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

[tabzer]

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.

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]

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?

Your rebuttal: what about strangers?!

Lol.

Making fun of your stupid (and settled) answer = tantrum.

I hope I can forgive myself.

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]

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]

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.

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]

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]

That's from your lack of education, not my lack of presentation.

Cry more. Then when you done crying, cry some more.

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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]

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?

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]

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.

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]

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]

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]

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]

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.

 

[Deleted member 586536]

Cry more. Then when you done crying, cry some more.

A very educated response, from a very reasonable and logical person

 

[LainaGabranth]

I wish Dark Brandon had forced estrogen camps for anti-choicers tbh. Would be pretty funny.

 

[Deleted member 586536]

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]

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]

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?

I mirror people, because people only respect how they act.

Oh. You are the mirror. Very meta.

 

[smf]

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.

Oh. You are the mirror. Very meta.

I expose your inner turmoil.

 

[tabzer]

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?

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]

Have you noticed where you are?

I'm sitting at my laptop.