GOP Resolution Seeking To Halt Abortion Care At Veterans Affairs
Fails In The Senate Yahoo News - April 21, 2023
GOP Resolution Seeking To Halt Abortion Care At Veterans Affairs Fails In The Senate
Yahoo News - April 21, 2023
-- https://news.yahoo.com/gop-resolution-seeking-halt-abortion-231256560.html
On Friday, April 21, 2023 at 11:12:54 AM UTC-7, bruce bowser wrote:
GOP Resolution Seeking To Halt Abortion Care At Veterans Affairs Fails In The Senate
Yahoo News - April 21, 2023
-- https://news.yahoo.com/gop-resolution-seeking-halt-abortion-231256560.html
Tell me, PLEASE, what those babies did to deserve to be MURDERED??? Do babies now have to PROVE that the sex was consensual to LIVE??????
On 2023-04-23 18:15, Tommy wrote:
On Friday, April 21, 2023 at 11:12:54 AM UTC-7, bruce bowser wrote:
GOP Resolution Seeking To Halt Abortion Care At Veterans Affairs Fails In The Senate
Yahoo News - April 21, 2023
-- https://news.yahoo.com/gop-resolution-seeking-halt-abortion-231256560.html
Tell me, PLEASE, what those babies did to deserve to
be MURDERED??? Do babies now have to PROVE that
the sex was consensual to LIVE??????
So, let me get this straight:
A 10 year old gets raped...
...and you think she should have to carry her rapist's baby to term?
On 2023-04-23 18:15, Tommy wrote:
On Friday, April 21, 2023 at 11:12:54 AM UTC-7, bruce bowser wrote:
GOP Resolution Seeking To Halt Abortion Care At Veterans Affairs Fails In The Senate
Yahoo News - April 21, 2023
-- https://news.yahoo.com/gop-resolution-seeking-halt-abortion-231256560.html
Tell me, PLEASE, what those babies did to deserve to be MURDERED??? Do babies now have to PROVE that the sex was consensual to LIVE??????So, let me get this straight:
A 10 year old gets raped...
...and you think she should have to carry her rapist's baby to term?
On Friday, April 21, 2023 at 11:12:54 AM UTC-7, bruce bowser wrote:
GOP Resolution Seeking To Halt Abortion Care At Veterans Affairs
Fails In The Senate Yahoo News - April 21, 2023
--
Tell me, PLEASE, what those babies did to deserve to be MURDERED???
Do babies now have to PROVE that the sex was consensual to LIVE??????
On 2023-04-23 18:15, Tommy wrote:
On Friday, April 21, 2023 at 11:12:54 AM UTC-7, bruce bowser wrote:
GOP Resolution Seeking To Halt Abortion Care At Veterans Affairs Fails In The Senate
Yahoo News - April 21, 2023
-- https://news.yahoo.com/gop-resolution-seeking-halt-abortion-231256560.html
Tell me, PLEASE, what those babies did to deserve to be MURDERED??? Do babies now have to PROVE that the sex was consensual to LIVE??????So, let me get this straight:
A 10 year old gets raped...
...and you think she should have to carry her rapist's baby to term?
On Sunday, April 23, 2023 at 8:30:03 PM UTC-7, Alan wrote:
On 2023-04-23 18:15, Tommy wrote:
On Friday, April 21, 2023 at 11:12:54 AM UTC-7, bruce bowser wrote:So, let me get this straight:
GOP Resolution Seeking To Halt Abortion Care At Veterans Affairs Fails In The Senate
Yahoo News - April 21, 2023
-- https://news.yahoo.com/gop-resolution-seeking-halt-abortion-231256560.html
Tell me, PLEASE, what those babies did to deserve to be MURDERED??? Do babies now have to PROVE that the sex was consensual to LIVE??????
A 10 year old gets raped...
...and you think she should have to carry her rapist's baby to term?
Answer the question, Fool, WHAT did the baby do to deserve to get MURDERED????
Tommy wrote:
On Friday, April 21, 2023 at 11:12:54 AM UTC-7, bruce bowser wrote:
GOP Resolution Seeking To Halt Abortion Care At Veterans Affairs
Fails In The Senate Yahoo News - April 21, 2023
--
https://news.yahoo.com/gop-resolution-seeking-halt-abortion-231256560.html
Tell me, PLEASE, what those babies did to deserve to be MURDERED???They are not babies when they are aborted, Betty, they are even less
alive than you.
Do babies now have to PROVE that the sex was consensual to LIVE??????Are you a rape baby, Betty? How about your kids?
Does a woman deserve to be raped and have to carry the baby of herNo woman "deserves" to be raped (except in your perverted mind!). We are NOT talking about the rape victim, we are talking about the BABY, you idiot!
rapist to term?
children but make sure their lives are a misery.
On Tuesday, April 25, 2023 at 3:23:03 PM UTC-7, Bigbird wrote:
Tommy wrote:
On Friday, April 21, 2023 at 11:12:54 AM UTC-7, bruce bowser wrote:https://news.yahoo.com/gop-resolution-seeking-halt-abortion-231256560.html >>>
GOP Resolution Seeking To Halt Abortion Care At Veterans Affairs
Fails In The Senate Yahoo News - April 21, 2023
--
Tell me, PLEASE, what those babies did to deserve to be MURDERED???They are not babies when they are aborted, Betty, they are even less
alive than you.
Oh, REALLY??? So, WTF were YOU in your mommies womb at their age, protoplasm??
On Tuesday, April 25, 2023 at 3:23:03 PM UTC-7, Bigbird wrote:
Tommy wrote:
On Friday, April 21, 2023 at 11:12:54 AM UTC-7, bruce bowser
wrote:
GOP Resolution Seeking To Halt Abortion Care At Veterans
Affairs Fails In The Senate Yahoo News - April 21, 2023
--
https://news.yahoo.com/gop-resolution-seeking-halt-abortion-23125656
0.html
Tell me, PLEASE, what those babies did to deserve to beThey are not babies when they are aborted, Betty, they are even
MURDERED???
less alive than you.
Oh, REALLY??? So, WTF were YOU in your mommies womb at their age, protoplasm??
Do babies now have to PROVE that the sex was consensual toAre you a rape baby, Betty? How about your kids?
LIVE??????
WTF does that have to do with ANYTHING, BirdBrain? What if I WAS???
Does a woman deserve to be raped and have to carry the baby of herNo woman "deserves" to be raped (except in your perverted mind!). We
rapist to term?
are NOT talking about the rape victim, we are talking about the BABY,
you idiot! Then what do republicans do with those unwanted
children but make sure their lives are a misery.
There are PLENTY of adoptive families out there EAGER to take these
babies!!
On Tuesday, April 25, 2023 at 3:23:03 PM UTC-7, Bigbird wrote:
Tommy wrote:
On Friday, April 21, 2023 at 11:12:54 AM UTC-7, bruce bowser wrote:
GOP Resolution Seeking To Halt Abortion Care At Veterans Affairs
Fails In The Senate Yahoo News - April 21, 2023
--
https://news.yahoo.com/gop-resolution-seeking-halt-abortion-231256560.html
Oh, REALLY??? So, WTF were YOU in your mommies womb at their age, protoplasm??Tell me, PLEASE, what those babies did to deserve to be MURDERED???They are not babies when they are aborted, Betty, they are even less
alive than you.
WTF does that have to do with ANYTHING, BirdBrain? What if I WAS???Do babies now have to PROVE that the sex was consensual to LIVE??????Are you a rape baby, Betty? How about your kids?
Does a woman deserve to be raped and have to carry the baby of herNo woman "deserves" to be raped (except in your perverted mind!). We are NOT talking about the rape victim, we are talking about the BABY, you idiot!
rapist to term?
Then what do republicans do with those unwanted
children but make sure their lives are a misery.There are PLENTY of adoptive families out there EAGER to take these babies!!
On Tuesday, April 25, 2023 at 8:20:44 PM UTC-4, Tommy wrote:
On Tuesday, April 25, 2023 at 3:23:03 PM UTC-7, Bigbird wrote:
…
Then what do republicans do with those unwanted
children but make sure their lives are a misery.
There are PLENTY of adoptive families out there EAGER to take these babies!!
S U R E - Just as long as YOU PERSONALLY don't have to be near the baby from a rape.
On Tuesday, April 25, 2023 at 8:20:44 PM UTC-4, Tommy wrote:
On Tuesday, April 25, 2023 at 3:23:03 PM UTC-7, Bigbird wrote:
Tommy wrote:
On Friday, April 21, 2023 at 11:12:54 AM UTC-7, bruce bowser wrote:
GOP Resolution Seeking To Halt Abortion Care At Veterans Affairs Fails In The Senate Yahoo News - April 21, 2023
--
https://news.yahoo.com/gop-resolution-seeking-halt-abortion-231256560.html
Oh, REALLY??? So, WTF were YOU in your mommies womb at their age, protoplasm??Tell me, PLEASE, what those babies did to deserve to be MURDERED???They are not babies when they are aborted, Betty, they are even less alive than you.
WTF does that have to do with ANYTHING, BirdBrain? What if I WAS???Do babies now have to PROVE that the sex was consensual to LIVE??????Are you a rape baby, Betty? How about your kids?
S U R E - Just as long as YOU PERSONALLY don't have to be near the baby from a rape.Does a woman deserve to be raped and have to carry the baby of her rapist to term?No woman "deserves" to be raped (except in your perverted mind!). We are NOT talking about the rape victim, we are talking about the BABY, you idiot!
Then what do republicans do with those unwanted
children but make sure their lives are a misery.There are PLENTY of adoptive families out there EAGER to take these babies!!
On Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 10:40:55 AM UTC-5, bruce bowser wrote:
On Tuesday, April 25, 2023 at 8:20:44 PM UTC-4, Tommy wrote:
On Tuesday, April 25, 2023 at 3:23:03 PM UTC-7, Bigbird wrote:
…
Then what do republicans do with those unwanted
children but make sure their lives are a misery.
There are PLENTY of adoptive families out there EAGER to take these babies!!
S U R E - Just as long as YOU PERSONALLY don't have to be near the baby from a rape.Or pay for them through higher taxes.
Plus if Tommy’s “plenty of adoptive families” claim was anywhere close to true,
there wouldn’t be ~391,000 kids waiting today for adoption in the USA.
<https://www.childwelfare.gov/fostercaremonth/awareness/facts/#:~:text=There%20are%20over%20391%2C000%20children,for%20these%20children%20and%20teens.>
-hh
On Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 12:06:59 PM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
On Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 10:40:55 AM UTC-5, bruce bowser wrote:
On Tuesday, April 25, 2023 at 8:20:44 PM UTC-4, Tommy wrote:
On Tuesday, April 25, 2023 at 3:23:03 PM UTC-7, Bigbird wrote:
…
Then what do republicans do with those unwanted
children but make sure their lives are a misery.
There are PLENTY of adoptive families out there EAGER to take these babies!!
S U R E - Just as long as YOU PERSONALLY don't have to be near the baby from a rape.Or pay for them through higher taxes.
Plus if Tommy’s “plenty of adoptive families” claim was anywhere close to true,
there wouldn’t be ~391,000 kids waiting today for adoption in the USA.
<https://www.childwelfare.gov/fostercaremonth/awareness/facts/#:~:text=There%20are%20over%20391%2C000%20children,for%20these%20children%20and%20teens.>
You are a piece of work, too, Lyin' Asshole. I am talking about BABIES, not foster children.
https://www.americanadoptions.com/pregnant/waiting_adoptive_families
"Some sources estimate that there are about 2 million couples currently waiting to adopt in the United States"
No, Lyin' Asshole, ANY newborn baby would be snapped up in a nanosecond.
On Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 7:45:08 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 12:06:59 PM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
On Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 10:40:55 AM UTC-5, bruce bowser wrote:
On Tuesday, April 25, 2023 at 8:20:44 PM UTC-4, Tommy wrote:
On Tuesday, April 25, 2023 at 3:23:03 PM UTC-7, Bigbird wrote:
…
Then what do republicans do with those unwanted
children but make sure their lives are a misery.
There are PLENTY of adoptive families out there EAGER to take these babies!!
S U R E - Just as long as YOU PERSONALLY don't have to be near the baby from a rape.Or pay for them through higher taxes.
Plus if Tommy’s “plenty of adoptive families” claim was anywhere close to true,
there wouldn’t be ~391,000 kids waiting today for adoption in the USA.
<https://www.childwelfare.gov/fostercaremonth/awareness/facts/#:~:text=There%20are%20over%20391%2C000%20children,for%20these%20children%20and%20teens.>
You are a piece of work, too, Lyin' Asshole. I am talking about BABIES, not foster children.Read the cite: it notes that 100K of those 391K fosters are babies.
Plus those kids who aren’t babies today used to be babies.
This is illustrating that supply has been exceeding demand for decades.
https://www.americanadoptions.com/pregnant/waiting_adoptive_familiesThen why are there any babies currently in foster, let alone 100K of them, plus another ~300K of older kids who used to be babies?
"Some sources estimate that there are about 2 million couples currently waiting to adopt in the United States"
No, Lyin' Asshole, ANY newborn baby would be snapped up in a nanosecond.
Likewise, if there’s 2M fighting for the subset of 100K who are *newborns* (Your goalpost add), then why aren’t they lowering their standards even an inch?
Maybe it has to do with another selection criteria that’s not being said?
-hh
On Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 7:19:05 PM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
On Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 7:45:08 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 12:06:59 PM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
On Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 10:40:55 AM UTC-5, bruce bowser wrote:
On Tuesday, April 25, 2023 at 8:20:44 PM UTC-4, Tommy wrote:
On Tuesday, April 25, 2023 at 3:23:03 PM UTC-7, Bigbird wrote:
…
Then what do republicans do with those unwanted
children but make sure their lives are a misery.
There are PLENTY of adoptive families out there EAGER to take these babies!!
S U R E - Just as long as YOU PERSONALLY don't have to be near the baby from a rape.Or pay for them through higher taxes.
Plus if Tommy’s “plenty of adoptive families” claim was anywhere close to true,
there wouldn’t be ~391,000 kids waiting today for adoption in the USA.
<https://www.childwelfare.gov/fostercaremonth/awareness/facts/#:~:text=There%20are%20over%20391%2C000%20children,for%20these%20children%20and%20teens.>
You are a piece of work, too, Lyin' Asshole. I am talking about BABIES, not foster children.Read the cite: it notes that 100K of those 391K fosters are babies.
Plus those kids who aren’t babies today used to be babies.
This is illustrating that supply has been exceeding demand for decades.
https://www.americanadoptions.com/pregnant/waiting_adoptive_families "Some sources estimate that there are about 2 million couples currently waiting to adopt in the United States"
No, Lyin' Asshole, ANY newborn baby would be snapped up in a nanosecond.
Then why are there any babies currently in foster, let alone 100K of them, plus another ~300K of older kids who used to be babies?
Likewise, if there’s 2M fighting for the subset of 100K who are *newborns*
(Your goalpost add), then why aren’t they lowering their standards even an inch?
Maybe it has to do with another selection criteria that’s not being said?
Your cite DOES NOT mention the word "baby" or "babies", liar.
Why the fuck are people adopting babies from 3rd world countries at great expense and difficulty?
On Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 10:51:33 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 7:19:05 PM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
On Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 7:45:08 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 12:06:59 PM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
On Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 10:40:55 AM UTC-5, bruce bowser wrote:
On Tuesday, April 25, 2023 at 8:20:44 PM UTC-4, Tommy wrote:
On Tuesday, April 25, 2023 at 3:23:03 PM UTC-7, Bigbird wrote:
…
Then what do republicans do with those unwanted
children but make sure their lives are a misery.
There are PLENTY of adoptive families out there EAGER to take these babies!!
S U R E - Just as long as YOU PERSONALLY don't have to be near the baby from a rape.Or pay for them through higher taxes.
Plus if Tommy’s “plenty of adoptive families” claim was anywhere close to true,
there wouldn’t be ~391,000 kids waiting today for adoption in the USA.
<https://www.childwelfare.gov/fostercaremonth/awareness/facts/#:~:text=There%20are%20over%20391%2C000%20children,for%20these%20children%20and%20teens.>
You are a piece of work, too, Lyin' Asshole. I am talking about BABIES, not foster children.Read the cite: it notes that 100K of those 391K fosters are babies.
Plus those kids who aren’t babies today used to be babies.
This is illustrating that supply has been exceeding demand for decades.
https://www.americanadoptions.com/pregnant/waiting_adoptive_families "Some sources estimate that there are about 2 million couples currently
waiting to adopt in the United States"
No, Lyin' Asshole, ANY newborn baby would be snapped up in a nanosecond.
Silence from Tommy!Then why are there any babies currently in foster, let alone 100K of them,
plus another ~300K of older kids who used to be babies?
Likewise, if there’s 2M fighting for the subset of 100K who are *newborns*
(Your goalpost add), then why aren’t they lowering their standards even an inch?
Maybe it has to do with another selection criteria that’s not being said?
Your cite DOES NOT mention the word "baby" or "babies", liar.[Repost attempt]
Sorry, was pulled from another cite. I’m sure you can find it too.
In any event, the other point made still holds:
“ …those kids who aren’t babies today used to be babies. This is illustrating that supply has been exceeding demand for decades.”
Why the fuck are people adopting babies from 3rd world countries at great expense and difficulty?That was also alluded to…even you should be smart enough to figure it out:
“Maybe it has to do with another selection criteria that’s not being said?”
… as well as why limiting reproductive services will backfire on those
who are trying to hold onto white majority in racial demographics.
-hh
On Friday, April 28, 2023 at 4:32:59 PM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
On Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 10:51:33 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 7:19:05 PM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
On Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 7:45:08 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 12:06:59 PM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
On Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 10:40:55 AM UTC-5, bruce bowser wrote:
On Tuesday, April 25, 2023 at 8:20:44 PM UTC-4, Tommy wrote:
On Tuesday, April 25, 2023 at 3:23:03 PM UTC-7, Bigbird wrote:
…
Then what do republicans do with those unwanted
children but make sure their lives are a misery.
There are PLENTY of adoptive families out there EAGER to take these babies!!
S U R E - Just as long as YOU PERSONALLY don't have to be near the baby from a rape.Or pay for them through higher taxes.
Plus if Tommy’s “plenty of adoptive families” claim was anywhere close to true,
there wouldn’t be ~391,000 kids waiting today for adoption in the USA.
<https://www.childwelfare.gov/fostercaremonth/awareness/facts/#:~:text=There%20are%20over%20391%2C000%20children,for%20these%20children%20and%20teens.>
You are a piece of work, too, Lyin' Asshole. I am talking about BABIES, not foster children.Read the cite: it notes that 100K of those 391K fosters are babies.
Plus those kids who aren’t babies today used to be babies.
This is illustrating that supply has been exceeding demand for decades.
https://www.americanadoptions.com/pregnant/waiting_adoptive_families "Some sources estimate that there are about 2 million couples currently
waiting to adopt in the United States"
No, Lyin' Asshole, ANY newborn baby would be snapped up in a nanosecond.
Silence from Tommy!Then why are there any babies currently in foster, let alone 100K of them,
plus another ~300K of older kids who used to be babies?
Likewise, if there’s 2M fighting for the subset of 100K who are *newborns*
(Your goalpost add), then why aren’t they lowering their standards even an inch?
Maybe it has to do with another selection criteria that’s not being said?
Your cite DOES NOT mention the word "baby" or "babies", liar.[Repost attempt]
Sorry, was pulled from another cite. I’m sure you can find it too.
In any event, the other point made still holds:
“ …those kids who aren’t babies today used to be babies. This is illustrating that supply has been exceeding demand for decades.”
Why the fuck are people adopting babies from 3rd world countries at great expense and difficulty?
That was also alluded to…even you should be smart enough to figure it out:
“Maybe it has to do with another selection criteria that’s not being said?”
… as well as why limiting reproductive services will backfire on those who are trying to hold onto white majority in racial demographics.
You're "sorry" all right - a SORRY ASSED LIAR!
Answer the fucking question: WHAT crime have these babies committed
to deserve being MURDERED?????
On Friday, April 28, 2023 at 4:32:59 PM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
On Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 10:51:33 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 7:19:05 PM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
On Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 7:45:08 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 12:06:59 PM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
On Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 10:40:55 AM UTC-5, bruce bowser wrote:
On Tuesday, April 25, 2023 at 8:20:44 PM UTC-4, Tommy wrote:
On Tuesday, April 25, 2023 at 3:23:03 PM UTC-7, Bigbird wrote:
…
Then what do republicans do with those unwanted
children but make sure their lives are a misery.
There are PLENTY of adoptive families out there EAGER to take these babies!!
S U R E - Just as long as YOU PERSONALLY don't have to be near the baby from a rape.Or pay for them through higher taxes.
Plus if Tommy’s “plenty of adoptive families” claim was anywhere close to true,
there wouldn’t be ~391,000 kids waiting today for adoption in the USA.
<https://www.childwelfare.gov/fostercaremonth/awareness/facts/#:~:text=There%20are%20over%20391%2C000%20children,for%20these%20children%20and%20teens.>
You are a piece of work, too, Lyin' Asshole. I am talking about BABIES, not foster children.Read the cite: it notes that 100K of those 391K fosters are babies.
Plus those kids who aren’t babies today used to be babies.
This is illustrating that supply has been exceeding demand for decades.
https://www.americanadoptions.com/pregnant/waiting_adoptive_families "Some sources estimate that there are about 2 million couples currently
waiting to adopt in the United States"
No, Lyin' Asshole, ANY newborn baby would be snapped up in a nanosecond.
Silence from Tommy!Then why are there any babies currently in foster, let alone 100K of them,
plus another ~300K of older kids who used to be babies?
Likewise, if there’s 2M fighting for the subset of 100K who are *newborns*
(Your goalpost add), then why aren’t they lowering their standards even an inch?
Maybe it has to do with another selection criteria that’s not being said?
Your cite DOES NOT mention the word "baby" or "babies", liar.[Repost attempt]
Sorry, was pulled from another cite. I’m sure you can find it too.
In any event, the other point made still holds:
“ …those kids who aren’t babies today used to be babies. This is illustrating that supply has been exceeding demand for decades.”
Why the fuck are people adopting babies from 3rd world countries at great expense and difficulty?That was also alluded to…even you should be smart enough to figure it out:
“Maybe it has to do with another selection criteria that’s not being said?”
… as well as why limiting reproductive services will backfire on those who are trying to hold onto white majority in racial demographics.
-hhYou're "sorry" all right - a SORRY ASSED LIAR!
Answer the fucking question: WHAT crime have these babies committed to deserve being MURDERED?????
On Friday, April 28, 2023 at 10:40:02 PM UTC-4, Tommy wrote:
On Friday, April 28, 2023 at 4:32:59 PM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
On Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 10:51:33 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 7:19:05 PM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
On Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 7:45:08 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 12:06:59 PM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
On Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 10:40:55 AM UTC-5, bruce bowser wrote:
On Tuesday, April 25, 2023 at 8:20:44 PM UTC-4, Tommy wrote:
On Tuesday, April 25, 2023 at 3:23:03 PM UTC-7, Bigbird wrote:
…
Then what do republicans do with those unwanted
children but make sure their lives are a misery.
There are PLENTY of adoptive families out there EAGER to take these babies!!
S U R E - Just as long as YOU PERSONALLY don't have to be near the baby from a rape.Or pay for them through higher taxes.
Plus if Tommy’s “plenty of adoptive families” claim was anywhere close to true,
there wouldn’t be ~391,000 kids waiting today for adoption in the USA.
<https://www.childwelfare.gov/fostercaremonth/awareness/facts/#:~:text=There%20are%20over%20391%2C000%20children,for%20these%20children%20and%20teens.>
You are a piece of work, too, Lyin' Asshole. I am talking about BABIES, not foster children.Read the cite: it notes that 100K of those 391K fosters are babies.
Plus those kids who aren’t babies today used to be babies.
This is illustrating that supply has been exceeding demand for decades.
https://www.americanadoptions.com/pregnant/waiting_adoptive_families
"Some sources estimate that there are about 2 million couples currently
waiting to adopt in the United States"
No, Lyin' Asshole, ANY newborn baby would be snapped up in a nanosecond.
Silence from Tommy!Then why are there any babies currently in foster, let alone 100K of them,
plus another ~300K of older kids who used to be babies?
Likewise, if there’s 2M fighting for the subset of 100K who are *newborns*
(Your goalpost add), then why aren’t they lowering their standards even an inch?
Maybe it has to do with another selection criteria that’s not being said?
Your cite DOES NOT mention the word "baby" or "babies", liar.[Repost attempt]
Sorry, was pulled from another cite. I’m sure you can find it too.
In any event, the other point made still holds:
“ …those kids who aren’t babies today used to be babies. This is illustrating that supply has been exceeding demand for decades.”
Why the fuck are people adopting babies from 3rd world countries at great expense and difficulty?That was also alluded to…even you should be smart enough to figure it out:
“Maybe it has to do with another selection criteria that’s not being said?”
… as well as why limiting reproductive services will backfire on those who are trying to hold onto white majority in racial demographics.
-hhYou're "sorry" all right - a SORRY ASSED LIAR!
Answer the fucking question: WHAT crime have these babies committed to deserve being MURDERED?????WHAT crime have LIVING hair cells committed to be cut by shears in mass so that a person can brag about getting a hair cut or a hair do?
On Friday, April 28, 2023 at 9:40:02 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Friday, April 28, 2023 at 4:32:59 PM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
On Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 10:51:33 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 7:19:05 PM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
On Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 7:45:08 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 12:06:59 PM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
On Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 10:40:55 AM UTC-5, bruce bowser wrote:
On Tuesday, April 25, 2023 at 8:20:44 PM UTC-4, Tommy wrote:
On Tuesday, April 25, 2023 at 3:23:03 PM UTC-7, Bigbird wrote:
…
Then what do republicans do with those unwanted
children but make sure their lives are a misery.
There are PLENTY of adoptive families out there EAGER to take these babies!!
S U R E - Just as long as YOU PERSONALLY don't have to be near the baby from a rape.Or pay for them through higher taxes.
Plus if Tommy’s “plenty of adoptive families” claim was anywhere close to true,
there wouldn’t be ~391,000 kids waiting today for adoption in the USA.
<https://www.childwelfare.gov/fostercaremonth/awareness/facts/#:~:text=There%20are%20over%20391%2C000%20children,for%20these%20children%20and%20teens.>
You are a piece of work, too, Lyin' Asshole. I am talking about BABIES, not foster children.Read the cite: it notes that 100K of those 391K fosters are babies.
Plus those kids who aren’t babies today used to be babies.
This is illustrating that supply has been exceeding demand for decades.
https://www.americanadoptions.com/pregnant/waiting_adoptive_families
"Some sources estimate that there are about 2 million couples currently
waiting to adopt in the United States"
No, Lyin' Asshole, ANY newborn baby would be snapped up in a nanosecond.
Silence from Tommy!Then why are there any babies currently in foster, let alone 100K of them,
plus another ~300K of older kids who used to be babies?
Likewise, if there’s 2M fighting for the subset of 100K who are *newborns*
(Your goalpost add), then why aren’t they lowering their standards even an inch?
Maybe it has to do with another selection criteria that’s not being said?
Your cite DOES NOT mention the word "baby" or "babies", liar.[Repost attempt]
Sorry, was pulled from another cite. I’m sure you can find it too.
In any event, the other point made still holds:
“ …those kids who aren’t babies today used to be babies. This is illustrating that supply has been exceeding demand for decades.”
Why the fuck are people adopting babies from 3rd world countries at great expense and difficulty?
That was also alluded to…even you should be smart enough to figure it out:
“Maybe it has to do with another selection criteria that’s not being said?”
… as well as why limiting reproductive services will backfire on those who are trying to hold onto white majority in racial demographics.
You're "sorry" all right - a SORRY ASSED LIAR!
Answer the fucking question: WHAT crime have these babies committedOh, look: a *new* question, to try to avoid acknowledging the difficult one of racism in adoptions.
to deserve being MURDERED?????
Plus I see you’ve still avoided Bigbird’s point made to you:
[If life is so precious] “Then what do republicans do with those unwanted children but make sure their lives are a misery.[?]
FYI, same also applies to lack of gun regulations which has
resulted in school shooting after school shootings
-hh
On Saturday, April 29, 2023 at 4:00:16 AM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
On Friday, April 28, 2023 at 9:40:02 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Friday, April 28, 2023 at 4:32:59 PM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
On Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 10:51:33 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 7:19:05 PM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
On Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 7:45:08 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 12:06:59 PM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
On Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 10:40:55 AM UTC-5, bruce bowser wrote:
On Tuesday, April 25, 2023 at 8:20:44 PM UTC-4, Tommy wrote:
On Tuesday, April 25, 2023 at 3:23:03 PM UTC-7, Bigbird wrote:
…
Then what do republicans do with those unwanted
children but make sure their lives are a misery.
There are PLENTY of adoptive families out there EAGER to take these babies!!
S U R E - Just as long as YOU PERSONALLY don't have to be near the baby from a rape.Or pay for them through higher taxes.
Plus if Tommy’s “plenty of adoptive families” claim was anywhere close to true,
there wouldn’t be ~391,000 kids waiting today for adoption in the USA.
<https://www.childwelfare.gov/fostercaremonth/awareness/facts/#:~:text=There%20are%20over%20391%2C000%20children,for%20these%20children%20and%20teens.>
You are a piece of work, too, Lyin' Asshole. I am talking about BABIES, not foster children.Read the cite: it notes that 100K of those 391K fosters are babies.
Plus those kids who aren’t babies today used to be babies.
This is illustrating that supply has been exceeding demand for decades.
https://www.americanadoptions.com/pregnant/waiting_adoptive_families
"Some sources estimate that there are about 2 million couples currently
waiting to adopt in the United States"
No, Lyin' Asshole, ANY newborn baby would be snapped up in a nanosecond.
Silence from Tommy!Then why are there any babies currently in foster, let alone 100K of them,
plus another ~300K of older kids who used to be babies?
Likewise, if there’s 2M fighting for the subset of 100K who are *newborns*
(Your goalpost add), then why aren’t they lowering their standards even an inch?
Maybe it has to do with another selection criteria that’s not being said?
Your cite DOES NOT mention the word "baby" or "babies", liar.[Repost attempt]
Sorry, was pulled from another cite. I’m sure you can find it too. In any event, the other point made still holds:
“ …those kids who aren’t babies today used to be babies. This is illustrating that supply has been exceeding demand for decades.”
Why the fuck are people adopting babies from 3rd world countries at great expense and difficulty?
That was also alluded to…even you should be smart enough to figure it out:
“Maybe it has to do with another selection criteria that’s not being said?”
… as well as why limiting reproductive services will backfire on those
who are trying to hold onto white majority in racial demographics.
You're "sorry" all right - a SORRY ASSED LIAR!
Answer the fucking question: WHAT crime have these babies committedOh, look: a *new* question, to try to avoid acknowledging the difficult one
to deserve being MURDERED?????
of racism in adoptions.
Plus I see you’ve still avoided Bigbird’s point made to you:
[If life is so precious] “Then what do republicans do with those unwanted
children but make sure their lives are a misery.[?]
FYI, same also applies to lack of gun regulations which has
resulted in school shooting after school shootings
-hhHey Lyin' Asshole, I don't respond to the absurd, which includes your sorry-assed comment.
On Monday, May 1, 2023 at 6:26:31 PM UTC-7, Tommy wrote:
On Saturday, April 29, 2023 at 4:00:16 AM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
On Friday, April 28, 2023 at 9:40:02 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Friday, April 28, 2023 at 4:32:59 PM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
On Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 10:51:33 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 7:19:05 PM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
On Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 7:45:08 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 12:06:59 PM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
On Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 10:40:55 AM UTC-5, bruce bowser wrote:
On Tuesday, April 25, 2023 at 8:20:44 PM UTC-4, Tommy wrote:
On Tuesday, April 25, 2023 at 3:23:03 PM UTC-7, Bigbird wrote:
…
Then what do republicans do with those unwanted children but make sure their lives are a misery.
There are PLENTY of adoptive families out there EAGER to take these babies!!
S U R E - Just as long as YOU PERSONALLY don't have to be near the baby from a rape.Or pay for them through higher taxes.
Plus if Tommy’s “plenty of adoptive families” claim was anywhere close to true,
there wouldn’t be ~391,000 kids waiting today for adoption in the USA.
<https://www.childwelfare.gov/fostercaremonth/awareness/facts/#:~:text=There%20are%20over%20391%2C000%20children,for%20these%20children%20and%20teens.>
You are a piece of work, too, Lyin' Asshole. I am talking about BABIES, not foster children.Read the cite: it notes that 100K of those 391K fosters are babies.
Plus those kids who aren’t babies today used to be babies. This is illustrating that supply has been exceeding demand for decades.
https://www.americanadoptions.com/pregnant/waiting_adoptive_families
"Some sources estimate that there are about 2 million couples currently
waiting to adopt in the United States"
No, Lyin' Asshole, ANY newborn baby would be snapped up in a nanosecond.
Silence from Tommy!Then why are there any babies currently in foster, let alone 100K of them,
plus another ~300K of older kids who used to be babies?
Likewise, if there’s 2M fighting for the subset of 100K who are *newborns*
(Your goalpost add), then why aren’t they lowering their standards even an inch?
Maybe it has to do with another selection criteria that’s not being said?
Your cite DOES NOT mention the word "baby" or "babies", liar.[Repost attempt]
Sorry, was pulled from another cite. I’m sure you can find it too. In any event, the other point made still holds:
“ …those kids who aren’t babies today used to be babies. This is
illustrating that supply has been exceeding demand for decades.”
Why the fuck are people adopting babies from 3rd world countries at great expense and difficulty?
That was also alluded to…even you should be smart enough to figure it out:
“Maybe it has to do with another selection criteria that’s not being said?”
… as well as why limiting reproductive services will backfire on those
who are trying to hold onto white majority in racial demographics.
You're "sorry" all right - a SORRY ASSED LIAR!
Answer the fucking question: WHAT crime have these babies committedOh, look: a *new* question, to try to avoid acknowledging the difficult one
to deserve being MURDERED?????
of racism in adoptions.
Plus I see you’ve still avoided Bigbird’s point made to you:
[If life is so precious] “Then what do republicans do with those unwanted
children but make sure their lives are a misery.[?]
FYI, same also applies to lack of gun regulations which has
resulted in school shooting after school shootings
...and you AGAIN avoided answering MY question.-hhHey Lyin' Asshole, I don't respond to the absurd, which includes your sorry-assed comment.
On Monday, May 1, 2023 at 8:27:25 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Monday, May 1, 2023 at 6:26:31 PM UTC-7, Tommy wrote:
On Saturday, April 29, 2023 at 4:00:16 AM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
On Friday, April 28, 2023 at 9:40:02 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Friday, April 28, 2023 at 4:32:59 PM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
On Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 10:51:33 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 7:19:05 PM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
On Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 7:45:08 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 12:06:59 PM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
On Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 10:40:55 AM UTC-5, bruce bowser wrote:
On Tuesday, April 25, 2023 at 8:20:44 PM UTC-4, Tommy wrote:
On Tuesday, April 25, 2023 at 3:23:03 PM UTC-7, Bigbird wrote:
…
Then what do republicans do with those unwanted children but make sure their lives are a misery.
There are PLENTY of adoptive families out there EAGER to take these babies!!
S U R E - Just as long as YOU PERSONALLY don't have to be near the baby from a rape.Or pay for them through higher taxes.
Plus if Tommy’s “plenty of adoptive families” claim was anywhere close to true,
there wouldn’t be ~391,000 kids waiting today for adoption in the USA.
<https://www.childwelfare.gov/fostercaremonth/awareness/facts/#:~:text=There%20are%20over%20391%2C000%20children,for%20these%20children%20and%20teens.>
You are a piece of work, too, Lyin' Asshole. I am talking about BABIES, not foster children.Read the cite: it notes that 100K of those 391K fosters are babies.
Plus those kids who aren’t babies today used to be babies. This is illustrating that supply has been exceeding demand for decades.
https://www.americanadoptions.com/pregnant/waiting_adoptive_families
"Some sources estimate that there are about 2 million couples currently
waiting to adopt in the United States"
No, Lyin' Asshole, ANY newborn baby would be snapped up in a nanosecond.
Silence from Tommy!Then why are there any babies currently in foster, let alone 100K of them,
plus another ~300K of older kids who used to be babies?
Likewise, if there’s 2M fighting for the subset of 100K who are *newborns*
(Your goalpost add), then why aren’t they lowering their standards even an inch?
Maybe it has to do with another selection criteria that’s not being said?
Your cite DOES NOT mention the word "baby" or "babies", liar.[Repost attempt]
Sorry, was pulled from another cite. I’m sure you can find it too.
In any event, the other point made still holds:
“ …those kids who aren’t babies today used to be babies. This is
illustrating that supply has been exceeding demand for decades.”
Why the fuck are people adopting babies from 3rd world countries at great expense and difficulty?
That was also alluded to…even you should be smart enough to figure it out:
“Maybe it has to do with another selection criteria that’s not being said?”
… as well as why limiting reproductive services will backfire on those
who are trying to hold onto white majority in racial demographics.
You're "sorry" all right - a SORRY ASSED LIAR!
Answer the fucking question: WHAT crime have these babies committed to deserve being MURDERED?????Oh, look: a *new* question, to try to avoid acknowledging the difficult one
of racism in adoptions.
Plus I see you’ve still avoided Bigbird’s point made to you:
[If life is so precious] “Then what do republicans do with those unwanted
children but make sure their lives are a misery.[?]
FYI, same also applies to lack of gun regulations which has
resulted in school shooting after school shootings
The flaw you so-called “question” has is that by how you’ve chosen to define ‘baby’, roughly 1 in 6 of them are already being ‘murdered’ (again, by your choice of definitions) even without counting any...and you AGAIN avoided answering MY question.-hhHey Lyin' Asshole, I don't respond to the absurd, which includes your sorry-assed comment.
Abortion interventions, “Day after” pills, *and* birth control.
What say you now? “Lock them Up”?
-hh
On Tuesday, May 2, 2023 at 5:31:10 AM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
On Monday, May 1, 2023 at 8:27:25 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Monday, May 1, 2023 at 6:26:31 PM UTC-7, Tommy wrote:
On Saturday, April 29, 2023 at 4:00:16 AM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
On Friday, April 28, 2023 at 9:40:02 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Friday, April 28, 2023 at 4:32:59 PM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
On Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 10:51:33 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 7:19:05 PM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
On Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 7:45:08 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 12:06:59 PM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
On Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 10:40:55 AM UTC-5, bruce bowser wrote:
On Tuesday, April 25, 2023 at 8:20:44 PM UTC-4, Tommy wrote:
On Tuesday, April 25, 2023 at 3:23:03 PM UTC-7, Bigbird wrote:
…
Then what do republicans do with those unwanted children but make sure their lives are a misery.
There are PLENTY of adoptive families out there EAGER to take these babies!!
S U R E - Just as long as YOU PERSONALLY don't have to be near the baby from a rape.Or pay for them through higher taxes.
Plus if Tommy’s “plenty of adoptive families” claim was anywhere close to true,
there wouldn’t be ~391,000 kids waiting today for adoption in the USA.
<https://www.childwelfare.gov/fostercaremonth/awareness/facts/#:~:text=There%20are%20over%20391%2C000%20children,for%20these%20children%20and%20teens.>
You are a piece of work, too, Lyin' Asshole. I am talking about BABIES, not foster children.Read the cite: it notes that 100K of those 391K fosters are babies.
Plus those kids who aren’t babies today used to be babies. This is illustrating that supply has been exceeding demand for decades.
https://www.americanadoptions.com/pregnant/waiting_adoptive_families
"Some sources estimate that there are about 2 million couples currently
waiting to adopt in the United States"
No, Lyin' Asshole, ANY newborn baby would be snapped up in a nanosecond.
Silence from Tommy!Then why are there any babies currently in foster, let alone 100K of them,
plus another ~300K of older kids who used to be babies?
Likewise, if there’s 2M fighting for the subset of 100K who are *newborns*
(Your goalpost add), then why aren’t they lowering their standards even an inch?
Maybe it has to do with another selection criteria that’s not being said?
Your cite DOES NOT mention the word "baby" or "babies", liar.[Repost attempt]
Sorry, was pulled from another cite. I’m sure you can find it too.
In any event, the other point made still holds:
“ …those kids who aren’t babies today used to be babies. This is
illustrating that supply has been exceeding demand for decades.”
Why the fuck are people adopting babies from 3rd world countries at great expense and difficulty?
That was also alluded to…even you should be smart enough to figure it out:
“Maybe it has to do with another selection criteria that’s not being said?”
… as well as why limiting reproductive services will backfire on those
who are trying to hold onto white majority in racial demographics.
You're "sorry" all right - a SORRY ASSED LIAR!
Answer the fucking question: WHAT crime have these babies committedOh, look: a *new* question, to try to avoid acknowledging the difficult one
to deserve being MURDERED?????
of racism in adoptions.
Plus I see you’ve still avoided Bigbird’s point made to you:
[If life is so precious] “Then what do republicans do with those unwanted
children but make sure their lives are a misery.[?]
FYI, same also applies to lack of gun regulations which has
resulted in school shooting after school shootings
...and you AGAIN avoided answering MY question.-hhHey Lyin' Asshole, I don't respond to the absurd, which includes your sorry-assed comment.
The flaw you so-called “question” has is that by how you’ve chosen to
define ‘baby’, roughly 1 in 6 of them are already being ‘murdered’ (again, by your choice of definitions) even without counting any
Abortion interventions, “Day after” pills, *and* birth control.
What say you now? “Lock them Up”?
Hey Lyin' Asshole, killing ANY baby that is viable IS murder (with extremely few exceptions). You DO know what "viable" means, don't you? Abortions in the second trimester should be considered to be manslaughter. This includes ALL third trimesterabortions, which accounts for about 7,200 abortions per year in the US. The so-called abortion pill is ONLY used in the first trimester. You SHOULD know this.
