Don’t start your fibbin’ again!

Could be worse! You and your twin boyfriend are referred to as Pete and Repeat. So close, huh, Pappy!

LOL, this is what he does!

He’ll whine about name calling, do the same thing and then accuse you of reporting him to Admin. He’s even been know to get caught in a lie or two.

He is quite a big silly to say the least!



Apparently he has a thing for backsides.

A******n is not about science. I taught science, Bio, AP Bio. It’s about mixing religion and politics. It’s not about the life of anyone, even a fetus, because I’ve already established that the anti-a******nists don’t care about any lives, except their own.

In a society which allows/encourages executions, and which insists that everyone is allowed to own semi auto handguns rifles and shotguns, insisting a******ns even for rape and incest is off the table is absurd.
We are prepared to slaughter billions, yet taking pills to remove an unwanted embryo is one step too much?
The same people who refused to wear a mask or get v******ted and didn’t care who that act would get sick and k**l are the same ones who insist a******ns are off limits.

My position on a******n has to do with the rights of the mother, not with the unwanted unborn. After the mother gives birth, I will back any legislation that supports the mother and her child.
What about you? You don’t seem to care about either the mother or her child after it’s born.

And, you didn’t answer my question about you being an INCEL. Did I hit too close to the mark? I’m sure it’s not entirely your fault.

You're making a baseless assumption, and you lack reason in your response. Science is not on your side. Therefore, your argument is fatally flawed, without any logic, and totally emotional.

A woman, without any medical condition to the contrary, has tacitly agreed to carry a child to term when she and a man have consensual sexual relations. The fact that she may have "buyer's remorse", is not a reason to terminate the life of a child. Any arguments to the contrary deny the inherent rights of a defenseless human being. That that human can't survive outside the womb until late in the term is beside the point. The couple has made a moral decision to create a new life, and therefore must ensure that new life survives and thrives.

Women have been carrying infants to term without "unwarranted risk to health and life" for hundreds of thousands of years. Pregnancy is a process, and it does contain risks. The "come lately" argument you present is nonsensical on its face. If the woman has been impregnated as a result of rape, incest, etc., then all bets are off.