociopath who will use 3 examples that are way outside of the norm to justify the 10's of millions of abortions done out of convenience. How weird that you completely avoided talking about that... almost like you lack empathy for all of those BIPOC's killed in the womb. I think there's words to describe people like you. Racist? Sexist? Bigot? Transphobe? I do believe all of those descriptors fit the left to a perfect T. Wear it with pride, you've earned it.


----------



## moneychild (Aug 25, 2022)

You know something is f**ked up when a gaming web site is posting about stuff like this.


----------



## g00s3y (Aug 25, 2022)

Another thread where the incels have come out.


----------



## sombrerosonic (Aug 25, 2022)

moneychild said:


> You know something is f**ked up when a gaming web site is posting about stuff like this.


Sometimes i question my sanity when i end up on there articles on the Pol area


----------



## tabzer (Aug 25, 2022)

Dark_Ansem said:


> I don't see any admission of "abortions being casualties". Because they aren't.



Illiteracy strikes again.  You must come from a poor country.



g00s3y said:


> Another thread where the incels have come out.



When people come onto a gaming website and talk about "incels" in a derogatory way (redundant as incels are already self-depreciating), it seems like they are trying to brag about having had sex.  

Nobody believes you are physically attractive, lol.


----------



## City (Aug 25, 2022)

Sorry I just had to butt in to say


tabzer said:


> When people come onto a gaming website and talk about "incels" in a derogatory way (redundant as incels are already self-depreciating), it seems like they are trying to brag about having had sex.
> 
> Nobody believes you are physically attractive, lol.


Based.


(You see a thread you don't like? No one is forcing you to comment. This isn't reddit where faking a high horse of moral grounds will get you le updoots. You're just coming off as the dumbass you actually are. There's a "politics" section for a reason. Also, anyone using "incel" as an insult might as well use "faggot", because the derogatory way is the same: people who don't have sex with women, that apparenly we hold to a lesser standard for some reason)


----------



## LainaGabranth (Aug 25, 2022)

TraderPatTX said:


> You found 3 specific examples and 3 general "we hear" examples. Wanna bet you don't want to talk about the tens of millions of abortions performed not because of rape, incest or medical emergency, but of convenience over the last 5 decades? How many of those aborted babies were female? BIPOC? Gay? Lesbian? Trans?


Bodily autonomy is cool, actually. Can you tell us why it upsets you so?


----------



## LainaGabranth (Aug 25, 2022)

City said:


> (You see a thread you don't like? No one is forcing you to comment. This isn't reddit where faking a high horse of moral grounds will get you le updoots. You're just coming off as the dumbass you actually are. There's a "politics" section for a reason. Also, anyone using "incel" as an insult might as well use "faggot", because the derogatory way is the same: people who don't have sex with women, that apparenly we hold to a lesser standard for some reason)


Actually the reason people are called incels as an insult is because holding views that women are lesser is funny. I don't give a shit if someone does or doesn't have sex, but if someone holds sex on a pedestal and believes they're owed it like incels do, then that's extremely funny and I love making fun of weirdos like that.

Something tells me that with how hard you had to misrepresent what incel means, you may in fact be coping from having been called one before.


----------



## TraderPatTX (Aug 25, 2022)

LainaGabranth said:


> Bodily autonomy is cool, actually. Can you tell us why it upsets you so?


Funny how the left screams about equality, except when it comes to bodily autonomy. Why does one person get to enjoy bodily autonomy, but the other person, who is more vulnerable not get to enjoy those same protections? Why does bodily autonomy for infant BIPOC's upset you so much?


----------



## tabzer (Aug 25, 2022)

LainaGabranth said:


> Actually the reason people are called incels as an insult is because holding views that women are lesser is funny.
> ...
> 
> I love making fun of weirdos



Nah, I'm pretty sure the only reason that @Dark_Ansem talks about his girlfriend's abortions and calls people incel is because he wants anon to see him in a way that the real world does not.  It's ironic that he can't see that the cringe is a personality issue and bleeds through wherever he goes.

Likewise, we have you, who seems to be humble bragging that you are "normal", as if that were ever going to pass--like one's gender on the internet.

If you are looking for weirdos, you've come to the right place.  If you are foolish enough to think you are above them, or that your internet identity is a suitable substitute to your irl inaction, then stay still long enough as I mint you as an NFT.


----------



## LainaGabranth (Aug 25, 2022)

TraderPatTX said:


> Funny how the left screams about equality, except when it comes to bodily autonomy. Why does one person get to enjoy bodily autonomy, but the other person, who is more vulnerable not get to enjoy those same protections? Why does bodily autonomy for infant BIPOC's upset you so much?


It's kind of weird that you'd ask this considering your opinion on renting and tenants.


----------



## TraderPatTX (Aug 25, 2022)

LainaGabranth said:


> It's kind of weird that you'd ask this considering your opinion on renting and tenants.


The whole "you destroyed my argument so look here as I change the topic" argument. You should scroll to the top of this page and respond with the title of this particular thread. Then read your comment to see if it fits in with the subject matter. You may be shocked at what you find.


----------



## LainaGabranth (Aug 25, 2022)

TraderPatTX said:


> The whole "you destroyed my argument so look here as I change the topic" argument. You should scroll to the top of this page and respond with the title of this particular thread. Then read your comment to see if it fits in with the subject matter. You may be shocked at what you find.


Can you explain to the class how you think pointing out hypocrisy is "changing the subject?" I know you have a one track mind, but if the topic changes because I call you a hypocrite, that is on *you*, bozo.


----------



## City (Aug 25, 2022)

LainaGabranth said:


> Actually the reason people are called incels as an insult is because holding views that women are lesser is funny. I don't give a shit if someone does or doesn't have sex, but if someone holds sex on a pedestal and believes they're owed it like incels do, then that's extremely funny and I love making fun of weirdos like that.
> 
> Something tells me that with how hard you had to misrepresent what incel means, you may in fact be coping from having been called one before.


LMAO grasp boy, grasp.

People get called incels because it's the current politically correct version of "faggot", aka "someone who doesn't fuck women". There's literally no other reason why. I've been called a faggot and an incel for decades for disagreeing witht trolls like you


----------



## g00s3y (Aug 25, 2022)

tabzer said:


> When people come onto a gaming website and talk about "incels" in a derogatory way (redundant as incels are already self-depreciating), it seems like they are trying to brag about having had sex.
> 
> Nobody believes you are physically attractive, lol.


No one said anything about having sex or bragging about it. Just stating facts, you are one.

Oh no, an incel said something about my looks, how will I move on with life?


----------



## TraderPatTX (Aug 25, 2022)

LainaGabranth said:


> Can you explain to the class how you think pointing out hypocrisy is "changing the subject?" I know you have a one track mind, but if the topic changes because I call you a hypocrite, that is on *you*, bozo.


You changed the subject without even providing any history or context. Anybody else reading that would not have a clue what you are talking about. In other words, they'd be in the same boat as you.


----------



## mituzora (Aug 25, 2022)

City said:


> LMAO grasp boy, grasp.
> 
> People get called incels because it's the current politically correct version of "faggot", aka "someone who doesn't fuck women". There's literally no other reason why. I've been called a faggot and an incel for decades for disagreeing witht trolls like you


You keep using the word "incel"  as a synonym for "faggot"

I don't think that word means what you think it means.


Back on topic,  being pro-choice doesn't mean pro-abortion like some of you are alluring.  it simply means that you are pro-CHOICE.  you can be against abortion, but with the choice to do so.  just because access is there doesn't mean it infringes on your personal beliefs,  and that's why it's called pro-choice, and not pro-abortion.

I personally am indifferent, but while my wife is pro-choice, she is anti-abortion for herself, and that's fine,  it's not like she's trying to control other AFAB/women.

In this particular case,  pro-choice would allow her to abort and carry on with her life without the burden of a child who has been clearly deemed that the mother doesn't feel fit to take care of, and that's a good thing, despite it being a sad fact that a potential child is being aborted.  why focus on people who don't even know their head from their ass, when we could be focusing on the person that not only would be wrecking her own life if she chose to had that kid, it would be wrecking that kid's life as well, negating the pro-life shit anyway.


----------



## g00s3y (Aug 25, 2022)

City said:


> LMAO grasp boy, grasp.
> 
> People get called incels because it's the current politically correct version of "faggot", aka "someone who doesn't fuck women". There's literally no other reason why. I've been called a faggot and an incel for decades for disagreeing witht trolls like you



Holy shit you are so fucking wrong. No one uses incel to mean that, except maybe alt-right cucks who hate being called an incel.


----------



## mituzora (Aug 25, 2022)

TraderPatTX said:


> You changed the subject without even providing any history or context. Anybody else reading that would not have a clue what you are talking about. In other words, they'd be in the same boat as you.


Stop calling for people to stay on subject when you can't even do this yourself.  you constantly change the subject to support whataboutism every chance you get on these topics,  you're no better in that regard.


----------



## sombrerosonic (Aug 25, 2022)

so a heavily damaged robot is fighting with some joycons, a fat guy from south part, and a Phenox from Texas.....

Man this form is fucking funny


----------



## TraderPatTX (Aug 25, 2022)

mituzora said:


> Stop calling for people to stay on subject when you can't even do this yourself.  you constantly change the subject to support whataboutism every chance you get on these topics,  you're no better in that regard.


And I get called out on it too. Did I ever say I was better in that regard? No, I did not. Is calling people out a one way street around here? In fact, I get called out for a lot of the same things that @LainaGabranth does on a daily basis, like not @'ing people in my comments. Guess some are more equal than others around. Duly noted.

In other words, stay in your lane. I'm sure @LainaGabranth can defend themselves without a knight riding in to the rescue.


----------



## TraderPatTX (Aug 25, 2022)

sombrerosonic said:


> so a heavily damaged robot is fighting with some joycons, a fat guy from south part, and a Phenox from Texas.....
> 
> Man this form is fucking funny


Life comes at ya fast sometimes.


----------



## City (Aug 25, 2022)

g00s3y said:


> Holy shit you are so fucking wrong. No one uses incel to mean that, except maybe alt-right cucks who hate being called an incel.


Literally every time someone disagrees with something, anything related to women, the word "incel" is used. Let's not pretend that "incel" is used for anything but to throw shades at the person's ability to get laid. The only reason why accusing someone of being homosexual is an insult is for that very reason.

One of many examples.


----------



## tabzer (Aug 25, 2022)

g00s3y said:


> No one said anything about having sex or bragging about it. Just stating facts, you are one.
> 
> Oh no, an incel said something about my looks, how will I move on with life?



By begging the question with a side of salt, apparently.


----------



## LainaGabranth (Aug 25, 2022)

TraderPatTX said:


> And I get called out on it too. Did I ever say I was better in that regard? No, I did not. Is calling people out a one way street around here? In fact, I get called out for a lot of the same things that @LainaGabranth does on a daily basis, like not @'ing people in my comments. Guess some are more equal than others around. Duly noted.
> 
> In other words, stay in your lane. I'm sure @LainaGabranth can defend themselves without a knight riding in to the rescue.


"WAAAH LAINA BAD"
cope harder nerd


----------



## LainaGabranth (Aug 25, 2022)

City said:


> LMAO grasp boy, grasp.
> 
> People get called incels because it's the current politically correct version of "faggot", aka "someone who doesn't fuck women". There's literally no other reason why. I've been called a faggot and an incel for decades for disagreeing witht trolls like you


Incels are people who believe women are objects and should adhere to their belief system of essentially treating them like objects. If you've been called an incel for decades, that's not something you should be so open about, considering that the only reason you'd be called that is if you held some truly misogynistic views. So, y'know. Cope and seethe, I guess.


----------



## TraderPatTX (Aug 25, 2022)

LainaGabranth said:


> "WAAAH LAINA BAD"
> cope harder nerd


Says the resident expert in coping and seething. Cry moar


----------



## Dark_Ansem (Aug 25, 2022)

TraderPatTX said:


> I'm talking about the completely separate body with it's own unique and separate organs and DNA belonging to the growing baby.



Completely separate - literally inside the body of the woman

Separate organs - literally made of maternal stem cells

Unique DNA - literally dna of both parents which means it's 95% similar to most other creatures on earth

You're really not good at this.


----------



## g00s3y (Aug 25, 2022)

Ever notice only actual people who are incels, get mad when the word is used. 

Imagine how mad they would be if the remarks were coming from a woman, LMAO.


----------



## TraderPatTX (Aug 25, 2022)

Dark_Ansem said:


> Completely separate - literally inside the body of the woman
> 
> Separate organs - literally made of maternal stem cells
> 
> ...


When you are inside a house, are you a part of that house or something completely separate?

Has nobody had the birds and bees convo with you?

That 5% is what makes it unique.

I try not to call people dumb, but damn bro. This is a new low for you.


----------



## tabzer (Aug 26, 2022)

g00s3y said:


> Ever notice only actual people who are incels, get mad when the word is used.
> 
> Imagine how mad they would be if the remarks were coming from a woman, LMAO.



Still begging I see.  I can be an incel and make accurate statements about those who act like it concerns them.  I had already assumed you were a woman, so you can already guess how mad I'd be.


----------



## LainaGabranth (Aug 26, 2022)

TraderPatTX said:


> When you are inside a house, are you a part of that house or something completely separate?
> 
> Has nobody had the birds and bees convo with you?
> 
> ...


Here's a question for you, and anything other than an answer is concession that pro-choice is morally correct.

