End of Roe Vs Wade?

Derf

Well-known member
1) I don't refute it.
2) You didn't offer any refutation of the link I posted either.
1) You should.
2) That's odd. I was quite certain that you actually replied to the post where I linked to a refutation of your posted link (you have to click on it, as the image isn't of your post, but the URL is):

You must not have actually read my link, which then makes me wonder if you really expect others to read your links, or if you just have lots of time on your hands.
 

User Name

Greatest poster ever
Banned
1) You should.
2) That's odd. I was quite certain that you actually replied to the post where I linked to a refutation of your posted link (you have to click on it, as the image isn't of your post, but the URL is):

You must not have actually read my link, which then makes me wonder if you really expect others to read your links, or if you just have lots of time on your hands.
1) Why should I? Opinions are just that. If you think you've refuted someone else's opinion, that's just your opinion.
2) I can post one link to refute another link. We can on and on like that. So what?
 

Derf

Well-known member
1) Why should I? Opinions are just that. If you think you've refuted someone else's opinion, that's just your opinion.
2) I can post one link to refute another link. We can on and on like that. So what?
So what indeed. That's about all your post is worth. Why did you post in the first place?
 

Gary K

New member
Banned
But you didn't offer any refutation of it. If there is an immoral position that you reference, I recommend you at least explain that you don't agree with it, else we will think you are immoral.
You trust the strangest voices in existence. The OT says nothing in favor of abortion but I've seen "Christians" who claim it does. Their reasoning depended upon the idea that women have no souls which must rely on the idea that women are not human beings. That is so obscene an idea that when I pointed out the reasoning the socialists kicked me off the forum but wouldn't publicly admit it. They just changed my password without notice so it would look like I had just left the forum.
 

PureX

Well-known member
Does it bother anyone that having already made the decision, the SC then chose to keep it a secret until just before they break? Why be so cowardly and under-handed about it? It's the kind of thing we've come to expect politicians to do, not judges.
 

ok doser

lifeguard at the cement pond
Does it bother anyone that having already made the decision, the SC then chose to keep it a secret until just before they break? Why be so cowardly and under-handed about it? It's the kind of thing we've come to expect politicians to do, not judges.
Do you understand that they are deliberating on many cases all at the same time?

do you understand that traditionally the Supreme Court doesn't announce its decisions for a single session until they are all resolved?
 

TomO

Get used to it.
Hall of Fame
Does it bother anyone that having already made the decision, the SC then chose to keep it a secret until just before they break? Why be so cowardly and under-handed about it? It's the kind of thing we've come to expect politicians to do, not judges.
:poop:
 

Idolater

"Matthew 16:18-19" Dispensationalist (Catholic) χρ
To provide the explanation for why many Jews are pro-choice.
I provided the explanation for why that explanation was science-deaf and -blind. We know that a fresh brand new organism is begun at conception with its own unique DNA molecule. Once that DNA molecule begins to do stuff on its own, like reproduce itself, and start creating organs and bones and such, that is an organism, we know that now, we have hard evidence of that now, we have DNA evidence.

You never replied . . . .
 

ok doser

lifeguard at the cement pond
1) You should.
2) That's odd. I was quite certain that you actually replied to the post where I linked to a refutation of your posted link (you have to click on it, as the image isn't of your post, but the URL is):

You must not have actually read my link, which then makes me wonder if you really expect others to read your links, or if you just have lots of time on your hands.
He's a troll
 

Derf

Well-known member
To provide the explanation for why many Jews are pro-choice.
But that's not the real reason--That's merely their justification for wickedness, so they don't have to repent. If you disagree with them, please say so. It will do you good.
 

Derf

Well-known member
Nope meaning take it up with him.
Coward.
Then we'll assume you believe the Bible supports intentional murder of a person made in God's image.

And because of that stance, you have no moral grounds for any stance you take.
 
Top