There are places the CV19 is saving more lives than it is taking
Apr 8, 2020 09:25:57 #
Apr 8, 2020 09:31:36 #
thom w
Loc: San Jose, CA
idaholover wrote:
https://dailycaller.com/2020/03/25/states-ban-a******n-c****av***s-c***d19/
If I had moved to Idaho because I thought that compared to the potatoes I would look brilliant, and the facts didn't prove that to be true, I might be pissed too. That stuff can happen when you are too impulsive. Oh, back to your article: lives, possibly. Persons? Since a******ns, do not k**l persons, you may be able to figure it out, or not.
Apr 8, 2020 09:37:54 #
thom w wrote:
If I had moved to Idaho because I thought that compared to the potatoes I would look brilliant, and the facts didn't prove that to be true, I might be pissed too. That stuff can happen when you are too impulsive.
Sounds like you may have considered that. Admit you are assuming thats why I did. It is not however, I only wished it had been 20 years earlier.
Apr 8, 2020 13:34:59 #
So spud
Hypothetically, If I were holding your newly born grandchild and a petri dish with a fertilized egg from your daughter and told you that I was going to drop one of them off a cliff.
Which would you choose, and why.
Hypothetically, If I were holding your newly born grandchild and a petri dish with a fertilized egg from your daughter and told you that I was going to drop one of them off a cliff.
Which would you choose, and why.
Apr 8, 2020 13:45:33 #
Frank T wrote:
So spud
Hypothetically, If I were holding your newly born grandchild and a petri dish with a fertilized egg from your daughter and told you that I was going to drop one of them off a cliff.
Which would you choose, and why.
Hypothetically, If I were holding your newly born grandchild and a petri dish with a fertilized egg from your daughter and told you that I was going to drop one of them off a cliff.
Which would you choose, and why.
You would be the first one over the cliff, no questions asked. OBTW I wouldn't let filth like you anywhere near me or mine.
Apr 8, 2020 18:42:28 #
thom w
Loc: San Jose, CA
idaholover wrote:
Sounds like you may have considered that. Admit you are assuming thats why I did. It is not however, I only wished it had been 20 years earlier.
Absolutely I’m guessing, but it seems likely enough.
Apr 8, 2020 19:31:14 #
Apr 8, 2020 19:45:40 #
idaholover wrote:
You would be the first one over the cliff, no questions asked. OBTW I wouldn't let filth like you anywhere near me or mine.
Refusing to answer is the path a coward would take.
Apr 8, 2020 20:40:05 #
thom w
Loc: San Jose, CA
mwalsh wrote:
...
That fetus may be alive. It is not yet somebody, so it can't be somebody else. She should not be required to support a parasite if she doesn't wish to. I'm not showing disrespect using the term parasite. By definition it is one as long as it is living off her body. Much like mistletoe on a tree. If you believe that God put a soul into it at conception, you can believe that. I won't put you down, but we have no common authorities to use to settle it so we'll just have to disagree. If your motivation isn't religious, I really don't understand where you are coming from.
Apr 8, 2020 20:58:28 #
thom w wrote:
That fetus may be alive. It is not yet somebody, s... (show quote)
If the unborn baby is not a person, then answer this.
"The Unborn Victims of Violence Act of 2004 (Public Law 108-212) is a United States law which recognizes an embryo or fetus in utero as a legal victim, if they are injured or k**led during the commission of any of over 60 listed federal crimes of violence. The law defines "child in utero" as "a member of the species Homo sapiens, at any stage of development, who is carried in the womb."
Apr 8, 2020 21:23:39 #
thom w
Loc: San Jose, CA
EyeSawYou wrote:
If the unborn baby is not a person, then answer this.
"The Unborn Victims of Violence Act of 2004 (Public Law 108-212) is a United States law which recognizes an embryo or fetus in utero as a legal victim, if they are injured or k**led during the commission of any of over 60 listed federal crimes of violence. The law defines "child in utero" as "a member of the species Homo sapiens, at any stage of development, who is carried in the womb."
"The Unborn Victims of Violence Act of 2004 (Public Law 108-212) is a United States law which recognizes an embryo or fetus in utero as a legal victim, if they are injured or k**led during the commission of any of over 60 listed federal crimes of violence. The law defines "child in utero" as "a member of the species Homo sapiens, at any stage of development, who is carried in the womb."
Many unwise laws have been passed over the years.
Apr 8, 2020 21:36:00 #
Frank T wrote:
Refusing to answer is the path a coward would take.
OBTW Davie in Connecticut is mixing cocktails for the two of you better get along
Apr 8, 2020 21:37:25 #
thom w wrote:
Many unwise laws have been passed over the years.
God you are a soulless POS
Apr 8, 2020 21:38:58 #
thom w wrote:
Many unwise laws have been passed over the years.
Are you saying this law is unwise?
Apr 8, 2020 21:43:28 #
idaholover wrote:
Come on man WTF would that little turd know about wisdom?
Lol he has none to speak of, he is mentally ill.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.