Stay Hard as Steel!!!

Male Multiple Orgasm
Discover your full Abilities!

Get Paid For
Using Social Sites!

Tired of ads
on this site?

The democrats cannot define a woman until...Look below...

Discussion Forum on Show It Off

Page #3

Pages:  #1   #2   #3   #4   #5   #6   #7   #8  

Started by tecsan [Ignore] 16,May,22 02:01  other posts
Until it involves abortion...Besides the fact that the end of Roe V Wade would not end it in many states...I agree with B. Clinton abortion should be rare...

New Comment       Rating: 0  


Comments:
By tecsan [Ignore] 12,Sep,22 00:05 other posts 
If a man gets pregnant then does she have a right to an abortion as long as he and his DR agree it is the right thing at the time.
By phart [Ignore] 12,Sep,22 10:44 other posts 
If a man gets pregnant, he needs to be caught and taken to a lab and studied, because he is a odd duck.40 years ago the idea of a man getting pregnant was a joke and understood not to be possiable.
By Ananas2xLekker [Ignore] 12,Sep,22 12:02 other posts 
Well, in 1994 it was a pretty nice movie from Arnold Schwarzenegger, called 'Junior'.
Never say impossible. Someone might figure it out tomorrow.
By tecsan [Ignore] 12,Sep,22 21:52 other posts 
Care for some shocking news ananas, research the mayo clinic in the late 80s -early 90s.
By tecsan [Ignore] 12,Sep,22 21:54 other posts 
I was playing with pronouns with my last comment. No uterus, thus no pregnancy. He can get pregnant if he is a woman. Another pronoun twist.
So you are talking about a trans-man getting pregnant.
That's possible, if he didn't have gender affirming surgery yet.
But hormone treatment might make that very unlikely.
It would make it likely it would be an unwanted pregnancy, because he would not expect to get pregnant or hormone treatment might mess with contraception.
Actually, there was such a case in the TV series; The Good Doctor.

In my country, anyone who has an unwanted pregnancy, has the right to an abortion, before 24 weeks of gestation by law, but in practice 22 weeks by most doctors, unless the pregnancy is endangering the pregnant person or the fetus has no or low life expectancy. Why would it be different if it was a transgender person?

I think you were messing up your pronouns there a bit.
But, I understand it's hard for you to put your mind around those things.
By phart [Ignore] 21,Sep,22 17:58 other posts 
A man ,a male, can not bear young. Period.
It may look like a male because of pills and shots and surgery on it's outer shell, but if it is pregnant ,damn it is A FEMALE human being.
It going to get to a point that a fellow will have to pay for a cat scan to make sure he is actually asking a woman to marry him.


By phart [Ignore] 07,Sep,22 22:36 other posts 
only registered users can see external links

What the fuck?
You know, a big store front, surgery and hormones, can only trick people so long before the TRUTH comes out.
If you were born a man, all the surgery in the world is not going to help you to produce viable nutrition for a baby from your fake tits.
Nor will you sprout a womb.
By tecsan [Ignore] 09,Sep,22 01:11 other posts 
Well said.


By #610414 11,Aug,22 09:29
only registered users can see external links

Here's a Repucker that doesn't know what is a woman either

Salt Lake County Council member tells Kamala Harris fetuses are not part of women’s bodies
By Ananas2xLekker [Ignore] 12,Aug,22 07:54 other posts 
And they think that is an argument somehow?

Because, I might agree with that premise; a fetus is a separate organism.
(They had a point IF the fetus was growing in a machine and not in women's bodies.)
But they don't give a sound or even a valid argument, for why that premise results
in a conclusion that the woman has no right to chose whether to continue supporting
that separate organism.

Up to a point in gestation, that organism is dependent on the woman to survive,
which makes it a parasite by definition.
Unless the woman thinks there is some benefit to her, as host, it is a parasite.

What we do with parasites is: killing them and flush them out of our system.
Google 'what to do with parasites' and see.

IF the woman thinks there is some benefit to her, to have the parasite, it's a 'commensal'.
The woman is completely FREE to support that commensal up to birth. She is the host.

(It would help support that freedom, if society helped more to support lost income during gestation, childbirth and recovery, with free or affordable healthcare and when taking care of the child and parenting, with free or affordable childcare or by compensating for lost income, when people cannot afford to lose that income and because working is not compatible with caring for a child and parenting)

I can make a sound argument for abortion:
- Premise 1: An unwanted pregnancy of a zygote or fetus, before it's viable to survive outside the womb, makes it a parasite by definition.
- Premise 2: Parasites are killed and flushed out of the system, on the host's request.
- Conclusion: An unwanted pregnancy of a zygote or fetus, before it's viable to survive outside the womb should be killed and flushed out of the system on the host's request.
By #610414 12,Aug,22 09:10
Last I checked that umbilical cord is firmly attached to mama. 😈
By Ananas2xLekker [Ignore] 12,Aug,22 09:39 other posts 
True, but something like that is applicable to more parasites.
Zygotes and fetuses have their own genetic code and metabolism,
so I do agree they are separate organisms.

