Reply With Quote
Hater getting dominated in the post.
Conspiracy to murder is not murder
Hater getting dominated in the post.
I'm having trouble finding a fundamental difference between a woman approaching someone to illegally murder someone (if that's the law) and a hitman scenario.
i'm not. i'm saying hiring a hitman isn't the same as being a hitman
I don't think it is either, but you still get punished if you hire a hitman.
of course. i think i misunderstood when you said "murder is murder" you were referring to the hitman and the hirer of the hitman
Gotcha. Right, I don't think pro-lifers equate abortion doctors with women having abortions, but I do believe that most would favor some punishment for the woman seeking the abortion.
And this is just stupid, tbh.
Pro-lifers have never thought about punishing the woman for the abortion. It's always been about banning abortions and punishing doctors who perform them. Trump got it all wrong which is why both sides have pummeled him.
If that's really what pro-lifers believe then they have a serious message problem. Maybe this will cause them to rethink the hysterics moving forward. And they should really try not to go off script in casual, private conversations either.
Stunning updated odds:
Trump -250
Cruz +250
Kasich +400
(Repub nomination)
Trump was -1200 a few weeks ago btw
Where is the link? I want to show this to a really pathetic friend of mine who wouldn't believe this without a "source."
Lmao is you re ? Iran has no reason to nukes? Saudi has no reason? Pretty much any country in the world covets nukes.
Isn't Israel Irans mortal enemy who possesses 200+ nukes??
You seem to live in a fictional fantasy land bro.
Saudi and Iran would kill for nukes
I agree with you bratha
http://www.bovada.lv
political section
Iran's mortal enemy used to be Saddam. Israel isn't a threat to them in the way India is a threat to Pakistan. Same way with the Saudis. They don't have a hostile neighbor with nukes like Pakistan does with India. So yeah, they don't have a viable reason to get nukes like Pakistan did in the 90s.
It's actually consistent with an "anti-choice" designation. As I said earlier, it implies that they don't consider women moral agents (people capable of making full rational decisions for which they are held responsible) but instead moral patients (those who lack agency but whom agents have to protect). They want to reduce women to animals or at least children, trying to preserve the belief that they didn't known what they were doing or that they were being tricked.
It's disturbing and paternalistic, and Trump had a great opportunity to come out and show how he's the most pro-woman than his counterparts. But in today's PC world where people are only looking for sound bites to latch onto, there probably wasn't a way for him to get that very important argument across, even if he was able to articulate it.
"It's disturbing and paternalistic"
and it's in the Bible.
Wrong wrong and wrong.
Irans mortal enemies are Israel and Saudi.
Israel and Saudis mortal enemy is Iran. They already engaged in proxy wars and have been for years.
Wake up
And it's part of both parties' platforms. That's why humans are disgusting if you let them talk long enough.
This is an art form in some cases.
Lead them to go on and remove the mask.
lol Iran wants nukes to protect themselves from us.
Which makes Trump's comments even more stupid. Dont you think?
Its like handing your enemy a gun and saying shoot me will ya? Nukes are bad for business, period. Allied or otherwise.
The evidence is that nukes promote peace.
Peace by impending fear.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions