However, denying someone a single right isn't the same as suggesting they shouldn't have human rights as a whole. Just for the purpose of accuracy, he doesn't advocate mass extermination or anything.

wkfan;1813876 wrote:Hmmmm...health and safety.....

Certainly not for the unborn child.

Convenience, yes. Health and safety....not often.

sleeper;1813878 wrote:Ah, so you're one of those people who think miscarriages should be involuntary manslaughter.

Heretic;1813866 wrote:If a person wants to believe, no biggie. If a person wants to use their PERSONAL belief as the foundation of their legislation while holding a public office, so countless people can be affected by their ability to pick and choose which verses in their holy book are deserving of becoming law, they deserve failure.

sleeper;1813878 wrote:Ah, so you're one of those people who think miscarriages should be involuntary manslaughter.

wkfan;1813883 wrote:Nope....

CenterBHSFan;1813881 wrote:That is a ridiculous misconstruing and you know it XD

sleeper;1813873 wrote:The ability to make her own health and life choices.

sleeper;1813886 wrote:Why not? You just said the cluster of cells is an unborn child therefore a miscarriage would be involuntary manslaughter.

Just using your own logic against you. Let me know when you want to accept reality and concede.

ZWICK 4 PREZ;1813851 wrote:hes a nutbag

ZWICK 4 PREZ;1813832 wrote:Watched the highlights of the debate... my only question is... why does Trump and Pence think they can deny what Trump has said.

QuakerOats;1813893 wrote:I see; what about the rights of the innocent unborn; she answers for them too I guess.

Nuts.

wkfan;1813894 wrote:Yes, that 'cluster of cells' IS an unborn child....but you are realllllllllllllllllllly stretching, as usual, to try to make a point.....and missing by a wide margin.

You are trying to use logic....and failing because your argument is completely illogical.

You lose.

QuakerOats;1813895 wrote:I guess if you are not a progressive/Marxist baby killer you are a nutbag ......... wonderful.

sleeper;1813873 wrote:The ability to make her own health and life choices.

superman;1813869 wrote:The nerve of him. What kind of asshole tries to make it harder on women to kill babies. Shame on him.

ZWICK 4 PREZ;1813906 wrote:Well when you're on the wrong side of the Supreme Court, you're not usually right.

wkfan;1813876 wrote:Hmmmm...health and safety.....

Certainly not for the unborn child.

Convenience, yes. Health and safety....not often.

sleeper;1813877 wrote:The right to make their own health choices is the most important human right. To deny this right to women is reprehensible in a civilized society.

CenterBHSFan;1813882 wrote:You've just described everybody from the writers of the Constitution to President Washington all the way through each Presidency to Barack Obama.

In context:
- Providence
- The Creator
- God
- The Almighty
etc.

wkfan;1813894 wrote:Yes, that 'cluster of cells' IS an unborn child....but you are realllllllllllllllllllly stretching, as usual, to try to make a point.....and missing by a wide margin.

You are trying to use logic....and failing because your argument is completely illogical.

You lose.

QuakerOats;1813895 wrote:I guess if you are not a progressive/Marxist baby killer you are a nutbag ......... wonderful.

sleeper;1813910 wrote:But they wanted Trump!

bases_loaded;1813916 wrote:When you say "they" you mean the voters right? Unlike the DNC the GOP isn't into election fixing.

ZWICK 4 PREZ;1813832 wrote:Watched the highlights of the debate... my only question is... why does Trump and Pence think they can deny what Trump has said. It's 2016. there's audio and video of everything. You look like an idiot when you deny stuff that you're recorded doing.

I HAVE to imagine that there are at least some Republicans who recognize how badly they whiffed here. Not that I care for them, but Paul Ryan, Ted Cruz, and possibly even that assbag John Kasich would have fared better.

O-Trap;1813911 wrote:If we assume that personhood (and, subsequently, rights) begin at conception, then we're dealing with two independent persons. Neither of them is owed the right to the use of the other one's body for any reason. Even if one cannot survive without the use of the other one's body, it still doesn't give the former the right to it. ...