THREAD: Partisan & cultist trolls frequently act dumbfounded that any conservative could POSSIBLY have reasons to be less than enamored with Trump, so I thought I'd start a handy running list to bookmark for easy reference. Feel free to submit anything I missed in the replies.
The vast majority of pro-lifers I have ever known do not jump straight to "evil," "demonic," "killer," etc. at the first sign of someone supporting the "right to choose" (choose what, Katherine?). But not everyone is open to reason. At some point shame & stigma have to take over.
A serious question for pro-lifers: When you call people who support the right to choose things like "evil" "demonic" "killer"...do you think that will change their mind? If not, why do it? What do you hope to gain by vilifyiny someone and putting them on the defensive?
In 29 days, we will celebrate the 250th birthday of our exceptional nation, which became the greatest of all because we were the first to declare the self-evident truth that all people are created equal by God.
Not โborn equal.โ We are โCREATED equal.โ
Because God made us all in His image, it means EVERY SINGLE PERSON has inestimable DIGNITY and VALUEโand our value is not related in any way to the color of our skin, what zip code we live in, what our talents are, our health condition, or any other factor. Our value is inherent, because it is given to us by our loving Heavenly Father.
When a culture devolves to the point of depravity where โinfluencersโ can go online and so casually dismiss the deliberate murder of their own precious child, the survival of that culture itself is at risk.
God have mercy on our nation as we pray and work for an end to this evil, for hearts and minds to change, and for a renewed understanding of the self-evident truths and the sanctity of all human life.
โBefore I formed you in the womb I knew you.โ (Jeremiah 1:5)
Exactly. Massie also gave no memorial speech on the House floor last month on May 17, the anniversary of when 27 American sailors were killed and 21 injured in 1987 when Iraq, a then-U.S. ally, accidentally hit the USS Stark in the Persian Gulf with an anti-ship missile. Gee, I wonder why? ๐ค
The USS Liberty was a tragic wartime mistake that Israel apologized for, and also paid millions to the families.
Thomas Massie doesnโt say a word about Hezbollah who - intentionally - bombed and killed hundreds of Americans in Lebanon.
The 1983 Beirut Marine bombing occurred on October 23, 1983, when a suicide truck bomber struck the U.S. Marine Corps barracks in Beirut, Lebanon.
A massive truck bomb, equivalent to roughly 12,000 pounds of TNT, was driven through the perimeter of the U.S. compound at Beirut International Airport and detonated inside the Marine Battalion Landing Team headquarters.
241 American service members were killed, it was the deadliest single-day tactical loss for the U.S. Marine Corps since the Battle of Iwo Jima.
No, youโre not sending โmore money to Ukraine,โ and you never have.
You used to send American money to American arms manufacturers so that American workers and engineers could have more contracts, jobs, salaries, and tax revenue while producing American weapons in America for Ukraine or replacing old equipment from U.S. stockpiles.
That allowed the Ukrainian military to keep saving their country, while your top-tier geopolitical enemy, a KGB dictatorship obsessed with hatred toward you, could be defeated in its war of aggression in Europe and critically weakened for decades to come -- without a single American soldier firing a single shot.
But then you decided to start pretending that night is day.
By this logic it is acceptable to kill a child who, at five years old, develops a debilitating disease or is severely injured in an accident. If the standard is "care for them with little assistance for the rest of their lives," why does it matter when the disability unfolds?
@johnholler1787 I would consider *what I said* (not just the parts you cherry-pick and pretend not to understand) enough for non-murderers.
Which clearly isn't you.
Good luck outgrowing that someday.
Simple tricks for discerning the validity of any pro-abortion argument: test how it would sound if you swap in a more accurate description of the action at issue, and/or if you'd accept doing the same to a born child.
Forcing people to carry babies with genetic abnormalities to term, and then to care for them with little assistance for the rest of their lives, will only discourage people from having kids.
This guy made the right choice for his family, and that choice will lead to other kids.
@johnholler1787 And you're simply lying about the facts not being "proper." I've been more than patient given your dishonesty and obstinance, but that patience has run out. So we're at an impasse. You are now free to go be vile somewhere else.
@johnholler1787 You may get some perverse, juvenile thrill from making people repeat themselves to the end of time, but in the world of serious adults it's just exhausting.
So last chance. Either shape up and stop being a dishonest troll, or you're gone.
@johnholler1787 I could give you all the quotes you could want from mainstream biology textbooks, in-depth definition breakdowns, even medical consensus about when life begin. But you haven't shown me you're open to persuasion. Everything I've seen here tells me the opposite.
@johnholler1787 I already did. In response, you tried to play dumb about the components of the definition, previewing a tactic that I strongly suspect would have no end no matter how long I played along. So it seems more productive to reiterate this isn't "my" definition, but *the* definition.
@johnholler1787 It sounds like your real quarrel here is not with me, but with the field of biology. Fortunately, there's a mountain of textbooks and resources out there to clear up your confusion.
@johnholler1787 2) it's not *just* that a zygote has human DNA. A flaked skin cell or severed arm has human DNA too, but they're obviously just parts. It's that a zygote *is a human being* -- a live, growing, human organism, i.e., genetically distinct and complete member of the human species.
@johnholler1787 "Noise and slop." More projection.
Roughly, but you still got a couple things wrong.
1) it's more accurate to say all *human beings* have rights. You're the one insinuating an arbitrary distinction between humans & persons. I completely reject the concept of human non-persons.
@johnholler1787 Which on top of being the obvious most humane way to go about it for anyone with a properly-functioning conscience, is also the only way to keep everyone elseโs rights secure, because the foundations erode into nothingness...