On Tuesday, May 2, 2023 at 7:52:39 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Tuesday, May 2, 2023 at 5:31:10 AM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
On Monday, May 1, 2023 at 8:27:25 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Monday, May 1, 2023 at 6:26:31 PM UTC-7, Tommy wrote:
On Saturday, April 29, 2023 at 4:00:16 AM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
On Friday, April 28, 2023 at 9:40:02 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Friday, April 28, 2023 at 4:32:59 PM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
On Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 10:51:33 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 7:19:05 PM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
On Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 7:45:08 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 12:06:59 PM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
On Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 10:40:55 AM UTC-5, bruce bowser wrote:
On Tuesday, April 25, 2023 at 8:20:44 PM UTC-4, Tommy wrote:
On Tuesday, April 25, 2023 at 3:23:03 PM UTC-7, Bigbird wrote:
…
Then what do republicans do with those unwanted children but make sure their lives are a misery.
There are PLENTY of adoptive families out there EAGER to take these babies!!
S U R E - Just as long as YOU PERSONALLY don't have to be near the baby from a rape.Or pay for them through higher taxes.
Plus if Tommy’s “plenty of adoptive families” claim was anywhere close to true,
there wouldn’t be ~391,000 kids waiting today for adoption in the USA.
<https://www.childwelfare.gov/fostercaremonth/awareness/facts/#:~:text=There%20are%20over%20391%2C000%20children,for%20these%20children%20and%20teens.>
You are a piece of work, too, Lyin' Asshole. I am talking about BABIES, not foster children.Read the cite: it notes that 100K of those 391K fosters are babies.
Plus those kids who aren’t babies today used to be babies.
This is illustrating that supply has been exceeding demand for decades.
https://www.americanadoptions.com/pregnant/waiting_adoptive_families
"Some sources estimate that there are about 2 million couples currently
waiting to adopt in the United States"
No, Lyin' Asshole, ANY newborn baby would be snapped up in a nanosecond.
Silence from Tommy!Then why are there any babies currently in foster, let alone 100K of them,
plus another ~300K of older kids who used to be babies?
Likewise, if there’s 2M fighting for the subset of 100K who are *newborns*
(Your goalpost add), then why aren’t they lowering their standards even an inch?
Maybe it has to do with another selection criteria that’s not being said?
Your cite DOES NOT mention the word "baby" or "babies", liar.[Repost attempt]
Sorry, was pulled from another cite. I’m sure you can find it too.
In any event, the other point made still holds:
“ …those kids who aren’t babies today used to be babies. This is
illustrating that supply has been exceeding demand for decades.”
Why the fuck are people adopting babies from 3rd world countries at great expense and difficulty?
That was also alluded to…even you should be smart enough to figure it out:
“Maybe it has to do with another selection criteria that’s not being said?”
… as well as why limiting reproductive services will backfire on those
who are trying to hold onto white majority in racial demographics.
You're "sorry" all right - a SORRY ASSED LIAR!
Answer the fucking question: WHAT crime have these babies committedOh, look: a *new* question, to try to avoid acknowledging the difficult one
to deserve being MURDERED?????
of racism in adoptions.
Plus I see you’ve still avoided Bigbird’s point made to you:
[If life is so precious] “Then what do republicans do with those unwanted
children but make sure their lives are a misery.[?]
FYI, same also applies to lack of gun regulations which has resulted in school shooting after school shootings
...and you AGAIN avoided answering MY question.-hhHey Lyin' Asshole, I don't respond to the absurd, which includes your sorry-assed comment.
The flaw you so-called “question” has is that by how you’ve chosen to
define ‘baby’, roughly 1 in 6 of them are already being ‘murdered’
(again, by your choice of definitions) even without counting any Abortion interventions, “Day after” pills, *and* birth control.
What say you now? “Lock them Up”?
abortions, which accounts for about 7,200 abortions per year in the US. The so-called abortion pill is ONLY used in the first trimester. You SHOULD know this.Hey Lyin' Asshole, killing ANY baby that is viable IS murder (with extremely few exceptions). You DO know what "viable" means, don't you? Abortions in the second trimester should be considered to be manslaughter. This includes ALL third trimester
So then using an abortion pill isn’t killing a baby?Tommy clearly has a hard time grasping the concept of how a woman can choose what happens to her body and what does not. the "baby" he is so adamantly referring to is a clump of cells in a woman's uterus, there isn't really any life there yet unless you
Better rework your definitions there, champ!
-hh
On Tuesday, May 2, 2023 at 5:31:10 AM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
On Monday, May 1, 2023 at 8:27:25 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Monday, May 1, 2023 at 6:26:31 PM UTC-7, Tommy wrote:
On Saturday, April 29, 2023 at 4:00:16 AM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
On Friday, April 28, 2023 at 9:40:02 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Friday, April 28, 2023 at 4:32:59 PM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
On Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 10:51:33 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 7:19:05 PM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
On Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 7:45:08 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 12:06:59 PM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
On Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 10:40:55 AM UTC-5, bruce bowser wrote:
On Tuesday, April 25, 2023 at 8:20:44 PM UTC-4, Tommy wrote:
On Tuesday, April 25, 2023 at 3:23:03 PM UTC-7, Bigbird wrote:
…
Then what do republicans do with those unwanted children but make sure their lives are a misery.
There are PLENTY of adoptive families out there EAGER to take these babies!!
S U R E - Just as long as YOU PERSONALLY don't have to be near the baby from a rape.Or pay for them through higher taxes.
Plus if Tommy’s “plenty of adoptive families” claim was anywhere close to true,
there wouldn’t be ~391,000 kids waiting today for adoption in the USA.
<https://www.childwelfare.gov/fostercaremonth/awareness/facts/#:~:text=There%20are%20over%20391%2C000%20children,for%20these%20children%20and%20teens.>
You are a piece of work, too, Lyin' Asshole. I am talking about BABIES, not foster children.Read the cite: it notes that 100K of those 391K fosters are babies.
Plus those kids who aren’t babies today used to be babies. This is illustrating that supply has been exceeding demand for decades.
https://www.americanadoptions.com/pregnant/waiting_adoptive_families
"Some sources estimate that there are about 2 million couples currently
waiting to adopt in the United States"
No, Lyin' Asshole, ANY newborn baby would be snapped up in a nanosecond.
Silence from Tommy!Then why are there any babies currently in foster, let alone 100K of them,
plus another ~300K of older kids who used to be babies?
Likewise, if there’s 2M fighting for the subset of 100K who are *newborns*
(Your goalpost add), then why aren’t they lowering their standards even an inch?
Maybe it has to do with another selection criteria that’s not being said?
Your cite DOES NOT mention the word "baby" or "babies", liar.[Repost attempt]
Sorry, was pulled from another cite. I’m sure you can find it too.
In any event, the other point made still holds:
“ …those kids who aren’t babies today used to be babies. This is
illustrating that supply has been exceeding demand for decades.”
Why the fuck are people adopting babies from 3rd world countries at great expense and difficulty?
That was also alluded to…even you should be smart enough to figure it out:
“Maybe it has to do with another selection criteria that’s not being said?”
… as well as why limiting reproductive services will backfire on those
who are trying to hold onto white majority in racial demographics.
abortions, which accounts for about 7,200 abortions per year in the US. The so-called abortion pill is ONLY used in the first trimester. You SHOULD know this.You're "sorry" all right - a SORRY ASSED LIAR!
Answer the fucking question: WHAT crime have these babies committedOh, look: a *new* question, to try to avoid acknowledging the difficult one
to deserve being MURDERED?????
of racism in adoptions.
Plus I see you’ve still avoided Bigbird’s point made to you:
[If life is so precious] “Then what do republicans do with those unwanted
children but make sure their lives are a misery.[?]
FYI, same also applies to lack of gun regulations which has
resulted in school shooting after school shootings
The flaw you so-called “question” has is that by how you’ve chosen to...and you AGAIN avoided answering MY question.-hhHey Lyin' Asshole, I don't respond to the absurd, which includes your sorry-assed comment.
define ‘baby’, roughly 1 in 6 of them are already being ‘murdered’ (again, by your choice of definitions) even without counting any
Abortion interventions, “Day after” pills, *and* birth control.
What say you now? “Lock them Up”?
-hhHey Lyin' Asshole, killing ANY baby that is viable IS murder (with extremely few exceptions). You DO know what "viable" means, don't you? Abortions in the second trimester should be considered to be manslaughter. This includes ALL third trimester
On Tuesday, May 2, 2023 at 7:52:39 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Tuesday, May 2, 2023 at 5:31:10 AM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
On Monday, May 1, 2023 at 8:27:25 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Monday, May 1, 2023 at 6:26:31 PM UTC-7, Tommy wrote:
On Saturday, April 29, 2023 at 4:00:16 AM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
On Friday, April 28, 2023 at 9:40:02 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Friday, April 28, 2023 at 4:32:59 PM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
On Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 10:51:33 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 7:19:05 PM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
On Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 7:45:08 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 12:06:59 PM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
On Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 10:40:55 AM UTC-5, bruce bowser wrote:
On Tuesday, April 25, 2023 at 8:20:44 PM UTC-4, Tommy wrote:
On Tuesday, April 25, 2023 at 3:23:03 PM UTC-7, Bigbird wrote:
…
Then what do republicans do with those unwanted children but make sure their lives are a misery.
There are PLENTY of adoptive families out there EAGER to take these babies!!
S U R E - Just as long as YOU PERSONALLY don't have to be near the baby from a rape.Or pay for them through higher taxes.
Plus if Tommy’s “plenty of adoptive families” claim was anywhere close to true,
there wouldn’t be ~391,000 kids waiting today for adoption in the USA.
<https://www.childwelfare.gov/fostercaremonth/awareness/facts/#:~:text=There%20are%20over%20391%2C000%20children,for%20these%20children%20and%20teens.>
You are a piece of work, too, Lyin' Asshole. I am talking about BABIES, not foster children.Read the cite: it notes that 100K of those 391K fosters are babies.
Plus those kids who aren’t babies today used to be babies.
This is illustrating that supply has been exceeding demand for decades.
https://www.americanadoptions.com/pregnant/waiting_adoptive_families
"Some sources estimate that there are about 2 million couples currently
waiting to adopt in the United States"
No, Lyin' Asshole, ANY newborn baby would be snapped up in a nanosecond.
Silence from Tommy!Then why are there any babies currently in foster, let alone 100K of them,
plus another ~300K of older kids who used to be babies?
Likewise, if there’s 2M fighting for the subset of 100K who are *newborns*
(Your goalpost add), then why aren’t they lowering their standards even an inch?
Maybe it has to do with another selection criteria that’s not being said?
Your cite DOES NOT mention the word "baby" or "babies", liar.[Repost attempt]
Sorry, was pulled from another cite. I’m sure you can find it too.
In any event, the other point made still holds:
“ …those kids who aren’t babies today used to be babies. This is
illustrating that supply has been exceeding demand for decades.”
Why the fuck are people adopting babies from 3rd world countries at great expense and difficulty?
That was also alluded to…even you should be smart enough to figure it out:
“Maybe it has to do with another selection criteria that’s not being said?”
… as well as why limiting reproductive services will backfire on those
who are trying to hold onto white majority in racial demographics.
You're "sorry" all right - a SORRY ASSED LIAR!
Answer the fucking question: WHAT crime have these babies committedOh, look: a *new* question, to try to avoid acknowledging the difficult one
to deserve being MURDERED?????
of racism in adoptions.
Plus I see you’ve still avoided Bigbird’s point made to you:
[If life is so precious] “Then what do republicans do with those unwanted
children but make sure their lives are a misery.[?]
FYI, same also applies to lack of gun regulations which has resulted in school shooting after school shootings
...and you AGAIN avoided answering MY question.-hhHey Lyin' Asshole, I don't respond to the absurd, which includes your sorry-assed comment.
The flaw you so-called “question” has is that by how you’ve chosen to
define ‘baby’, roughly 1 in 6 of them are already being ‘murdered’
(again, by your choice of definitions) even without counting any Abortion interventions, “Day after” pills, *and* birth control.
What say you now? “Lock them Up”?
abortions, which accounts for about 7,200 abortions per year in the US. The so-called abortion pill is ONLY used in the first trimester. You SHOULD know this.Hey Lyin' Asshole, killing ANY baby that is viable IS murder (with extremely few exceptions). You DO know what "viable" means, don't you? Abortions in the second trimester should be considered to be manslaughter. This includes ALL third trimester
So then using an abortion pill isn’t killing a baby?
Better rework your definitions there, champ!
-hh
On Tuesday, May 2, 2023 at 6:43:10 PM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
On Tuesday, May 2, 2023 at 7:52:39 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Tuesday, May 2, 2023 at 5:31:10 AM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
On Monday, May 1, 2023 at 8:27:25 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Monday, May 1, 2023 at 6:26:31 PM UTC-7, Tommy wrote:
On Saturday, April 29, 2023 at 4:00:16 AM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
On Friday, April 28, 2023 at 9:40:02 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Friday, April 28, 2023 at 4:32:59 PM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
On Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 10:51:33 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 7:19:05 PM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
On Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 7:45:08 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 12:06:59 PM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
On Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 10:40:55 AM UTC-5, bruce bowser wrote:
On Tuesday, April 25, 2023 at 8:20:44 PM UTC-4, Tommy wrote:
On Tuesday, April 25, 2023 at 3:23:03 PM UTC-7, Bigbird wrote:
…
Then what do republicans do with those unwanted
children but make sure their lives are a misery.
There are PLENTY of adoptive families out there EAGER to take these babies!!
S U R E - Just as long as YOU PERSONALLY don't have to be near the baby from a rape.Or pay for them through higher taxes.
Plus if Tommy’s “plenty of adoptive families” claim was anywhere close to true,
there wouldn’t be ~391,000 kids waiting today for adoption in the USA.
<https://www.childwelfare.gov/fostercaremonth/awareness/facts/#:~:text=There%20are%20over%20391%2C000%20children,for%20these%20children%20and%20teens.>
You are a piece of work, too, Lyin' Asshole. I am talking about BABIES, not foster children.Read the cite: it notes that 100K of those 391K fosters are babies.
Plus those kids who aren’t babies today used to be babies.
This is illustrating that supply has been exceeding demand for decades.
https://www.americanadoptions.com/pregnant/waiting_adoptive_families
"Some sources estimate that there are about 2 million couples currently
waiting to adopt in the United States"
No, Lyin' Asshole, ANY newborn baby would be snapped up in a nanosecond.
Silence from Tommy!Then why are there any babies currently in foster, let alone 100K of them,
plus another ~300K of older kids who used to be babies?
Likewise, if there’s 2M fighting for the subset of 100K who are *newborns*
(Your goalpost add), then why aren’t they lowering their standards even an inch?
Maybe it has to do with another selection criteria that’s not being said?
Your cite DOES NOT mention the word "baby" or "babies", liar.[Repost attempt]
Sorry, was pulled from another cite. I’m sure you can find it too.
In any event, the other point made still holds:
“ …those kids who aren’t babies today used to be babies. This is
illustrating that supply has been exceeding demand for decades.”
Why the fuck are people adopting babies from 3rd world countries at great expense and difficulty?
That was also alluded to…even you should be smart enough to figure it out:
“Maybe it has to do with another selection criteria that’s not being said?”
… as well as why limiting reproductive services will backfire on those
who are trying to hold onto white majority in racial demographics.
You're "sorry" all right - a SORRY ASSED LIAR!
Answer the fucking question: WHAT crime have these babies committedOh, look: a *new* question, to try to avoid acknowledging the difficult one
to deserve being MURDERED?????
of racism in adoptions.
Plus I see you’ve still avoided Bigbird’s point made to you:
[If life is so precious] “Then what do republicans do with those unwanted
children but make sure their lives are a misery.[?]
FYI, same also applies to lack of gun regulations which has resulted in school shooting after school shootings
...and you AGAIN avoided answering MY question.-hhHey Lyin' Asshole, I don't respond to the absurd, which includes your sorry-assed comment.
The flaw you so-called “question” has is that by how you’ve chosen to
define ‘baby’, roughly 1 in 6 of them are already being ‘murdered’
(again, by your choice of definitions) even without counting any Abortion interventions, “Day after” pills, *and* birth control.
What say you now? “Lock them Up”?
Hey Lyin' Asshole, killing ANY baby that is viable IS murder (with extremely
few exceptions). You DO know what "viable" means, don't you? Abortions in the second trimester should be considered to be manslaughter. This includes ALL third trimester abortions, which accounts for about 7,200 abortions per year in the US. The so-called abortion pill is ONLY used in
the first trimester. You SHOULD know this.
So then using an abortion pill isn’t killing a baby?
Better rework your definitions there, champ!
Hey Lyin' Asshole, you are SO FULL OF SHIT I can't believe it. A first trimester
fetus IS NOT VIABLE, you DUMB SHIT!
On Thursday, May 11, 2023 at 12:28:03 AM UTC-4, Tommy wrote:
On Tuesday, May 2, 2023 at 6:43:10 PM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
On Tuesday, May 2, 2023 at 7:52:39 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Tuesday, May 2, 2023 at 5:31:10 AM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
On Monday, May 1, 2023 at 8:27:25 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Monday, May 1, 2023 at 6:26:31 PM UTC-7, Tommy wrote:
On Saturday, April 29, 2023 at 4:00:16 AM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
On Friday, April 28, 2023 at 9:40:02 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Friday, April 28, 2023 at 4:32:59 PM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
On Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 10:51:33 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 7:19:05 PM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
On Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 7:45:08 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 12:06:59 PM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
On Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 10:40:55 AM UTC-5, bruce bowser wrote:
On Tuesday, April 25, 2023 at 8:20:44 PM UTC-4, Tommy wrote:
On Tuesday, April 25, 2023 at 3:23:03 PM UTC-7, Bigbird wrote:
…
Then what do republicans do with those unwanted
children but make sure their lives are a misery.
There are PLENTY of adoptive families out there EAGER to take these babies!!
S U R E - Just as long as YOU PERSONALLY don't have to be near the baby from a rape.Or pay for them through higher taxes.
Plus if Tommy’s “plenty of adoptive families” claim was anywhere close to true,
there wouldn’t be ~391,000 kids waiting today for adoption in the USA.
<https://www.childwelfare.gov/fostercaremonth/awareness/facts/#:~:text=There%20are%20over%20391%2C000%20children,for%20these%20children%20and%20teens.>
You are a piece of work, too, Lyin' Asshole. I am talking about BABIES, not foster children.Read the cite: it notes that 100K of those 391K fosters are babies.
Plus those kids who aren’t babies today used to be babies.
This is illustrating that supply has been exceeding demand for decades.
https://www.americanadoptions.com/pregnant/waiting_adoptive_families
"Some sources estimate that there are about 2 million couples currently
waiting to adopt in the United States"
No, Lyin' Asshole, ANY newborn baby would be snapped up in a nanosecond.
Silence from Tommy!Then why are there any babies currently in foster, let alone 100K of them,
plus another ~300K of older kids who used to be babies?
Likewise, if there’s 2M fighting for the subset of 100K who are *newborns*
(Your goalpost add), then why aren’t they lowering their standards even an inch?
Maybe it has to do with another selection criteria that’s not being said?
Your cite DOES NOT mention the word "baby" or "babies", liar.[Repost attempt]
Sorry, was pulled from another cite. I’m sure you can find it too.
In any event, the other point made still holds:
“ …those kids who aren’t babies today used to be babies. This is
illustrating that supply has been exceeding demand for decades.”
Why the fuck are people adopting babies from 3rd world countries at great expense and difficulty?
That was also alluded to…even you should be smart enough to figure it out:
“Maybe it has to do with another selection criteria that’s not being said?”
… as well as why limiting reproductive services will backfire on those
who are trying to hold onto white majority in racial demographics.
You're "sorry" all right - a SORRY ASSED LIAR!
Answer the fucking question: WHAT crime have these babies committedOh, look: a *new* question, to try to avoid acknowledging the difficult one
to deserve being MURDERED?????
of racism in adoptions.
Plus I see you’ve still avoided Bigbird’s point made to you:
[If life is so precious] “Then what do republicans do with those unwanted
children but make sure their lives are a misery.[?]
FYI, same also applies to lack of gun regulations which has resulted in school shooting after school shootings
...and you AGAIN avoided answering MY question.-hhHey Lyin' Asshole, I don't respond to the absurd, which includes your sorry-assed comment.
The flaw you so-called “question” has is that by how you’ve chosen to
define ‘baby’, roughly 1 in 6 of them are already being ‘murdered’
(again, by your choice of definitions) even without counting any Abortion interventions, “Day after” pills, *and* birth control.
What say you now? “Lock them Up”?
Hey Lyin' Asshole, killing ANY baby that is viable IS murder (with extremely
few exceptions). You DO know what "viable" means, don't you? Abortions in the second trimester should be considered to be manslaughter. This includes ALL third trimester abortions, which accounts for about 7,200 abortions per year in the US. The so-called abortion pill is ONLY used in
the first trimester. You SHOULD know this.
So then using an abortion pill isn’t killing a baby?
Better rework your definitions there, champ!
Hey Lyin' Asshole, you are SO FULL OF SHIT I can't believe it. A first trimesterAh, so then you don’t consider a first trimester fetus to be a “baby”?
fetus IS NOT VIABLE, you DUMB SHIT!