The placenta separates the blood of the mother from the blood of the fetus,
but the oxygen, glucose and other nutrients filter through.

However, a parasite is: an organism that lives in or on an organism of another species (its host) and benefits by deriving nutrients at the other's expense.
That fits for zygotes and fetuses. They only survive and grow by deriving nutrients
at the mother's expense. So it's not an INDEPENDENT organism.

That's the trick they use; confusing 'separate' and 'independent'.
They are dependent on tricks, because they don't have real arguments.

They can get a premise right sometimes, but they are incapable of providing
any complete valid or sound argument. But they don't need to, for THEIR audience.
By tecsan [Ignore] 13,Aug,22 22:42 other posts 
I agree a fetus is a parasite to a certain extent. But if your willing actions produce it then let it live. Close them legs if you do not want a parasite inside you. That was simple to say like the damn vasectomy comment. Vasectomies may be permanent where keeping those legs together is not.
By Ananas2xLekker [Ignore] 15,Aug,22 08:47 other posts 
"But if your willing actions produce it then let it live."

WHY? What is your argument?
People don't have abortions if they get pregnant by their willing actions.
How can you put so much nonsense in just one short sentence.

'Close them legs' ... It all boils down to sex.... Why do you hate it so much?

Vasectomies are for people who never want to have children (again). Some people just don't want a child NOW. For example, when they just lost their job, because of
a recession and they are forced into food-lines or they risk losing their home like
60 million Americans experienced, due to Trump fucking up in fighting a pandemic.
It wasn't a good time for being pregnant and needing hospital care. Can we at least agree on that?
By tecsan [Ignore] 15,Aug,22 22:58 other posts 
So when the loon left forces the crap on us right. Now you admit the loons control crap. Yes I said crap. Basically what you said. Trump had fewer covid deaths than that loon brandon. Feel free to correct me. Let's go loons.
By Ananas2xLekker [Ignore] 02,Sep,22 17:10 other posts 
loon...crap...loons...crap...covid...loon...brandon...loons

There is nothing to correct, because there is no point.
By tecsan [Ignore] 16,Aug,22 04:00 other posts 
They were willing to screw right. WILLING.
By Ananas2xLekker [Ignore] 05,Sep,22 10:46 other posts 
You've never heard of ra.pe, obviously. Right-wingers were attacking a hospital that provided abortion for a 10 year old ra.pe victim, which is actually their responsibility by law, even in states where abortion is now banned, because pregnancy would endanger the little girl.
By tecsan [Ignore] 06,Sep,22 01:00 other posts 
Sounds like left wing BS.
By Ananas2xLekker [Ignore] 06,Sep,22 13:25 other posts 
Oh really? Republicans would allow abortion for 10 year old ra.pe victims?
By phart [Ignore] 18,Aug,22 14:14 other posts 
hard to agree with some of your ideas when you can't even agree on the simple FACTS.
Closed legs, no babies.
vasecotmys,no babies.

no abortions needed.
And I don't what planet you are from but in the big city locally women do just fuck recklessly and stop in at the clinic like they were getting their hair done.
That shit needs to stop. Murder is murder.
By Ananas2xLekker [Ignore] 06,Sep,22 13:13 other posts 
I've been accused of hating Americans, but no one hates Americans just like you.
According to you, they're all lazy and should be deprived of any social benefits or they'll just sit on their ass all day. The American women get abortions just like they were getting their hair done. And American parents would send their kids to clinics to get their private parts cut off, unless right-wingers 'protect' them. Americans who smoke a bit of weed should be locked up forever or just executed, to be sure they don't turn into drug addicts. Americans who want to use another restroom just want to ra.pe. If you don't arm yourself, Americans come take your stuff and kill you.

I would imagine you would love abortion. It prevents more Americans from being born. Are you sure you want all those extra horrible Americans around?
By phart [Ignore] 06,Sep,22 17:43 other posts 
So I guess you are in favor of this?


only registered users can see external links

There is serious discussion about doing hysterectomies on prepubescent girls for the sake of gender reaffirm.
This can't be good for a k1d.I HOPE it is all HYPE.

only registered users can see external links

only registered users can see external links
By Ananas2xLekker [Ignore] 07,Sep,22 10:20 other posts 
If people desire gender-affirming care, I am in favor of allowing that.
People should be FREE to be who they want to be.
Can't you read? It's right there: "We only perform gender-affirming hysterectomies on patients who are age 18 or older."