There's a burning building, and you can either save five babies from it, or 30 embryos that will absolutely lead to healthy children if properly cared for. Which do you save?


----------



## tabzer (Aug 26, 2022)

LainaGabranth said:


> Here's a question for you, and anything other than an answer is concession that pro-choice is morally correct.
> 
> There's a burning building, and you can either save five babies from it, or 30 embryos that will absolutely lead to healthy children if properly cared for. Which do you save?



"There's a burning lady, she is pregnant with 5 kids and has the ability to produce 30 more kids if a donor is available.  Also, clairvoyance is real.  Do you choose to save the 5 kids or impregnate her for 30 other children.  Checkmate loser."

Please make a video game.


----------



## Dark_Ansem (Aug 26, 2022)

TraderPatTX said:


> When you are inside a house, are you a part of that house or something completely separate?


Lemme check my veins, concrete must be there!


----------



## TraderPatTX (Aug 26, 2022)

g00s3y said:


> Ever notice only actual people who are incels, get mad when the word is used.
> 
> Imagine how mad they would be if the remarks were coming from a woman, LMAO.


Ever notice only actual people who are groomers, get mad when the word is used.

They get so mad, social media has to ban the use of the word. Weird.


----------



## TraderPatTX (Aug 26, 2022)

LainaGabranth said:


> Here's a question for you, and anything other than an answer is concession that pro-choice is morally correct.
> 
> There's a burning building, and you can either save five babies from it, or 30 embryos that will absolutely lead to healthy children if properly cared for. Which do you save?


I would put the fire out and save them all.


----------



## LainaGabranth (Aug 26, 2022)

TraderPatTX said:


> I would put the fire out and save them all.


The building collapses and everyone dies. Game over.


----------



## sombrerosonic (Aug 26, 2022)

LainaGabranth said:


> The building collapses and everyone dies. Game over.


----------



## TraderPatTX (Aug 26, 2022)

LainaGabranth said:


> The building collapses and everyone dies. Game over.


Checkmate.


----------



## Dark_Ansem (Aug 26, 2022)

TraderPatTX said:


> I would put the fire out and save them all.


This from a guy who can't literally stop flaming in an online forum.


----------



## TraderPatTX (Aug 26, 2022)

Dark_Ansem said:


> This from a guy who can't literally stop flaming in an online forum.


C'mon man, you can do better than that. Try harder.


----------



## JJ1013 (Aug 27, 2022)

tabzer said:


> "There's a burning lady, she is pregnant with 5 kids and has the ability to produce 30 more kids if a donor is available.  Also, clairvoyance is real.  Do you choose to save the 5 kids or impregnate her for 30 other children.  Checkmate loser."
> 
> Please make a video game.


TIL this guy likes to give non-answers. Figures...



Nothereed said:


> [URL]https://www.politico.com/news/2022/07/14/anti-abotion-10-year-old-ohio-00045843
> "“She would have had the baby, and as many women who have had babies as a result of rape, we would hope that she would understand the reason and ultimately the benefit of having the child,”' From Jim Bop, one of the major people who wrote the right to life laws that exist in many states. Talking about the benefits of having a child as a 10 year old.


Lord al-fucking-mighty, not even us underaged people are safe from conservatives milking the fuck out of the law and "making us understand" to abuse us. Reminds me a lot of this stupid-ass shit those idiots said. And then THEY say we "are the groomers".


----------



## Dark_Ansem (Aug 27, 2022)

TraderPatTX said:


> C'mon man, you can do better than that. Try harder.


Why should I, you're doing everything yourself, as I'm sure you're used to heh heh heh


----------



## tabzer (Aug 27, 2022)

JJ1013 said:


> TIL this guy likes to give non-answers. Figures...



Just demonstrating how faithfully the analogy corresponds to the stated intention.  Question was for @TraderPatTX.  It's hard to tell if you are trolling.

You do realize that there is a difference between defending a pregnancy and defending a rape, right?  Oh, of course not.  Too nuanced.  Forget about the baby rapists; rapist babies are the problem.


----------



## chrisrlink (Aug 30, 2022)

Dragon91Nippon said:


> Texas is overall one of the worst states for anyone of any kind of diversity or vulnerability, they not only have extreme Prejudice towards LGBTQ but also treat women absolutely atrociously. I know they're not the only one, Florida is pretty awful as well but Texas has been doing all the bad stuff lately.


then let them seceed stupid move if they want power within DC stupid idea imo though one less red state in the US plus their oil supply isn't limitless and we could punish any state who trades with them (they want to suceed there will be consequences ) and if they declare war on their former country well again retarded move cause their military minus those who refuse to fight or even side with the US (those with morals), will be much weaker than those states that stay in the Union


----------



## chrisrlink (Aug 30, 2022)

not very funny but ironic how republicans force women to carry a pregnancy full term while tryin currently to cut off women from life sustaining programs (Food stamps,wic, SSI and welfare) their logic is so damn flawed how can you force a woman to give birth only to kill a baby from malnutition from poverty what logic is that?


----------



## sombrerosonic (Aug 30, 2022)

tabzer said:


> Just demonstrating how faithfully the analogy corresponds to the stated intention.  Question was for @TraderPatTX.  It's hard to tell if you are trolling.
> 
> You do realize that there is a difference between defending a pregnancy and defending a rape, right?  Oh, of course not.  Too nuanced.  Forget about the baby rapists; rapist babies are the problem.


Stupid question but can i be in your siggy.... I want to be in tabzer hall of shame. i think it would be funny


----------



## Dark_Ansem (Aug 30, 2022)

sombrerosonic said:


> Stupid question but can i be in your siggy.... I want to be in tabzer hall of shame. i think it would be funny



Consider it a badge of honour.


----------



## Dakitten (Aug 30, 2022)

Dark_Ansem said:


> Consider it a badge of honour.


I am still in love with how he floundered with my joke condensing of his reply to me as a sig. Stretched so hard to make it look like a pass at him or something. <3


----------



## The Catboy (Aug 30, 2022)

TraderPatTX said:


> But we all know that the abortion cult does not care. The goal is to rip out as many babies limb from limb and cut as many spinal cords as possible.


Go to therapy


----------



## tabzer (Aug 31, 2022)

sombrerosonic said:


> Stupid question but can i be in your siggy.... I want to be in tabzer hall of shame. i think it would be funny



It's not a stupid question.  But you'd have to say something very special.



Dakitten said:


> I am still in love with how he floundered with my joke condensing of his reply to me as a sig. Stretched so hard to make it look like a pass at him or something. <3



It's something you imagined me saying to you.  Literal projection.  Get your partner in here.  We'll have a circus.


----------



## TraderPatTX (Aug 31, 2022)

The Catboy said:


> Go to therapy


If that's the best you can come up with, delete your account and cancel your internet service.


----------



## Dark_Ansem (Aug 31, 2022)

TraderPatTX said:


> If that's the best you can come up with, delete your account and cancel your internet service.


You'd listen to some advice. You have displayed behaviour which can only be described as erratic and paranoid.


----------



## City (Aug 31, 2022)

TraderPatTX said:


> If that's the best you can come up with, delete your account and cancel your internet service.


Just ignore him. He clearly has some serious mental issues (have you seen his twitch? LMAO)


----------



## TraderPatTX (Aug 31, 2022)

Dark_Ansem said:


> You'd listen to some advice. You have displayed behaviour which can only be described as erratic and paranoid.


And here you are swooping in to offer your 2 cents that nobody asked for as usual. Learn how to spell check your comments. At the very least, edit it after the fact.

You have never offered anything of substance. Just weak insults any 8 year old could type out minus spelling errors.


----------



## TraderPatTX (Aug 31, 2022)

City said:


> Just ignore him. He clearly has some serious mental issues (have you seen his twitch? LMAO)


I've noticed there are a handful of people here who just can't control themselves and they have to respond to my every comment. Either they are getting paid to make stupid school yard insults or they want this D. Time will tell.


----------



## Dark_Ansem (Aug 31, 2022)

TraderPatTX said:


> I've noticed there are a handful of people here who just can't control themselves and they have to respond to my every comment. Either they are getting paid to make stupid school yard insults or they want this D. Time will tell.


I'm not sure anyone wants anything from you but even if it were your "d", it would leave anyone starved and craving a completely different meal.


TraderPatTX said:


> And here you are swooping in to offer your 2 cents that nobody asked for as usual.


Nobody asked for your nonsense either and yet, here we are.


TraderPatTX said:


> Learn how to spell check your comments. At the very least, edit it after the fact.
> 
> You have never offered anything of substance. Just weak insults any 8 year old could type out minus spelling errors.


Your ignorance is displaying very strongly. It's really sad.


----------



## tabzer (Aug 31, 2022)

Dark_Ansem said:


> I'm not sure anyone wants anything from you but even if it were your "d", it would leave anyone starved and craving a completely different meal.



@Dark_Ansem admits that @TraderPatTX's "d" would  leave them wanting.  Is @Dark_Ansem just greedy or is @TraderPatTX an underperformer?

Please continue.


----------



## erikas (Aug 31, 2022)

To all the people screeching about "abortion is a human right", if there were appropriate exceptions for cases like this, would you be happy then? Or do you just want the right to be able to kill babies left and right with no restrictions?


----------



## City (Aug 31, 2022)

Dark_Ansem said:


> I'm not sure anyone wants anything from you but even if it were your "d", it would leave anyone starved and craving a completely different meal.


Out of curiosity, what are you exactly implying here? Are you making fun of another human for a possible birth defect? Is that how low you're willing to go? Hm.


----------



## tabzer (Aug 31, 2022)

He's just hoping that he scored enough points with the soapbox crowd that he can coast on it.  Or he'll be forced to gay out, out of obligation.  But it's not like he didn't already want that.


----------



## TraderPatTX (Aug 31, 2022)

Dark_Ansem said:


> I'm not sure anyone wants anything from you but even if it were your "d", it would leave anyone starved and craving a completely different meal.
> 
> Nobody asked for your nonsense either and yet, here we are.
> 
> Your ignorance is displaying very strongly. It's really sad.


That's why you keep coming back for more. You're not starving, you're just thirsty. 

I can actually hold a conversation without insults. You have yet to display that ability.

Projection much?


----------



## TraderPatTX (Aug 31, 2022)

City said:


> Out of curiosity, what are you exactly implying here? Are you making fun of another human for a possible birth defect? Is that how low you're willing to go? Hm.


Leftists can't recognize jokes and they can't meme. They are completely humorless, which is why they lash out at strangers on the internet. I'd be willing to bet they are nice and cordial in person. In a nutshell, they are fake.


----------



## Dark_Ansem (Aug 31, 2022)

City said:


> Out of curiosity, what are you exactly implying here? Are you making fun of another human for a possible birth defect? Is that how low you're willing to go? Hm.


No. Are you illiterate? Also "defect"? wow.


erikas said:


> To all the people screeching about "abortion is a human right", if there were appropriate exceptions for cases like this, would you be happy then? Or do you just want the right to be able to kill babies left and right with no restrictions?


Foetuses aren't babies. You know what is a baby? a BABY.


TraderPatTX said:


> I can actually hold a conversation without insults. You have yet to display that ability.


This has been demonstrated to be, time and again, completely false. by you.


TraderPatTX said:


> That's why you keep coming back for more. You're not starving, you're just thirsty.


Thirsty for what? you? I don't exactly crave to read more of your delusions. I always keep hoping you'll stop embarassing yourself.


TraderPatTX said:


> Leftists can't recognize jokes and they can't meme. They are completely humorless, which is why they lash out at strangers on the internet. I'd be willing to bet they are nice and cordial in person. In a nutshell, they are fake.


And you would know all about fake, yes, considering the nonsense you post regularly.


----------



## LainaGabranth (Aug 31, 2022)

erikas said:


> To all the people screeching about "abortion is a human right", if there were appropriate exceptions for cases like this, would you be happy then? Or do you just want the right to be able to kill babies left and right with no restrictions?


I'll take "strawman" for $400.


----------



## The Catboy (Aug 31, 2022)

TraderPatTX said:


> If that's the best you can come up with, delete your account and cancel your internet service.


Actually go to therapy. There isn’t an abortion cult out to kill fetuses. If you actually believe that’s something happening, touch grass and talk to a professional.


----------



## Dark_Ansem (Aug 31, 2022)

The Catboy said:


> touch grass


It's something else the guy has to touch, and it ain't happening anytime soon!


----------



## TraderPatTX (Aug 31, 2022)

Dark_Ansem said:


> No. Are you illiterate? Also "defect"? wow.
> 
> Foetuses aren't babies. You know what is a baby? a BABY.
> 
> ...


You obviously have not read my interactions with @appleburger.

Not sure what foetuses are, but please explain the difference between a 9 month old fetus and a 1 day old baby besides location. I'll wait.

I know fake because you respond to me like a little girl.


----------



## TraderPatTX (Aug 31, 2022)

The Catboy said:


> Actually go to therapy. There isn’t an abortion cult out to kill fetuses. If you actually believe that’s something happening, touch grass and talk to a professional.


The person that tells people to go to therapy is often the one who needs therapy themselves.

Based on your comments, you are not a doctor so you need to knock it off.


----------



## Dark_Ansem (Aug 31, 2022)

TraderPatTX said:


> I know fake because you respond to me like a little girl.


Nah, this is all first-hand knowledge bub, all these nights spent in that basement trolling...


TraderPatTX said:


> The person that tells people to go to therapy is often the one who needs therapy themselves.
> 
> Based on your comments, you are not a doctor so you need to knock it off.


