US Politics: Bike tricks

Status
Not open for further replies.
rietrot said:
What's wrong with that?
Click to expand...
They want more of this

iu
 
Twatter is so broken on Tapatalk right now

eaeef55d828d5fee779e9b985b875568.png



Anyway...


www.independent.co.uk

Republican committee chair admits he’s found no dirt on Biden

James Comer tells CNN ‘we’ve found a lot that should be illegal’
www.independent.co.uk www.independent.co.uk

Republican committee chair trying to dig up dirt on Biden admits they’ve come up dry

“Well, we’ve found a lot that’s certainly unethical, we’ve found a lot that should be illegal, though the line is blurry as to what is legal with respect to family influence-peddling,” he said in response. “I think people in both parties have argued for many years that family members of both Republicans and Democrats – especially family members of presidents – have benefited from our adversaries around the world.”

Mr Comer has vigorously pursued investigations into Mr Biden as well as his son Hunter Biden for influence peddling. But so far, most of the Oversight Committee’s investigations have come up short.

seth-meyers-late-night-seth.gif
 
konfab said:
So if a rape exception was made for abortion, pro-abortionists would shut up?
Click to expand...

Sorry what are you trying to argue here? "We have to prevent 10-year olds from abortion access because if we allow rape exceptions the pro-choicers won't stop at that"? Seriously?
 
cerebus said:
Sorry what are you trying to argue here? "We have to prevent 10-year olds from abortion access because if we allow rape exceptions the pro-choicers won't stop at that"? Seriously?
Click to expand...
Argument is: if a rape exception was made for all abortion, would the fervor for people pushing abortions decrease?
And the answer is that it wouldn't.

That is because the pro-abortion crowd don't want abortion for rape, they want it for birth control. Because we all know the prime directive of society is that woman cannot have any form of responsibility.
 
konfab said:
Argument is: if a rape exception was made for all abortion, would the fervor for people pushing abortions decrease?
And the answer is that it wouldn't.

That is because the pro-abortion crowd don't want abortion for rape, they want it for birth control. Because we all know the prime directive of society is that woman cannot have any form of responsibility.
Click to expand...

So exactly what I said then. **** man I was hoping you'd moderate my representation of your point but no... You seriously think "10-year old rape victims can't have abortions because leftists are the real extremists" is a solid point.
 
Reading thru all these posts I can only say America is one f*uped divided country. Our politicians maybe useless thieving clowns but these American politicians all need serious mental health care.
 
cerebus said:
So exactly what I said then. **** man I was hoping you'd moderate my representation of your point but no... You seriously think "10-year old rape victims can't have abortions because leftists are the real extremists" is a solid point.
Click to expand...
That is the argument of the pro-life crowd. And it is why there isn't really point arguing about the rape side of things because it won't change the opinion either side.

Where I stand is a 6 week limit, and if a woman is raped and it is after that, but before 12 weeks, they need to at least open a criminal case of rape. And because I actually don't want abortion in society, I would have this tied to the availability of effective state funded birth control, like IUDs and contraceptive injections.
 
konfab said:
That is the argument of the pro-life crowd. And it is why there isn't really point arguing about the rape side of things because it won't change the opinion either side.
Click to expand...
I once overheard a conversation while in Georgia - A pro-lifer argued that a rape exclusion was dangerous because women wanting abortions would claim they had been raped. Apparently this isn't a rare belief on the matter either.
 
quovadis said:
I once overheard a conversation while in Georgia - A pro-lifer argued that a rape exclusion was dangerous because women wanting abortions would claim they had been raped. Apparently this isn't a rare belief on the matter either.
Click to expand...
Falsely accusing someone of rape is a criminal offence, and should carry more criminal weight than it currently does.
 
konfab said:
That is the argument of the pro-life crowd. And it is why there isn't really point arguing about the rape side of things because it won't change the opinion either side.

Where I stand is a 6 week limit, and if a woman is raped and it is after that, but before 12 weeks, they need to at least open a criminal case of rape. And because I actually don't want abortion in society, I would have this tied to the availability of effective state funded birth control, like IUDs and contraceptive injections.
Click to expand...

Why six weeks?
 
konfab said:
That is the argument of the pro-life crowd. And it is why there isn't really point arguing about the rape side of things because it won't change the opinion either side.
Click to expand...

I agree there's no point arguing with the pro-life crowd. They're way too far gone for reasoning.
 
Unhappy438 said:
Why six weeks?
Click to expand...
Three reasons:
1) it is about when the heart and brain development starts to happen.
2) It is when most of the risk of miscarriage falls starts falling off:
image-5.png

3) It still gives women ample time to get a pregnancy test. Pregnancy gestation time is medically defined as the time since the last period. Pregnancy tests start working at about 3 weeks, and even the cheapest pregnancy tests are unambiguous at 5 weeks.

Reality is that if you are having unprotected sex, you need to be prepared for inconveniences.
 
cerebus said:
I agree there's no point arguing with the pro-life crowd. They're way too far gone for reasoning.
Click to expand...
There is no point in arguing with the "pro-choice"crowd either because they cannot justify their position on anything else but the "right" of women to have sex without any consequences. They cannot give a coherent explanation why it would be wrong to abort a 39 week old foetus.

Even the framing of the question as "pro-life" or "pro-choice" is wrong. The correct framing is whether you are pro-abortion or anti-abortion, and to what degree you are in that camp.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X