-hh
On Thursday, May 11, 2023 at 3:46:41 AM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
On Thursday, May 11, 2023 at 12:28:03 AM UTC-4, Tommy wrote:
On Tuesday, May 2, 2023 at 6:43:10 PM UTC-7, -hh wrote:Ah, so then you don’t consider a first trimester fetus to be a “baby”? >>
On Tuesday, May 2, 2023 at 7:52:39 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Tuesday, May 2, 2023 at 5:31:10 AM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
On Monday, May 1, 2023 at 8:27:25 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Monday, May 1, 2023 at 6:26:31 PM UTC-7, Tommy wrote:
On Saturday, April 29, 2023 at 4:00:16 AM UTC-7, -hh wrote: >>>>>>>>> On Friday, April 28, 2023 at 9:40:02 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On Friday, April 28, 2023 at 4:32:59 PM UTC-7, -hh wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> On Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 10:51:33 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> On Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 7:19:05 PM UTC-7, -hh wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 7:45:08 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 12:06:59 PM UTC-7, -hh wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 10:40:55 AM UTC-5, bruce bowser wrote:...and you AGAIN avoided answering MY question.
Hey Lyin' Asshole, I don't respond to the absurd, which includes your sorry-assed comment.Oh, look: a *new* question, to try to avoid acknowledging the difficult oneRead the cite: it notes that 100K of those 391K fosters are babies.On Tuesday, April 25, 2023 at 8:20:44 PM UTC-4, Tommy wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, April 25, 2023 at 3:23:03 PM UTC-7, Bigbird wrote:Or pay for them through higher taxes.
…There are PLENTY of adoptive families out there EAGER to take these babies!!
Then what do republicans do with those unwanted >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> children but make sure their lives are a misery. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
S U R E - Just as long as YOU PERSONALLY don't have to be near the baby from a rape.
Plus if Tommy’s “plenty of adoptive families” claim was anywhere close to true,
there wouldn’t be ~391,000 kids waiting today for adoption in the USA.
<https://www.childwelfare.gov/fostercaremonth/awareness/facts/#:~:text=There%20are%20over%20391%2C000%20children,for%20these%20children%20and%20teens.>
You are a piece of work, too, Lyin' Asshole. I am talking about BABIES, not foster children.
Plus those kids who aren’t babies today used to be babies. >>>>>>>>>>>>> This is illustrating that supply has been exceeding demand for decades.
https://www.americanadoptions.com/pregnant/waiting_adoptive_families
"Some sources estimate that there are about 2 million couples currently
waiting to adopt in the United States"
No, Lyin' Asshole, ANY newborn baby would be snapped up in a nanosecond.
Then why are there any babies currently in foster, let alone 100K of them,
plus another ~300K of older kids who used to be babies? >>>>>>>>>>> Silence from Tommy!
Likewise, if there’s 2M fighting for the subset of 100K who are *newborns*
(Your goalpost add), then why aren’t they lowering their standards even an inch?
Maybe it has to do with another selection criteria that’s not being said?
Your cite DOES NOT mention the word "baby" or "babies", liar. >>>>>>>>>>> [Repost attempt]
Sorry, was pulled from another cite. I’m sure you can find it too.
In any event, the other point made still holds:
“ …those kids who aren’t babies today used to be babies. This is
illustrating that supply has been exceeding demand for decades.” >>>>>>>>>>>
Why the fuck are people adopting babies from 3rd world countries at great expense and difficulty?
That was also alluded to…even you should be smart enough to figure it out:
“Maybe it has to do with another selection criteria that’s not being said?”
… as well as why limiting reproductive services will backfire on those
who are trying to hold onto white majority in racial demographics. >>>>>>>>>>>
You're "sorry" all right - a SORRY ASSED LIAR!
Answer the fucking question: WHAT crime have these babies committed >>>>>>>>>> to deserve being MURDERED?????
of racism in adoptions.
Plus I see you’ve still avoided Bigbird’s point made to you: >>>>>>>>>
[If life is so precious] “Then what do republicans do with those unwanted
children but make sure their lives are a misery.[?]
FYI, same also applies to lack of gun regulations which has
resulted in school shooting after school shootings
-hh
The flaw you so-called “question” has is that by how you’ve chosen to
define ‘baby’, roughly 1 in 6 of them are already being ‘murdered’
(again, by your choice of definitions) even without counting any
Abortion interventions, “Day after” pills, *and* birth control. >>>>>>
What say you now? “Lock them Up”?
Hey Lyin' Asshole, killing ANY baby that is viable IS murder (with extremely
few exceptions). You DO know what "viable" means, don't you? Abortions >>>>> in the second trimester should be considered to be manslaughter. This >>>>> includes ALL third trimester abortions, which accounts for about 7,200 >>>>> abortions per year in the US. The so-called abortion pill is ONLY used in >>>>> the first trimester. You SHOULD know this.
So then using an abortion pill isn’t killing a baby?
Better rework your definitions there, champ!
Hey Lyin' Asshole, you are SO FULL OF SHIT I can't believe it. A first trimester
fetus IS NOT VIABLE, you DUMB SHIT!
-hh
I have said ALL ALONG that a first trimester abortion IS permissible because the fetus IS NOT VIABLE. You dodge the issue of 2nd and 3rd trimester babies.
To review: YES, Republicans WANT 2nd and 3rd trimester babies to be NOT MURDERED!
On 2023-05-11 22:08, Tommy wrote:
On Thursday, May 11, 2023 at 3:46:41 AM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
On Thursday, May 11, 2023 at 12:28:03 AM UTC-4, Tommy wrote:
On Tuesday, May 2, 2023 at 6:43:10 PM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
On Tuesday, May 2, 2023 at 7:52:39 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Tuesday, May 2, 2023 at 5:31:10 AM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
On Monday, May 1, 2023 at 8:27:25 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Monday, May 1, 2023 at 6:26:31 PM UTC-7, Tommy wrote:
On Saturday, April 29, 2023 at 4:00:16 AM UTC-7, -hh wrote: >>>>>>>>> On Friday, April 28, 2023 at 9:40:02 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On Friday, April 28, 2023 at 4:32:59 PM UTC-7, -hh wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> On Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 10:51:33 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> On Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 7:19:05 PM UTC-7, -hh wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 7:45:08 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:...and you AGAIN avoided answering MY question.
Hey Lyin' Asshole, I don't respond to the absurd, which includes your sorry-assed comment.Oh, look: a *new* question, to try to avoid acknowledging the difficult oneOn Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 12:06:59 PM UTC-7, -hh wrote:Read the cite: it notes that 100K of those 391K fosters are babies.
On Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 10:40:55 AM UTC-5, bruce bowser wrote:
On Tuesday, April 25, 2023 at 8:20:44 PM UTC-4, Tommy wrote:Or pay for them through higher taxes.
On Tuesday, April 25, 2023 at 3:23:03 PM UTC-7, Bigbird wrote:
…There are PLENTY of adoptive families out there EAGER to take these babies!!
Then what do republicans do with those unwanted >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> children but make sure their lives are a misery. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
S U R E - Just as long as YOU PERSONALLY don't have to be near the baby from a rape.
Plus if Tommy’s “plenty of adoptive families” claim was anywhere close to true,
there wouldn’t be ~391,000 kids waiting today for adoption in the USA.
<https://www.childwelfare.gov/fostercaremonth/awareness/facts/#:~:text=There%20are%20over%20391%2C000%20children,for%20these%20children%20and%20teens.>
You are a piece of work, too, Lyin' Asshole. I am talking about BABIES, not foster children.
Plus those kids who aren’t babies today used to be babies. >>>>>>>>>>>>> This is illustrating that supply has been exceeding demand for decades.
https://www.americanadoptions.com/pregnant/waiting_adoptive_families
"Some sources estimate that there are about 2 million couples currently
waiting to adopt in the United States"
No, Lyin' Asshole, ANY newborn baby would be snapped up in a nanosecond.
Then why are there any babies currently in foster, let alone 100K of them,
plus another ~300K of older kids who used to be babies? >>>>>>>>>>> Silence from Tommy!
Likewise, if there’s 2M fighting for the subset of 100K who are *newborns*
(Your goalpost add), then why aren’t they lowering their standards even an inch?
Maybe it has to do with another selection criteria that’s not being said?
Your cite DOES NOT mention the word "baby" or "babies", liar. >>>>>>>>>>> [Repost attempt]
Sorry, was pulled from another cite. I’m sure you can find it too.
In any event, the other point made still holds:
“ …those kids who aren’t babies today used to be babies. This is
illustrating that supply has been exceeding demand for decades.”
Why the fuck are people adopting babies from 3rd world countries at great expense and difficulty?
That was also alluded to…even you should be smart enough to figure it out:
“Maybe it has to do with another selection criteria that’s not being said?”
… as well as why limiting reproductive services will backfire on those
who are trying to hold onto white majority in racial demographics.
You're "sorry" all right - a SORRY ASSED LIAR!
Answer the fucking question: WHAT crime have these babies committed
to deserve being MURDERED?????
of racism in adoptions.
Plus I see you’ve still avoided Bigbird’s point made to you: >>>>>>>>>
[If life is so precious] “Then what do republicans do with those unwanted
children but make sure their lives are a misery.[?]
FYI, same also applies to lack of gun regulations which has >>>>>>>>> resulted in school shooting after school shootings
-hh
The flaw you so-called “question” has is that by how you’ve chosen to
define ‘baby’, roughly 1 in 6 of them are already being ‘murdered’
(again, by your choice of definitions) even without counting any >>>>>> Abortion interventions, “Day after” pills, *and* birth control. >>>>>>
What say you now? “Lock them Up”?
Hey Lyin' Asshole, killing ANY baby that is viable IS murder (with extremely
few exceptions). You DO know what "viable" means, don't you? Abortions >>>>> in the second trimester should be considered to be manslaughter. This >>>>> includes ALL third trimester abortions, which accounts for about 7,200 >>>>> abortions per year in the US. The so-called abortion pill is ONLY used in
the first trimester. You SHOULD know this.
So then using an abortion pill isn’t killing a baby?
Better rework your definitions there, champ!
Hey Lyin' Asshole, you are SO FULL OF SHIT I can't believe it. A first trimester
fetus IS NOT VIABLE, you DUMB SHIT!
Ah, so then you don’t consider a first trimester fetus to be a “baby”?
-hh
I have said ALL ALONG that a first trimester abortion IS permissible because thefetus IS NOT VIABLE. You dodge the issue of 2nd and 3rd trimester babies.
To review: YES, Republicans WANT 2nd and 3rd trimester babies to be NOT MURDERED!
So you agree that you can't deport a person who might be in the US
illegally if she's in the US when she enters her 2nd trimester, right?
On 2023-05-11 22:08, Tommy wrote:
On Thursday, May 11, 2023 at 3:46:41 AM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
On Thursday, May 11, 2023 at 12:28:03 AM UTC-4, Tommy wrote:
On Tuesday, May 2, 2023 at 6:43:10 PM UTC-7, -hh wrote:Ah, so then you don’t consider a first trimester fetus to be a “baby”?