LOL if I had to judge you from your posts (and I do) you're barely even in the same genus as humans. And yes, it is intentional.


----------



## TraderPatTX (Aug 31, 2022)

Dark_Ansem said:


> Nah, this is all first-hand knowledge bub, all these nights spent in that basement trolling...


Damn dude, Florida doesn't have basements.


----------



## The Catboy (Aug 31, 2022)

TraderPatTX said:


> The person that tells people to go to therapy is often the one who needs therapy themselves.
> 
> Based on your comments, you are not a doctor so you need to knock it off.


Dude, you are in Florida.


----------



## TraderPatTX (Aug 31, 2022)

The Catboy said:


> Dude, you are in Florida.


So are 22 million other people. Lots of NY, NJ, PA, and CA plates here too.


----------



## Dakitten (Aug 31, 2022)

erikas said:


> To all the people screeching about "abortion is a human right", if there were appropriate exceptions for cases like this, would you be happy then? Or do you just want the right to be able to kill babies left and right with no restrictions?



Murder them all! I need at least a baby brain and TWO hearts on my dinner plate during our weekly satanic cult meetings in the basement of my local Papa John's, and supplies are thinning! 

Seriously, the exceptions are just bare minimum adherence to common sense without stepping into the theocratic nonsense and debate. Please act like you've met another human being before and presume your peers aren't all marrow sucking lich lords, hmm? Kids these days...


----------



## erikas (Aug 31, 2022)

Dark_Ansem said:


> Foetuses aren't babies. You know what is a baby? a BABY.


I have seen people arguing that abortion should be legal up to and even after the moment of birth. So I'm not talking about fetuses here. I would agree with allowing abortion up to 3 months, which is the case in most of Europe. Are you fine with that?


----------



## erikas (Aug 31, 2022)

Dakitten said:


> Murder them all! I need at least a baby brain and TWO hearts on my dinner plate during our weekly satanic cult meetings in the basement of my local Papa John's, and supplies are thinning!
> 
> Seriously, the exceptions are just bare minimum adherence to common sense without stepping into the theocratic nonsense and debate. Please act like you've met another human being before and presume your peers aren't all marrow sucking lich lords, hmm? Kids these days...


Just to make it clear, I'm not religious. Maybe I came off a bit strong, but in my defence, so does the american debate on abortion, because the loudest pro abortion activists want the right to abort up to the moment of birth.


----------



## Dark_Ansem (Sep 1, 2022)

TraderPatTX said:


> Damn dude, Florida doesn't have basements.





erikas said:


> I have seen people arguing that abortion should be legal up to and even after the moment of birth. So I'm not talking about fetuses here. I would agree with allowing abortion up to 3 months, which is the case in most of Europe. Are you fine with that?



As we say back home, abortion should be legal up to the 40th birthday heh.


----------



## Dark_Ansem (Sep 1, 2022)

erikas said:


> Just to make it clear, I'm not religious. Maybe I came off a bit strong, but in my defence, so does the american debate on abortion, because the loudest pro abortion activists want the right to abort up to the moment of birth.



Care to back that claim up?


----------



## Dakitten (Sep 2, 2022)

erikas said:


> Just to make it clear, I'm not religious. Maybe I came off a bit strong, but in my defence, so does the american debate on abortion, because the loudest pro abortion activists want the right to abort up to the moment of birth.


I will back this claim up. I believe that women should be able to have an "abortion " up to the point of birth since they are more knowledgeable about their bodies and their situations than anyone. There is no way around it. Abortions are tragic but so is the lack of social and even medical support for women in the world.

That being said, I put abortion in quotes because after a point in time, the procedure is often to just induce birth. Viability arguments come under an immediate test here, but it is worth pointing out that 92% of abortions take place before the end of the first trimester, before the fetus is measurably conscious to stimuli, a fair benchmark of life by any standards (including most of the religious and nonsensical ones). After that point, abortions become serious medical issues and are often insanely painful and a bit risky! No woman nonchalantly opts for a month 4 abortion because they just "weren't feeling motherhood anymore."

In a perfect world, medical science would make the child birthing process absolutely safe and painless, and society would ensure both the child and the woman would not go wanting for anything in the aftermath, where both are at their most vulnerable point. Sadly, we are nowhere near that yet, and in America we have some of the most scientifically illiterate politicians on planet Earth, who doubled down by also slamming on the academic community for their expert input and insight on this sort of thing! To them, women come third behind the potential life that can genuinely harm and or kill them and the capitalist wet dream of the doctors risking their ability to practice or even live free by doing their jobs in the face of hospital liability insurance and legal fees.

I can provide sources again if y'all can't find them yourselves (I am on my cell prior to the start of my work day atm), but keep in mind that just even bringing a lot of this up is strawmanning a marginalized group in society that is responsible for all of your existences. Don't play dumb and get confused why this is such a touchy topic, the very premise of shaming women as a whole for wanting the choice after "being loose" or whatever is absolutely fair grounds for half the population to pop you in the mouth!


----------



## TraderPatTX (Sep 2, 2022)

Dakitten said:


> I will back this claim up. I believe that women should be able to have an "abortion " up to the point of birth since they are more knowledgeable about their bodies and their situations than anyone.


What is the difference between a 9 month old fetus and a 1 day old baby besides physical location?


----------



## tabzer (Sep 2, 2022)

Dakitten said:


> I will back this claim up. I believe that women should be able to have an "abortion " up to the point of birth since they are more knowledgeable about their bodies and their situations than anyone.



"Knowledgeable", no.  Just because someone is personally affected doesn't mean they know what is happening.  It can be pretty terrifying.  Making decisions because one is afraid is a recipe for regret.  "Abortion" =/= support.  Sometimes the best support for a woman is an abortion, but that's only after consideration and consultation.  




Dakitten said:


> Abortions are tragic but so is the lack of social and even medical support for women in the world.



Abortions shouldn't be treated as a shortcut to make up for the lack of social and medical support.  Maybe one should address those concerns before putting themselves in the position of needing it?

Do you honestly think a perfect world is a place without pain or desire?  If so, then it's probably something you need to address with a therapist who enjoys being alive.


----------



## Dakitten (Sep 2, 2022)

tabzer said:


> "Knowledgeable", no.  Just because someone is personally affected doesn't mean they know what is happening.  It can be pretty terrifying.  Making decisions because one is afraid is a recipe for regret.  "Abortion" =/= support.  Sometimes the best support for a woman is an abortion, but that's only after consideration and consultation.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Jebus, you're a conceited asshat. Thank you for mansplaining responsibility to straw-women, oh great and wise Tabzer. Without your guidance, I am sure women would dismiss medical advice outright after reading my rebuttal to ill informed men that didn't address medical consultation outright, a prerequisite to obtaining an abortion.

As for the perfect world bit, you're once again dancing about foolishly in your make believe world and I will kindly request you stop making an ass of yourself presuming you know what the objectively correct ideals should be for anyone. I can't speak about your personal life, but you literally add nothing but condescension and unwanted opinions to these threads while getting swatted down repeatedly by your peers, occasionally copying out of context phrases for your signatures. You are literally a loser troll, so maybe no sane person should ever value your opinion on ideals, psychology, or anything since you are worthless here. Just pointing this out for you since you seem unaware.


----------



## SyphenFreht (Sep 2, 2022)

TraderPatTX said:


> What is the difference between a 9 month old fetus and a 1 day old baby besides physical location?



A 9 month old still inside the womb requires the mother to provide everything it needs. A baby no longer attached to it's mother, as such a 1 day old, most likely does not. 



TraderPatTX said:


> ...I can actually hold a conversation without insults.





TraderPatTX said:


> ...I know fake because you respond to me like a little girl.





TraderPatTX said:


> ...Leftists can't recognize jokes and they can't meme. They are completely humorless..



You do know what the word "hypocrite" is, yes?


----------



## tabzer (Sep 2, 2022)

Dakitten said:


> Jebus, you're a conceited asshat. Thank you for mansplaining responsibility to straw-women, oh great and wise Tabzer. Without your guidance, I am sure women would dismiss medical advice outright after reading my rebuttal to ill informed men that didn't address medical consultation outright, a prerequisite to obtaining an abortion.
> 
> As for the perfect world bit, you're once again dancing about foolishly in your make believe world and I will kindly request you stop making an ass of yourself presuming you know what the objectively correct ideals should be for anyone. I can't speak about your personal life, but you literally add nothing but condescension and unwanted opinions to these threads while getting swatted down repeatedly by your peers, occasionally copying out of context phrases for your signatures. You are literally a loser troll, so maybe no sane person should ever value your opinion on ideals, psychology, or anything since you are worthless here. Just pointing this out for you since you seem unaware.



A wise man once told me that if you are not attractive, then you are worthless.

It seems crude, but if I think about it, it is a great wisdom.  One could speak succinct truths, but have their message rejected only because it wasn't appealing.

You might have great intentions, grasshopper, but undermining your message by virtue of being "you", your own ego becomes more important than whatever truth you wish to lead people to.  "You" becomes your greatest adversary.

It pains me, greatly, that my mythical genitals hinder you.  Be assured that they need not matter to you.  Acknowledging that the world does have pain and desire is not "make believe".  It is acceptance.  To willfully, and with calculation, change the world, you must first  accept and understand the world.

I am peerless.

Also, you are welcome.


----------



## tabzer (Sep 2, 2022)

SyphenFreht said:


> A 9 month old still inside the womb requires the mother to provide everything it needs. A baby no longer attached to it's mother, as such a 1 day old, most likely does not.



I remember when I was paying rent at 1 day old.



SyphenFreht said:


> You do know what the word "hypocrite" is, yes?



It's not hypocritical to be able to do something but not do it.  Try using brain if you are going to attempt to come off as witty.


----------



## TraderPatTX (Sep 2, 2022)

SyphenFreht said:


> A 9 month old still inside the womb requires the mother to provide everything it needs. A baby no longer attached to it's mother, as such a 1 day old, most likely does not.


So newborn babies just walk on out and finds a job and buys it's own food? 


SyphenFreht said:


> You do know what the word "hypocrite" is, yes?


You do know what uneducated is, right? Reference your quote above.


----------



## Nothereed (Sep 2, 2022)

TraderPatTX said:


> So newborn babies just walk on out and finds a job and buys it's own food?
> 
> You do know what uneducated is, right? Reference your quote above.


How much does it take for someone like you to endlessly jump through hoops so you can prance around the most logical answer. So you can try to grandstand to look smart.
Let's look at what syphen said.


SyphenFreht said:


> A 9 month old still inside the womb requires the mother to provide everything it needs. A baby no longer attached to it's mother, as such a 1 day old, most likely does not



If the fetus is removed from the womb. It dies. Near Immediately. The fetus is dependent biologically. Their organs aren't developed enough to exist outside. Even blood circulation. Hence you know. The umbilical cord.

A baby however, outside of the body. Is not nearly as dependent. Hell it doesn't even need the mother once outside. Someone else can care for them. It is objectively less dependent. It's still incredibly dependent as it can't do much on their own. But not so dependent that if the host dies, they die. If the mother where to die, or and the father died. And someone else found that baby. It would still be alive if found in a timely manor. 

The mother dies with a fetus, that's it. The fetus is dead.

Fact I had to explain this is really stupid, and already my daily dose of "did I really need to explain how this works to trader"


----------



## SyphenFreht (Sep 2, 2022)

tabzer said:


> I remember when I was paying rent at 1 day old.



If your mother was forcing you to pay rent the day you were born, maybe she should've been allowed to abort?



tabzer said:


> It's not hypocritical to be able to do something but not do it.  Try using brain if you are going to attempt to come off as witty.



You're right, however it is hypocritical to constantly try to comment on others resorting to insults when you yourself (not you specifically) consistently begin the insult slinging while trying to maintain this platform of somehow being above the action in which you (again, not you specifically) routinely partake in. 

Try using brain to comprehend before commenting back please. Save us both some time and some embarrassment for yourself. 



TraderPatTX said:


> So newborn babies just walk on out and finds a job and buys it's own food?



Literally no one in this forum, except for you right now, has made that statement or otherwise implied any part of it as fact. If you don't have a response, you don't have to respond. Take the L for whatever stupid point you were trying to pontificate and get back on subject. 



TraderPatTX said:


> You do know what uneducated is, right? Reference your quote above.



Yes, I do. I guess I just didn't realize it ran so rampant through the conservative Republican crowd. 

I wouldn't know firsthand, do forgive my ignorance. Does it hurt to actively be that stupid, or does extra forehead cushioning come with the helmets they give y'all at the RNCs?


----------



## TraderPatTX (Sep 3, 2022)

Nothereed said:


> How much does it take for someone like you to endlessly jump through hoops so you can prance around the most logical answer. So you can try to grandstand to look smart.
> Let's look at what syphen said.
> 
> 
> If the fetus is removed from the womb. It dies. Near Immediately. The fetus is dependent biologically. Their organs aren't developed enough to exist outside. Even blood circulation. Hence you know. The umbilical cord.


At 9 months I can guarantee that a fetus can live outside of the womb. Have you never heard of premature births?

https://www.uab.edu/news/health/item/12427-uab-hospital-delivers-record-breaking-premature-baby


Nothereed said:


> A baby however, outside of the body. Is not nearly as dependent. Hell it doesn't even need the mother once outside. Someone else can care for them. It is objectively less dependent. It's still incredibly dependent as it can't do much on their own. But not so dependent that if the host dies, they die. If the mother where to die, or and the father died. And someone else found that baby. It would still be alive if found in a timely manor.


A baby still needs around the clock care. The only thing that a baby does that a fetus does not is breathe air. Hell, a toddler can't fend for themselves either.


Nothereed said:


> The mother dies with a fetus, that's it. The fetus is dead.


Once again, a fetus can be pulled from the mother by C-section, especially at 9 months.


Nothereed said:


> Fact I had to explain this is really stupid, and already my daily dose of "did I really need to explain how this works to trader"


The only thing you explained is your lack of knowledge of human development inside the womb. This entire comment feels like one giant troll it is so dumb and lacking in any facts. The entire forum is dumber for reading this.


----------



## TraderPatTX (Sep 3, 2022)

SyphenFreht said:


> If your mother was forcing you to pay rent the day you were born, maybe she should've been allowed to abort?


You do know that Roe v Wade was just overturn this year, right. And one can assume that I am older than 4 months old. Your snark is retarded.


SyphenFreht said:


> You're right, however it is hypocritical to constantly try to comment on others resorting to insults when you yourself (not you specifically) consistently begin the insult slinging while trying to maintain this platform of somehow being above the action in which you (again, not you specifically) routinely partake in.
> 
> Try using brain to comprehend before commenting back please. Save us both some time and some embarrassment for yourself.
> 
> ...


You said that newborn babies are not reliant on their mothers after they are born and now you are getting roasted by multiple people. Take the L bro.


SyphenFreht said:


> Yes, I do. I guess I just didn't realize it ran so rampant through the conservative Republican crowd.
> 
> I wouldn't know firsthand, do forgive my ignorance. Does it hurt to actively be that stupid, or does extra forehead cushioning come with the helmets they give y'all at the RNCs?


Calling other people stupid when you claim that newborn babies are independent is peak projection. Just admit you said something stupid and move on. Here's a primer on human development in the womb. Watch it as many times as you need to fully understand.


----------



## SyphenFreht (Sep 3, 2022)

TraderPatTX said:


> You do know that Roe v Wade was just overturn this year, right. And one can assume that I am older than 4 months old. Your snark is retarded.



But yet here you are getting butthurt over a comment that wasn't even directed toward you. 

Are you so desperate for attention that you take on other people's conversations as your own in an attempt to validate your own value?

Roe v Wade being overturned isn't going to stop abortions in the same way banning guns isn't going to stop bad guys from getting guns. You're bringing in other points of contention to detract from the fact you have nothing viable to debate. 

Are there any other dumbass one liners you wanna spit out to prove relevance or are you going to whine about putting people on your ignore list some more, as if we're all so violently worried about that retaliation. 

Christ.



TraderPatTX said:


> You said that newborn babies are not reliant on their mothers after they are born and now you are getting roasted by multiple people. Take the L bro.



No, what I said was:



SyphenFreht said:


> A 9 month old still inside the womb requires the mother to provide everything it needs. A baby no longer attached to it's mother, as such a 1 day old, most likely does not.



... So maybe you should learn to read a little before trying to put on some big boy pants and playing with the adults. 



TraderPatTX said:


> Calling other people stupid when you claim that newborn babies are independent is peak projection. Just admit you said something stupid and move on. Here's a primer on human development in the womb. Watch it as many times as you need to fully understand.



I have a feeling you have no idea what projecting actually means, you just saw it on Facebook or Tumblr and decided to regurgitate it to make yourself sound smart. 

Read the quote again. Read the actual post. Again. 

I never said newborns were independent. I said: 



SyphenFreht said:


> A 9 month old still inside the womb requires the mother to provide everything it needs. A baby no longer attached to it's mother, as such a 1 day old, most likely does not.



... And have yet to hear any roasts by any other forum member except for the pathetic attempt you've tried, yet again, to put words in my mouth because you, yet again, have run out of arguments. 

Please God, reply back with some insults so we can go back to the cycle of you being a hypocrite and me calling you out because God I look forward to this bi weekly anger management session.


----------



## TraderPatTX (Sep 3, 2022)

SyphenFreht said:


> But yet here you are getting butthurt over a comment that wasn't even directed toward you.
> 
> Are you so desperate for attention that you take on other people's conversations as your own in an attempt to validate your own value?


You do know that the purpose of a forum is that anybody can respond to anybody, right? You do know of this concept, I hope.


SyphenFreht said:


> Roe v Wade being overturned isn't going to stop abortions in the same way banning guns isn't going to stop bad guys from getting guns. You're bringing in other points of contention to detract from the fact you have nothing viable to debate.
> 
> Are there any other dumbass one liners you wanna spit out to prove relevance or are you going to whine about putting people on your ignore list some more, as if we're all so violently worried about that retaliation.
> 
> ...


You act like I'm the only one that called you out. It's a dumb sentence and you're too dumb to take the L.


SyphenFreht said:


> I have a feeling you have no idea what projecting actually means, you just saw it on Facebook or Tumblr and decided to regurgitate it to make yourself sound smart.
> 
> Read the quote again. Read the actual post. Again.
> 
> I never said newborns were independent. I said:


What do you think not requiring the mother means? Are you really this dense or are you just trolling?


SyphenFreht said:


> ... And have yet to hear any roasts by any other forum member except for the pathetic attempt you've tried, yet again, to put words in my mouth because you, yet again, have run out of arguments.
> 
> Please God, reply back with some insults so we can go back to the cycle of you being a hypocrite and me calling you out because God I look forward to this bi weekly anger management session.


The funny part is you think I'm mad. Why would I be mad when you are the one who is wrong? A newborn baby actually needs more care than a 9 month old fetus does. If you were a parent, you'd know this.


----------



## Dakitten (Sep 3, 2022)

TraderPatTX said:


> The funny part is you think I'm mad. Why would I be mad when you are the one who is wrong? A newborn baby actually needs more care than a 9 month old fetus does. If you were a parent, you'd know this.



Funny, if you were a woman (or the least bit empathic) you would know that a fetus is very taxing and demanding of a body's resources. I feel sorry for your wife. Being married to a forum debate masochist without a shred of kindness or intelligence must be tough.


----------



## tabzer (Sep 3, 2022)

SyphenFreht said:


> it is hypocritical to constantly try to comment on others resorting to insults when you yourself (not you specifically) consistently begin the insult slinging while trying to maintain this platform of somehow being above the action in which you (again, not you specifically) routinely partake in.



If that's how you really feel, then you should have led with that.  I know it doesn't have as much bite, but maybe you should sacrifice the drama for the sake of accuracy.  From what I have seen, @TraderPatTX is capable of having a conversation that doesn't become an edge contest.  You are too.



SyphenFreht said:


> If your mother was forcing you to pay rent the day you were born, maybe she should've been allowed to abort?



That's a whiff.  Your comment insinuates that a baby stops being dependent when it is born.  Another clumsy attempt at snark.  Please stop embarrassing everyone.



Dakitten said:


> Being married to a forum debate masochist without a shred of kindness or intelligence must be tough.



That's coming from a place of empathy for your guy, right?


----------



## SyphenFreht (Sep 3, 2022)

TraderPatTX said:


> You do know that the purpose of a forum is that anybody can respond to anybody, right? You do know of this concept, I hope.



Yes but when you personally take the hit meant for someone else, that's something you need to talk to a therapist about, because that's not a forum issue, that's a mommy not loving you as much issue. 



TraderPatTX said:


> You act like I'm the only one that called you out. It's a dumb sentence and you're too dumb to take the L.



You are, and you didn't even call anyone out. Nothing I said was wrong, but here we are duking it out because you lack basic reading comprehension.



TraderPatTX said:


> What do you think not requiring the mother means? Are you really this dense or are you just trolling?



What do you think "most likely does not" means? A newborn baby most likely does not need to have all of it's requirements met by the host mother. Have you never been around babies before?



TraderPatTX said:


> The funny part is you think I'm mad. Why would I be mad when you are the one who is wrong? A newborn baby actually needs more care than a 9 month old fetus does. If you were a parent, you'd know this.



No one thinks you're mad. Just a moron.

A newborn baby needs care, but after it's born it no longer needs it's mother as other options for survival become viable. 

I'm really having a hard time understanding how you can't grasp basic concepts. 



tabzer said:


> If that's how you really feel, then you should have led with that.  I know it doesn't have as much bite, but maybe you should sacrifice the drama for the sake of accuracy.  From what I have seen, @TraderPatTX is capable of having a conversation that doesn't become an edge contest.  You are too.



I did lead with that. Just because you didn't understand it doesn't mean it isn't as credible or that i have to leverage any part of my argument for your benefit. As Trader pointed out, this is a public forum so anyone can reply to anyone, but if you don't understand something you don't have to debate it either. 

What drama comes with pointing out hypocrisy comes from he who is pointed out. You can call it drama all you want, but how accurate of a stance can one take on anything when their platform is constantly wavering on a faulty foundation?

Maybe instead of focusing on my pointing out of hypocrisy, you should spend some time understanding why people with that trait don't make good debators. 



tabzer said:


> That's a whiff.  Your comment insinuates that a baby stops being dependent when it is born.  Another clumsy attempt at snark.  Please stop embarrassing everyone.



How? Was it when I said the baby was less likely to need to have all of it's requirements met by it's mother? Meaning it can survive from other means?

If you can't read, just say so. Between you two I don't understand how either one manages to operate a computer well enough to make it this to the forum, much less formulate enough drivel to type out.


----------



## tabzer (Sep 3, 2022)

SyphenFreht said:


> I did lead with that



Nah.  I had to drag _that_ out of you.  



SyphenFreht said:


> How? Was it when I said the baby was less likely to need to have all of it's requirements met by it's mother? Meaning it can survive from other means?



You said that a baby "most likely" stops having all of its needs provided for by the mother.

Maybe you survived without a mother.  So far, most mothers take care of the majority (if not all) of a baby's needs after it is born.

You going to toss a baby out in the wild and hope it becomes Tarzan?


----------



## TraderPatTX (Sep 3, 2022)

Dakitten said:


> Funny, if you were a woman (or the least bit empathic) you would know that a fetus is very taxing and demanding of a body's resources. I feel sorry for your wife. Being married to a forum debate masochist without a shred of kindness or intelligence must be tough.


I was the one who was caring for my wife during her pregnancies. Cooking meals, taking care of the older kids, driving her to doctors appointments, helping her out of bed, drawing warm baths for her. I feel sorry for you and all of your cats, but mostly your cats.

So in your opinion, what is the difference between a 9 month old fetus and a 1 day old baby. This question was originally asked of you, but for some reason, you never answered it.


----------



## TraderPatTX (Sep 3, 2022)

SyphenFreht said:


> Yes but when you personally take the hit meant for someone else, that's something you need to talk to a therapist about, because that's not a forum issue, that's a mommy not loving you as much issue.


This doesn't even make sense.


SyphenFreht said:


> You are, and you didn't even call anyone out. Nothing I said was wrong, but here we are duking it out because you lack basic reading comprehension.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Please describe the needs that a baby can provide on it's own. I would love to hear what you come up with.


SyphenFreht said:


> I'm really having a hard time understanding how you can't grasp basic concepts.


You could have stopped at "I'm really having a hard time understanding" and it still would have made sense.


SyphenFreht said:


> I did lead with that. Just because you didn't understand it doesn't mean it isn't as credible or that i have to leverage any part of my argument for your benefit. As Trader pointed out, this is a public forum so anyone can reply to anyone, but if you don't understand something you don't have to debate it either.


If multiple people are not understanding what you wrote, the problem is not everybody else.


SyphenFreht said:


> What drama comes with pointing out hypocrisy comes from he who is pointed out. You can call it drama all you want, but how accurate of a stance can one take on anything when their platform is constantly wavering on a faulty foundation?
> 
> Maybe instead of focusing on my pointing out of hypocrisy, you should spend some time understanding why people with that trait don't make good debators.


You want to point out hypocrisy, but you don't want people to focus on it. Why point it out in the first place?


SyphenFreht said:


> How? Was it when I said the baby was less likely to need to have all of it's requirements met by it's mother? Meaning it can survive from other means?
> 
> If you can't read, just say so. Between you two I don't understand how either one manages to operate a computer well enough to make it this to the forum, much less formulate enough drivel to type out.


Fun fact, I'm a Cisco certified network engineer with 25+ years experience. I guarantee that I can operate a computer better than you. Know your audience before you look the fool when you attempt to insult them.


----------



## SyphenFreht (Sep 3, 2022)

tabzer said:


> Nah.  I had to drag _that_ out of you.



No, you had to dissect it because you couldn't understand it and now that it's laid upon the table you want to imply that my argument was convoluted in order to discredit my position. 

Try again bud. 




tabzer said:


> You said that a baby "most likely" stops having all of its needs provided for by the mother.
> 
> Maybe you survived without a mother.  So far, most mothers take care of the majority (if not all) of a baby's needs after it is born.
> 
> You going to toss a baby out in the wild and hope it becomes Tarzan?



Or. The father could provide the needs. A guardian. A sibling. Random strangers. 

Originally the question was about the difference between a late term fetus and a newborn infant aside from location. I've answered the question and anything you and Trader have referred to in reply to this specific question has all been deflection because the point has been argued and settled and you want to throw tantrums instead of spurring actual debate. 

Try again. Harder and with some effort this time.


----------



## SyphenFreht (Sep 3, 2022)

TraderPatTX said:


> This doesn't even make sense.



That's from your lack of education, not my lack of presentation.



