Racmanaz wrote:
I just proved that you are an unhinged pathological liar and yes I did destroy your “We want to control women’s body” argument with this response, I will repeat it. Can you answer any of my questions below?
If we want to control women, the name, one other law or rule that we want to oppose that controls women. Do we want them to dress like how we want them to dress? do we dictate what types of jobs they have? Do we dictate where they go? Do we dictate how much make up they use or not? Do we dictate how they talk or where they travel or what they eat? Do we dictate tattoos? We dictate that they cannot have piercings? do we dictate that they have to get married? The That is an astounding. So that destroys your argument.
I just proved that you are an unhinged pathologica... (
show quote)
You destroyed your credibility is all that you have destroyed basement boy :) Give them crumbs.....
Racmanaz wrote:
I just proved that you are an unhinged pathological liar and yes I did destroy your “We want to control women’s body” argument with this response, I will repeat it. Can you answer any of my questions below?
If we want to control women, the name, one other law or rule that we want to oppose that controls women. Do we want them to dress like how we want them to dress? do we dictate what types of jobs they have? Do we dictate where they go? Do we dictate how much make up they use or not? Do we dictate how they talk or where they travel or what they eat? Do we dictate tattoos? We dictate that they cannot have piercings? do we dictate that they have to get married? The That is an astounding. So that destroys your argument.
I just proved that you are an unhinged pathologica... (
show quote)
In your history of posting on this site, you have never, "destroyed" anyone.
You merely prove to the observers of your post that you are a little man with a little mind whose answer to everything he disagrees with is that the poster is a "pathological liar".
You, sir, are pathological and are suffering from the Dunning-Krueger effect.
In the words of John Cleese, "If you are really, really stupid, then it's impossible for you to know you are really, really stupid". This quote fits you perfectly and is why you believe you're the smartest person in the room.
When was the last time you were actually with a woman? I bet it's been a long, long time.
Please tell me. BTW - If you paid them to be with you, that doesn't count.
McKinneyMike wrote:
You destroyed your credibility is all that you have destroyed basement boy :) Give them crumbs.....
lol yup, just as I thought, you can’t even answer my questions because you know it utterly destroyed your argument. I WIN AGAIN!
Frank T wrote:
In your history of posting on this site, you have never, "destroyed" anyone.
You merely prove to the observers of your post that you are a little man with a little mind whose answer to everything he disagrees with is that the poster is a "pathological liar".
You, sir, are pathological and are suffering from the Dunning-Krueger effect.
In the words of John Cleese, "If you are really, really stupid, then it's impossible for you to know you are really, really stupid". This quote fits you perfectly and is why you believe you're the smartest person in the room.
When was the last time you were actually with a woman? I bet it's been a long, long time.
Please tell me. BTW - If you paid them to be with you, that doesn't count.
In your history of posting on this site, you have ... (
show quote)
lol yup, just as I thought, you can’t even answer my questions because you know it utterly destroyed your argument. I WIN AGAIN!
Hey, lefty liar losers, if the ‘unborn’ have no rights and they’re not people, then tell us why, when a pregnant woman is murdered, the perp is charged with TWO murders?
I’m less interested in your answer than the mental gymnastics you’ll have to go through to provide that answer.
skylane5sp wrote:
Hey, lefty liar losers, if the ‘unborn’ have no rights and they’re not people, then tell us why, when a pregnant woman is murdered, the perp is charged with TWO murders?
I’m less interested in your answer than the mental gymnastics you’ll have to go through to provide that answer.
It would have to depend on how far along she was.
Kraken wrote:
It would have to depend on how far along she was.
Nope, doesn’t matter what stage the unborn is in utero as the federal law states.
The Unborn Victims of Violence Act of 2004 (Public Law 108-212) is a United States law that recognizes an embryo or fetus in utero as a legal victim, if they are injured or killed 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."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unborn_Victims_of_Violence_Act
skylane5sp wrote:
Hey, lefty liar losers, if the ‘unborn’ have no rights and they’re not people, then tell us why, when a pregnant woman is murdered, the perp is charged with TWO murders?
I’m less interested in your answer than the mental gymnastics you’ll have to go through to provide that answer.
Study the law and get back to.us.
Frank T wrote:
Study the law and get back to.us.
Maybe YOU should study the law.
The Unborn Victims of Violence Act of 2004 (Public Law 108-212) is a United States law that recognizes an embryo or fetus in utero as a legal victim, if they are injured or killed 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."https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unborn_Victims_of_Violence_Act
Racmanaz wrote:
Maybe YOU should study the law.
The Unborn Victims of Violence Act of 2004 (Public Law 108-212) is a United States law that recognizes an embryo or fetus in utero as a legal victim, if they are injured or killed 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."https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unborn_Victims_of_Violence_ActMaybe YOU should study the law. br br The Unbor... (
show quote)
Repeat Pedo-Rac, repeat repeat repeat.
Kraken wrote:
Repeat Pedo-Rac, repeat repeat repeat.
Maybe YOU should study the law.
The Unborn Victims of Violence Act of 2004 (Public Law 108-212) is a United States law that recognizes an embryo or fetus in utero as a legal victim, if they are injured or killed 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."https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unborn_Victims_of_Violence_Act
Racmanaz wrote:
Maybe YOU should study the law.
The Unborn Victims of Violence Act of 2004 (Public Law 108-212) is a United States law that recognizes an embryo or fetus in utero as a legal victim, if they are injured or killed 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."https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unborn_Victims_of_Violence_ActMaybe YOU should study the law. br br The Unbor... (
show quote)
Congratulations, you must be really celebrating,
you finally got one right go ahead and repeat it 3 more times.
Kraken wrote:
Congratulations, you must be really celebrating,
you finally got one right go ahead and repeat it 3 more times.
Finally? I have known about this law for years.
Racmanaz wrote:
Finally? I have known about this law for years.
Well then it's probably outdated and has been revised
to something that makes more sense.
Kraken wrote:
Well then it's probably outdated and has been revised
to something that makes more sense.
lol A federal law that’s been updated and revised?
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.