Text 14595, 174 rader
Skriven 2014-04-24 09:53:00 av TIM RICHARDSON (1:123/140)
     Kommentar till en text av DAVID DRUMMOND
Ärende: JoHo
============
On 04-24-14, DAVID DRUMMOND said to TIM RICHARDSON:


DD>On 24/04/14 4:22 PM, TIM RICHARDSON -> DAVID DRUMMOND wrote:

DD>> You don;t seem to give a shit about the contributors to
DD>> society who die on the roads, but do about a few nobody fetuses....


TR> I care more about those who your `contributors to society' who get
TR> drunked up and take out with their vehicle, than I do the `contributor'
TR> who got drunk and climbed behind the wheel.


DD>As opposed to drunked up and climb behind the penis?


Which comes right back to the very question I've asked on this all along, for
many years now:


If individuals can't be responsible enough to take precautions to prevent a
pregnancy...what makes anyone think they're responsible enough to make a life
or death decision for an un-born child?


And so far...NONE of you who are such ardent supporters of abortion, have
addressed that question! Either in the past, when all those batty women were
raging at me over this issue here in Fido, or now, today!


TR> No wonder you have such a cold-eyed way of refering to `fetuses'...Canada
TR> looks upon them as cord wood! Canada doesn't have to worry about their
TR> aborted fetuses...they send them to America's power plants to be used as
TR> fuel to make electricity! They just call it `medical waste'. Some plant up
TR> in Oregon operates on `waste'.


DD>We at least they contributed something to society. Good luck to Canada.


Yeah...I suppose the Germans who maybe weren't actually members of the Nazi
party thought the same about the Jews getting gassed. `Good luck Jews!'


TR> Of course...its not EVER refered to as `a few nobody fetuses'! Especially
TR> >not to any Catholic authorities who got wind of the matter and started
TR> asking questions.


DD>Makes a change from kiddie fucking I suppose. The catholics don't want
DD>them aborted, cannot fuck them if they've been burned in furnaces.


Well....the Catholics don't have a lock on THAT one...Hollywood's chock FULL
of child molesters who sodomize young boy actors.


In fact...yet anOTHer case is rolling out of Hollywood on that very subject
even as I type. A `sex ring' that molested young boy actors is being exposed
in the very recent news.


See...its always been my opinion that the priesthood is the easiest
`profession' that is open to sodomite pedophiles. Either `the priesthood', or
convent.


For one thing...its the cheapest. And it does bring the sodomite into contact
with the youngsters of their `choice-of-gender', rather quickly.


Not that there aren't sodomite pedophiles in other choices of profession...its
just that few pedophiles actually have the money and patience to go through
several years of medical school, say, or dental school, or teachers' college,
just in order to get near their `targets'. Although teachers are pretty common
pedophiles as well.


`Child actors' though.....well....


TR> No no...its called `medical waste'. Far more soothing to the ear...calms
TR> any fears on the part of the public.


DD>What has it got to do with the public, any more than any other medically
DD>excised unwanted tissue?


You mean like the `Jews' or the `unter menchen' of the 1940's? Yeah...refer to
them as something `un'human, something that sounds like you'd WANT to get rid
of it...yeah...that works!


TR> Makes it all sound...oh...innocent, no threatening. Must'nt conjure up
DD>images of the `crematories'...Nazis and all
TR> that! tsk tsk! That wouldn't do...now would it!


DD>Are the Nazis running USA and Canada now?


Depends. How many `Gosnell' types are up there?


DD>Would they be any worse than your ilk telling people what they can and
DD>cannot do?


You make it sound so `adversarial'! Like *I'm* the one who's fault it is some
couple didn't have the responsibility to think of the possible consequences of
un-protected sex activity, which led to a Gosnell-like abortion.


All I'm saying...all I've EVER said on the subject is...lets demand a whole
lot more responsibililty on the part of the participants...and we might not be
having a discussion on this in the first place!


You hear a lot about `its HER body'...when some idiot politician stands at the
podium in Congress making a case for abortion being freely available to women.
But, you never hear any politician stand at that same podium and expound on
the virtue of `personal responsibility' a woman takes on when she makes the
decision to engage in un-protected sexual activity! And don't come back with
`what about the guy'! Because you can't have it both ways; `its HER body' when
it comes to making a decision that will cost a life...but it `WASN'T her body'
when she made the decision to engage in sex without protection!


And by the way...its funny how my expressing the need for `responsibility' on
the part of the participants, almost always degenerates into the other side
making the claim that `I and my ilk' telling people what they can or cannot
do!


Not just THIS time....but always! Without fail!


Why is it that way for the `abortion' issue...yet for all those people who get
drunked up and die in vehicle accidents, taking a lot of innocents with them,
suddenly they are `contributers'?


And another thing thats funny:


This Sandra Fluke person getting trotted out in front of a Congressional
committee during the Obamacare leadup, and making the claims she made about
her sex activities, for the purpose of getting the taxpayers to pay for HER
birth control!


Again...you heard nothing about HER taking responsibility for her own actions,
or paying her OWN way....only making OTHER people responsible for what she
does! Weird way of reasoning.


TR> In fact...a report states that `more than 15,000 aborted babies were
TR> incinerated to heat and generate power for British hospitals'.


DD>I'm sure that is the only reason they were conceived too.....


Knowing *your ilk*...probably so.





---
*Durango b301 #PE* 
 * Origin: Fidonet Since 1991 Join Us: www.DocsPlace.org (1:123/140)