TraderPatTX said:


> Please describe the needs that a baby can provide on it's own. I would love to hear what you come up with.



Considering I never said the baby could survive completely on it's own, I'm not sure why you keep hammering this point. 



TraderPatTX said:


> If multiple people are not understanding what you wrote, the problem is not everybody else.



So far the only one not understanding is you. Tabzer is more concerned with deconstructing arguments than he is actually putting forth a point.



TraderPatTX said:


> You want to point out hypocrisy, but you don't want people to focus on it. Why point it out in the first place?



No, I don't like to use hypocrisy as a debate point. Stick with your ideals or disregard your own opinion. 



TraderPatTX said:


> Fun fact, I'm a Cisco certified network engineer with 25+ years experience. I guarantee that I can operate a computer better than you. Know your audience before you look the fool when you attempt to insult them.



Oh boy, sounds like someone wants an award. 

Question. How should one go about "knowing their audience" in an anonymous online forum riddled with people that know how to use DDoS attacks and such? Don't pretend to be this high and mighty tech wizard with a sense of morality when you continuously show your disregard for women, minorities, gays, the poor, and pretty much anyone that isn't a white conservative Republican male. That isn't a RINO, whatever tf that is. You're a child, through and through, who regurgitates whatever they see in their online Republican echo chamber as fact and throws tantrums whenever they get proven wrong. 

Wouldn't you be happier with the rest of your like minded ilk on Truth Social?


----------



## tabzer (Sep 3, 2022)

SyphenFreht said:


> No, you had to dissect it because you couldn't understand it and now that it's laid upon the table you want to imply that my argument was convoluted in order to discredit my position.
> 
> Try again bud.



It's not even complicated.  You proposed he was a hypocrite because he called someone names and also claimed he was capable of holding a conversation.  When shown that both are possible, you broke down and claimed that you felt like he was treating someone unfairly...  which could have be an issue.  And the idea that it could be an issue was good enough.  You cancelled yourself and showed us that it didn't even matter.



SyphenFreht said:


> Or. The father could provide the needs. A guardian. A sibling. Random strangers.
> 
> Originally the question was about the difference between a late term fetus and a newborn infant aside from location. I've answered the question and anything you and Trader have referred to in reply to this specific question has all been deflection because the point has been argued and settled and you want to throw tantrums instead of spurring actual debate.
> 
> Try again. Harder and with some effort this time.




Your rebuttal: what about strangers?!

Lol.

Making fun of your stupid (and settled) answer = tantrum.

I hope I can forgive myself.


----------



## SyphenFreht (Sep 3, 2022)

tabzer said:


> It's not even complicated.  You proposed he was a hypocrite because he called someone names and also claimed he was capable of holding a conversation.  When shown that both are possible, you broke down and claimed that you felt like he was treating someone unfairly...  which could have be an issue.  And the idea that it could be an issue was good enough.  You cancelled yourself and showed us that it didn't even matter.



How did I cancel myself? By itemizing his hypocrisy that you clearly feel the need to defend so badly? You're not even arguing the point of the thread anymore, you're derailing again. 

And don't say it's not complicated when it took you two posts of dissection to understand the point that everyone else clearly understood. It was complicated for you, and at the end of the day, that's ok. Not everyone operates at the same level, and there's no shame in admitting you're a bit behind. 

Anything else?



tabzer said:


> Your rebuttal: what about strangers?!
> 
> Lol.
> 
> ...



My rebuttal: what about all the things that aren't mothers that can take care of the baby that you and Trader can't seem to understand. Just because the baby is disconnected from the mother doesn't mean it needs the same host to continue functioning. 

The fact that you still can't grasp the 14 or so words I originally typed a page or two ago does not fill me with hope for any kind of intellectual argument with you. Care to get back on track or is this your week to only argue semantics?


----------



## tabzer (Sep 4, 2022)

SyphenFreht said:


> And don't say it's not complicated



It's not.  Your first post didn't demonstrate hypocrisy.  I pointed it out.  You seem to think I care if he is a hypocrite and want to convince me.

Using a like from the most illiterate person on this thread as evidence that "everyone understood you" is pathetic.

"A 9 month old still inside the womb requires the mother to provide everything it needs. A baby no longer attached to it's mother, as such a 1 day old, most likely does not."

Just admire it, big brain.  You said _that_, and it's beautiful.

Also, "implied inference on perspective". Lol.


----------



## SyphenFreht (Sep 4, 2022)

tabzer said:


> It's not.  Your first post didn't demonstrate hypocrisy.  I pointed it out.  You seem to think I care if he is a hypocrite and want to convince me.
> 
> Using a like from the most illiterate person on this thread as evidence that "everyone understood you" is pathetic.
> 
> ...



Of course it did. Just because you want hard enough doesn't mean it's true. 

The like isn't evidence. The evidence comes from the only people disputing it are the only actively pro birth posters. I've seen how things go down here; if I pointed something out that was universally wrong like "Any PS4 can be downgraded" I'd be jumped on like a half dead rabbit in a wolves' den. Unanimous silent acceptance is still a vote in favor of. 

And what part of that statement is disputable? Are you implying the baby inside is not dependant upon the mother? Are you implying that a newborn baby can only live with the sustenance provided by it's mother, no other source? Please explain, because this really can't be deconstructed much further. At some point you have to come to terms that you simply don't understand widely accepted science and have proven that fact many times by many posters about many things. 

You keep repeating my words in humor despite not understanding what they mean. Is this some poor people humor I just don't get or what?


----------



## tabzer (Sep 4, 2022)

I'm able to say that I don't need to call you an idiot, but it's enjoyable to do so.  That's not hypocrisy.  That's snark.  Figure it out.

_Just because you want hard enough doesn't mean it's true.

Is this some poor people humor I just don't get or what?_

You are hilarious.

It's true that babies don't need mothers once they shed them.  Most babies keep them, and they also rely on them for all of their needs.

For someone who claims I don't understand, you are the one asking a lot of questions.

You can tell by the silence that everyone understood me.


----------



## TraderPatTX (Sep 4, 2022)

SyphenFreht said:


> That's from your lack of education, not my lack of presentation.


Cry more. Then when you done crying, cry some more.


SyphenFreht said:


> Considering I never said the baby could survive completely on it's own, I'm not sure why you keep hammering this point.


We all know what you said


SyphenFreht said:


> So far the only one not understanding is you. Tabzer is more concerned with deconstructing arguments than he is actually putting forth a point.


You do know that a debate consists of deconstructing arguments. Since your argument was not built well, it failed under the slightest of scrutiny.


SyphenFreht said:


> No, I don't like to use hypocrisy as a debate point. Stick with your ideals or disregard your own opinion.
> 
> 
> 
> Oh boy, sounds like someone wants an award.


Just proving to you that I have more knowledge. 


SyphenFreht said:


> Question. How should one go about "knowing their audience" in an anonymous online forum


Have you thought about asking? That's what normal people do in real life.


SyphenFreht said:


> riddled with people that know how to use DDoS attacks and such? Don't pretend to be this high and mighty tech wizard with a sense of morality when you continuously show your disregard for women, minorities, gays, the poor, and pretty much anyone that isn't a white conservative Republican male.


The regurgitated leftist screech about how anybody to the right of Stalin hates everybody who doesn't look like them. Give it up. There are black, Hispanic, Asian, gays, women, poor etc republicans. You marginalizing them shows your disregard for minorities. You know where you can stick that opinion of your at.


SyphenFreht said:


> That isn't a RINO, whatever tf that is. You're a child, through and through, who regurgitates whatever they see in their online Republican echo chamber as fact and throws tantrums whenever they get proven wrong.


Wanna talk about regurgitating talking points? See above.


SyphenFreht said:


> Wouldn't you be happier with the rest of your like minded ilk on Truth Social?


You would be happier if I was on Truth Social instead of sitting here bursting your echo chamber and challenging your weak ideas. I'm happy wherever I go.


----------



## TraderPatTX (Sep 4, 2022)

SyphenFreht said:


> Of course it did. Just because you want hard enough doesn't mean it's true.
> 
> The like isn't evidence. The evidence comes from the only people disputing it are the only actively pro birth posters. I've seen how things go down here; if I pointed something out that was universally wrong like "Any PS4 can be downgraded" I'd be jumped on like a half dead rabbit in a wolves' den. Unanimous silent acceptance is still a vote in favor of.
> 
> ...


What is poor people humor and why do you use it as a derogatory term? What's the word for that? Oh yeah, hypocrisy.

You should put the shovel down and stop digging?


----------



## Dark_Ansem (Sep 4, 2022)

Dakitten said:


> Being married to a forum debate masochist without a shred of kindness or intelligence must be tough.


In addition to very unsatisfying in the marriage.


TraderPatTX said:


> was the one who was caring for my wife during her pregnancies. Cooking meals, taking care of the older kids, driving her to doctors appointments, helping her out of bed, drawing warm baths for her.


So, you did your duty then? want a medal?


----------



## smf (Sep 4, 2022)

Dakitten said:


> You are literally a loser troll, so maybe no sane person should ever value your opinion on ideals, psychology, or anything since you are worthless here. Just pointing this out for you since you seem unaware.


It's taken you how long to figure this out?


----------



## smf (Sep 4, 2022)

TraderPatTX said:


> You said that newborn babies are not reliant on their mothers after they are born and now you are getting roasted by multiple people. Take the L bro.


Newborn babies are not reliant on their mothers, that doesn't mean they don't have needs that must be met. It just doesn't have to be the mother.

A fetus attached to a woman, is reliant on that woman.

It's funny how the people who will bring up the record for surviving a premature birth, are the same kind of people who will say only women have cervix's and that a man born with a cervix is too rare and should be ignored.


----------



## City (Sep 4, 2022)

I'm annoyed because I remember watching a funny video about people protesting abortion that was in the "Important videos" playlist but I can't find it anymore. Any help?


----------



## tabzer (Sep 5, 2022)

smf said:


> It's taken you how long to figure this out?



I see the sadness of someone who loses at their own games of arbitrary logic.


----------



## Nothereed (Sep 5, 2022)

TraderPatTX said:


> Cry more. Then when you done crying, cry some more.


A very educated response, from a very reasonable and logical person


----------



## LainaGabranth (Sep 5, 2022)

I wish Dark Brandon had forced estrogen camps for anti-choicers tbh. Would be pretty funny.


----------



## Nothereed (Sep 5, 2022)

TraderPatTX said:


> The regurgitated leftist screech about how anybody to the right of Stalin hates everybody who doesn't look like them. Give it up. There are black, Hispanic, Asian, gays, women, poor etc republicans. You marginalizing them shows your disregard for minorities. You know where you can stick that opinion of your at.


excuse me... What? What did I just read?
_huh???_

No like actually what did I just read? Did you just throw up every possible word that could of came out of your mouth in some incoherent rage rambling? Leftists don't like Stalin, and I mean that in a "the majority of leftists don't like Stalin" Not whatever bs your going to pull later.

"There are black, Hispanic, Asian, gays, women, poor etc republicans."
okay and? is the Republican party popular/widely supported?
No? Are they widely supported by minority groups?
Also NO?
Then what's the point of your argument?  that somehow... that the majority within a ethnic group is supporting... their own suppression??????????? But somehow your the party that's not supressing minorties.... even though trying to ban gay marriage, or excuse me "turn it into states rights issue" which is the same tactic for slavery btw. And removal of choice for women or idk, targeting trans youth hospitals because there is a peditrician that helps tailor to trans people, and putting a bomb threat on it. Which is... also another set of minorities (specifically trans and gay people)...mkay.
edit:
That's a pretty arbitrary line to draw, considering this was the same party who backed a man saying "the illegals are crossing the border and out to take your jobs"


----------



## smf (Sep 5, 2022)

tabzer said:


> I see the sadness of someone who loses at their own games of arbitrary logic.


Every day when you look in the mirror. Yes it must be hard for you.


----------



## tabzer (Sep 5, 2022)

smf said:


> Every day when you look in the mirror. Yes it must be hard for you.


What's this trend of people imagining themselves as me.   Is your pronoun 'it' now?



smf said:


> I mirror people, because people only respect how they act.



Oh.  You _are the mirror.  _Very meta.


----------



## smf (Sep 5, 2022)

tabzer said:


> What's this trend of people imagining themselves as me.


I don't think that is a thing, but if it were then it would be found on some self harming website.



tabzer said:


> Oh.  You _are the mirror.  _Very meta.


I expose your inner turmoil.


----------



## tabzer (Sep 5, 2022)

smf said:


> I don't think that is a thing, but if it were then it would be found on some self harming website.



Have you noticed where you are?



smf said:


> I expose your inner turmoil.



It's pretty clear that your superhero persona prefers to be anything other than you.  I'll send an invoice.


----------



## smf (Sep 5, 2022)

tabzer said:


> Have you noticed where you are?


I'm sitting at my laptop.


----------



## Dark_Ansem (Sep 5, 2022)

It's amazing how all the pro-birthers here are calling abortion "murder" and yet were happy to ignore any lockdown measure at the peak of the pandemic "because of the economy". I guess sick and elderly don't count as people for them?


----------



## TraderPatTX (Sep 6, 2022)

Dark_Ansem said:


> In addition to very unsatisfying in the marriage.
> 
> So, you did your duty then? want a medal?


Imagine having to talk about somebody's marriage that you know nothing about to try and score points. You literally cannot debate the topic so you are forced to use personal attacks. What a f'n loser you are.


----------



## TraderPatTX (Sep 6, 2022)

smf said:


> Newborn babies are not reliant on their mothers, that doesn't mean they don't have needs that must be met. It just doesn't have to be the mother.


Generally that's how it's done. I'm not gonna sit here and argue edge cases. That's the entire abortion argument as it is. You can only use edge cases to prove your point.


smf said:


> A fetus attached to a woman, is reliant on that woman.
> 
> It's funny how the people who will bring up the record for surviving a premature birth, are the same kind of people who will say only women have cervix's and that a man born with a cervix is too rare and should be ignored.


I'm not even sure what this word salad is supposed to mean, but I'm pretty sure it has nothing to do with the topic at hand.


----------



## TraderPatTX (Sep 6, 2022)

Nothereed said:


> A very educated response, from a very reasonable and logical person


You should read the drivel I get on a regular basis. It'll make your eyes bleed.


----------



## TraderPatTX (Sep 6, 2022)

Nothereed said:


> excuse me... What? What did I just read?
> _huh???_
> 
> No like actually what did I just read? Did you just throw up every possible word that could of came out of your mouth in some incoherent rage rambling? Leftists don't like Stalin, and I mean that in a "the majority of leftists don't like Stalin" Not whatever bs your going to pull later.
> ...


So those minorities don't matter to you, right? They are just semi-fascists anyway, amirite comrade?


Nothereed said:


> Also NO?
> Then what's the point of your argument?  that somehow... that the majority within a ethnic group is supporting... their own suppression??????????? But somehow your the party that's not supressing minorties.... even though trying to ban gay marriage, or excuse me "turn it into states rights issue" which is the same tactic for slavery btw.


Slavery was taken care of by constitutional amendments, written and passed by republicans.


Nothereed said:


> And removal of choice for women or idk,


Choice for what? Killing babies? Guess what? I can't kill babies either.


Nothereed said:


> targeting trans youth hospitals because there is a peditrician that helps tailor to trans people, and putting a bomb threat on it.


Let me know when you get around to reading about Jane's Revenge. You don't get to take the high road here, sport.


Nothereed said:


> Which is... also another set of minorities (specifically trans and gay people)...mkay.


I can't believe you compared trans people to gays and racial minorities. Wow.


Nothereed said:


> edit:
> That's a pretty arbitrary line to draw, considering this was the same party who backed a man saying "the illegals are crossing the border and out to take your jobs"


6 million illegal aliens have crossed the border since Sponge-Brains Shits-Pants took office. More than the population of Colorado. And we don't know who they are or where they came from. Many of the women and children were sex trafficked here. And you applaud it. You cheer it on. You want more of it to happen.

PS. It's oppression, not suppression. You sound like an idiot. Now make like a tree and go away.


----------



## Nothereed (Sep 6, 2022)

TraderPatTX said:


> So those minorities don't matter to you, right?


So the popular opinion of those minorities don't matter to you right?


TraderPatTX said:


> Slavery was taken care of by constitutional amendments, written and passed by republicans.


Except no, not Republicans since What is the old day Republicans became the Democrat party, proven by Modern day Republicans use of the southern strategy, which appealed to the KKK and inflamed racial tensions. If it was true that Republicans supported racial equality, they wouldn't have used such a strategy, nor be linked towards KKK like groups.


TraderPatTX said:


> Choice for what? Killing babies? Guess what? I can't kill babies either.


Except not babies, and except it's not in YOUR body. You do not have the right to choose for women, and most women say they deserve a choice. And I will stick with that front unless they change their mind, because they know better than I do. And it's a fetus, usually 12 weeks old.


TraderPatTX said:


> I can't believe you compared trans people to gays and racial minorities. Wow.


Under the basis that Gay people and Trans people are another group of minorities? Is that so insane?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institut_für_Sexualwissenschaft
and it's historically happened before (them being suppressed), and also targeted by Nazi's in Germany (no Wikipedia isn't a source, but the sources on that page are my source)


TraderPatTX said:


> 6 million illegal aliens have crossed the border since Sponge-Brains Shits-Pants took office. More than the population of Colorado. And we don't know who they are or where they came from.


That's also false, you know where" they" came from,  considering that "We're going to make Mexico pay for the wall"
It's targeting Mexicans, quit trying to be disingenuous with your beliefs.


TraderPatTX said:


> Many of the women and children were sex trafficked here. And you applaud it.


That's literately just a ad hominem attack with no basis/evidence. Screech harder.


TraderPatTX said:


> PS. It's oppression, not suppression. You sound like an idiot who advocates for child s3x trafficking.


Suppression is a synonym for Oppression. If you have to do an attack based on specific word choice and not the argument, then already that's a loss cause. (Which I already proved that your argument is baseless, so I'm not going to bother with your attack)

Edit: since your likely going to throw a fit regardless of what I say
Oppression:
prolonged cruel or unjust treatment or control.
Suppression:
the restraint or repression of an idea, activity, or reaction by something more powerful.
Both are about restraint and control, and since we're talking Oppression in the sense of the mind and body, Suppression applies here.
The word achieves a similar enough idea. If we want to talk about natural (sounding) verbiage, then yes, opression should of been said for flow sake. But that would still be missing the point of the argument.  IE, That your nickpicking words because you cannot find a good argument, so you're throwing the table.


----------



## TraderPatTX (Sep 6, 2022)

Nothereed said:


> So the popular opinion of those minorities don't matter to you right?
> 
> Except no, not Republicans since What is the old day Republicans became the Democrat party, proven by Modern day Republicans use of the southern strategy, which appealed to the KKK and inflamed racial tensions. If it was true that Republicans supported racial equality, they wouldn't have used such a strategy, nor be linked towards KKK like groups.


tHeRe WaS a PaRtY sWiTcH, rUbE!!

Except besides a handful of politicians, nobody actually switched parties.


Nothereed said:


> Except not babies, and except it's not in YOUR body. You do not have the right to choose for women, and most women say they deserve a choice. And I will stick with that front unless they change their mind, because they know better than I do. And it's a fetus, usually 12 weeks old.


If it's usually 12 weeks old, then stop advocating for 9 month abortions. Women say they deserve a lot, lol. Obviously, you've never been married.


Nothereed said:


> Under the basis that Gay people and Trans people are another group of minorities? Is that so insane?


Keep dividing us up into smaller and smaller groups. It's what your masters want so we keep arguing with each other instead of paying attention to them.


Nothereed said:


> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institut_für_Sexualwissenschaft
> and it's historically happened before (them being suppressed), and also targeted by nazi's in germany (no wikipedia isn't a source, but the sources on that page are my source)


Nazi's also supported abortion, censorship and gun control. Sound familiar?


Nothereed said:


> That's also false, you know where they came from,  considering that "We're going to make Mexico pay for the wall"
> It's targeting Mexicans, quit trying to be disingenuous with your beliefs.


There are so many stories published proving you wrong. There have been Haitians, Cubans, Venezuelans, Ukrainians and Middle Eastern men coming across the border illegally. And nobody knows who they are. Didn't even check criminal histories or against terror watch lists.
https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-ta...ppening-at-the-u-s-mexico-border-in-7-charts/


Nothereed said:


> That's literately just a ad hominem attack with no basis/evidence. Screech harder.


https://www.cbsnews.com/dfw/news/woman-child-sex-trafficking-caught/


Nothereed said:


> Suppression is a synonym for Oppression. If you have to do an attack based on specific word choice and not the argument, then already that's a loss cause.


Just trying to help you not sound like an idiot, but now I know there's no way I could help enough.


----------



## Nothereed (Sep 6, 2022)

TraderPatTX said:


> then stop advocating for 9 month abortions.


Never have, stop trying to make a fake version of me that lives in your head rent free.


TraderPatTX said:


> Nazi's also supported abortion, censorship and gun control. Sound familiar?


Nazi's didn't support abortion, they were pretty against it. Nice attempt at spinning. Censorship, well golly, I don't remember banning books from schools happening from democrats. But what do I know.


TraderPatTX said:


> It's what your masters


Who's my masters? The one that lives in your head rent free?


TraderPatTX said:


> There are so many stories published proving you wrong. There have been Haitians, Cubans, Venezuelans, Ukrainians and Middle Eastern men coming across the border illegally.


Yes but not as high amounts as Mexicans or el Salvadorans who are painted as Mexicans, since primarily idk. Gang violence happening in el salvador and that's the reason all of them are fleeing up here, and our refusal to help even though we made the problem.


TraderPatTX said:


> https://www.cbsnews.com/dfw/news/woman-child-sex-trafficking-caught/


Straw man number 2.
The reason I said you had no evidence, is because your making an accusation directly towards me, and I have given nothing, no basis for your claim to substainate that I support child sex traffiicing (Though it's really awsome of you to target me of all people, since you know. My child hood involves my biological father who was child molester and having to go to thearpy at the age of 8. And I was lucky to even get that therapy in the first place)
I can call you a fascist or adjecent primarily because the things you have said were used as evidence against you. And the things you've previous said substantiated my claim.


TraderPatTX said:


> tHeRe WaS a PaRtY sWiTcH, rUbE!!
> 
> Except besides a handful of politicians, nobody actually switched parties.


You know what? Let's look between a few election years.










Notice that texas is blue here, and the rest are blue, for a long ass while.






1908





1924.
Notice that texas and the entire area that is usually republican, is still blue.

About this point is when the southern stragety happens, and it gradually transitions as jim crow laws are passed, up until regan takes control, at which the shift fully happened.




1944





1968

So far skiping every 20 years roughly. Let's go check in again.




Southern strategy in full effect use by republican party and a blow out year. Let's jump another 20 years.






Notice something?
If you said "the map very quickly flipped" that be the correct answer. The entire map, flipped parties, rapidly. What was blue went red, and what was red went blue (most states don't charge parties like that) twenty years is relatively fast for consensus to just flip like that. Considering it was solid for over 60 years.
New York of all places, was red up until again, southern strategy.

Other words, this proves that a flip did happen. It didn't happen in one night. But it clearly happened through time. Especially considering Regan getting support from the KKK, and the southern strategy started by Nixon.


----------



## Nothereed (Sep 6, 2022)

Now if you'll excuse me, but I think I had enough of TX giving me second hand brain hemorrhage. good night.


----------



## JJ1013 (Sep 6, 2022)

tabzer said:


> You do realize that there is a difference between defending a pregnancy and defending a rape, right?  Oh, of course not.  Too nuanced.  Forget about the baby rapists; rapist babies are the problem.


"Rapist babies", what the fuck are you actually talking about?

You're actually willing to make a 10 year old stay with a fetus inside her, aren't you? Wouldn't the baby or the child end up damaged either mentally, physically or both if the baby is born, apart from the damage already done to the child? They're too small for one to be inside another. Not only that, she's just a goddamn kid. She can't be a mother.

How the hell can the thought of *"""defending a pregnancy"""* even cross your fucking mind if who we're talking about is literally a child? This is just advocating for inhuman bullshit. You over here, *"""defending a pregnancy"""* while most likely complaining about the Lightyear movie? Get a grip.


----------



## tabzer (Sep 6, 2022)

JJ1013 said:


> "Rapist babies", what the fuck are you actually talking about?
> 
> You're actually willing to make a 10 year old stay with a fetus inside her, aren't you? Wouldn't the baby or the child end up damaged either mentally, physically or both if the baby is born, apart from the damage already done to the child? They're too small for one to be inside another. Not only that, she's just a goddamn kid. She can't be a mother.
> 
> How the hell can the thought of *"""defending a pregnancy"""* even cross your fucking mind if who we're talking about is literally a child? This is just advocating for inhuman bullshit. You over here, *"""defending a pregnancy"""* while most likely complaining about the Lightyear movie? Get a grip.



I'm not rationalizing the existence of raped children just so I can advocate abortion as a feels issue.

Get a grip.


----------



## smf (Sep 6, 2022)

TraderPatTX said:


> Generally that's how it's done. I'm not gonna sit here and argue edge cases. That's the entire abortion argument as it is. You can only use edge cases to prove your point.


How it's done is irrelevant.

The point was that babies are reliant on their mothers before they are born and not afterwards, when they are reliant on someone.  Adoption is possible after birth, you can't adopt a fetus.

Just because you embarrassed yourself by misunderstanding that point is not my problem.



TraderPatTX said:


> If it's usually 12 weeks old, then stop advocating for 9 month abortions.


If it's usually 12 weeks old, then why are all the pro lifers arguing as if we're advocating 9 month abortions.

I'm not going to sit here and argue edge cases.



tabzer said:


> I'm not rationalizing the existence of raped children just so I can advocate abortion as a feels issue.
> 
> Get a grip.


Abortion is a feels issue. You're just arguing that you feel a different way that is somehow more correct, by ignoring things that don't support your feels.


----------



## tabzer (Sep 6, 2022)

smf said:


> How it's done is irrelevant.



It's not, because the fact that most children do rely on their mother after they are born means that they rely on their mother after they are born.



smf said:


> Abortion is a feels issue. You're just arguing that you feel a different way that is somehow more correct.



It's not a feels issue in the frame of preventing the unnecessary loss of life, which is exactly the argument being made.


----------



## TraderPatTX (Sep 6, 2022)

Nothereed said:


> Never have, stop trying to make a fake version of me that lives in your head rent free.


Not you personally. The left in general. Why can't any of you understand when people say "you", it's you as a group and not you personally? None of the leftists here understand that concept.


Nothereed said:


> Nazi's didn't support abortion, they were pretty against it. Nice attempt at spinning. Censorship, well golly, I don't remember banning books from schools happening from democrats. But what do I know.


Well golly, let's just allow kindergartners to look at porn in their school libraries. That's not gr00m1ng at all. 


Nothereed said:


> Who's my masters? The one that lives in your head rent free?
> 
> Yes but not as high amounts as Mexicans or el Salvadorans who are painted as Mexicans, since primarily idk. Gang violence happening in el salvador and that's the reason all of them are fleeing up here, and our refusal to help even though we made the problem.


The only people who paint El Salvadordans is you since I had to provide the distinction. I can't help that you are racist and think they all look alike.


Nothereed said:


> Straw man number 2.
> The reason I said you had no evidence, is because your making an accusation directly towards me, and I have given nothing, no basis for your claim to substainate that I support child sex traffiicing (Though it's really awsome of you to target me of all people, since you know. My child hood involves my biological father who was child molester and having to go to thearpy at the age of 8. And I was lucky to even get that therapy in the first place)
> I can call you a fascist or adjecent primarily because the things you have said were used as evidence against you. And the things you've previous said substantiated my claim.


I guarantee that you have always been against building the wall and you are perfectly ok with 6 million illegal aliens in 18 months because "we made the problem".


Nothereed said:


> You know what? Let's look between a few election years.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


So you are saying that the entire country decided all at once to completely flip, even though less than a handful of national politicians actually changed parties. Does this mean that the current Republicans, who use to be Democrats, are the ones who passed the New Deal and the Great Society? If the parties truly flipped, why were there still segregationists in the Democrat Party into the 80's? Biden was buddies with all of them. And Robert Byrd was a Democrat until the day he died in 2010.

This is to help you with the nuance of the English language.
https://grammarist.com/usage/oppres...ess means to keep,to keep from being revealed.


----------



## TraderPatTX (Sep 6, 2022)

smf said:


> How it's done is irrelevant.
> 
> The point was that babies are reliant on their mothers before they are born and not afterwards, when they are reliant on someone.  Adoption is possible after birth, you can't adopt a fetus.


I have proven that other than location, there is very little difference between a 9 month old fetus and a 1 day old infant.


smf said:


> Just because you embarrassed yourself by misunderstanding that point is not my problem.


I have proven that the left dehumanizes people so they can take away constitutional rights. You see it all thru history in the Soviet Union, Germany, and China.


smf said:


> If it's usually 12 weeks old, then why are all the pro lifers arguing as if we're advocating 9 month abortions.
> 
> I'm not going to sit here and argue edge cases.


Except Democrat politicians advocate for 9 month abortions and after birth abortions. In fact, Governor Ralph "blackface" Northam talked about making survivors of abortion comfortable while the mother decides to keep it or throw it away.


smf said:


> Abortion is a feels issue. You're just arguing that you feel a different way that is somehow more correct, by ignoring things that don't support your feels.


I'm the one that talks about science. Hence why I initially asked, what is the difference between a 9 month old fetus and a 1 day old baby. Nobody could effectively answer besides pointing out location. A 9 month old fetus and a 1 day old baby is the exact same person. The left talks about a "woman's right to choose", which is based in emotion. This is why the left has to dehumanize fetus's so they can persuade other people that killing them is no big deal. I remember reading somebody did the same thing towards the Jewish population in Europe.


----------



## smf (Sep 6, 2022)

TraderPatTX said:


> I have proven that other than location, there is very little difference between a 9 month old fetus and a 1 day old infant.


Ok, it's a good job that nobody apart from you is considering 9 month terminations.

At 12 weeks there is a lot of difference.



TraderPatTX said:


> I'm the one that talks about science.


No, you're the one who constantly switches arguing about different things.

You think you're doing a good job, but it's not.



TraderPatTX said:


> I have proven that the left dehumanizes people so they can take away constitutional rights.


You are dehumanizing people by assuming "the left" are a homogeneous group.

What about rights to abortion? Didn't that just get taken away? The constitution isn't magic by the way, it's just a set of laws written by old white men. No different from all the laws that have been written since.

It would be a lot easier for you, if you stopped fighting this imagined culture war that you want to be fighting.



TraderPatTX said:


> I remember reading somebody did the same thing towards the Jewish population in Europe.


Are you Jewish? How do you think they would feel about you using the holocaust to try to win an argument on a gaming forum?

https://www.ncjw.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/Judaism-and-Abortion-FINAL.pdf


----------



## TraderPatTX (Sep 6, 2022)

smf said:


> Ok, it's a good job that nobody apart from you is considering 9 month terminations.
> 
> At 12 weeks there is a lot of difference.


The Democrat Party is considering 9 month terminations. Where do you live, under a rock?


smf said:


> No, you're the one who constantly switches arguing about different things


Sure buddy. Scroll up and you'll see I've had to deal with gay issues, trans issues and debating the fabled national "party switch" in this thread alone.

Let me know when you want to debate actual science instead of your fee fees.


----------



## smf (Sep 6, 2022)

TraderPatTX said:


> The Democrat Party is considering 9 month terminations.


Prove it.



TraderPatTX said:


> Let me know when you want to debate actual science instead of your fee fees.


Scientifically there is no reason why new born babies can't be turned into a nutritional milkshake. Abortion is not a scientific issue.


----------



## Dark_Ansem (Sep 6, 2022)

TraderPatTX said:


> This is to help you with the nuance of the English language.
> https://grammarist.com/usage/oppres...ess means to keep,to keep from being revealed.



I'd be careful with such claims since you don't seem capable of distinguishing your and you're.



TraderPatTX said:


> Imagine having to talk about somebody's marriage that you know nothing about to try and score points. You literally cannot debate the topic so you are forced to use personal attacks. What a f'n loser you are.



Answer the question. Do you want a medal? Also, the irony of you of all people trying to stay on the moral high ground, hilariously pathetic.



smf said:


> Prove it.



Plot twist: he can't. Besides they would be medically unsafe.


----------



## TraderPatTX (Sep 6, 2022)

smf said:


> Prove it.


I already did. Read above.


smf said:


> Scientifically there is no reason why new born babies can't be turned into a nutritional milkshake. Abortion is not a scientific issue.


Your attempts at gaslighting are feeble at best.


----------



## TraderPatTX (Sep 6, 2022)

Dark_Ansem said:


> I'd be careful with such claims since you don't seem capable of distinguishing your and you're.


There's a huge difference between a typo and intentionally misusing words multiple times.


Dark_Ansem said:


> Answer the question. Do you want a medal? Also, the irony of you of all people trying to stay on the moral high ground, hilariously pathetic.


I'd like my metal in gold please.


Dark_Ansem said:


> Plot twist: he can't. Besides they would be medically unsafe.


Gov Ralph "blackface" Northam advocated for after birth abortions and he's supposedly a doctor and was a governor of a major state who received millions of votes when he won election. Not exactly some nobody from some backwoods town nobody's ever heard of.  Virginia also tried to pass a bill legalizing after birth abortion. Luckily, it failed in committee.

Before you say I can't prove something, you better make damn sure I can't prove it. Now you look foolish.


----------



## TraderPatTX (Sep 6, 2022)

Dark_Ansem said:


> It's amazing how all the pro-birthers here are calling abortion "murder" and yet were happy to ignore any lockdown measure at the peak of the pandemic "because of the economy". I guess sick and elderly don't count as people for them?


It's amazing how all the Branch Covidians ignore studies that prove they have been wrong on every single issue, but let's try and keep it on topic, mmkay?

https://www.fox5dc.com/news/johns-h...ckdowns-only-reduced-covid-19-death-rate-by-2


----------



## Dark_Ansem (Sep 6, 2022)

TraderPatTX said:


> Before you say I can't prove something, you better make damn sure I can't prove it. Now you look foolish.



Nah that's still you.



TraderPatTX said:


> I'd like my metal in gold please.



Denied. You only did what a husband would do.



TraderPatTX said:


> There's a huge difference between a typo and intentionally misusing words multiple times.



Except that your "typos" are real and betray ignorance, this word abuse you talk of is totally imaginary.



TraderPatTX said:


> Gov Ralph "blackface" Northam advocated for after birth abortions and he's supposedly a doctor and was a governor of a major state who received millions of votes when he won election. Not exactly some nobody from some backwoods town nobody's ever heard of. Virginia also tried to pass a bill legalizing after birth abortion. Luckily, it failed in committee.



Is that the best you have? Hearsay and unverified stuff?


----------



## Dark_Ansem (Sep 6, 2022)

TraderPatTX said:


> It's amazing how all the Branch Covidians ignore studies that prove they have been wrong on every single issue, but let's try and keep it on topic, mmkay?
> 
> https://www.fox5dc.com/news/johns-h...ckdowns-only-reduced-covid-19-death-rate-by-2



Lol fox as news, do one really.


----------



## Nothereed (Sep 6, 2022)

TraderPatTX said:


> If it's usually 12 weeks old, then stop advocating for 9 month abortions.





TraderPatTX said:


> Not you personally. The left in general.


Straw man number1 and unlogical argument, since you made an accusation towards me



TraderPatTX said:


> Choice for what? Killing babies? Guess what? I can't kill babies either.


You asserted it was to kill babies as your original argument. So your later positions are incoherent with your original reasoning. Since you question me saying that people deserve a choice. aka focused directly on me.


TraderPatTX said:


> Well golly, let's just allow kindergartners to look at porn in their school libraries. That's not gr00m1ng at all.


Straw man number 2, since it's not porn.
https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/...na-and-trinity-neal-illustrated-by-art-twink/
https://books.google.com/books/about/Téo_s_Tutu.html?id=zAdAEAAAQBAJ&source=kp_book_description
just a sample of some of the books being banned. All specifically towards trans individuals or queer.


TraderPatTX said:


> The only people who paint El Salvadordans is you since I had to provide the distinction.


Strawman 3 and dodging the argument.
Strawman due to the fact that I never said they looked alike. And I had to provide a distinction, since your own party refuses to acknowledge that there is a distinction, via "the illegals" and boiling it down all to that/dehumanizing.

If we said "el salvador immigrants" people would be a lot more aware of the gang conflict that is happening there (since a large bulk of the illegal immigrants are as a result of that conflict. And waiting down at the border is not a good idea, when the gang will actively hunt you down and shoot you.)
 But your party would rather deflect, and boil it down to "illegals" and bash on them. Not like your party also made it way harder to get refugee status... oh wait. They did. (and if I'm not mistakened biden hasn't fixed that. So he get's a layer of shit as well.)

And you dodged an argument. Earlier "on Trader brain hemorrhages"


TraderPatTX said:


> https://www.cbsnews.com/dfw/news/woman-child-sex-trafficking-caught/


This is a dodged argument after I countered your assertion, and now your dropping it.
Really entertaining how you want to throw everything at the wall at me.


TraderPatTX said:


> I guarantee that you have always been against building the wall and you are perfectly ok with 6 million illegal aliens in 18 months because "we made the problem".


Building a wall is ineffective. I'm not even talking from a political stand point. I'm just talking basic ass maintenance and up keep cost, topped with the fact people WILL find ways around that wall. In some places (in the world) if there was some sort of choke point then yes a wall is feasible.
But for the US, no we can't, primarily because the amount of distance that would have to be covered, ontop of the geological area not being exactly well suited for building without proper treatment. Otherwise you get the current wall now, which is toppling over itself. The foundation is not stable.

I propose a better solution. Fix the problem we made. It's like drinking soda after every meal, and trying to lose weight. So instead you drink a fuck ton of water so you piss the soda out in hoping that it helps loose weight.
Why not just remove the soda? Putting a wall up doesn't fix the problem, it just makes it easier to ignore the problem.


TraderPatTX said:


> So you are saying that the entire country decided all at once to completely flip, even though less than a handful of national politicians actually changed parties.


"All at once"

Wow. no go on ahead, just skip the fact that it took roughly 24 years for that flip to happen, and it didn't even happen evenly. But okay sure. Whatever.


TraderPatTX said:


> ? If the parties truly flipped, why were there still segregationists in the Democrat Party into the 80's?


Because it didn't happen all at once? Granted you clearly skipped that reading or at least comprehension and went straight to responding.
 The map shows that it didn't happen all at once. But it happened "very rapidly"
Places that were solidly one color for over 60 years. Switched in the span of 20.
Republicans adopted again, southern strategy. You had the KKK literately openly support Nixon. which, again, as we know, Republicans (in name) supported civil rights. But that conflicts with their current image. Just like how Democrats modern image, doesn't fit their previous language either. If you did just the slightest analysis of their talking points, it would of also been obvious that a party switch happened.

Parties and their meaning change with time, just like words, just like gestures. Course, your going to go ahead and reject that too. Since already you dodged the KKK and Nixon situation. And tried to strawman me to hell and back. And just didn't do any thinking at all when I presented the maps to you.


----------



## TraderPatTX (Sep 6, 2022)

Dark_Ansem said:


> Nah that's still you.


Denial is not a river in Egypt.


Dark_Ansem said:


> Denied. You only did what a husband would do.


I was really hoping to score some gold to counteract all this transitory inflation going on.


Dark_Ansem said:


> Except that your "typos" are real and betray ignorance, this word abuse you talk of is totally imaginary.


As imaginary as you arguing based on science instead of emotion?


Dark_Ansem said:


> Is that the best you have? Hearsay and unverified stuff?


Say you're scared of watching the man say it on video and a finding a copy of the proposed bill without saying you are scared.


----------



## TraderPatTX (Sep 6, 2022)

Dark_Ansem said:


> Lol fox as news, do one really.