On Tuesday, May 2, 2023 at 7:52:39 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Tuesday, May 2, 2023 at 5:31:10 AM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
On Monday, May 1, 2023 at 8:27:25 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Monday, May 1, 2023 at 6:26:31 PM UTC-7, Tommy wrote:
On Saturday, April 29, 2023 at 4:00:16 AM UTC-7, -hh wrote: >>>>>>>>> On Friday, April 28, 2023 at 9:40:02 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On Friday, April 28, 2023 at 4:32:59 PM UTC-7, -hh wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> On Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 10:51:33 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> On Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 7:19:05 PM UTC-7, -hh wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 7:45:08 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:...and you AGAIN avoided answering MY question.
Hey Lyin' Asshole, I don't respond to the absurd, which includes your sorry-assed comment.Oh, look: a *new* question, to try to avoid acknowledging the difficult oneOn Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 12:06:59 PM UTC-7, -hh wrote:Read the cite: it notes that 100K of those 391K fosters are babies.
On Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 10:40:55 AM UTC-5, bruce bowser wrote:
On Tuesday, April 25, 2023 at 8:20:44 PM UTC-4, Tommy wrote:Or pay for them through higher taxes.
On Tuesday, April 25, 2023 at 3:23:03 PM UTC-7, Bigbird wrote:
…There are PLENTY of adoptive families out there EAGER to take these babies!!
Then what do republicans do with those unwanted >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> children but make sure their lives are a misery. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
S U R E - Just as long as YOU PERSONALLY don't have to be near the baby from a rape.
Plus if Tommy’s “plenty of adoptive families” claim was anywhere close to true,
there wouldn’t be ~391,000 kids waiting today for adoption in the USA.
<https://www.childwelfare.gov/fostercaremonth/awareness/facts/#:~:text=There%20are%20over%20391%2C000%20children,for%20these%20children%20and%20teens.>
You are a piece of work, too, Lyin' Asshole. I am talking about BABIES, not foster children.
Plus those kids who aren’t babies today used to be babies. >>>>>>>>>>>>> This is illustrating that supply has been exceeding demand for decades.
https://www.americanadoptions.com/pregnant/waiting_adoptive_families
"Some sources estimate that there are about 2 million couples currently
waiting to adopt in the United States"
No, Lyin' Asshole, ANY newborn baby would be snapped up in a nanosecond.
Then why are there any babies currently in foster, let alone 100K of them,
plus another ~300K of older kids who used to be babies? >>>>>>>>>>> Silence from Tommy!
Likewise, if there’s 2M fighting for the subset of 100K who are *newborns*
(Your goalpost add), then why aren’t they lowering their standards even an inch?
Maybe it has to do with another selection criteria that’s not being said?
Your cite DOES NOT mention the word "baby" or "babies", liar. >>>>>>>>>>> [Repost attempt]
Sorry, was pulled from another cite. I’m sure you can find it too.
In any event, the other point made still holds:
“ …those kids who aren’t babies today used to be babies. This is
illustrating that supply has been exceeding demand for decades.”
Why the fuck are people adopting babies from 3rd world countries at great expense and difficulty?
That was also alluded to…even you should be smart enough to figure it out:
“Maybe it has to do with another selection criteria that’s not being said?”
… as well as why limiting reproductive services will backfire on those
who are trying to hold onto white majority in racial demographics.
You're "sorry" all right - a SORRY ASSED LIAR!
Answer the fucking question: WHAT crime have these babies committed
to deserve being MURDERED?????
of racism in adoptions.
Plus I see you’ve still avoided Bigbird’s point made to you: >>>>>>>>>
[If life is so precious] “Then what do republicans do with those unwanted
children but make sure their lives are a misery.[?]
FYI, same also applies to lack of gun regulations which has >>>>>>>>> resulted in school shooting after school shootings
-hh
The flaw you so-called “question” has is that by how you’ve chosen to
define ‘baby’, roughly 1 in 6 of them are already being ‘murdered’
(again, by your choice of definitions) even without counting any >>>>>> Abortion interventions, “Day after” pills, *and* birth control. >>>>>>
What say you now? “Lock them Up”?
Hey Lyin' Asshole, killing ANY baby that is viable IS murder (with extremely
few exceptions). You DO know what "viable" means, don't you? Abortions >>>>> in the second trimester should be considered to be manslaughter. This >>>>> includes ALL third trimester abortions, which accounts for about 7,200 >>>>> abortions per year in the US. The so-called abortion pill is ONLY used in
the first trimester. You SHOULD know this.
So then using an abortion pill isn’t killing a baby?
Better rework your definitions there, champ!
Hey Lyin' Asshole, you are SO FULL OF SHIT I can't believe it. A first trimester
fetus IS NOT VIABLE, you DUMB SHIT!
-hh
I have said ALL ALONG that a first trimester abortion IS permissible because the fetus IS NOT VIABLE. You dodge the issue of 2nd and 3rd trimester babies.
To review: YES, Republicans WANT 2nd and 3rd trimester babies to be NOT MURDERED!So you agree that you can't deport a person who might be in the US
illegally if she's in the US when she enters her 2nd trimester, right?
On Thursday, May 11, 2023 at 10:17:10 PM UTC-7, Alan wrote:
On 2023-05-11 22:08, Tommy wrote:
On Thursday, May 11, 2023 at 3:46:41 AM UTC-7, -hh wrote:So you agree that you can't deport a person who might be in the US
On Thursday, May 11, 2023 at 12:28:03 AM UTC-4, Tommy wrote:
On Tuesday, May 2, 2023 at 6:43:10 PM UTC-7, -hh wrote:Ah, so then you don’t consider a first trimester fetus to be a “baby”?
On Tuesday, May 2, 2023 at 7:52:39 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Tuesday, May 2, 2023 at 5:31:10 AM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
On Monday, May 1, 2023 at 8:27:25 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote:
On Monday, May 1, 2023 at 6:26:31 PM UTC-7, Tommy wrote:
On Saturday, April 29, 2023 at 4:00:16 AM UTC-7, -hh wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> On Friday, April 28, 2023 at 9:40:02 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> On Friday, April 28, 2023 at 4:32:59 PM UTC-7, -hh wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 10:51:33 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 7:19:05 PM UTC-7, -hh wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 7:45:08 PM UTC-5, Tommy wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 12:06:59 PM UTC-7, -hh wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 10:40:55 AM UTC-5, bruce bowser wrote:...and you AGAIN avoided answering MY question.
Hey Lyin' Asshole, I don't respond to the absurd, which includes your sorry-assed comment.Oh, look: a *new* question, to try to avoid acknowledging the difficult oneRead the cite: it notes that 100K of those 391K fosters are babies.On Tuesday, April 25, 2023 at 8:20:44 PM UTC-4, Tommy wrote:Or pay for them through higher taxes.
On Tuesday, April 25, 2023 at 3:23:03 PM UTC-7, Bigbird wrote:
…There are PLENTY of adoptive families out there EAGER to take these babies!!
Then what do republicans do with those unwanted >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> children but make sure their lives are a misery. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
S U R E - Just as long as YOU PERSONALLY don't have to be near the baby from a rape.
Plus if Tommy’s “plenty of adoptive families” claim was anywhere close to true,
there wouldn’t be ~391,000 kids waiting today for adoption in the USA.
<https://www.childwelfare.gov/fostercaremonth/awareness/facts/#:~:text=There%20are%20over%20391%2C000%20children,for%20these%20children%20and%20teens.>
You are a piece of work, too, Lyin' Asshole. I am talking about BABIES, not foster children.
Plus those kids who aren’t babies today used to be babies. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This is illustrating that supply has been exceeding demand for decades.
https://www.americanadoptions.com/pregnant/waiting_adoptive_families
"Some sources estimate that there are about 2 million couples currently
waiting to adopt in the United States"
No, Lyin' Asshole, ANY newborn baby would be snapped up in a nanosecond.
Then why are there any babies currently in foster, let alone 100K of them,
plus another ~300K of older kids who used to be babies? >>>>>>>>>>>>> Silence from Tommy!
Likewise, if there’s 2M fighting for the subset of 100K who are *newborns*
(Your goalpost add), then why aren’t they lowering their standards even an inch?
Maybe it has to do with another selection criteria that’s not being said?
Your cite DOES NOT mention the word "baby" or "babies", liar. >>>>>>>>>>>>> [Repost attempt]
Sorry, was pulled from another cite. I’m sure you can find it too.
In any event, the other point made still holds:
“ …those kids who aren’t babies today used to be babies. This is
illustrating that supply has been exceeding demand for decades.”
Why the fuck are people adopting babies from 3rd world countries at great expense and difficulty?
That was also alluded to…even you should be smart enough to figure it out:
“Maybe it has to do with another selection criteria that’s not being said?”
… as well as why limiting reproductive services will backfire on those
who are trying to hold onto white majority in racial demographics.
You're "sorry" all right - a SORRY ASSED LIAR!
Answer the fucking question: WHAT crime have these babies committed
to deserve being MURDERED?????
of racism in adoptions.
Plus I see you’ve still avoided Bigbird’s point made to you: >>>>>>>>>>>
[If life is so precious] “Then what do republicans do with those unwanted
children but make sure their lives are a misery.[?]
FYI, same also applies to lack of gun regulations which has >>>>>>>>>>> resulted in school shooting after school shootings
-hh
The flaw you so-called “question” has is that by how you’ve chosen to
define ‘baby’, roughly 1 in 6 of them are already being ‘murdered’
(again, by your choice of definitions) even without counting any >>>>>>>> Abortion interventions, “Day after” pills, *and* birth control. >>>>>>>>
What say you now? “Lock them Up”?
Hey Lyin' Asshole, killing ANY baby that is viable IS murder (with extremely
few exceptions). You DO know what "viable" means, don't you? Abortions >>>>>>> in the second trimester should be considered to be manslaughter. This >>>>>>> includes ALL third trimester abortions, which accounts for about 7,200 >>>>>>> abortions per year in the US. The so-called abortion pill is ONLY used in
the first trimester. You SHOULD know this.
So then using an abortion pill isn’t killing a baby?
Better rework your definitions there, champ!
Hey Lyin' Asshole, you are SO FULL OF SHIT I can't believe it. A first trimester
fetus IS NOT VIABLE, you DUMB SHIT!
-hh
I have said ALL ALONG that a first trimester abortion IS permissible because the fetus IS NOT VIABLE. You dodge the issue of 2nd and 3rd trimester babies.
To review: YES, Republicans WANT 2nd and 3rd trimester babies to be NOT MURDERED!
illegally if she's in the US when she enters her 2nd trimester, right?
LOL! Leave to you libtards to try to find a crack for illegals to enter the US!! Answer: they ALL should be sent to Canada where libtards like you will welcome them with open arms.
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 546 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 04:21:19 |
| Calls: | 10,386 |
| Calls today: | 1 |
| Files: | 14,057 |
| Messages: | 6,416,606 |