Less choice coming for New York City

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by joeydb

OK - how many conservatives are telling you how much soda you are not allowed to have?
Ironically, if you're on welfare, the conservatives are paying for the soda and everything else...

conservatives also inject themselves into health and privacy, but nice try. maybe not soda, maybe it's birth control.

[brianwspencer]

Interesting that when it comes to soda, all of the sudden "choice" is something that matters to you.

Cool.

[dellinger63]

Conservatives as a whole are not against birth control or even abortion for that matter. They just don't want to be forced to pay for it.

Conservatives like me have no problem with a fat slob supersizing everything sugar and bad. We do have a problem when others are forced to pay for it or its effects. Like when these slobs can't afford health insurance because of heart disease and diabetes caused by poor diet choices and are now in need of others pitching in for their premiums in the name of Obamacare!

Simple should you feel you may need BC pills or an abortion, make the choice to make sure the policy you signed up for covers such.

Choice should not be supplemented

[bigrun]

[Riot]

Only thing wrong with that cartoon is that the kid should be as fat as the cops, and be a couch-sitting insulin-dependent diabetic who is driven everywhere by their parents, with some media screen in front of his face 14-hours-a-day

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by dellinger63

Conservatives as a whole are not against birth control or even abortion for that matter. They just don't want to be forced to pay for it.
Conservatives like me have no problem with a fat slob supersizing everything sugar and bad. We do have a problem when others are forced to pay for it or its effects. Like when these slobs can't afford health insurance because of heart disease and diabetes caused by poor diet choices and are now in need of others pitching in for their premiums in the name of Obamacare!

Simple should you feel you may need BC pills or an abortion, make the choice to make sure the policy you signed up for covers such.

Choice should not be supplemented

bullshit

[joeydb]

Originally Posted by brianwspencer

Interesting that when it comes to soda, all of the sudden "choice" is something that matters to you.

Cool.

Sure - because in this case it's not a euphemism for killing somebody. I'm all for the choice of choosing not to get somebody pregnant since you both are not ready for it.

The "choice" to kill at a later date is a canard. It never existed except as a footnote to a poorly litigated Supreme Court case, and only survives since the one thing there is a shortage of in Washington D.C. is balls.

Sodas are more important than babies and gay people. I totally got your point Joey. You are teh worst man ever!!

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by brianwspencer

Interesting that when it comes to soda, all of the sudden "choice" is something that matters to you.

Cool.

[joeydb]

Originally Posted by Danzig

So when the word "choice" actually means choice instead of murder, I shouldn't use it? Riiiight....

New York City - where you can't get a 20 oz soda but you can abort as many babies as you like. What a great town!

[Riot]

Originally Posted by joeydb

So when the word "choice" actually means choice instead of murder, I shouldn't use it? Riiiight....

New York City - where you can't get a 20 oz soda but you can abort as many babies as you like. What a great town!

You really need to read up on abortion law.

[joeydb]

Originally Posted by Riot

You really need to read up on abortion law.

Oh so there is a limit now on how many abortions? Per month, per year, per lifetime - what's the number?

[dellinger63]

Originally Posted by joeydb

Oh so there is a limit now on how many abortions? Per month, per year, per lifetime - what's the number?

12 a year from first menstration to last. 40 years? 480 total.

Abortion is the law as is the right to own arms. How many or how often is nobody else's business. However likewise paying or financing is also nobody else's business.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by joeydb

Oh so there is a limit now on how many abortions? Per month, per year, per lifetime - what's the number?

No. There are legal limits on when abortions can be performed. And taxpayer dollars don't pay for any of it.

It's probably the 3 strike rule. 3 fetuses and your uterus is out.

Soda is awful but this isn't about people's safety and health. It's about money.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Coach Pants

It's probably the 3 strike rule. 3 fetuses and your uterus is out.

Soda is awful but this isn't about people's safety and health. It's about money.

isn't everything?

[Danzig]

joey, i don't care what you call it.
but i do find it ironic that you and others are sooo anti-government intervention, until you're for it.

[joeydb]

Originally Posted by Danzig

joey, i don't care what you call it.
but i do find it ironic that you and others are sooo anti-government intervention, until you're for it.

Where did I say I was for government intervention?

I am against the government intervention that continues to keep the massacre of babies in utero legal.

Had the Supreme Court not acted in 1973, the deadlock in the case would have prevented the killing of that human being, and of course the erroneous precedent that one parent alone can order the execution of her would-be child would never have been established.

The fathers aren't off the hook either. It's wrong to set up that situation and then be nowhere to be found. Everybody should learn a little self control instead of acting mentally like children, who then don't want children.

Find a dictionary printed prior to 1973 and you may find a word : aborticide.

[jms62]

Originally Posted by joeydb

Where did I say I was for government intervention?

I am against the government intervention that continues to keep the massacre of babies in utero legal.
Had the Supreme Court not acted in 1973, the deadlock in the case would have prevented the killing of that human being, and of course the erroneous precedent that one parent alone can order the execution of her would-be child would never have been established.

The fathers aren't off the hook either. It's wrong to set up that situation and then be nowhere to be found. Everybody should learn a little self control instead of acting mentally like children, who then don't want children.

Find a dictionary printed prior to 1973 and you may find a word : aborticide.

So are you also against the government intervention that keeps someone from blowing your head off because you looked at them the wrong way? It's called Law Joey

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by joeydb

Where did I say I was for government intervention?

I am against the government intervention that continues to keep the massacre of babies in utero legal.

Had the Supreme Court not acted in 1973, the deadlock in the case would have prevented the killing of that human being, and of course the erroneous precedent that one parent alone can order the execution of her would-be child would never have been established.

The fathers aren't off the hook either. It's wrong to set up that situation and then be nowhere to be found. Everybody should learn a little self control instead of acting mentally like children, who then don't want children.

Find a dictionary printed prior to 1973 and you may find a word : aborticide.

do you feel the government is correct in putting more rules and regulations in place for women who go to a clinic to receive legal care?