If you would have actually read the story, you would have noticed a link to the actual study. Somehow I knew you would do this so it's no surprise. This is why your arguments fail. You refuse to actually read up on topics.

https://sites.krieger.jhu.edu/iae/f...ffects-of-Lockdowns-on-COVID-19-Mortality.pdf


----------



## Dark_Ansem (Sep 6, 2022)

TraderPatTX said:


> If you would have actually read the story, you would have noticed a link to the actual study. Somehow I knew you would do this so it's no surprise. This is why your arguments fail. You refuse to actually read up on topics.
> 
> https://sites.krieger.jhu.edu/iae/f...ffects-of-Lockdowns-on-COVID-19-Mortality.pdf



A paper discredited by basically everyone because it was not methodologically sound and rigorous? Is this another regnerus nonsense? Even the way it's written is ridiculous and unscientific. But I suppose you love it since it's been dumbed down to your level!



TraderPatTX said:


> Denial is not a river in Egypt.



It definitely is an area of your smooth brain.



TraderPatTX said:


> was really hoping to score some gold to counteract all this transitory inflation going on.



And yet biden's economic growth outclassed Trump years.



TraderPatTX said:


> As imaginary as you arguing based on science instead of emotion?



Unfortunately for you I do argue relying on science.



TraderPatTX said:


> Say you're scared of watching the man say it on video and a finding a copy of the proposed bill without saying you are scared.



I did look him up and couldn't even find evidence of the "blackface" part. See, this is what your illiteracy does to you.


----------



## Nothereed (Sep 6, 2022)

TraderPatTX said:


> As imaginary as you arguing based on science instead of emotion?


You know what? Let's experience some true brain trauma.
Do you think leftists *enable* abortions as an option because we want fetuses dead?
No.
We (this is an asserted we, as other leftists may have other reasons. So in otherwords, what I think others think, but not sure if it's actually what they think)
 allow the option because of 3 pretenses
1. If we are bringing a life to the world, it better be A DAMN GOOD LIFE for that kid. Abortions allow in the cases of condoms failing or birth control failing. Enable the ability to prevent a life from constant suffering through bad conditions due to parents not being ready.

2. Life starts at self awareness or a a abstract difficult to explain level of brain function. And Mother awareness
A fetus, at 9-12 weeks, has little no self awareness or brain function, the entity merely exists, it's not aware of it's existences, nor even capable of developing memories. The brain isn't developed (ie brain function) to the point it looks remotely close to a developed baby. Thus it's reason to assume that while an arbitrary line, it's a safe line.
As the heartbeat bill (and others) is cruelly crafted so that way by the time mothers know they are pregnant, it's too late. It's unfair to the women in every aspect.
3. Forcing life, is not the best option
A pro life stance forces life to exist without any stipulations or exceptions, and even more concerningly, is unable to account for unforseen situations. Even if you made as many possible exceptions, you'd still be missing more exceptions to that law.

I didn't think I would be talking about a headless baby, but I am now. There's a women who is going to have to carry a headless baby to term, and then watch it die. And this brings a question. There's nothing regarding deformities in such bills. I'm talking serious impairment physically speaking that could be life threatening later on. Or cause extreme suffering.


----------



## TraderPatTX (Sep 6, 2022)

Nothereed said:


> Straw man number1 and unlogical argument, since you made an accusation towards me
> 
> 
> You asserted it was to kill babies as your original argument. So your later positions are incoherent with your original reasoning. Since you question me saying that people deserve a choice. aka focused directly on me.


What is the choice? To allow a baby to live or to not let it live. You argue like the "right to choice" is some abstract concept.


Nothereed said:


> Straw man number 2, since it's not porn.
> https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/...na-and-trinity-neal-illustrated-by-art-twink/
> https://books.google.com/books/about/Téo_s_Tutu.html?id=zAdAEAAAQBAJ&source=kp_book_description
> just a sample of some of the books being banned. All specifically towards trans individuals or queer.


This is what you want kindergartners to read.

https://theiowastandard.com/shockin...h-is-stocked-in-school-libraries-across-iowa/


Nothereed said:


> Strawman 3 and dodging the argument.
> Strawman due to the fact that I never said they looked alike. And I had to provide a distinction, since your own party refuses to acknowledge that there is a distinction, via "the illegals" and boiling it down all to that/dehumanizing.


You are the one who was arguing that it was only Mexicans. I had to share a Pew Research article proving you wrong. Now you want to gaslight to defend yourself.


Nothereed said:


> If we said "el salvador immigrants" people would be a lot more aware of the gang conflict that is happening there (since a large bulk of the illegal immigrants are as a result of that conflict. And waiting down at the border is not a good idea, when the gang will actively hunt you down and shoot you.)
> But your party would rather deflect, and boil it down to "illegals" and bash on them. Not like your party also made it way harder to get refugee status... oh wait. They did. (and if I'm not mistakened biden hasn't fixed that. So he get's a layer of shit as well.)


Those gang conflicts are being imported here. And 9 more illegal aliens just drowned trying to cross the border. If only we had a system that people could use instead of breaking the law. Hmmm...


Nothereed said:


> And you dodged an argument. Earlier "on Trader brain hemorrhages"
> 
> This is a dodged argument after I countered your assertion, and now your dropping it.
> Really entertaining how you want to throw everything at the wall at me.


I don't argue against personal attacks. I let them stand to show how weak your arguments are.


Nothereed said:


> Building a wall is ineffective. I'm not even talking from a political stand point. I'm just talking basic ass maintenance and up keep cost, topped with the fact people WILL find ways around that wall. In some places (in the world) if there was some sort of choke point then yes a wall is feasible.


Tell Biden that as we are paying for him to build a wall around his Delaware home.


Nothereed said:


> But for the US, no we can't, primarily because the amount of distance that would have to be covered, ontop of the geological area not being exactly well suited for building without proper treatment. Otherwise you get the current wall now, which is toppling over itself. The foundation is not stable.


The Great Wall of China worked just fine and also covers a great distance.


Nothereed said:


> I propose a better solution. Fix the problem we made. It's like drinking soda after every meal, and trying to lose weight. So instead you drink a fuck ton of water so you piss the soda out in hoping that it helps loose weight.
> Why not just remove the soda? Putting a wall up doesn't fix the problem, it just makes it easier to ignore the problem.


The left argues with the assumption that the wall is the only solution because you know walls work. That's why they are put up everywhere for security.


Nothereed said:


> "All at once"
> 
> Wow. no go on ahead, just skip the fact that it took roughly 24 years for that flip to happen, and it didn't even happen evenly. But okay sure. Whatever.
> 
> ...


You neglected to address why there were segregationists and KKK members in the Democrat Party all the way to the 2000's. What was it that Johnson said about black people voting Democrat for the next 200 years? Not to mention all the racist things Biden said during the 2020 election.


----------



## Dark_Ansem (Sep 6, 2022)

TraderPatTX said:


> This is what you want kindergartners to read.
> 
> https://theiowastandard.com/shockin...h-is-stocked-in-school-libraries-across-iowa/



Make up your mind. Either it's in school library or in kindergarten library. It can't be in both.



TraderPatTX said:


> Not to mention all the racist things Biden said during the 2020 election



Really? Such as?


----------



## Dark_Ansem (Sep 6, 2022)

TraderPatTX said:


> The Great Wall of China worked just fine and also covers a great distance



Actually, the great wall of China was a historical failure.


----------



## TraderPatTX (Sep 6, 2022)

Dark_Ansem said:


> A paper discredited by basically everyone because it was not methodologically sound and rigorous? Is this another regnerus nonsense? Even the way it's written is ridiculous and unscientific. But I suppose you love it since it's been dumbed down to your level!


So Johns Hopkins is discredited now. Bold move Cotton.


Dark_Ansem said:


> It definitely is an area of your smooth brain.


Sick burn.


Dark_Ansem said:


> And yet biden's economic growth outclassed Trump years.


We haven't even recovered all the jobs lost from the Democrat governors' lockdowns. Stock market is not as high. Energy prices are out of control and inflation is hurting poor people. Not to mention, we are in a recession right now.


Dark_Ansem said:


> Unfortunately for you I do argue relying on science.


You haven't said one scientific thing since you started responding to me.


Dark_Ansem said:


> I did look him up and couldn't even find evidence of the "blackface" part. See, this is what your illiteracy does to you.


This was so easy to find, even you could have done it.


----------



## TraderPatTX (Sep 6, 2022)

Dark_Ansem said:


> Actually, the great wall of China was a historical failure.


Just because you say it doesn't make it true.


----------



## Dark_Ansem (Sep 6, 2022)

TraderPatTX said:


> Just because you say it doesn't make it true.



https://www.livescience.com/did-great-wall-china-work

Didn't stop invasions, big or small. It did work as a flex.


----------



## Dark_Ansem (Sep 6, 2022)

TraderPatTX said:


> So Johns Hopkins is discredited now. Bold move Cotton.



Can you read, illiterate? I said the paper. Not the University.



TraderPatTX said:


> We haven't even recovered all the jobs lost from the Democrat governors' lockdowns. Stock market is not as high. Energy prices are out of control and inflation is hurting poor people. Not to mention, we are in a recession right now.



You can blame your hero Putin for it, and Trumpo for having made the vaccine a political issue.



TraderPatTX said:


> This was so easy to find, even you could have done it



There's been a whole investigation about it which said "it ain't him". And even if it were true, I'd be less worried about a blackface than I'd be about Jim Crow laws which you RepubliKKKans love.


----------



## TraderPatTX (Sep 6, 2022)

Dark_Ansem said:


> Make up your mind. Either it's in school library or in kindergarten library. It can't be in both.


Where do you think kindergartners go to learn?


Dark_Ansem said:


> Really? Such as?


You ain't black if you don't vote for him.

Poor kids are just as bright as white kids.

They are used to being experimented on—the Tuskegee Airmen and others.

Unlike the African American community, with notable exceptions, the Latino community is an incredibly diverse community with incredibly different attitudes about different things.

Responding to a question on whether he had taken a cognitive test, Biden angrily fired back with the suggestion that the black reporter was a drug addict.
“That’s like saying you . . . before you got in this program, you’re take [sic] a test whether you’re taking cocaine or not,” Biden said. “What do you think? Huh? Are you a junkie?”

In 2007, he referred to Barack Obama as “the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean.”

In 2006, he said, “You cannot go to a 7-Eleven or a Dunkin’ Donuts unless you have a slight Indian accent.”

Way back in 1977, he said that forced busing to desegregate schools would cause his children to “grow up in a racial jungle.”

He infamously worked with segregationist senators to oppose that mandatory busing, which decades later led to the strongest moment in Kamala Harris’s campaign for president, when she blasted him as having personally impacted her as a young girl.

Is this enough examples for you?


----------



## Dark_Ansem (Sep 6, 2022)

TraderPatTX said:


> Where do you think kindergartners go to learn?



Kindergarten library, not school library. Different places, doofus.



TraderPatTX said:


> Is this enough examples for you?



They would be if they weren't de-contextualised or if they were actually racist. I wasn't aware that "poor" was a race btw.

On that note, Obama took him as VP and they were great friends. And I think he knows better than you about whether Biden is a racist. So again, you're full of shite.


----------



## Nothereed (Sep 6, 2022)

TraderPatTX said:


> What is the choice? To allow a baby to live or to not let it live. You argue like the "right to choice" is some abstract concept.


aka literately the right to choose. right now you, and your party makes it "always yes"
You don't let the person choose yes *or *no.


TraderPatTX said:


> This is what you want kindergartners to read.


That's just fucking false and a half. It's targeted to 16-18 year olds. Why?
https://www.amazon.com/Gender-Queer-Memoir-Maia-Kobabe/dp/1549304003
how about the actual amazon listing. Your argument doesn't stand any ground.
Especially since
"a book in schools across Iowa"
is this high school?
Pre k?
doesn't tell you. If they specified what school and what grade, I'd have more reason to believe.


TraderPatTX said:


> I don't argue against personal attacks. I let them stand to show how weak your arguments are.


dude. YOU DON'T GET TO HAVE THE HIGH GROUND
Not after you littearly just :


TraderPatTX said:


> Many of the women and children were sex trafficked here. And you applaud it.


Tried to assert that I applaud sex trafficking, with NO EVIDENCE.
How sad do you have to be to not only get owned for getting nailed for dropping a bad argument. But doubling down on it and then grandstanding ontop of it. Your hubris is insane.


TraderPatTX said:


> The Great Wall of China worked just fine and also covers a great distance.


is the great wall in the middle of a desert and ontop of a fuck ton of shifting grain? Also having to deal with extreme heat and cold which can result in build materials expanding and contracting and eventually breaking the foundation? Not saying it's impossible, but it's going to take a lot more work and investment than just fixing the actual problem.


TraderPatTX said:


> The left argues with the assumption that the wall is the only solution because you know walls work. That's why they are put up everywhere for security.


BAAAAAAAH
wow imagine thinking that you can just, throw down a wall anywhere at any time. With absolutely no prep work.


TraderPatTX said:


> You neglected to address why there were segregationists and KKK members in the Democrat Party all the way to the 2000's.


When you need more whataboutism as much as possible to keep avoiding answering that southern strategy was used, or that the KKK loudly supported the Republican party. https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo...ke-says-of-course-trump-voters-are-his-voters
or that you know. Behind Trump too. I can keep adding onto the list if you'd like.


----------



## DinohScene (Sep 6, 2022)

This thread has outlived its purpose...
Locked.


----------