Has anyone actually presented any evidence, when they claim hospitals
do hysterectomies on younger patients? Because I haven't seen any.
(That audio recording is from some desk clerk, who obviously knows nothing)
These are just obvious lies to keep the stupid culture war going.
Or don't you even care that they are lying, as long as the outrage and violence that the lies create serve your purpose?

Understand that it's not YOUR purpose. You are just getting your head filled with bullshit, with the only purpose of distracting you from issues that actually matter.
They are doing that, so you are an accomplice in your own oppression.
You are in poverty and bad health, because you are brainwashed into thinking people deserve nothing, so the rich can take everything. They point you to some imaginary enemy and you are fooled. They are laughing how easy it is.

Do you even look at your own links? One is some repost from a stupid Twitter account on a just as stupid Australian, right-wing, ideologue, fake-news website and the other is mostly confirming that right-wingers are going mad over the newest fake outrage story. Are they supposed to be credible references?

But I have seen evidence on people threatening that hospital and hospitals like that. Just look on YouTube and see Matt Walsh asking for violence against that hospital. By the way, according to US laws, that's a violation that transgresses limits on freedom of speech, so Matt Walsh should be banned from YouTube,
at least temporary. He has clearly caused danger for the hospital and patients.

Why would hospitals do such a thing? Profit motives?
Maybe reconsider your for-profit privatized healthcare system then.
By tecsan [Ignore] 17,Aug,22 22:49 other posts 
What about the blood/brain barrier?
By tecsan [Ignore] 13,Aug,22 01:46 other posts 
Sure there were not some socialist views that caused that???
By #610414 13,Aug,22 07:30
No. Just Biblical
By tecsan [Ignore] 14,Aug,22 03:27 other posts 
Think you are referring to libturds.
By #610414 14,Aug,22 08:11
No. I'm referring to the rabid Christian ultra right
By tecsan [Ignore] 14,Aug,22 22:28 other posts 
You will figure it out one day I think.
By #675701 16,Aug,22 20:38
and neither is her brain


By Ananas2xLekker [Ignore] 07,Sep,22 03:18 other posts 
Republicans fight abortion backlash with ads — and stealth website edits
only registered users can see external links

Most Americans are pro-choice and lots more are not as extremely pro-life as the Republicans are now pushing. The Republicans fear it will make them lose the midterms.


By #675701 01,Sep,22 22:55
they can not find their ass with both hands. It is dodo econimics
By tecsan [Ignore] 01,Sep,22 23:10 other posts 
econimics?
By tecsan [Ignore] 03,Sep,22 01:15 other posts 
Maybe loon-nomics.
By Ananas2xLekker [Ignore] 03,Sep,22 08:40 other posts 
Trump-nomics? Trickle-down-economics?


By #610414 16,Aug,22 11:34
Georgia Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene (A REPUCKER) suggesting that solar panels and wind turbines would cause appliances like washing machines to stop working.
"Lord, please God, don’t make me scrub clothes in a bucket and have to hang them out on the line when we switch over to wind turbines and solar panels,” the Republican House member said.
She also seemed to suggest that these technologies would prevent people from keeping the lights on at night.
“I like the lights on. I want to stay up later at night. I don’t want to have to go to bed when the sun sets,” Rep. Greene added.
She doesn’t know what storage batteries are for.
Actually, she doesn’t know. 🤪
By Ananas2xLekker [Ignore] 16,Aug,22 12:17 other posts 
I've seen that and I would have been surprised, if hadn't ever joined this site.

One complete lunatic in that room is statistically probable.
But the whole crowd was cheering for that stupidity.

Republicans really lift up the most ignorant among them, don't they?
At least I hope so, or it means that the rest was even dumber!

When the sun don't shine and the wind don't blow, there are still many other technologies that can provide renewable energy. Sun and wind are just the most economically beneficial ones, because they are so much cheaper than fossil fuels.
And it's not like we couldn't keep a few old-tech-powerplants standing backup, for when all weather dependent renewable energy systems take a day off simultaneously.
This is not that difficult to understand. Why do people listen to a dumb-ass like her?
By #610414 16,Aug,22 13:41
We say she's a few cards short of a full deck. 🤣 I'm sure she'll win her primary and election. Voters in that neck of the woods have really red necks.
By tecsan [Ignore] 18,Aug,22 00:13 other posts 
You should appreciate this, I am so glad that WY LC lost. Just a libturd wannnabe. She is making great strides, right?
By #610414 18,Aug,22 18:30
Liz Chaney is one of the normal ones. Her opponent still thinks Trump won 2020. The wackos are taking over
By phart [Ignore] 18,Aug,22 09:54 other posts 
I think it may have been a attempt at sarcassm to get accross a point.
Now we have the timeing saving machines to wash our clothes effortlessly. We went from stones in the creek to washboards to gas powered machines in the 20's and up to the weird shit we have now.
Windmills and solar panels ,make electricity. But do they make enough? Battery's store it, do they store enough?
Have you added up the cost of a solar pack and battery back up system enough to power a entire home?
Most of the folks that live with "off grid" power have went back to washing clothes by hand and using a clothes line. WHY? because they can't afford a system large enough to power a clothes dryer. A resistance heat source, like a dryer element is the least efficient use of energy of any type. study it.
By Ananas2xLekker [Ignore] 18,Aug,22 13:19 other posts 
No, I really think she is THAT stupid. She shows it in lots of other ways.

You understand the progress we went through, but than you prefer to get stuck in the 20's with those gas powered machines. Most people (at least in the rest of the world) understand that those gas powered machines will be the end of us and want to progress beyond them.

When you have only a solar panel, if you are that "off grid" person, you have way more than just being "off grid". Than at least you can run your electric washing machine during the day. If you than add a wind turbine and geothermal heating, it starts looking civilized. If you than add hydro-power from the stream nearby, your getting pretty well coverage. You understand that, because you were thinking about that. Now connect that to a million times the size, to a smart grid and everyone is covered. It might take some storage capacity, but it isn't absolutely necessary. It is possible to cover 80% of the electricity and massively reduce CO2 emissions AND have much cheaper electricity.
By phart [Ignore] 18,Aug,22 14:11 other posts 
Have you ever ran a gas powered washing machine? Actually quite neat to operate and when you are thru washing clothes,on a Maytag you could remove the wringer and install a sausage grinder. I knew a fellow that modified a ice cream maker to run in place of the wringer on a maytag
By Ananas2xLekker [Ignore] 02,Sep,22 17:38 other posts 
I would love to see a gas powered washing machine sometimes.
It sounds fun. I also love seeing steam engines and I loved
the light of gas lighting we had once on a vacation in Germany.
Those are all things that are fun for having sometimes,
like grilling meat over a coal fire.

But they are all technologies we have to abandon for daily use,
and progress to new technologies that burn less fossil fuels.
It is the only option to keep living like we are living now.
If we wait too long, that option will not be enough to save us anymore
and then we will have no option left, other then using no technology.
Because maybe you think it will happen past your life, but there are more
people who have more life in front of them and they will demand their future.
And people who have their future taken away, make dangerous enemies.
By #610414 18,Aug,22 17:55
I have a friend who bought a three bedroom, 2.5 bathe 2400 square foot, 2 story home in Palm Bay, Florida. He bought it 12 yrs ago. The home is totally electric including built in vacuum system. When he bought the home he had solar panels installed to handle as much a load as possible. Since then, the savings in electrical bills paid for the system and he sells the extra to the electric company. My friend is not the type to skimp on any luxury. Just his jacuzzi draws more than many people’s homes (an exaggeration) but you get the picture. Charlie worked for Sears for over 20 years as an outside on-site appliance tech. I don’t know anything about a dryer element but Charlie does. My friend, Rick, swears on solar panels.
Green was not using sarcasm. She is just plain ignorant and too lazy to do the research


By tecsan [Ignore] 01,Sep,22 04:50 other posts 
What will mr magoo say next. Those aviators need to come off, they only offer concealment not improved sight.
By Ananas2xLekker [Ignore] 02,Sep,22 09:34 other posts 
Those aviators are his attempt at looking cool and younger.
True, it's not as effective as Trump painting his hair yellow and his skin orange.
No one can match that.
By phart [Ignore] 02,Sep,22 10:08 other posts 
sadly I have wanted a pair of Ray bans for years. but I won't get any now, I do NOT want to resemble joe biden.
By Ananas2xLekker [Ignore] 02,Sep,22 14:45 other posts 
I can understand that. Trump ruined the comb over for me.
Now my only option for the future is ever shorter hair.

Haven't seen Trump wearing sunglasses much, but Kim Jong-un wears great ones.


New Comment   Go to top

Pages:  #1   #2   #3   #4   #5   #6   #7   #8  



Show It Off